Cornell Alniversity Library BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME FROM THE SAGE EN DOW MENT FUND THE GIFT OF Henry W. Saae 1891 ~ eee ee ol = el CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY Cornell University The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924088434547 The Victoria thistory of the Counties of England EDITED BY WILLIAM PAGE, F.S.A. A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE VOLUME II a2 This Histcry is tssued to Subscribers only By Archibald Constable & Company Limited and printed hy Eyre & Spottiswoode Limited HAL. Printers of London INSCRIBED TO THE MEMORY OF HER LATE MAJESTY QUEEN VICTORIA WHO GRACIOUSLY GAVE THE TITLE TO AND ACCEPTED THE DEDICATION OF THIS HISTORY THE VICTORIA HISTORY OF THE COUNTY OF LANCASTER EDITED BY WILLIAM FARRER anv J. BROWNBILL, M.A. VOLUME TWO LONDON ARCHIBALD CONSTABLE AND COMPANY LIMITED 1908 CONTENTS OF VOLUME TWO PAGE Dedication . ; a 7 F 7 ‘i s ‘ . : ‘ é v Contents : : 3 : 5 ‘ : - ix List of Illustrations na Maps . : : é : F 3 e ‘ ‘ xiii Editorial Note : : P ‘ F ‘ F 5 i : 3 4 : A xv Ecclesiastical History :— To the Reformation . . 5 By Pror. James Tait, M.A. . 5 . : : I From the Reformation 2 : By W. A. Suaw, D.Litr. . : i . - 40 Religious Houses :— Introduction . . - r By Pror. James Tait, M.A. . 3 ‘ 3 - 102 Priory of Penwortham : , 5 5 3 S 3 < : - 104 Priory of Lytham. ‘ " a ee x5 : 7 . . . 107 Priory of Upholland . 2 : 7 55 3 . . F i . Tl Cell of Kersal . - : : a 36 5 é - A * . 113 Abbey of Furness. : : By F. M. Powicxz, M.A... : ‘ : . 114 Abbey of Wyresdale . : é By Pror. James Tait, M.A. . : : 3 2 31 Abbey of Whalley. F , 5 *” 9 : 7 : , « 133 Priory of Conishead . ‘i : 35 45 35 . 5 3 : . 140 Priory of Cartmel . . 3 Sy 3 $s ‘ ; i 5 @ 1A3 Priory of Burscough . ‘ - 53 35 > , F 5 : . 148 Priory of Cockerham ‘i , 3 » 3 ‘ . ‘ ‘ 2 152 Abbey of Cockersand . a 3 PA 55 ‘ 5 ‘ F 2 nee Priory of Hornby. : : 35 3 55 é F ‘ F . 160 House of Dominican Friars, Lan- caster : j : . = ss 3 . : ‘ : . 6y House of Franciscan Friars, Preston 5 3 5 i : ‘ ‘ - 162 House of Austin Friars, Warrington FF re ey 3 ; i 5 - 162 Hospital of St. Ney en Preston : 5 ss si : . . 2 . 163 Hospital of St. race eats 5 35 si ; ‘ ‘ ‘ . 165 Gardiner’s Hospital, Lancaster . a ie a : ; é . . 166 Lathom Almshouse . y a 55 35 i P . % ‘ . 166 Hospital of St. Saviour, Stidd under Longridge . : : 5 5 3 : ‘ F ‘ . 166 College of Upholland é ‘ #5 #5 - ; r ‘ ‘ . 166 College of Manchester 3 : 55 3 9) : 7 - . . 167 Priory of Lancaster . : ‘ 3 55 ms ‘ ; r . - 167 Political History :— To the end of the oe of Henry VIII : By Pror. James Tart, M.A. ‘ a 175 From the Reign of Henry VIII. By Miss Auice Law, First Class Honours Hist. Trip. 218 Social and Economic History . : By Miss Atice Law, First-Class Honours Hist. Trip. 261 Table of Population, 1801-1901 By Georce S. Mincuin ‘ A ‘ j . 330 1x CONTENTS Industries :— Introduction Natural Products Copper Smelting Coal Mining Iron Hardware and Allied Trades Watch-Making Engineering. : : . Ordnance and Armaments . Shipbuilding Textile Industries The Woollen Tadley The Linen Industry . The Cotton Industry . Felt-Hat Making The Silk Industry Calico Printing é Bleaching, Finishing, and oe Chemical Industries . India-rubber Soap Industry . Potteries and Glass. ‘ 5 Potteries . Glass : The Sugar Industry . The Paper Industry . Asbestos . Miscellaneous Industries Sea Fisheries Agriculture Forestry Sport Ancient and Modern Introduction Hunting . Staghounds Harriers Beagles Otter Hounds Coursing . Racing Flat Racing . Steeplechasing Polo Shooting . Duck Decoys Angling . Cricket OF VOLUME TWO By Pror. S. J. aki A., M.Com., and Douctas Knoop, M.A. By Douctas Knoop, M.A. ” ” ” By Dovuctas Knoop, M.A. By Pror. S. J. Cuapman, M, A, M. ens. By Douctas Knoop, M.A. ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” ” By James Jounstone, B.Sc. aang: By W. H. R. Currzer By Wittiam Farrer Edited by the Rev. E. E. en M.A. By Maj. Arruur WittoucuBy-OsBorne ” ” ” By Harotp Brockrepank By Maj. Artuur Wittoucupy-Osgorne . By Maj. Arruur WitLoucupy-Osporne . ” ” ” By Maj. ArrHur Wittoucupy-Osgorne . By Sir Home Gorpox, Bart x PAGE 351 354 355 356 360 364 366 367 374 375 376 376 378 379 393 394 395 398 399 401 402 403 403 404 406 407 408 408 409 419 437 467 469 470 470 471 472 472 479 479 480 481 482 485 487 489 CONTENTS Sport Ancient and Modern (continued) Rugby Football Golf Wrestling Bowls Tennis Cock-Fighting . Whippet Racing Ancient Earthworks :— Lancashire South of the Sands Lancashire North of the Sands Schools :— Introduction The Royal Grammar School, Lancaster : ‘ Preston Grammar School The Harris Institute, Preston Middleton Grammar School Prescot Grammar School Manchester Schools . The Grammar School Hulme Grammar Schools The Municipal rene School : Farnworth Grammar School, Widnes Blackburn Grammar schéall Stonyhurst College, Blackburn Liverpool Schools The Grammar School Liverpool Institution, Liverpool Institute, and sai oa College Bolton-le-Moors Grammar School The Church Institute School, Bolton-le-Moors F Leyland Grammar School . The Boteler Grammar School, Warrington . St. Michaels- pe aes Gane School . Winwick School : 5 A Whalley Grammar School . é Kirkham Grammar School . . Penwortham Endowed School Clitheroe Grammar School . i Rochdale Grammar School . Rivington and Blackrod Grammar School . Blackrod School . . . Burnley School . . . OF VOLUME TWO By C. J. Bruce Marriott, M.A. . By the Rev. E. E. Doruinc, M.A.. By May. ArrHur WiLLoucHBy-OsporneE . ” ” ” By Wittoucusy Garpner, F.L.S. . By H. Swainson Cowerr, F.S.A. By A. F. Leacu, M.A., F.S.A. ” ” ” ” ” ” By the Rev. H. J. Cuayror, M.A. By A. F. Leacu, M.A.,, F.S.A. 2”? ” 9 ” ” ” By A. F. Leacu, M.A., F.S.A. By A. F. Leacu, M.A., F.S.A. By the Rev. H. J. Cuaytor, M.A. By A. F. Leacu, M.A., F.S.A. By the Rev. H. J. Cuayror, M.A. ” ” ” ” ” ? xl PAGE 493 495 499 500 sol 502 504 5°7 555 561 561 569 574 574 578 578 578 589 589 589 59° 591 593 593 595 596 600 600 601 603 603 604 604 605 605 606 606 607 607 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY I—TO THE REFORMATION HE ecclesiastical condition of the territory now included in Lancashire, during the period between the departure of the Romans and its conquest by Northumbria, is as obscure as its political organization.’ That it was already to some extent Christianized seems a reasonable inference from the establishment of a British missionary centre by Ninian at Whithern, in Galloway, beyond the bounds of the province, towards the close of the Roman occupation.’ ‘There is a possible trace of Irish influence at a later date, in the primitive little chapel at Heysham, near Morecambe, which is dedicated to St. Patrick. This is a plain rectangular oratory without a chancel, a form which may still be seen in early Irish cells, but of which there is no other instance going back beyond the Norman Conquest in any other English county save Cornwall, whose examples are undoubtedly Celtic.’ The site of the chapel, too, on a promon- tory (overlooking Morecambe Bay) is one which was very commonly chosen for Irish religious settlements. ‘The actual fabric of the chapel is perhaps Saxon, but it may have replaced an earlier building. A similar oratory may possibly have been connected with that cemetery at Kilgrimol, which is only mentioned as a boundary mark in the foundation charter of Lytham Priory.‘ This chapel, too, was close to the sea, which now covers its site.® In what, if any, diocese or dioceses the future Lancashire lay during this period, there is nothing to show. It has indeed been assumed that the diocese of Glasgow, established by St. Kentigern at the end of the sixth century, extended as far south as the Mersey. But this rests upon the further assumption that Kentigern’s patron, King Rhydderch of Alclud (Dumbarton), ruled over the whole district lying between Clyde and Mersey and bounded on the east by the hills that form the watershed ; a hypothesis which is ' See article on ‘ Political History.’ ? Vita Sti. Niniani (Historians of Scotland), v, 11. * Baldwin Brown, The Arts in Early England, i, 311 ; ii, 30, 100-103, 2793 Trans. Lancs. and Ches. Antiq. Soc. v, 4. The chapel has the Irish feature of great length in proportion to its width. Internally it is 27 ft. long, while its width varies from nearly 9 ft. to less than 8 ft. Brown gives a plan, and figures the south doorway. ‘Farrer, Lancs. Pipe R. 346, 348. ® Local tradition regards this lost chapel as the original church of Lytham (Trans. Lancs. and Ches. Hist. Soc. (New Ser.), xiii, 95). * Haddan and Stubbs, Councils, ii, 4. 2 I I A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE contradicted by one of the few pieces of fairly trustworthy evidence which are available for that age.’ If church dedications are any guide, Kentigern’s diocese did not extend southwards beyond the northern limits of the lake district. He is the patron saint of eight churches in Low Cumberland, but south of this there are no dedications to him.° Among the invocations of Lancashire churches, one has been claimed as British. The St. Elfin to whom Warrington church is dedicated is indeed usually identified with Aelfwine, the young brother of Ecgfrith of Northum- bria, whose death in battle with the Mercians near the Trent, in 679, was lamented by both nations." But Aelfwine would normally give Elwin, and there is no historical connexion known between the Aelfwine in question and Warrington, while Elfin, it is said, occurs as a Celtic name in Geoffrey of Monmouth. A new epoch in the history of the lands between the Mersey and the Solway opened with Ethelfrith’s great defeat of the Britons at Chester, in 613. The whole of this hitherto purely Celtic region was before long conquered by Northumbria, and brought into ecclesiastical dependence on the Northumbrian see of York, or on one or other of the three dioceses into which it was split up in 678—Lindisfarne, Hexham, and the narrower York. To the last-named, which comprised the present Yorkshire, then known as Deira, would naturally be attached those portions of the newly-conquered land which adjoined it on the west, including what is now Lancashire and the southern parts of the later counties of Cumberland and Westmorland. There is good reason for believing that the north-western boundary of the obedience of York was drawn now as it ran in the eleventh century, and, in fact, down to the formation of the diocese of Chester in 1541. This boundary followed the watershed between the Eden on the north and the Lune and Kent on the south to the head waters of the Derwent, along which it ran to the sea. It is a natural frontier which, as we have seen, may very well have been the southern limit of the diocese of Glasgow in Kentigern’s day, and perhaps down to Ecgfrith’s transference of Carlisle and its district to Cuthbert, that is, to the see of Lindisfarne. The changes just described are, in part at all events, alluded to in a well-known passage in Eddi’s life of Wilfrid, a passage which is not without its difficulties of interpretation. At the dedication of his church at Ripon about 675, Wilfrid, who had been bishop of York for some five years, made a speech, the gist of which is reported by his faithful secretary and biographer :— Stans itaque sanctus Wilfrithus ante altare, conversus ad populum, coram regibus (ie. Ecgfrith and Aelfwine) enumerans regiones, quas ante reges pro animabus suis et tunc in illa die, cum consensu et subscriptione episcoporum et omnium principum qui (sic) illi dederunt, lucide enuntiavit ; necnon et ea loca sancta in diversis regionibus, quae clerus Brytannus aciem gladii hostilis manu gentis nostrae fugiens deseruit. Erat quippe Deo placabile donum quod religiosi reges tam multas terras Deo ad serviendum pontifici nostro conscripserunt ; et haec sunt nomina regionum—Juxta Rippel, et in Gaedyne, et in regione Dunutinga, et in Caetlaevum, in caeterisque locis,! “ Nennius, Hist. Brit. 75. * Ferguson, Hist. of Cumb. 114. Even this extension is perhaps doubtful. The Kentigern dedications may not go back beyond the tenth and eleventh centuries, when the district of Carlisle was in Scottish hands * Trans. Lancs. and Ches. Hist. Soc. (New Ser.), xviii, 34. ” Bede, Hist. Eccl. iv, 21 : " Raine, Historians of the Church of York (Rolls Ser.), i, 25-6. , a“) 2 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY The mention of the Ribble (Rippel) indicates generally the position of the first of these regions granted to Wilfrid, in other words, to the see of York. It was undoubtedly part of the later Lancashire, but what part is not so clear. In quoting this passage, Leland (unless it was an interpolation in the copy of Eddi’s work which he followed) interjects after Rippel the explanation, ‘id est Hacmundernes,’” thus identifying the district in question with the land between the Ribble and the Cocker, which from the tenth century at latest has borne the name of Amounderness.* Canon Raine, who overlooked this passage, was inclined to give a wider extension to the ‘regio juxta Rippel’ which would make it include the greater part of the present Lancashire, the district extending from the Mersey as far north as the Cocker. In support of this view he appealed to the list of the gifts to Wilfrid as given in a lost twelfth-century life of the saint by Peter of Blois, also quoted by Leland. This list, which differs from Eddi’s both in addition and omission, runs as follows :—‘ Rible et Hasmundesham et Marchesiae et in regione Duninga.’ “ Canon Raine takes the earlier part of this to mean Amounderness, and the ‘terra inter Ripam et Mersham’ of Domesday Book, the country between the Ribble and Mersey. He has, of course, to assume that the sentence is badly dislocated, as well as corrupt in its forms. Peter of Blois’ interpretation of an ambiguous phrase written down five centuries before his time cannot carry any weight of its own, but it is possible that the meaning put upon it in the passage first cited from Leland is really too narrow, and that ‘juxta Rippel’ covered the districts both south and north of that river. The first name in Eddi’s list at least gives a starting point for identifica- tion, but it is followed by three unknowns. If we bear in mind that the later archdeaconry of Richmond, in the diocese of York, extended over the Pennine Range to the western sea, and included, besides Amounderness, the rest of the present north Lancashire and the southern halves of the present counties of Cumberland and Westmorland, its northern boundary in this direction being the Cumberland Derwent and the Eden watershed, it is tempting to locate the unknown names among the royal gifts to Wilfrid in this quarter, and so obtain a direct record of its annexation to the see of York. This Canon Raine attempted to do. Gaedyne, indeed, he was inclined to identify with Gilling (Bede’s ‘in Getlingum ’) in Yorkshire, and accounted for its appearing in this collocation on the theory that as it contained the nearest monastery to the new western annexations, they may have been placed under the charge of its abbot. The ‘regio Dunutinga,’ he thought, might be the country watered by the Duddon (Duddondale, locally Dunner- dale) and Caetlaevum Cartmel. But Cartmel cannot be identified with Caetlaevum ; the other identifications, too, are equally unconvincing, and after all there is perhaps no necessity to look for the whole of the places mentioned in this quarter. Eddi’s words are certainly more consistent with the view that Wilfrid was enumerating royal gifts of land in different quarters than with the supposition that he was describing a great addition to his diocese." The latter may more probably be referred to in the mention of the holy places from which the British clergy had been driven. ™ Leland, Colectanea, iii, 109. 8 Kemble, Cod. Dip/. No. 352. “4 Leland, Col, ili, 110. ® As regards Gaedyne, Mr. Stevenson tells me that Gae may in Southern Northumbrian have produced Yea, and points out that curiously enough there is a Yeadon in the West Riding of Yorkshire. 3 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE The ecclesiastical dependence of the district about the Ribble upon York before 675 is in any case satisfactorily established by the passage Just discussed. According to one interpretation of another passage (in Bede) there was a Northumbrian religious settlement at Whalley as early as 664. Tuda, bishop of Lindisfarne, who died in that year, is said to have been buried ‘in monaster1o quod dicitur Paegnalaech.’ ™ The Anglo-Saxon ‘ P and ‘“W’ are of course easily confused, and the Chronicle in reproducing this passage calls the place Wagele.” In a later and undoubted reference to Whalley, however, the form used in the Chronicle is ‘ aet Hweallaege,’ ® and Smith’s identification of Paegnalaech with the Pincanheal which was the meeting place of more than one Northumbrian Witenagemot, and is generally supposed to be repre- sented by the later Finchale near Durham, seems much more likely to be right. The existence of a religious centre at Whalley at an early, if uncertain, date, is, however, independently supported by tradition and its early crosses." Although Eddi’s Caetlaevum cannot be identified with Cartmel, there is positive evidence that this district (now in the Lancashire hundred of Lons- dale, north of the Sands) was, before 685, within the obedience of the Northumbrian church. King Ecgfrith gave it ‘and all the Britons with it’ to St. Cuthbert after he had raised a boy from the dead ‘ in villa quae dicitur Exanforda.’ Cuthbert entrusted it, along with the vill of Suth-Gedluit, given to him on the same occasion, to the charge of Abbot Cyneferth, son of Cugincg, who ‘ ordered them with wisdom at his discretion.’ If Cartmel was thereby attached to Cuthbert’s diocese of Lindisfarne it was not destined to remain permanently part of that see. More than two centuries elapse without a gleam of further light upon the ecclesiastical condition of the lands that were to be Lancashire. The Anglian, and later the Northman, settled sparsely in this rugged depen- dency of Northumbria, and a limited number of religious centres was doubtless established among them, closer together in the low country by the Irish Sea than in the moorlands beneath the Pennine Range. ‘The only churches, indeed, whose dedications have been thought to afford presumptive evidence of their origin in this period, are those of St. Oswald at Winwick and St. Elfin at Warrington, if indeed the latter was a Northumbrian saint.” But early crosses, or portions of such, and other sculptured stones are found south of the Ribble at Bolton and Winwick, as well as at Whalley and north of that river at Heysham, Halton, Bolton-le-Sands, Hornby, Melling, and Lancaster, the last with an Anglian inscription.” The obscurity is not broken until about the close of the first quarter of the tenth century, when the district in which the two churches above mentioned lay, the land ‘ between Ribble '6 Bede, Hist. Eccl. iii, 27. In the Anglo-Saxon version it appears as Peginaleah. " Angl.-Sax. Chron. sub anno 664 ; Leland (Col. ii, 143) has Vegnalech. '8 Angl.-Sax. Chron. sub anno 798. It is Walalege in Symeon of Durham, Hist. Regum. (Rolls Ser.), ii 9 In the fourteenth century traditionally ascribed to St. Augustine (Whalley Coucher, 186) see ” Sym. Dun. Hist. de St. Cuthd. (Rolls Ser.), i, 200. celae "See above. The advowson of Winwick was given by Roger of Poitou to the canons of St. Osw Nostell (Testa de Nevill, 405 4), but the mention of the church in . swald ae its ea was due ae connexion. Domesday hardly supports a suggestion that ? See V.C.H. Lancs.1, 262 ; Trans. Lancs. and Ches. Antig. Soc. v, 1-18. Bi transition from the Anglian to the Danish period in one of ie Halton oe oe oF the Monuments, ili, 1843 Victor, Die Northumbrischen Runensteine (1895), 23; Taylor, Anct. Cr Soeur Wells «f Lancs. The inscription on a stone found in the wall of Manchester Cathedral thou h a os ce than those already mentioned. , gh Saxon, is later 4 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY and Mersey,’ was wrested from Northumbria by Edward the Elder or Athelstan, attached to Mercia and transferred from the diocese of York to the Mercian diocese of Lichfield. The lands beyond the Ribble continued to be a dependency of Northumbria, and in the obedience of York. The ecclesiastical change thus effected was destined to be more lasting than the civil one, for the Ribble remained an ecclesiastical frontier down to the Reformation, when the districts which had long been united for civil pur- poses in the county of Lancaster were brought together for ecclesiastical purposes in Henry VIII’s new diocese of Chester. A few years later we seem to get a little light upon the district north of the Ribble. According to a charter entered in the York Registers, Athel- stan, who annexed Northumbria in 927, granted the whole region of Amoun- derness to the cathedral church of St. Peter, York, in perpetuity.% The king asserts that he had bought it with a large sum of his own money, but does not say from whom. The omission is supplied by the twelfth-century ‘ Lives of the Archbishops of York,’** in which it-is stated that Athelstan purchased it @ paganis, i.e. from the Northmen to whom the district owed the name it now bore. A grant that depended upon a bargain which subsequent pagan invaders might not consider binding upon them was clearly so pre- carious that the absence of any further trace of St. Peter’s ownership of Amounderness need not force us to question the genuineness of Athelstan’s gift, although his charter is not without its difficulties.* Just before the Norman Conquest Amounderness was in the possession of Tostig, earl of Northumbria.” These meagre and ambiguous notices exhaust the information yielded by Anglo-Saxon sources as to the ecclesiastical state of the remote and backward region with which we are concerned. With the advent of the Normans more light is forthcoming, though it is still far less abundant than could be wished. There is a strong probability that a fair proportion of the parishes into which Lancashire was divided during the later Middle Ages had already been marked out before the Conquest, while there was as yet no county of Lan- caster.” Only seventeen or eighteen indeed are named or implied in Domes- day ; but the Conqueror’s geld-book is notoriously erratic in its mention of *S Historians of Ch. of York (Rolls Ser.), iii, 1, and (without the boundaries) Kemble, Cod. Dip], No. 352 ; Birch, Cart. Sax. No. 703. Can the place-name Bispham, which in the eleventh century was Biscopham, be brought into connexion with this grant or with the earlier one to Wilfrid? ™ Hist. of Ch. of York, ii, 239. * It professes to be granted on 7 June, in 930, in the sixth year of Athelstan, at Nottingham, but the in- diction, epact and concurrent given are those of 934, to which year Birch suggests that it should be trans- ferred ; the more so because its general clauses are exactly those of Athelstan’s charter to Aelfwold granted at Winchester 28 May, 934; Birch, No. 702. If it really belongs to 934 Birch must be wrong in attributing Athelstan’s London charter to St. Mary’s, Worcester (Cart. Sax. No. 701) to this year, for it has exactly the same dating, down to the day of the month, as that we are discussing. A further result of the adoption of the later date would be to put the appointment of Wulfstan as archbishop of York, which appears from the charter to have been concurrent with or only slightly prior to the grant of Amounderness, four years later than has been usually supposed. The original charter is unfortunately not producible. ** Dom. Bk. i, 3014. ” The county boundaries as ultimately settled did not everywhere coincide with parish boundaries. In Lonsdale, where the county boundary was drawn after the Conquest, Dalton township was left in the parish of Burton in Kendal, and Ireby in the Yorkshire parish of Thornton. The limits of Amounderness and ‘Between Ribble and Mersey’ were fixed before the Conquest, but Aighton in Amounderness was after- wards placed in the Yorkshire parish of Mitton, while the parish of Whalley included parts of Bowland and that of Rochdale Saddleworth, both in Yorkshire. 5 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE churches. Considering the very small space allotted to the district the number given compares favourably with what is vouchsafed in the case of some of the midland and southern counties. It comprises more than a fourth of the parish churches which are recorded to have existed before the end of the thirteenth century. The Yaxatio of Pope Nicholas drawn up in 1291-2 enumerates forty-eight, to which must be added eight which cer- tainly existed then, but from poverty or other reasons were excluded from the list ;°° of the fifty-six at least forty-seven can be traced back in records to the twelfth century, and nineteen are mentioned in documents of the eleventh. Ten of the seventeen or eighteen Domesday churches belonged to the district between the Ribble and the Mersey and to the diocese of Chester, whither the see of Lichfield had been removed in 1075 by its first Norman bishop Peter, a chaplain of the Conqueror. In every case but one a con- siderable pre-Conquest endowment of land is recorded, and some had had extensive immunities ; this doubtless accounts for their being mentioned. The most highly endowed were Whalley (St. Mary) ® and Winwick (St. Oswald), each of which had under the Confessor two carucates of land tree of all ‘custom.’ In other words, each had a glebe assessed at some 240 arable acres, the fines for all emendable crimes and offences committed within its limits were taken by the church itself and its land was exempt from danegeld. Warrington (St. Elfin), Wigan, and Walton-on-the-Hill each had a carucate of land, and the first was quit of all ‘custom’ except geld.” In Manchester the church of St. Mary and the church of St. Michael had held a carucate of land with the same immunity ;* St. Michael’s was at Ashton-under-Lyne, and its close association with Manchester suggests that this comparatively small parish was not yet quite independent of the mother church. The priest of Childwall is entered as the tenant T.R.E. of half a carucate in (free) alms.* Two bovates, or a quarter of a carucate, was the endowment of Blackburn church.* In Leyland Hundred a priest is inci- dentally mentioned among the tenants of Roger the Poitevin’s vassals in 1086.% This has been thought to imply the existence of a church at Leyland.*® Although, with this exception, the information given all refers to a date twenty years before the Survey there is no reason to suppose that the churches lost any of their land. Five of the churches mentioned or implied were closel associated with the great hundredal manors of the crown into which this district was divided before the Conquest. At Warrington, Blackburn, and perhaps Leyland the church was actually in the royal vill; Manchester was * In Bedfordshire, for instance, only four are named. * The complete list and the reasons referred to above for the exclusion in 12 i dist ar 91 of certain church supphed by the /nguisitio N onarum of 1341 (Rec. Com.), 35-41. It is as follows :—Deanery of Ma. and Blackburn: Manchester, Middleton, Bury, Flixton, Radcliffe, Ashton-under-Lyne, Prestwich, Bolto Rochda'e, Eccles, Blackburn, Whalley. Deanery of Warrington: Warrington, Leigh, Winwick ; Presc - Childwall, Huyton, Sefton, Aughton, Ormskirk, Halsall, North Meols, Walton-on-the-Hill Wigan 5 D ao of Leyland: Leyland, Croston, Eccleston, Standish, Penwortham. Deanery of Aromas : Deesiay, ae ham, Lytham, St. Michaels-on-Wyre, Gar:tang, Poulton, Ribchester, Chipping, Cockerham Dates 9 : Deanery A ae ae Kendal: Heysham, Halton, Tunstall, Melling, Tatham, Claughton Warton Whit. tington, Polron-Je-Sands. Deanery of Copeland: Dalton, Ulverst Aldi h ? ’. i “artmel, Kirkby Ire!eth. SEE Ge ees ee Menainaten, ® Dom. Br. i, 270. 3! Tbid. 2694 3 Tb; 7 ? ‘ * ‘ . Ib . «Ibid. 270. * Ibid. 2694. * Ibid. 270. ¢ 6 Ibid A sugzestion has, however, been made that Croston may have been the mother church of de hund d red. 6 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY the parish church of the adjacent Salford, and Walton-on-the-Hill of (West) Derby. Wigan, though more remote from Newton, which moreover was in the parish of Winwick, is generally regarded as the church which Domesday speaks of as ‘the church of this manor’ (i.e. Newton). It would seem more natural for Winwick to have occupied that position, and it is difficult to suggest an explanation of the actual state of things unless it be that Wigan was its mother church.” The smallness of the endowment of Blackburn as compared with Whalley, which divided the hundred with it, is noteworthy, and it is possible that the latter was the mother church. The evidence as a whole, scanty though it be, especially in the cases where manor-house and church were in different vills, seems to point to these five churches or most of them being older than the hundredal division, which was probably sub- sequent to the Mercian conquest. If Whalley be added we have a list which pretty certainly includes the most ancient churches of ‘ Between Ribble and Mersey,’ from whose original parochiae the other parishes were gradually cut out. The thirty parishes into which the district was ultimately divided varied greatly in size.” The most extensive were naturally in its eastern moorlands ; Whalley—the largest—-covered about 180 square miles and comprised not less than thirty townships. Blackburn, Eccles, Rochdale, and Manchester came next in the order named. The last had an area of sixty square miles, All, especially Whalley and Rochdale, included great stretches of waste land. The smallest were Radcliffe and Aughton—the only single township parishes—and Flixton, containing two townships of less than average size.” The space allotted in Domesday to those parts of the present Lancashire which lie north of the Ribble, and were then in the diocese of York, is even scantier than that devoted to ‘ Between Ribble and Mersey,’ and no more than eight churches at most can be deduced from the Survey. Under Amounderness the enumeration of its vills is followed by a state- ment that all these with three churches belong to Preston. The churches referred to are presumably Kirkham (the vill is entered as Chicheham), Poulton, and St. Michaels-on-Wyre (vill entered as Michelescherche). ‘7 Mr. Farrer suggests that as Newton Hundred (or manor) was probably cut out of that of West Derby, the church of the former and mother church of Winwick may have been Walton-on-the-Hill. In support of this hypothesis he points out that Robert de Walton, whom he takes to be the parson of Walton, held in 1212 one-third of the Winwick glebe of two carucates (Testa de Nevill, 405 ; Lancs. Ing. i, 72). Butas the carucate belonging ‘to the church of the manor’ in 1066 was exclusive of the two carucates held by Winwick the suggested explanation presents difficulties of its own. 3° In the twelfth century, it is true, one-fourth of the tithes, &c., of Whalley and its chapels at Clitheroe and Downham was attached to the rectory of Blackburn ; Whalley Coucher, 91-4. But Henry de Lacy (c. 1150) in one of his charters claims that this benefice was the gift of his ancestors (ibid. 76). 8° No less than twelve of the churches were dedicated (if the original dedications have survived) to St. Mary (Manchester, Blackburn, Bury, Eccles, Leigh, Prescot, Prestwich, Walton-on-the-Hill, Whalley, Eccle- ston, Radcliffe, and Penwortham); five to St. Michael (Aughton, Croston, Huyton, Flixton, and Ashton- under-Lyne) ; two each to St. Cuthbert (Halsall and North Meols), and All Saints (Childwall, Wigan), and one each to St. Andrew (Leyland), St. Chad (Rochdale), St. Elfin (Warrington), St. Helen (Sefton), St. Leonard (Middleton), St. Oswald (Winwick), St. Peter (Bolton), St. Peter and St. Paul (Ormskirk), and St. Wilfrid (Standish). See Mr. Brownbill’s article on ‘Ancient Church Dedications in Ches. and South Lancs., Trans. Hist. Soc. (New Ser.), xviii, 19-44. “ A number of the smaller parishes were no doubt of post-Conquest creation ; North Meols, for example, was still a chapel about 1155 ; Farrer, Lancs. Pipe R. 323. In this and probably other cases feudal changes seem to have altered ecclesiastical topography. North Meols was a detached township of the barony of Penwortham. Eccleston was claimed as a chapel of Croston as late as 1317 (Hist. of Lanc. Church, Chet. Soc. 24, 411), but is described as a church in 1094; Lancs. Pipe R. 290. Sefton church, which is first mentioned in 1203, was probably formed out of Walton. 7 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Preston itself made a fourth parish. As Chipping and Ribchester, which are now in Blackburn Hundred, were then in Amounderness they would appear not to have been as yet separate parishes. Lytham and Garstang, too, are seemingly post-Conquest churches. ease Only two churches (Tatham and Tunstall) are specifically mentione in the later Lonsdale Hundred, but Kirk Lancaster (Chercaloncastre) is included among the vills dependent on Halton, and Mr. Farrer is no doubt right in identifying the Cherchebi which had been held as one manor by Duuan 1n the time of King Edward with Cartmel (Kirkby-in-Cartmel). To this meagre list the foundation charter of Lancaster Priory (¢. 1094) adds Bolton- le-Sands, Heysham, and Melling,” while thirteen others occur in twelfth- century documents. The twenty-six parishes in this part of the county at the end of the thirteenth century “ included a larger proportion of small parishes than was the case south of the Ribble. There were seven single-township parishes— Pennington, Whittington, Tatham, Halton, Claughton, Heysham, and Lytham.* Some of these besides Lytham may have been of post-Conquest origin. Lancaster and Dalton-in-Furness were the most extensive, but both contained large areas of wood and fell. It is a striking indication of the backwardness of the districts now sncluded in Lancashire that not a single religious house had been founded within them before the Norman Conquest. No land was held there in 1086 by any monastery or church without its limits, though, as we have seen, grants had been made at various times to Lindisfarne (Durham) and St. Peter’s, York.* Eight years after the date of Domesday, however, count Roger of Poitou founded Lancaster Priory as a cell of the Norman abbey of St. Martin at Sées. The first denizen house was established thirty years later by his successor, as lord of the honour of Lancaster, at Tulketh by Preston and removed after three years to Furness.” Before the close of the twelfth century eight other religious houses had been established, but half of these were mere cells of monasteries outside the county.* Count Roger and his sheriff Godfrey also made liberal grants to Shrewsbury Abbey and the priory of Nostell. To the period immediately after the Conquest belongs not only the temporary transference of the see of Lichfield to Chester, but the division of that and other dioceses into territorial archdeaconries. Hitherto the bishops had needed but one ‘ eye’ ; but now almost every county was provided with “ Trans. Lancs. and Ches. Antig. Soc. xviii, 98. “ For other churches known to have been of pre-Conquest date see above, p. 4. ** Of these six were dedicated (if their original dedications have survived) to St. Michael (Kirkham St. Michaels-on-Wyre, Cockerham, Tunstall, Urswick, Pennington); four to St. Mary (Lancaster, Caruiel, Ulverston, Dalton-in-Furness); three each to St. Cuthbert (Lytham, Aldingham, Kirkby Ireleth) atid St. Wilfrid (Preston, Ribchester, Halton) ; two each to St. Peter (Heysham, Melling) St. Chad (Poulto Claughton), and Holy Trinity (Bolton-le-Sands, Warton); and one each to St. Bartholomew (Chippi , St. Helen (Garstang), and St. James (Tatham). Some cases of adjoining parishes with the same Re e.g. Kirkham, St. Michaels-on-Wyre, and Cockerham may be due to affiliation. In 1205 an attemptt Sue that Garstang was a chapel of St. Michaels-on-Wyre failed on an adverse verdict of a jury (Lancs Pp R rok 197). Furness Abbey a few years later claimed Pennington and Ulverston as chapels of Urewick bg : re Dedications to St. James and Holy Trinity are probably late. The St. Chad dedications if ori t ‘ as expected beyond the bounds of his diocese. The Whittington invocation is unknown pee i Claughton was the smallest in the county. Lytham seems to have been taken ‘aut of Kirkh “See above, pp. 2, 45 5. *° See p. 167, ‘ Religious Houses.’ ae © See p. 114, ‘ Religious Houses.’ “* See p. 102, ‘ Religious Houses? fe) ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY its archdeacon. The lands composing the nascent ‘ Lancashire,’ as belong- ing to two dioceses, were divided between two archdeacons. The district ‘between Ribble and Mersey’ formed with Cheshire the sphere of the archdeacon of Chester. That north of the Ribble was combined with the western half of the North Riding of Yorkshire and the districts of Kendal and Copeland in the archdeaconry of Richmond. Three archdeacons of Chester—Halmar, William, and Robert—are recorded without dates before Richard Peche (afterwards bishop of the see), who is said to have held the office in 1135. Conan ‘ the archdeacon,’ who witnessed a charter of Count Alan of Richmond in the reign of William Rufus, is thought to be the earliest archdeacon of Richmond on record.” The archidiaconal courts and visitations were no doubt originally held in virtue of authority delegated by the bishop, but ‘early in the twelfth century the English archdeacons possessed themselves of a customary jurisdic- tion including certain matters of importance and in particular cases, as that of the archdeaconry of Richmond, augmented by recorded acts of devolu- tion from the bishops." The archdeacon of Richmond exercised a large measure of episcopal authority within the region assigned to him. He was ordinary therein concurrently with and almost to the exclusion of the arch- bishop of York.” The archbishop’s right to visit the archdeaconry was some- times disputed, and it was ultimately agreed that the clergy were not obliged to receive or entertain him.* The episcopal functions of confirmation, con- secration,™ and ordination were of course exercised only by the archbishop ; but the archdeacon instituted to all benefices,* and to him fell the sequestra- tions during their vacancy. He received the synodals and Peter’s pence, paying only to the Chancellor of York 20s. per annum. The archbishop could not impose an aid upon the clergy of the archdeaconry nor suspend a church or clerk belonging to it.°° Richmond was exceptional, but the jurisdiction of the archdeacons was everywhere so aggressive that the bishops about the middle of the twelfth century sought to limit it by delegating their own judicial powers to episcopal officials.” The division of the various dioceses into rural deaneries seems to have been older than that into archdeaconries and prior to the Norman Conquest. Originally mere episcopal delegates, the rural deans in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries had distinct rights and duties. They exercised a general supervision over the clergy and—in spiri- tual matters—over the laity of their deaneries whether by formal visitations or otherwise; inducted to benefices, which they took into their hands during vacancies; and enjoyed jurisdiction, which in minor matters they administered in virtue of their own power, but in more serious cases in the chapters of the clergy of their deaneries, which they had the right to summon, and in which they presided. From the middle of the thirteenth century onwards, however, they gradually became tompletely subordinate to the archdeacons. © Le Neve, Fasti, i, 565. ® Dugdale, Mon. Angl. 1, 391 ; Whitaker, Richmondshire, i, 35, 83. 51 Rep. of Eccl. Courts Com. i, 25-6 ; Richmondshire Wills (Surtees Soc.), p. xx. 5? Whitaker, op. cit. i, 34. 53 Ibid. ; Cal. Pap. Letters, ii, 93 ; cf. Furness Coucher, 657, 659. 54 He granted licences for graveyards ; Hist. of Lanc. Church, 153, 164, 362. > Including headships of religious houses ; but Cockersand seems to have had direct relations with the archbishop ; see ‘ Religious Houses,’ p. 108. 56 Whitaker, loc. cit. ” Rep. of Eccl. Courts Com. i, 26. 58 Makower, Const. Hist. of the Church of England (Eng. tr.), 322; Dansey, Horae Decanicae Rurales (1835). 2 9 2, A HISTORY OF Ce es pester 1 he first age of the office their appointment had ot, e ranaated bY 7m ee ys the thirteenth century they ae ie eonrics of Chester and bishops, ee hdeacon jointly. In the ao the archdeacon only.” the bishop and the arc “4 have been appointed by h Richmond they are said f0 ffice, contrary to the ; tury the o ; ; t in the twelfth centu i aa eae ear eee held for life.” Little 1s known of the decanal usual practice > eem to have been made before the ae is date, but changes § divisions at this > i th century.” ; ; : ee on Conquest ushered in a period of monastic revival through- out England and a corresponding outburst of lay liberality to religious houses. Land, tithes, and church advowsons were showered upon them by the Norman barons. The most munificent of these donors in the district with which we are concerned was Count Roger of Poitou, the first lord of the honour of Lancaster. Included in his lavish grants to the great Norman abbey of St. Martin at Sées, for the endowment of a dependent priory at Lancaster, were, in addition to the church of St. Mary there, the advowsons of no fewer than nine churches and a portion of the tithes of nearly all his wide demesne land in this region. Roger’s successor in the honour, Stephen of Blois, and a number of the great tenants here made similar but less sweep- ing grants ; by the close of the twelfth century nearly half of the churches in the new county of Lancaster had been transferred from lay to monastic patrons. Most of these grants of churches were made to religious houses outside the county,” who, however, generally received their advowsons as endowments of daughter houses within it. Only eleven advowsons were granted to independent Lancashire monasteries, and three of these were no longer in their possession when the fourteenth century opened.” Such grants occasionally led to litigation between different religious houses, who put forward rival claims to the same church. The rights of the lay patrons who bestowed churches were not always well defined, and a further complication was introduced by the ambiguous relation of certain 5° Dansey, op. cit. li, 369. Ibid. i, 149. §! See below, App. II. ® To Sées (for Lancaster Priory): Bolton-le-Sands, Childwall, Croston, a moiety of Eccleston, Heys- ham, Kirkham, Lancaster, Melling, Poulton-le-Fylde, and Preston, all c. 1094 (Lancs. Pipe R. 289-90), Kirk- ham was lost in 1143 (but Bispham Chapel obtained 1147), Preston in 1196, Melling alienated 1185-1210, and Childwall in 1232. To Nostell: Winwick by Roger of Poitou. To Shrewsbury : Kirkham (lost 1196) and Walton-on-the-Hill by Godfrey, sheriff of Count Roger, c. 1093-4. To Pontefract : Whalley (with the castle chapel of Clitheroe and the chapels of Clitheroe, Colne, and Burnley) by Hugh de la Val between 1121 and 1135 (Chart. of St. Fobn of Pontefract). Withdrawn in 1135 by Ilbert de Lacy on his recovery of the honours of Pontefract and Clitheroe. To Evesham (for Penwortham Priory): Penwortham by Warin Bussel between 1140 and 1149 (Lancs. Pipe R. 320-3), Leyland and North Meols by Richard Bussel between 1153 and 1160 (ibid. 323-5), To Leicester: Cockerham (with Ellel Chapel) by William de Lancaster I between 1153 and 1156 (ibid. 392). To Mattersey: Bolton-le-Moors by Roger de Marsey (Mattersey) under Henry II (Lancs. Pipe R. 408; Lancs. Final Concords,i, 75). To Durham (for Lytham Priory) : Lytham by Richard son of Roger between 1189 and 1194 (ibid. 346). To Stanlaw: Rochdale by Roger de Lacy between 1194 and 1211 (Coucher of Whalley, 135-8). The institutions in the Lich- field episcopal registers, which begin in the fourteenth century, show that Lancaster Priory Presented to its livings, while the presentations to Penwortham, &c., were made by Evesham. ® To Furness : Dalton and Urswick, doubtless conveyed with Furness by Count Stephen of Mortain’s grant of 1127 (Lancs, Pipe R. 301) and Kirkby Ireleth, acquired ¢. 1160-80 and held til] ieee “ in Coucher, 318). ‘The advowson of Ulverston may also have belonged for a time to Furness, ToC ( Ae Pennington by Gamel de Pennington before 1181, Ulverston before 1184 by William de onishead : (Lancs. Pipe R. 357). To Cartmel : Cartmel by William Marshal between 1189 and 4 ¢ Lancaster II To Burscough: Huyton, Flixton (lost before 1300) and Ormskirk by Robert son of H 94 (ibid. 341). (ibid. 350). To Wyresdale : St. Michaels-on-Wyre by Theobald Walter bet enry about 1190 336). This grant lapsed on the death of Theobald. To Cockersand : Claughton b God; and 1198 (ibid. Roger de Croft between 1216 and 1255 (see below, ‘ Religious Houses,’). ¥ Godith de Kellet and fe) ween 1193 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY religious houses to others. To this latter cause of confusion has been attri- buted the dispute which raged during the first half of the twelfth century between the abbey of Shrewsbury and Lancaster Priory over the advowson of Kirkham church. Shrewsbury Abbey had been colonized from Sces by Roger of Montgomery, and his first intention may have been that it should remain an affiliated house of the great Norman abbey. At any rate the latter laid claim to certain possessions of Shrewsbury Abbey for fifty years after its foundation. But in the case of Kirkham the Sées claim rested on more definite ground than this. It had been clearly granted to both houses. The grant to Shrewsbury by Godfrey the sheriff confirmed by Roger of Poitou son of Roger of Montgomery was the earlier, and in 1143 William Fitz Herbert, archbishop of York, finally decided in its favour. Count Roger’s grant of it to Sées for Lancaster Priory must, if correctly dated, have followed that to Shrewsbury in a very few months. The only reason- able explanation of this double grant would suppose some transfer of God- frey’s interest in Kirkham to his superior lord in the interval. For this, however, there is no evidence. It is true that Godfrey’s lands reverted to the demesne, apparently before 1102, and that Walton-on-the-Hill, the other church which he gave to Shrewsbury Abbey, was, there is reason to believe, regranted to that house by Count Roger. But this general resump- tion must have been subsequent to the grant of Kirkham to Lancaster Priory, which was accompanied by his own concession of the tithes of Bispham close by.™ A dispute which arose at the end of the twelfth century between Furness Abbey and Conishead Priory over the churches of Pennington and Ulverston illustrates another way in which rival claims to advowsons by monasteries might arise. The monks of Furness, who resented the estab- lishment of the priory in close proximity to their own house and on land over which they possessed the lordship, put in a claim to the two churches which had been granted to Conishead by its founders on the ground that they were chapels of its own church of Urswick. ‘The dispute was ulti- mately settled by a compromise, Furness relinquishing its claim to the churches in question on certain conditions which included the abandonment by Conishead of its counter-claim to the chapel of Hawkshead.* Monasteries had also to defend their title to advowsons against laymen. Church patronage was valuable as a means of providing for younger members of families and dependants, and the successors of donors not infrequently begrudged their generosity and were ready to seize upon any defect of title to get it reversed. Thus Theobald Walter on receiving a grant of all Amounderness from Richard I in 1194 immediately laid claim to the advow- sons of Kirkham, Poulton, and Preston, founding it, we may suppose, upon the ground that the validity of Roger of Poitou’s gifts had been impaired by his disinherison and banishment in 1102. The result of the suits which he instituted in the royal courts was that Shrewsbury Abbey had to surrender the advowson of Kirkham church to Theobald, reserving only an annual pension of twelve marks, and the monks of Sées, while obtaining a confirma- tion of the churches of Poulton and Bispham, gave up that of Preston with * See below, ‘ Religious Houses.’ ® Tbid. II A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE the exception of a yearly pension of ten marks. Theobald Walter's heir was not allowed to inherit Amounderness, and the advowsons of Preston and Kirkham with that of St. Michaels-on-Wyre, which the monks of Wyres- dale had enjoyed for a moment by his gift, passed to the crown, and Henry III ultimately bestowed the two former upon his younger son Edmund, first earl of Lancaster. The rights of heirs could not always be defeated by the grant of a church to a monastery. Robert son of Henry, lord of Lathom, in or about 1190 gave the church of Flixton to his new house of canons at Burscough. But on a vacancy a few years later and after his death his younger brother and (seemingly) a nephew presented, and the question of right was brought before the king’s court; an assize of darrein presentment was held, and a local jury found that Robert’s father Henry, son of Siward, had last presented to the church, and that the two descendants whose title was impugned by the canons were his heirs and the true patrons; whereupon the bishop of Lich- field instituted their candidate to the benefice.” Religious houses sought to protect themselves against these dangers by procuring charters of confirmation from all who were in any way interested in the benefice whether as superior lords or otherwise, in addition to the consent of the bishop of Lichfield in the case of churches south of the Ribble and of the archdeacon of Richmond in the case of those north of that river, which was required by the canon of the Council of London in 1102, making the licence of the diocesan necessary to the validity of all such transfer of patronage.” To make assurance doubly sure confirmations were often obtained from the king and the pope, though this was an expensive safeguard. Until the last quarter of the twelfth century the monastic grantees of Lancashire churches had with rare exceptions been content with the right of presenting a rector or parson in the same way as the lay patrons had done, receiving from him a fixed pension.” In several cases, however, religious houses had already been allowed to appropriate the whole property and income of certain benefices to their own uses, subject to making provision for the cure of souls therein. The monastery became the rector, and served the church either by its own members or by paid vicars, curates, or chap- lains." In Lancashire such appropriations were first made when the parish church was intended to be the conventual church of a monastery, as at Lancaster and Penwortham. But about the middle of the twelfth centur Cockerham church seems to have been appropriated to Leicester Abbey without obligation to establish a cell there. It was not until 1207 that the abbey, which had hitherto served the church by a stipendiary chaplain, undertook to settle some of its canons at Cockerham.” With the foundation of new religious houses in the latter half of the century appropriations © Lancs. Final Concords, i, 2, 6. Lancs. Pipe R. 353-6; below, ‘Religious Houses,’ p. 149. © Evesham received from the church of Leyland until its appropri 12 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY increased, and by 1300 some twenty parish churches had passed into the hands of monastic rectors.” Only five of these were conventual. In addition to these the church of Kirkby Ireleth was appropriated before 1291 to the cathedral church of York,” those of Bolton-le-Moors and Bolton-le-Sands were annexed to the archdeaconries of Chester and Richmond respectively,” while Flixton was appropriated about 1280 to a new prebendal stall in Lichfield Cathedral.* The extension of appropriations had its dangers. It involved a great change in parochial arrangements which had not been the case with monastic patronage. The mere substitution of religious for lay patrons was on the whole a change for the better. Monastic patrons must have helped to arrest that tendency of tithes to become lay property which was so marked in the twelfth century, and they did something no doubt to secure a better class of rectors. It has to be confessed, however, that in Lancashire at all events they failed to get rid of those half-secular and even hereditary parsons against whom the church councils of the twelfth century were constantly fulminating—an abuse to which a number of Lancashire benefices, owing to the great size of their parishes and the rectorial manors attached to some of them, were peculiarly subject.” The rectories of Walton and Kirkham seem to have remained just as hereditary under the patronage of the religious as Blackburn and Whalley did under lay patrons.” But their drafts upon parish revenues were comparatively moderate, and the rectors they presented were instituted by, and owed obedience only to, the bishop. When, however, religious corporations became rectors them- selves they were tempted to divert an undue proportion of parish revenues to their own purposes, and delegate the cure of souls to poorly paid chaplains or vicars. ‘The bishops soon became alive to this danger, and set themselves to provide a remedy. Appropriations could only be effected with their consent, though a great house like Furness or Whalley sometimes forced their hand by a direct appeal to the pope, and they succeeded in most cases in establishing their right to institute and receive the exclusive obedience of the vicar to whom the cure of souls in the appropriate parish was entrusted. In all the ecclesiastical affairs of the benefice the monastic rector was reduced to the position of a patron, and the vicar stood on the same legal footing as 72 Appropriate to Lancaster: Lancaster (c. 1094), Poulton (one moiety before 1198, the other in 1247). To Evesham (Penwortham) : Penwortham (between 1140 and 1149). To Leicester: Cockerham (between 1153 and 1156). To Conishead: Pennington (before 1181) and Ulverston (c. 1200). ‘To Cartmel : Cartmel (between 1189 and 1194). To Wyresdale : St. Michaels-on-Wyre (between 1193 and 1198). This appro- priation lasted only a few years. To Furness: Dalton and Urswick. To Burscough: Ormskirk (between 1215 and 1223) and Huyton (¢.1230). ‘To Cockersand: Garstang (between 1217 and 1237). To Croxton: Tunstall (before 1230). To Nostell : Winwick (in or before 1231). ‘Fo Stanlaw: Rochdale (1222), Blackburn (1230, 1259), Eccles (before 1277), Whalley (1283). To Vale Royal: Kirkham (between 1280 and 1291). The authority for the dates assigned will be found in the case of the Lancashire houses in the monastic section. 73 Advowson transferred from Furness Abbey in 1228 (Furness Coucher, 653). ™ The former between 1246 and 1256 (Not. Cestr. ii, 8); but Mattersey Priory retained a pension and the presentation of the vicars; the latter (whose advowson was acquired from Lancaster Priory in 1246) between 1279 and 1291 (Cal. Pap. Letters, i, 484). Vicarage ordained at Bolton-le-Sands in 1336; Not. Cestr. il, 548. 78 Le Neve, Fasti Eccl. Angi. i, 602. V.C.H. Lancs. iti, § ; Lancs. Pipe R. 110. 7 A division between the sons of a twelfth-century rector seems to be the explanation of the two medieties of Blackburn Rectory, which were transferred to Stanlaw Abbey in 1230 and 1259 respectively ; Whalley Coucher, 72 sqq. The rectory of Whalley was held for generations by one family with the title of dean, a state of things which was only terminated in 1234 ; ibid. 187, 293. 13 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE the rector of a non-appropriate church. In this way perpetual seed came into existence. The bishop’s right to institute such vicars enable him further to insist on a permanent endowment of the cure by the oe priator, the amount of which was fixed by the diocesan and could be pa by him if need arose. A few perpetual vicarages were created in the closing ears of the twelfth century, but their establishment on a large scale belongs to the first half of the thirteenth. In one small group of appropriated churches no vicarages were created. Lancaster, Penwortham, Cockerham, Cartmel, Lytham, and Ulverston, which had early become conventual or quasi-conventual, continued to be served by members of the appropriating house or by clergy whom it instituted and removed at its pleasure without reference to the ordinary and whose stipends it fixed.” To these latter the designation ‘curate’ was ultimately confined, and with the exception of Lancaster, in which a vicarage was ordained after the suppression of the alien priory in the fifteenth century, the benefices in question became perpetual curacies after the Reformation.” These precedents were not followed when the abbey of Stanlaw was removed to Whalley in 1296: a vicarage was ordained, the church remaining purely parochial. But, on the ground that the residence of secular clerks within the monastic precincts led to disturbances, the abbey induced the bishop of Lichfield to institute members of its own body as vicars, and finally procured a licence for this usage from Pope Innocent VI in 1358.% The priory of Burscough too obtained episcopal licence to present canons of the house to their appropriate and adjacent church of Ormskirk ‘in relief of their burdens.’ * The earliest recorded case of the ordination of a vicarage in Lancashire has a somewhat transitional character. In sanctioning the appropriation of the church of St. Michaels-on-Wyre to the monks of Wyresdale between 1193 and 1196 the archdeacon of Richmond stipulated for the appointment of a definite (certus) vicar ‘ with a portion sufficient for his food and clothing.’ Where- upon the monks entered into a formal agreement with a certain chaplain that he should be their chaplain for life in the church of St. Michael, or should find at his own charges another competent chaplain who should first do fealty to the abbot and monks. For this service (propter hoc servicium) they granted him land near the church and half a mark of silver yearly for his vicarage (vicaria) and for his faithful service.” The removal of the abbey to Ireland put an end to this arrangement, but fourteen or fifteen vicarages had been created in Lancashire before 1300. The minimum annual income of a vicar was fixed by the council of Oxford in 1222 at 5 marks,® and this was the amount assigned to the vicar of Rochdale, which was appropriated in that year to Stanlaw Abbey. Found to be too low it was augmented in 1277 to 18 marks.* The others 73 . + 7 Makower, op. cit. 330. The case of Lytham shows that even where the prior of a cell was admitted by the ordinary, he could be removed at any time by the convent. Th i even admitted by the bishops of Lichfeld. ; : Et Heeb St RCE nara ere Thid. 332. “ Cal. Pap. Let. iii, §95. In the fifteenth century monks of Whalley their churches at Blackburn and Rochdale. which had become very general, by statute. a Reg. Bursc, fol. 1064 (1285) ; Duc. Lanc. Anct. Deeds, L. 275 (1 339). * Lancs. Pipe R. 336-9. 8 Wilkins, Concisia, i 587 “ Whaley Coucher, 139. ® Ibid. 85. Repo 14 were not infrequently vicars of Under Hen. IV an attempt was made to stop this practice, ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY ranged from £5 (Cockerham, Urswick) up to £44 (Whalley). This was nearly always made up from the small tithes and the altarage of the church, but in at least one case all the tithes of one of the townships were assigned (with altarage) to the vicar. A competent manse* was usually added and sometimes a portion of the glebe. The vicars were generally bound to pay the ordinary charges upon the benefice, the synodalia or cathedral dues, and the archdeacon’s procurations (originally food and other provisions during his visitations), the extraordinary charges being borne by the monastery ; other arrangements, however, occur.” The provision made for these Lancashire vicars was fairly liberal as times went. It was not attempted to fix a proportion between the value of the whole rectory and the vicar’s portion, the principle being simply to secure the vicar a sufficient maintenance, not to give him a fair share of the profits. But allowance was made for the greater burdens incumbent upon him in the more extensive parishes, and occasionally, where the benefice was exceptionally rich, this fact may have been to some extent taken into account. Neverthe- less, the more valuable the church the larger was the residue that went to the religious. The vicar of Kirkham was nearly twice as well paid as the vicar of Garstang,” but while Cockersand Abbey drew only 40 marks a year from the latter, the income of the monks of Vale Royal from Kirkham was six times that amount. Kirkham, Blackburn, which was worth 40 marks, and Whalley were the best endowed vicarages in the county. Bishop Langton assigned to the vicar of Whalley in 1298 a competent manse, 30 acres of land with ‘ house- bote’ in the abbey’s wood and pasturage for his beasts with theirs, the whole altarage of the church and six of its seven chapels, and the glebes of those of Burnley and Church.” The altarage was estimated to be worth over £37, exactly a quarter of the gross value of the rectory. All the ordinary and one- third of the extraordinary charges were to be borne by the vicar, but the abbey was made responsible for the repairs and maintenance of the chancel of the church. The altarage probably increased in value, and in 1330 the monks induced Bishop Northburgh to revise the vicar’s portion as excessive. His altarage was commuted for an annual sum of (44, the land and common rights were withdrawn, and the maintenance of divine service in the chapels was imposed upon him, which involved an expenditure of at least £20 a year. The abbey, however, had now to defray all extraordinary charges.” It would seem that the value of the vicarage was afterwards further reduced, perhaps 8 Garstang (Cockersand Chart. (Chet. Soc.], 282) ; a detailed ordination of considerable interest. % The vicar of Leyland was given half the rectory manse. e.g. at Whalley (in the first ordination) 30 acres and the glebes of all its chapels ; at Rochdale 4 oxgangs ; at Blackburn 2 oxgangs; at Garstang 1 oxgangin the town fields ; at Ormskirk 4 acres ; at Huyton selions. ou The tax known as ‘synodals’ or ‘synodaticum ’ (also ‘cathedraticum’) was so called because generally paid at the bishop’s Easter synod ; Phillimore, Eccl, Law, 162. Normally 2s. was the maximum from each church, but some Lancashire parishes seem to have paid more; Whalley Coucher, 206. 9 35% marks and 20 marks respectively. The figures are taken from the ‘Taxation of Pope Nicholas.’ Benefices were not taxed at their full value, but this does not affect the proportions between vicarages and rectories. In that part of Lancashire which lay in the diocese of Lichfield the vicarages were not separately taxed. °° Whalley Coucher, 215. % Tbid. 219. In 1281, on appeal from the abbey, the archbishop inhibited the bishop of Lichfield from acceding to a request of the vicar of Blackburn for an augmentation of his portion (ibid. 95). 15 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE as a result of its being held by monks of the house. At the time of the Dissolution the vicar’s pension amounted to £12 only.” eranaied The ravages of the Scots in the reign of Edward II seriously diminishe the incomes of the Lancashire vicars in the archdeaconry of Richmond, but the rectories were equally affected.” Limited by the establishment of per- petual vicarages, the system of monastic appropriations was not originally without redeeming features. The expenses of a celibate priest were, or ought to have been, comparatively small ; and as long as the religious houses served a good purpose, the surplus revenues of rich rectories were better employed in their maintenance than in swelling the incomes of such great pluralists and non-residents as the notorious John Mansel, minister of Henry III, whose three hundred benefices included the desirable rectory of Wigan. Of him it is related that on one occasion when he had received a fair benefice of £20, he exclaimed, ‘ This will provide for my dogs.’ * Rectors too, it must be remembered, were frequently allowed by com- plaisant bishops to delegate their duties at the sacrifice of a small fraction of their income, and in the case of one rich Lancashire living—that of Walton- on-the-Hill—a perpetual vicarage was ordained in 1326 by the bishop of Lichfield. Even where rectories escaped the pluralist and the sinecure rector they were apt to be treated by lay patrons as a convenient provision for younger sons, who had often to be given leave of absence from their cures for some years in order that they might fit themselves for their work.” On the whole it would seem probable that for long the vicars presented by the monasteries made better parish priests. Nor were they worse off in the thirteenth century than the incumbents of the smaller rectories. ‘The rector of Flixton was poorer than any Lancashire vicar. The commissioners of 1291 valued the living for the tenth at 7 marks only. Three other rectories, Tatham, Claughton, and Pennington, were taxed at 10 marks and under.” The great size of many of the parishes, and the rugged character of much of the county, made access to the parish church always laborious, and often in winter impossible to the inhabitants of the remoter villages and hamlets. Something had probably been done to relieve this hardship by the foundation of parochial chapels even before the Conquest. It can scarcely be supposed that the ecclesiastical decentralization of the huge parish of Whalley, for instance, was entirely subsequent to that date. But the growth of popu- lation and prosperity in the twelfth century, and the increased religious fervour of the age, greatly stimulated the process. Norman lords of manors built chapels and obtained permission to have divine service celebrated in them for themselves, their households, and their tenants. The further privilege of burying their dead in a graveyard of their own was often secured, HET ener eee ee ee > er, carefully guarded. Attendance 3 Ducdaie, on. ; i ee oo . ck Bas or) fen ae Sas a froma 46) sake £0138. es ae 1470, Pia it was sees ee Sir Time Monee eae rig ia ie ta vicar of Wigan for life in 1199 at the request of the rector, made here ; Hist. of the Ch. of Wigan (Chet. Soc.), 3. 7 Numerous cases in the Lich. Epis. Reg. See below, p. 31. ** Philimore, Ece/, Law, 1825 ; Makower, op. cit. 333. 16 ty Abbey from 1094 to Adam de Freckleton was ie but no permanent ordination s-ems to have been ” Pope Nich. Tax. 249, 307-8. ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY there was still usually required on the greater festivals, the offerings at the chapel continued to go to the rector, and the tithes were still paid to him. In a few cases, indeed, these were severed from the rectory, and the parochial chapelry became an independent parish. North Meols, described as a chapel’ (perhaps of Halsall parish) in the middle of the twelfth century, is included among the parishes in the Taxatio of 1291. The church of Ashton-under- Lyne seems to have been originally a chapel in the parish of Manchester, and the mention of a joint endowment in Domesday Book suggests doubts whether it had yet become the centre of a distinct parish. If the statement of the same record as to the churches of Amounderness is to be interpreted strictly, the parishes of Lytham, Garstang, Chipping, and Ribchester must have been formed between 1086 and 1291, and were perhaps originally chapelries.!” In this county there was but one clear instance of the free chapel exempt by special privilege from dependence upon any parish church, and even from the jurisdiction of the ordinary." The church of the little hospital of St. Mary Magdalen at Preston enjoyed these privileges, being of the foundation and patronage of the lords of the honour of Lancaster."* Henry de Lacy, when he gave to the monks of Stanlaw the church of their new home at Whalley, withheld the chapel of St. Michael in the castle at Clitheroe, and Queen Isabella, upon whom the honour of Clitheroe was bestowed for life by the crown on the attainder of Lacy’s son-in-law Thomas of Lancaster, continued to treat it as a free chapel." But fifty years afterwards the abbey regained possession on the ground that the chapel had no rights of baptism or burial, nor any papal privilege such as other free chapels could show.'* Some parochial chapels may have grown out of private oratories in which the cele- bration of mass was at first only licensed, under restrictions devised to pre- serve the rights of the rector of the parish, for the benefit of the lord of the manor and his household.’” Others, like Saddleworth, were from the outset chapels of ease for a district remote from the parish church. William de Stapleton, the founder of Saddleworth chapel between 1194 and 1211, had to bind himself and his heirs not to subtract their tithes and oblations from the mother church of Rochdale, to the parson of which the chaplain was to be presented and swear obedience.“ The appointment of the chaplain was sometimes, however, reserved to the rector of the mother church. When the archbishop of York in 1230 granted a cemetery to the chapel of Caton, owing to its distance from Lancaster and the danger of the ways, the lay lords of 1 Lancs. Pipe R. 323. 101 Dom. Bk. i, 270. 109 See above, p. 8. Garstang was claimed in 1205 as a chapelry of St. Michaels-on-Wyre, but the verdict of a jury was that within living memory it had always been a parish church ; Lancs, Pipe R. 197. In 1241 Aymer des Roches, rector of Preston, failed in an attempt to establish that Chipping was a chapel appendant to Preston and not the church of an independent parish; T. C. Smith, Rec. of Preston Par. Ch. 26. 18 Phillimore, op. cit. 1823. 14 Lancs. Chant. 208 ; see below, ‘ Religious Houses.’ % Whalley Coucher, 226. 6 Tbid. 226-36. The question was re-opened more than once, but-the king and the dukes of Lancaster ultimately ratified the rights of the abbey. See ‘ Religious Houses,’ under Whalley Abbey. 17 Such a private chapel was allowed by the priory of Burscough to Henry de Tarbock in the early part of the thirteenth century. He was to have a chantry in his oratory at Tarbock, but he and his family were to attend the mother church of Huyton on Christmas Day, Candlemas, Easter Day, Whitsunday, Michaelmas Day, and All Saints’ Day with due oblations. No parishioners might use the chapel, and all its offerings were to go to the mother church under a penalty of £5 for subtraction; Reg. of Burscough, fol. 444. ‘Tarbock chapel, however, never became parochial. 8 Whalley Coucher, 147. The founder’s son gave an endowment of land ; ibid. 148. 2 17 3 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE the place renounced all claim to the advowson.’* The deans of Whalley appointed the chaplains of at least seven of its eight chapels, and paid them by custom 4 marks a year each."" In the neighbouring parish of Blackburn the rector is described at the end of the twelfth century as parson of its two chapels at La Lawe (Walton-in-the-Dale) and Samlesbury."! The former, indeed, was in all but name a parish church. The tithes of a certain district (which included Samlesbury) were paid to it, it was called ecc/esia, and was the mother church of Samlesbury chapel, enjoying the full privileges of that position down to the episcopate of Hugh de Nonant (1 188-98). Samlesbury had as yet no graveyard. During the absence abroad of Bishop Hugh, Gos- patric the lord of Samlesbury entertained two bishops from Ireland, who, with the consent of the rector, dedicated a cemetery. Hugh on his return was much annoyed, and declared the proceeding null and void. But after- wards, in consideration of the difficulty of getting to Walton, especially in winter, he allowed a graveyard to be made.'* On the strength of this the lords of Samlesbury seem to have claimed a right of advowson, which was resisted by Stanlaw Abbey as appropriator of Blackburn rectory. But for the firm hold which the rectors of Blackburn and their monastic successors kept upon it, and the apparent indifference of the Banasters, the lords of the place, Walton might very easily have become a separate parish. In the case of Altham, one of the Whalley chapels, a persistent local family nearly succeeded. During the greater part of the thirteenth century they treated it as a rectory, and the bishop and archdeacon seem at times to have favoured their claim, which the abbey only got rid of at last by an appeal to Canterbury and a handsome monetary solatium.™ The following twenty-nine chapels, exclusive of Saddleworth, which was in Yorkshire, though in the parish of Rochdale, and of those which had become parish churches before 1291, can be traced back to the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Nearly all of them were probably in existence before 1200: Broughton,"* appendant to Kirkby Ireleth Church ; Hawkshead," to Dalton; Over Kellet to Bolton le Sands 3" Gressingham,”* Caton,!"” Stalmine,"” and Overton," to Lancaster; Ellel,"* to Cockerham ; Bispham," to Poulton ; Pilling,’ to Garstang ; Longton,’ to Penwortham ; Douglas,” to Eccleston; La Lawe, or Walton, and Samlesbury ¥% (indirectly), % Blackburn ; Burnley,’* Clitheroe Castle,* Clitheroe Town,”* Colne, - at a of Lanc.(Chet. Soc.), 20. a Whalley Coucher, 206. id. go. Ibid. "* Tbid. 228-35. ™ Has a Norman nave. '* Ulverston resigned its claim to be th h ; j oo ae ake © be the mother church of Hawkshead ; Lancs. Pipe R. 362. "6 Originally a chapel in Melling parish, but transferred to L , 5 ancaster bet Roger de Montbegon ; Hist. of Ch. of Lanc. 20. Licence for cemetery, 12 a. ter sis Earliest mention in 1230; ibid. 164, 362. Licences for cemeteries, ; us Earliest mention in 1247; ibid. 127. Has a Norman door. ™ Earliest mention ¢. 1155 ; Lancs. Pipe R. 392. '* Earliest mention in 1147 ; ibid. 283. '" Earliest mention (indirect) in 1272 ; Cockersand Chart. 49. ‘” Earliest mention c. 1160 ; Lancs. Pipe R. 323. ™ Earliest mention between 1230 and 1264; Reg. of B ; par. of Wigan ; Lich. Epis. Reg. Heyworth, oh eee” ane 47. Im 1445 said to have been in '* Mentioned before 1182. It had font and graveyard, c. 1190; Wha, : Licence for cemetery between 1188 and 1 198 (ibid.) ; a one ee oe Granted to Pontefract Priory by Hugh de la Val between 1121 and 1135 sete : ve, p. Io, 18 5 and 1210 by ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY Church,” Altham,”* Downham,” and Haslingden,’® to Whalley; Dids- bury,’ to Manchester ; Deane,'* to Eccles ; Rokeden, or Newton,’ to Win- wick ; Farnworth," to Prescot ; Knowsley,“ to Huyton; Garston,'* and Hale,'* to Childwall ; and Liverpool, St. Mary at Key (Quay) ** to Walton. Some of the chapels which are first mentioned in the fourteenth century, such as Rufford in Croston parish, and Melling and Maghull in the parish of Halsall, may go back to a considerably earlier date. The cost of up-keep of parochial chapels and their services was in some cases borne entirely by the locality, in others it was divided with the mother church. The nature of the division varied. At Saddleworth, Whalley Abbey, which held the tithes of Rochdale, found the chaplain and the necessary books and vestments, and repaired the chancel, the maintenance of the rest of the fabric being thrown upon the parishioners.” On the other hand the parishioners of Church in Whalley parish were bound to repair the chancel of their chapel, and though here, as in its sister chapels, the chaplain was found by the abbey (from 1330 by the vicar of Whalley) they had to provide a clerk to take his place if necessary. These obligations were affirmed in 1335 by the bishop of Lichfield, the chancel having been allowed to become ruinous and the people having sometimes to leave without mass for want of a clerk." There is little more to be said as to the ecclesiastical history of the county until the closing years of the thirteenth century are reached. The Lichfield episcopal registers do not begin until 1298, and the scanty extracts from the lost registers of the archdeaconry of Richmond extend only (with gaps) from 1361 to 1484. For North Lancashire we have, however, one important document in the Constitution of Archbishop Walter de Gray (1215-55) fixing for the province of York the portions of the church fabrics and furniture to be maintained and repaired by the parishioners and by the rectors and vicars ™ Prior to 1202 ; Lancs. Fines, i, 14. %° Supposed to have been founded temp. Ric. 1; Whalley Coucher, 301. % Probably before 1147 ; ibid. 76, 92. '® Mentioned in 1296 ; ibid. 214. With the exception of the castle chapel at Clitheroe the chapels of Whalley seem to have had rights of baptism and burial ; ibid. 227. ™ Said by Hollingworth (Mancuniensis, p. 26 [ed. 1839]), on what authority does not appear, to have been built before 1235. In 1352, when a cemetery was granted, the chapel was said to be of antiquity beyond memory ; Lich. Epis. Reg. Northburgh, ii, fol. 127. ™ Earliest mention in 1234; Whalley Coucher, 44. Graveyard mentioned in 1276; ibid. 60. 8 For the identification of Newton chapel with the chapel of Rokeden, in which Sir Robert Banaster had licence in 1284 to have a chantry owing to his distance from the mother church, see Not. Cestr. (Chet. Soc.),271. It is possible, however, that the licence was only for himself and his household and Newton as yet merely a private chapel. 88a V.C.H. Lancs. iii, 391. ™ Earliest mention in 1190 ; Lancs. Pipe R. 350. This chapel, called also apparently the Ridding Chapel (Reg. Burscough, fol. [4]), soon disappeared. "8 Earliest mention in 1261 ; Trans. Lancs. and Ches. Hist. Soc. (New Ser.), xvii, 54. ** Mentioned before 1257; ibid. xviii, 77. A larger chapel (St. Nicholas) was built close by about 1350. “8” Whalley Coucher, 150. 18 Ibid. 236-45. The Richmond Registers have shared the fate of the archdeacon’s special powers. One of them, extending from 1442 to 1484, was still extant about fifty years ago (Richmondshire Wills, Surtees Soc. p. xx.), but my inquiries have failed to discover its present place of deposit. Extracts from Canon Raine’s trans- cript of it are in Raine’s Lancashire MSS. (vol. xxii, p. 373, sqq.) in the Chetham Library. They are followed by a reproduction of extracts from three earlier registers, those of Charlton (1359-82), Dalby (1388-1400), and Bowet (1418-42) made by Dr. Matthew Hutton in 1686 and preserved among the Harleian MSS. (Nos. 6969-78). Some fragments of what appears to be a fifteenth-century register are at Somerset House. 19 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE respectively.” Some information can be gleaned from the pap and monastic chartularies. The latter contain abundant evidence of the religious zeal of the people of Lancashire in hundreds of charters bestowing lands and rents upon the local monasteries (half of which were founded in the last quarter of the twelfth century), ‘for the health of their own souls and the souls of their ancestors and successors.” Until the removal of the monks of Stanlaw to Whalley all the religious houses, with the unimportant exception of Kersal cell, were in the western half of the county, and this form of piety was comparatively absent in its eastern portions. The generosity of the laity to the religious occasionally led to friction between the latter and the parochial clergy. Early in the thirteenth century Albert de Nevill, rector of Manchester, complained to Pope Innocent III of the infringement of the rights of his church by the Cluniac priory of Lenton, which was admitting the inhabitants of Kersal to service in the chapel of its cell there, burying them in a graveyard of its own and taking their tithes and offer- ings.'* A compromise was arranged by the bishop and the archdeacon of Ely as papal delegates. The monks retained their cemetery and the tithe from land which they had won from the waste. For the latter they were to pay 2s. a year to the mother church and its rights of sepulture were to be recognized by the annual render of two candles, each of 14 1b. of wax. No parishioner was to make an offering or receive burial at Kersal unless the church of Manchester were properly indemnified, and the monks must not administer the sacraments to parishioners in their chapel.“* Occasionally the aggrieved party was itself a religious house, the appropriator of the church whose dues were imperilled. Such a case arose when the hospital (soon abbey) of Cockersand was founded in the parish of Cockerham, whose church belonged to Leicester Abbey. The question was complicated by the fact that the hospital had been established on the abbey’s manor of Cockerham during a temporary disseisin. A settlement was arrived at in 1204 or 1205 confirming the hospital in its share of the manor and making it extra- parochial.'* The canons in their turn had to agree to waive, in the case of any other lands they might acquire in the parish of Cockerham, the privilege they had obtained from the pope of exemption from tithes.’ These papal exemptions were another mode in which parish revenues were encroached upon in favour of monasteries. After further dispute it was settled in 1242 that the abbey should not admit any parishioners of Cockerham to confession, communion, or other sacraments, but only those of their own establishment." Of some importance for the spiritual life of the county was the fact that six of the religious houses which were new in the early part of the thirteenth century consisted of canons.” The institution of regular canons marked an attempt to bridge the gulf between the older monks and the secular clergy. They al archives 149 Wilkins, Concilia, 1, 168 ; Cockersand Chart. (Chet. Soc. 1). o Conishead, Cockersand, Cartmel, Hornby, Lytham, Burscou the little hospital of St. Saviour at Stidd under Longridge and the leper hospital of St. Leonard, Lancaster. gh, (the short lived) Wyresdale babl (which was afterwards piven to th ered The last was the second ot its kind i ae That of St. Mary Magdalen, Preston, possibly dated from the reign of Henry | n the county. “ Lancs, Pipe R. 330. “8 Ibid. 331 ve “ Cockersand Chart. 376-8. MS Tbid. 4. Ws Ibid, 28 * 4. id. 382. ’ Conishead, Cartmel, Cockersand, Burscough, Hornby, and Cockerham 20 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY were normally in orders, and no breach of their rule was involved in their serving as parish priests in appropriate churches, provided they still lived the common life. In 1207 the abbey of Leicester arranged to appoint three canons in their church of Cockerham in addition to the existing chaplain, and after his death to keep four canons there. A more active religious influence was no doubt introduced by the coming of the friars in the second half of the century. They settled as usual in the towns; the Dominicans or Black Friars at Lancaster, the Franciscans or Grey Friars at Preston, and the Austin Friars at Warrington.“ Their work lay in the slums of the town among the poorest and most neglected class of the population, but their devotion must have stirred spiritual life in a wider circle. Such an example was much needed. The conditions under which the parish clergy were appointed were not favourable to high ideals of character and self-sacrifice. Prominent among the causes of clerical apathy and inefficiency must be reckoned the papal dispensations for pluralities and non-residence which were freely granted to those who had influence. In a great many parishes the cure of souls was left to stipendiary clergy without sufficient guarantees for their being well chosen and properly paid. Allusion has already been made to one mighty pluralist, John Mansel, the non-resident rector of Wigan. His, no doubt, was an exceptionally gross case. But John le Romeyn (Romanus), who became archbishop of York in 1286, had held the Lancashire rectories of Bolton-le-Sands and Melling along with that of Wallop in Hampshire and other preferments.'® He was the natural son by a servant girl of John le Romeyn, archdeacon of Richmond (c.1241-7), and treasurer of York, himself of illegitimate birth, and according to Matthew Paris, very rich and avaricious. Moreover the crown used its patronage, with the connivance of the pope, to pay its servants and reward its favourites, and the spiritual interests of the county were thrust into the background. The valuable benefice of Preston, which had reverted to the crown on the death of Theobald Walter, was thus employed by John and his son. Henry III successively presented to the living a nephew of Peter des Roches, his treasurer William Haverhill, Arnulf a chaplain of his half-brother Geoffrey of Lusignan, Henry de Wengham, ‘a discreet and circumspect courtier ’ and a great pluralist, who was also rector of Kirkham, and retained both livings after his appointment as bishop of London, and finally the famous Walter de Merton, chancellor, bishop of Rochester, and founder of Merton College, Oxford. Matthew Paris singles out as a conspicuous instance of the king’s abuse of his patronage the preferment of Arnulf : a fool and buffoon . . . utterly ignorant alike in manners and learning, whom I have seen pelting the King, his brother Geoffrey and other nobles, whilst walking in the orchard of St. Albans, with turf, stones and green apples and pressing the juice of unripe grapes in their eyes, like one devoid of sense.’ Edward I was not guilty of such scandals as this last, but the rich rectories of Manchester and Childwall, when they came into his hands during the protracted minority of Thomas Grelley, the last of his line, were bestowed “8 Lancs. Final Concords (Rec. Soc.), i, 26. 49 See ‘ Religious Houses.’ 199 Dict. Nat. Biog. xlix, 182. 11 TC. Smith, Ree. of Preston Church, 25 sqq. 1 Matth. Paris, Chron. Maj. (Rolls Ser.), v, 329. 21 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE upon his ministers. One of Edward’s non-resident rectors of Manchester was his well-known councillor Walter Langton,'’ who had previously had papal licence to hold the rectories of St. Michaels-on-Wyre and Croston without residing therein or being ordained priest.’ He resigned his benefices on becoming bishop of Lichfield in 1296. The rectory of Childwall was given, with four others in different parts of England, and numerous prebends to another crown servant, who in due course was raised to the episcopal bench. This was John Drokensford, bishop of Bath and Wells from 1309 to 1329. He received Childwall while still under the canonical age,'* and as late as 1298 was only in deacon’s orders. The rectory of Prescot was held for thirty years by Alan le Bretoun im commendam with that of Coddington and the treasurership of Lichfield.“* Church revenue was further trenched upon by the demands of pope and king. The taxation of spiritualities initiated by the Saladin tithe of 1188 became common in the thirteenth century. At first it was taken by papal authority, and usually for a crusade or some other quasi-ecclesiastical object, but the popes sometimes allowed Henry III to relieve his necessities from this source, and thus paved the way for the regular taxation of the clergy as an estate of the realm introduced by Edward I. From the middle of the century the amount taken was nearly always a tenth. The bringing of the clergy under contribution rendered necessary an assessment of benefices."’ Such an assessment is recorded to have been made in 1219, and perhaps remained in force until Pope Innocent IV in 1253 ordered a new valuation for the tenth which he had granted to Henry III for a fresh crusade. The re-assessment was carried out in the following year by Walter Suffield, bishop of Norwich, and was therefore generally known as the ‘ Norwich Taxation.’ Its figures are only preserved in isolated cases from which no trustworthy inferences can be drawn. The assessment of Garstang rectory, for instance, was raised from 20 to 33 marks, in addition to a vicarage taxed at 8 marks; but there are no means of deciding whether this was due to greater stringency or to a corresponding rise in the value of the benefice.'* Thirty-four years later Pope Nicholas IV ordered a new assessment to be made, which was completed in 1291 for the province of Canterbury, and in 1292 for that of York. This ‘Taxatio,’ never subsequently revised for the greater part of England, remains among the archives of the kingdom, and was printed in 1802 by the Record Commission. For Lancashire it is valuable as giving the first fairly complete summary of church property in the county as well as Mina dee a ee The list is a quite Ae ee : See sar i cere eat uae or ore ; : re omitted for reasons which, except in one case, can be gathered from the later document known as the Ingui s1tl0 Nonarum.\© Bolton-le-Moors and Bolton-le-Sands were exempt a taxation as being annexed to the two archdeaconries, Kirkby Sag appropriated to the cathedral church of York, Radcliffe and North Meols on "S$ Cail. Pat. 1292-1301, p. 190. 1A Cay ms Ibid. i, $77. “ Lich. Epis. Reg. Langton, fol. 22. Pape Letters i, S45, sf. $50 $50: 7 Stubbs, Const, Hist. li, 174-5 ~ ; ; See above, p. 6. The vicarages in that part of the county which was i also omitted, unless indeed they are included in the valuation of the rectories 22 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY account of their poverty, Aughton doubtless for the same reason. The total annual value given is: spiritualities £1,544 135. 4d.; temporalities £420 os. 6d. Under the former head the churches in the archdeaconry of Richmond were taxed at £931 6s. 8d.; those in the archdeaconry of Chester at £613 6s. 8¢. The temporalities (of religious houses) in these same areas were respectively £371 15. 2d. and £48 19s. 4d. The churches most poorly endowed were Lytham, assessed at Pa Flixton, £4 135. 4d., and Pennington, (5 6s. 8d. The richest were Kirk- ham, £186 135. 4d. (£160); Lancaster, £80; Poulton, £68 135. 4d. (£46 135. 4d.) ; Preston, St. Michaels-on-Wyre, Warton and Whalley, each £66 135. 4¢.; Aldingham and Manchester, each £53 6s. 8¢.'\% Only six benefices in this county of extensive parishes were taxed at less than {10 a year, a third of the whole number varied between that figure and £20. In the one instance (Garstang) in which we are able to compare the assess- ment of 1292 with that of 1254 the valuation of the rectory is higher by £4 135. 4d. and that of the vicarage by £8. Benefices were not assessed at their full annual value. Matthew Paris in 1252 estimated that Preston church was worth f100.'* In an inquest held after the death of Robert Grelley in 1282, as to the value of his advowsons, it was found that the church of Manchester and the church of Childwall were each worth £133 6s. 8d. a year, more than double the assess- ment of the former in 1292 and more than three times that of the latter." Ashton-under-Lyne, the advowson of which Grelley had also held, was returned as worth £20, or double its taxed value ten years later.” Five years after Pope Nicholas’s taxation an inquiry was held as to the true value of the rectory of Whalley with a view to the ordination of a vicarage. Its gross annual income was found to be £210 gs. 8d.; this was reduced on further inquiry in 1298 to £148, but even so it is more than twice the taxed value of 1292.'% Liberal deductions seem to have been allowed for fixed charges.’ The fearful ravages wrought by the Scots in the north of England in the years following Bannockburn put large areas of land out of cultivation, 161 Pope Nich. Tax. 249, 258-9, 307-9. The figure for spiritualities includes certain monastic pensions in churches north of the Ribble which are accounted for separately. The valuation of two or three churches differs slightly from the report of the Inguisitio Nonarum as to the tax of 1292. ‘That for temporalities may also not be quite accurate, as the details do not in every case exactly agree with the totals, and one or two entries are a little ambiguous. 16 When two figures are given the first represents the taxed annual value of the whole endowment including vicarage and pensions, the second the residual rectory. According to the Inguisitio Nonarum Manchester was taxed in 1292 at £66 135. 4d. 18 The following is a summary of those not named above. Vicarages and pensions are included :— Over £6 and under £10: Claughton, Leigh, and Tatham. £10 and upwards : Ashton-under-Lyne, Bury, Chipping, Dalton, Eccleston, Halsall, Halton, Heysham, Huyton, Ormskirk, Prestwich, Standish, Urswick, Warrington, and Whittington. £20 and upwards: Cockerham, Eccles, Penwortham, Ribchester, Rochdale, Sefton. £30 and upwards : Blackburn, Croston, Tunstall, Ulverston, Wigan. £40 to £50: Cartmel, Childwall, Garstang, Melling, Prescot, Walton. 164 Cockersand Chart. 286-7. ‘8 Chron. Maj. v, 329. A local jury put the same value on it in 1361 although its assessment had by that time been further reduced to £23 65. 84. 186 Lancs. Ing. and Extents (Rec. Soc.), i, 250. ‘7 Ibid. 18 Whalley Coucher, 205-6, 213-15. 1 Aldingham rectory, however, was stated later to have been overtaxed by 20 marks in 1292; Inquisitio Nonarum, 36. 23 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE and it was found necessary to make sweeping reductions of the a ee of benefices throughout the greater part of the province of York, ae ports the archdeaconry of Richmond. The Lancashire churches of t Of deaconry were relieved of two-thirds of their rating, or about ae ae this £375 was allowance for loss of tithes from lands wasted by a st > the rest took the form of an exemption of small tithes, oblations, and giebes from taxation. The reduction varied in different parishes from fifty per cent., e.g. at Heysham, Melling, and Tatham, to over eighty per cent. at oe ham, Cartmel, and Ulverston. One rectory —Pennington—and four out 0 seven vicarages were entirely freed from taxation, on the ground of their poverty.’” On an average the relief given to the monasteries in consideration of the depreciation of their temporalities in North Lancashire was even greater than was accorded to the churches. What had been rated in 1292 at £371 1s. 2d. now paid only £52 10s. a reduction of eighty-six per cent. Furness must have suffered most; the annual value of its temporal possessions was reckoned to have sunk from £176 to £13. 65. 8d." The Ribble was practically the southern limit of the Scottish invasion to the west of the Pennine Range, and none of the Lancashire churches in the diocese of Lichfield were included in the ‘ New Taxation,’ as it was called. No provision seems to have been made for a re-valuation of the northern parishes on their recovery from the effects of the harrying they had received, and apparently they continued to enjoy this exceptionally low rating down to the sixteenth century. Some slight improvement in a few parishes within the twenty years which followed is revealed by the returns of the commis- sioners appointed to assess the ninth of sheaves, fleeces, and lambs granted by Parliament to Edward III in March, 1340..% The ecclesiastical ‘ Taxatio,” mainly based as it was upon the great tithes, afforded an obvious guide in their labours, and their instructions were to take the church assessments as a standard in ascertaining the true value of the ninth.’* So closely did they follow them that in many cases at all events the tax became a tenth and not a ninth. In seventeen out of twenty-four Lancashire parishes in the arch- deaconry of Richmond the ‘ New Taxation,’ which only took into account the great tithes, was returned as the true value of the ninth. But in five parishes a higher figure was given, the assessment being recognized as too low. The difference was not, however, great, except at Dalton, where the ninth was valued at twice the amount of the assessment of twenty years before.'% Preston affords a solitary instance of a parish in which the com- missioners put the value of the ninth below even the low assessment of the ‘New Taxation.’ South of the Ribble the returns show greater variety. In ten parishes the ninth was estimated as exceeding the valuation of 1292, in five as exactly equal to it, and in thirteen as falling below it. In the last class of cases we are occasionally told that the difference consisted of allow- ances for glebes, small tithes and oblations, and for the exclusion of boroughs (where they existed) which paid a ninth of goods instead. The explanation “° This ‘Nova Taxatio’ is printed in the Pope Nich. Tax. 329. p. 200. The figures differ in one or two ins into the value of the ninth of 1340. - These details come from the Inguisitio Nonarum (Rec. Com.). Pope Nick. Tax. 309. "8 Rot. Parl. ii, 112 ; Inguisitio Nonarum, 35. Cal. Pat. 1340-3, p. 125. " Ing, Non. 36. "6 Thid. 37 24 ‘ For its date see ‘ Political History,’ tances from those given by the commissioners who inquired ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY of the cases in which the true value of the ninth equalled or exceeded the whole valuation of the benefice in 1292 must be either that the assessment was revised as too low or that the real value of a ninth was calculated from the tithe data. For Whalley parish, where careful statistics of the tithes were available, the commissioners returned the ninth as worth as much again as Pope Nicholas’s assessment.” Compared with the preceding age the fourteenth century was upon the whole a period of depression in the history of the church in Lancashire. The north of the county lay prostrate under the successive blows of the Scottish invasions and the Black Death, and though the south escaped the earlier of these scourges it was thrown into much disorder by the struggle between Earl Thomas of Lancaster and Edward II. The French wars exer- cised a distracting influence. These were not the only causes, however, of the slackening of the stream of church endowments which is observable. The county was now fairly well provided with parish churches and parochial chapels. To the former a single addition was made late in the century. Brindle, hitherto an outlying part of the parish of Penwortham, was erected into a separate parish between 1341, when it does not appear as such in the Nonarum Inquisitio, and 1369, when it is described as a rectory.’ Of the eleven chapels which are first mentioned or implied in this century some may have been of older foundation, some perhaps were as yet purely domestic.” Sir Robert de Holland, who owed his advancement to Thomas of Lancaster, endowed a college of priests in his chapel of (Up) Holland in the parish of Wigan in 1310, but the chapel itself may have been of earlier date.' Funds were forthcoming for the rebuilding or extension of existing churches, and in one case at least a rectory was augmented, but this did not make very deep drafts upon private munificence. The county already contained nineteen religious houses, large and small ; their further multiplication and enrichment was not desirable, and royal policy definitely discouraged such extension by the Statute of Mortmain (1279). One addition only was made to their number during the fourteenth century. Through the influence of his patron Thomas of Lancaster Sir Robert de Holland obtained permission in 1319 to convert his collegiate church of St. Thomas the Martyr at Upholland into a priory of Benedictine "7 See above, p. 23. "8 Lich. Epis. Reg. Stretton, fol. 85 ; Lancs. Final Concords (Rec. Soc.), ii, 182. 7 Melling in Halsall parish had a chapel with a cemetery as early as 1322 ; Lich. Epis. Reg. North- burgh, ii, 44. The chapel of Goosnargh, an outlying portion of the parish of Kirkham, is first mentioned in 1349; Engl. Hist. Rev. v, 526. The custody of Singleton chapel in Kirkham parish was granted on 20 Aug. 1358 to John of Eastwitton, hermit, by Henry, duke of Lancaster; Fishwick, Hist. of Kirkham, 44. The chapel of Rufford in Croston parish is first mentioned in 13463; Nor. Ceser. ii, 367. The inhabitants of Chorley in the same parish procured in or before 1362 a licence for the dedication of a chapel to be served by one chaplain ; Lich. Epis. Reg. Stretton, fol. 45. The chapel of St. Nicholas, Liver- pool, in the parish of Walton, is first mentioned in 1361 ; ibid. fol. 44. The chapel of Oldham in Prestwich parish first appears in 1336 (Coram Rege R. 306, m. 26d.) ; that of West Derby in Walton in 1360 (Assize R. 451, m. 3) ; William, clerk of Stretford, in Manchester parish, occurs 1326; the chapel certainly existed before 1413 ; Hist. of Stretford Chap. (Chet. Soc. 48). To these perhaps Great Harwood chapel in Blackburn parish ought to be added (Nor. Cestr. ii, 208, 285.) 189 Cal. Pat. 1307-13, p. 233. 181 Warrington church was rebuilt ; An. of Warrington (Chet. Soc.), 197. 1 Thirteen laymen in 1344 gave (or sold) plots of lands varying from an acre to 80 ft. square to Henry de Haydock, parson of Eccleston, ‘for the easement and utility of him and his successors, rectors there’ ; Cal. Pat. 1343-5, p. 306. 2 25 4 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE monks. This was the last Benedictine foundation in England. Restricted in its flow by external obstacles rather than by slackening of religious zeal the liberality of the laity began to run in new channels. The favourite form of benefaction now in constantly increasing measure down to the Reformation was the foundation of chantries. The doctrine of purgatory and of the efficacy of prayers for the dead and of the sacrifice of the altar to abbreviate its terrors had taken firm root throughout Christendom. The landowning class had heaped gifts upon the monasteries for their souls and the souls of their relations, but they now desired a more direct, instant, and individual intercession. This was secured by endowing a perpetual chaplain to sing mass for the souls of the founders and their kindred, to which were sometimes added the souls of all the faithful, at an altar in their parish church or parochial chapel, more rarely in a conventual church. In some cases the chantry was attached to an existing altar, in others a new one was contrived in an aisle, but not infrequently a chapel was built on to the older fabric ; by the addition of such chantry chapels the church of Manchester was doubled in size during the two centuries preceding the Reformation. The founder and his descendants were often buried in the chapel he had endowed, and the chantry priest was surrounded by the sculptured effigies and inlaid brasses of those for whose souls he continually ministered. It must not be assumed that the motives of chantry founders were always purely personal ; these special endowments increased the dignity of the church and its services, the chantry priest being commonly bound to assist the parish clergy in addition to his special work. Sometimes too he was required to act as schoolmaster for a certain number of free scholars, but of this arrangement no Lancashire instance is recorded before the fifteenth century. : An occasional chantry had been founded in the thirteenth century. About 1208—9 the family of Beetham endowed one in the church of Cocker- sand Abbey,’ and another was founded about seventy years after at Conis- head Priory.* In the following age they became more numerous, some sixteen being recorded."* The foundation of endowed chantries was carefully watched both by the lay and the ecclesiastical authorities. Gifts of land for this purpose required a licence from the crown for alienation in mortmain, and the bishops usually applied to them the same principles as governed the creation of vicarages. Perpetual chaplainships were ordained with a fixed stipend, and the incumbents were presented by the founders and their heirs to the diocesan, from whom they received admission to the chantry. In the case of the well-endowed Winwick chantry in Huyton church (1383) Bishop Stretton insisted that each of the two chaplains should be paid 10 marks a he Pos mu and eee elaborate regulations as to the oath they were , their manner of life and the duties incumbent upon them. It is noteworthy that the endowment out of which this chantry was provided had “8 Cockersand Chart. 332, 1013. They also endowed two beds i i , ; eds in the abbey inf '* Duchy of Lanc. Anct. D., L. 564. For others ascribed to this vin ae By enon Raines (Lancs Chantries (Chet. Soc.), 31, 74, 225, 264) there is either i i i ; , , Jt ’ nsufhi t fusion with the older and wider sense of ‘cantaria,’ in which it is ee aL ai Seca 88 Accounts of the various chantries will be found in th ica rt € topogr. i ™ These admissions are entered in the Epis. Reg. oe ti Res Coe fol 8 : , fol. 94-8. 26 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY been intended by John de Winwick for the foundation of a new college at Oxford. His brother secured its diversion to Burscough Priory on the ground of the poverty of that house, but subject to the institution and maintenance of a chantry at Huyton. The almost complete absence of such foundations in that part of the county comprised in the archdeaconry of Richmond speaks eloquently of the impoverishment of North Lancashire by the Scottish ravages. The position of the parish churches in relation to the religious houses was little altered during the fourteenth century. Three or four more were appropriated. The rectories of Melling and Leyland, whose advowsons had long been held by Croxton and Evesham respectively, were bestowed upon those houses in 1310" and 1331.” Childwall, the advowson of which had been acquired by Sir Robert de Holland and given to his new college at Up- holland, was appropriated to the Benedictine monks who replaced the seculars there in 1319." Preston, which Whalley had attempted to secure, but without success, was appropriated to the dean and canons of Henry of Lancaster’s college of St. Mary Newark at Leicester between 1380 and 1415,” when the first mention of a vicar occurs. At Leyland and prob- ably at Melling the ordination of a vicarage accompanied the appropria- tion." Childwall had had a perpetual vicar appointed while its patronage was still in lay hands. Edward I, as already stated, gave the living to his minister John de Drokensford. Drokensford, a pluralist and non-resident, consented voluntarily or otherwise in December, 1307, shortly before his promotion to the see of Bath and Wells, to the ordination of a vicarage at Childwall."* Light is thrown upon the staff of clergy considered necessary for an important church by the provision made for the support of three chaplains and a deacon in addition to the vicar.'* The vicar’s independence in regard to the religious who held the appropriation not infrequently led to friction between them, especially when the church was close to the monastery. The monks of Whalley maintained that Henry de Lacy had never intended that a vicarage should be established at their very gates, and complained bitterly that it had been excessively endowed. In 1330 they induced Bishop Northburgh to make a new ordinance considerably reducing the emoluments of the vicar of Whalley.’ Ten years later Northburgh had to settle a dispute between Burscough Priory and the vicar of Ormskirk as to the portion due to the latter. But neither house remained content with this. As early as 1285 the canons of Burscough had secured a licence from Bishop Roger Longespée, on the ground of the proximity of Ormskirk church to the priory, to present canons of their house to the living after the next vacancy.” In 1339, having, in 18 Reg. of Burscough, fol. 764 ; Cal. Pat. 1377-81, p. 560. *° Cal. Pat. 1307-13, p. 229. 1 As additional endowment of the cell of Penwortham (Priory of Penwortham, 41-6.) | Cal. Pat. 1317-21, p. 353. ™ Smith, Rec. of Preston Ch. 5, 37-8. "8 Priory of Penwortham, 47. The vicar took part of the great tithes; but besides defraying the synodals and procurations he had to pay an annual pension of forty shillings to the abbey, which had bound itself to com- pensate the see of Lichfield for the loss it sustained owing to the appropriation—the cessation of vacancies during which the bishop took the profits of the benefice—by a yearly payment to that amount. ™ Lich. Epis. Reg. Northburgh, vol. 1, fol. 28. The case is somewhat similar to that of Walton-on- the-Hill. See above, p. 16. 1 The council of Oxford in 1222 had made a canon that churches with wide parishes should have two or three priests ; Wilkins, Conci/ia, i, 588. 18 Whalley Coucher, 216~20. 197 Reg. of Burscough, fol. 1064. a] A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE the interim, ‘by negligence’ presented a secular clerk they procured a renewal of the grant from Northburgh ‘for the relief of their soe burdens,’! and henceforth down to the Dissolution the vicar of Ormskir was always a canon of Burscough. The same expedient was adopted at Whalley. Prior to 1358 the bishop had given a dispensation to three monks in succession to hold the vicarage, the reason offered being that the residence of secular clerks within the monastic inclosure led to disturbances, and in that year Pope Innocent VI gave them a general licence to present members of their community to the living,’ and this was done down to the Reformation. Archbishop Thoresby in his re-ordination of the vicarage of Kirkham in 1357 allowed the abbot and convent of Vale Royal to present one of their own number to the benefice; but perhaps this was restricted to the next vacancy.” That this practice was not confined to Lancashire is evident from the statute of 1402, which forbad the religious to hold vicarages in any churches appropriated after that date.*” The tenure of a cure of souls was, no doubt, more inconsistent with the ideal of the monk than of the canon. But monks had long been allowed to serve parish churches which became conventual, like Lancaster, Lytham, and Penwortham ; and at Whalley at all events the monastic vicars could still live with the community. The position of the monk of Vale Royal at Kirkham or of the monks of Whalley, who in the fifteenth century were occasionally made vicars of Blackburn and Rochdale, was less easily reconciled with the observance of the common life. Even in the case of canons, who were normally priests, departure from the house to serve a benefice was regarded as an exceptional thing, requiring dispensation and guarded by special conditions. The monastic vicar of either kind had to be accompanied by one or more of his fellow monks or canons,” and in some cases at least the rule forbad him to administer the Sacraments personally to his parishioners.’ The canon vicar was the commoner. A canon of Conishead served Orton church in West- morland as early as 1281.% In addition to Ormskirk, which was only three miles away, Burscough occasionally presented a canon to Huyton in the fifteenth century,”* and Cockersand had then no less than six of its canons regularly absent from the house, the vicars of Garstang and Mitton, the proctors for those benefices, and the chantry priests of Middleton and Tunstall.* At least one canon of Nostell occurs among the vicars of Winwick in the fourteenth century. The ordination registers of the bishops of Lichfield give us the number of the religious in South Lancashire who took orders. In the quarter of a © Duchy of Lanc. Anct. D., L. DFS ™ Cal. Pap. Letters, iii ”' Hist. of Kirkham (Chet. Soc.), 32. Philip de Ei nk cee Pr iar Gea a a oe p de Grenhal, monk of Vale Royal, was instituted in 1362, ™ Stat. 4 Hen. IV, cap. 12. An Act of 1391 (15 Ric. II, appropriation the diocesan should ordain not only the vicar’s portio the benefit of the poor parishioners. ™ Lich. Epis. Reg. Northbur; i, 1225 (Whalley); Alexander III in 1170 aha oe a of coed et a ee te churches, provided the vicar was assisted by two or three of his fellow canons * Duchy of Lane. Anct. D., L. 293. *™ Nicolson and B = i eae grea ee os nand burn, Hist. of Westmld. and Cum). 1, 481-2. 06 Se 24 See ‘ Religious Houses,’ 156 note 42. The churches of Ulverston and Car were ever established, and Cockerham, until one was created towar served by canons with or without stipendiary priests. 28 cap. 6) had enjoined that before any n, but a proper share of the income for : 293. Pope hold perpetual vicarages in their ape tmel, in which no vicarages : ges ds the end of the thirteenth century, were ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY century between 1360 and 1385 the monks of Whalley head the list, with the Austin Friars of Warrington a good second ; about a third as many were contributed by Burscough and Holland respectively. There is no instance of a monk of Penwortham being ordained, unless some of the monks of Evesham, who were occasionally ordained, resided in that cell. The titles offered by secular candidates for ordination reveal in a striking way the concentration of church patronage and employment in the hands of the three important monasteries of this district. From 1325 to the end of the century the titles given by them vastly outnumber all others. Between 1360 and 1385 Whalley gave more than four times as many as those presented by beneficed clergy, and the Holland titles are some 40 per cent. more numerous than those of the great Cistercian house. Burscough, however, gave very few. As Holland had only one appropriate church in the county, while Burscough had two and Whalley four, with many chapels,” these proportions are not a little perplexing. In any case it is obvious that, besides those for whom the religious houses could at once find places, many of those to whom they gave titles must have been maintained by them for years. It was chiefly to the monasteries that the Church of England owed its supply of clergy.” The increase in the number of ordinations during the second half of the century must have been largely due to the necessity of filling up the gaps caused by the Black Death. In 1349, the year of the first and most fatal visitation of the pestilence, there were seven deaths among the beneficed clergy of that part of the diocese of Coventry and Lichfield which comprised South Lancashire as against one or two in ordinary years. The benefices vacated by death were the rectory of Walton and the vicarages of Childwall, Huyton, Winwick, Whalley, Eccles, and Rochdale* As these were less than a third of the whole number the mortality here was not so great as in Derbyshire and Yorkshire, where upwards of fifty per cent. of the beneficed clergy died.*” Of the number of deaths among the unbeneficed clergy and the religious we have no means of forming a precise estimate, but no doubt it was large. The disorganization caused by the ravages of the plague is illustrated by the fact that the bishop had to collate to the vicarage of Eccles per /apsum, and that the vicarage of Rochdale remained vacant for eight months.”° The mortality among the beneficed clergy of the deanery of Amounder- ness was even greater. Between 8 September, 1349, and 11 January, 1350, the churches of Lytham, Poulton, Lancaster, Kirkham, and Garstang, half the benefices of the deanery, were all vacated by death, the last two twice.” In addition to these the chapel of St. Mary Magdalen at Preston was vacant for eight weeks. We owe this information and an obviously #7 These would account for a considerable proportion of the fifty-five chaplains without benefices, who towards the end of Edward III’s reign were resident in the deanery of Blackburn ; Gasquet, The Grear Pestilence, 155. 278 Collect. for Hist. of Staffordshire (Salt Soc.), viii (New Ser.), p. xii. 28 Lich. Epis. Reg. Northburgh, vol. i, fol. 123-27. *09 Gasquet, op. cit. 147, 151. 70 Lich. Epis. Reg. Northburgh, vol. i, fol. 1254, 127. "11 In the case of Lytham it was the prior who died, and this, though not stated, must have been the case at Lancaster, which was served by chaplains paid by the priory. The coupling with Lancaster, Poulton, and Kirkham of their respective chapels Stalmine, Bispham, and Goosnargh has led to a mistaken statement that nine benefices were vacant (including the Preston chapel). The reference is only to the death of the incumbent of the mother church. 29 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE exaggerated estimate of the number of deaths in each oar ee deanery (varying from 3,000 in those of Preston, Lancaster, and : Ir to sixty in that of Chipping, and amounting in the total to 13,180) a dispute between Henry de Walton, archdeacon of Richmond, and Adam de Kirkham, dean of Amounderness, as to the sums received by the latter inter alia from vacant benefices, probate of wills, and administration of the goods of intestates."? As Adam, whose accountability began in September, was executor for his predecessor in the office of dean, William Ballard, it is not unlikely that the latter was himself a victim of the plague.”* For the other Lancashire deaneries no similar data are available. The prior of Cartmel apparently died, probably of the plague.”* The Lichfield Registers do not reveal any unusual mortality among the beneficed clergy of South Lancashire during the subsequent visitations of the plague in 1361 and 1369. While the plague raged it was not possible to enforce the rights of sepulture of the parish church where the distances involved were great ; licences were therefore granted for local burial. In two cases this interim arrangement led to a more permanent one. In 1352 Bishop Northburgh authorized the consecration of a cemetery for the chapel of Didsbury in consequence of the devotion of its people during the late pestilence and the difficulty of carrying their dead to Manchester, on account of which they had had a licence to bury at Didsbury.”* The burgesses of Liverpool received a licence to bury in the cemetery of their chapel of St. Nicholas during the plague of 1361, saving the dues of the parish church of Walton, and in the following year the rector of Walton procured from the bishop a commission to dedicate the chapel and appoint a cemetery to last as long as the vicar of Walton pleased.?"* The more general effects of this terrible scourge, which must have been specially felt in North Lancashire, where the wounds inflicted by the Scots were still fresh, are not easy to appraise.2”7 A temporary relaxation of morals and disorganization of church institutions, some lowering of the character of the clergy, whose thinned ranks had to be suddenly recruited without too nice an attention to qualifications, must have resulted. Against this is to be set a certain revival of religious feeling, partly no doubt the effect of panic. _ The mortality among the landowning class doubtless stimulated the desire to secure permanent intercession for the souls of the dead by the ™ Engl. Hist. Reo. v, 325 (1890). The archdeacon claimed £28 administration of intestates’ goods), and a jury assessed the amount > There may als office. ** Lich. Epis. Reg. Northburgh, vol. ii, fol. 127% to bury in their cemetery, in Sept. 1361, ‘on account Stretton, i, fol. 7). Northburgh also authorized them t though it is of antiquity beyond memory, has been seldom done of late, oblations to the rectory of Manchester. : os pear aa oe vol. ii, fol. 44-5. The agreement in the roston and the inhabitants of Chorley for the dedicat; brought about by the pestilence, though ae is ee ae hd A Tay ee Aye: Bash The hospital of St. Leonard at Lancaster was given to the povert oe i Froved fatal to its usefulness ; see ¢ Religious Houses.’ PES: Gan orca aire ** Gasquet, The Great Pestilence, 205. of the mortality due to the plague’ (ibid. Reg. same year between the rector of 30 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY foundation of chantries. Another feature of the plague period was the great increase in the number of licences granted to the local lords for the celebra- tion of divine service in the oratories of their manor-houses,”” and here too we may perhaps detect an attempt to obtain a more direct and personal intervention with heaven coupled in some cases doubtless with a dread of infection. These licences were only granted for a short term of years, or, occasionally, during the bishop’s pleasure, but their effect was unfortunate in so far as they tended to raise a barrier between the lord and his tenants. Allusion has been made to a probable lowering of tone in the clergy and religious as one of the results of the Black Death. It must be admitted, however, that this was not marked enough to come out in the rather scanty information at our disposal as to the state of the Church in Lancashire during the fourteenth century. Both before and after the great pestilence there is some reason to believe that the appropriate churches were better served than those under lay patronage. The frequent occurrence of the names of Langton, Standish, Halsall, and Le Walsch among the rectors of Wigan, Standish, Halsall, and Aughton illustrates the habitual use of livings by lay patrons as a provision for younger members of their families. Rectors were instituted when only in minor orders, or even with the first tonsure, occasionally under the canonical age, and so little qualified for their work that licences of absence for several years to study at a university had to be granted to them.*° The bishop might and did insist that the cure should not be neglected ; but for this there was no real guarantee when its duties were performed by chaplains not too well paid and without security of tenure. Leave of absence was also freely granted to rectors for other reasons the nature of which is seldom expressed,” and in such cases they were allowed to put their churches to farm. Between 1355 and 1383 Thomas de Wyk, rector of Manchester, was absent from his cure for eleven years altogether. The episcopal registers contain only one instance of such permission in the case of a vicar, and then only for a year; in 1309 the vicar of Blackburn received leave to go on pilgrimage for that length of time.¥* Robert de Clitheroe, rector of Wigan from 1303 to 1334, undertook the work of escheator beyond Trent and other royal commissions without formal leave of absence ; he had an acknowledged (but of course illegitimate) son born after he was ordained priest, and was an active partisan of Earl Thomas of Lancaster, for which he was tried and heavily fined in 1323.%% He pleaded 9 Lich. Epis. Reg. passim. The licence was sometimes granted to rectors and even chaplains ; ibid. Scrope, fol. 124. An enigmatic entry in 1394 records the grant of a licence to the prior of Penwortham to celebrate divine worship in his parish church without prejudice to the oratory in his priory for two years ; ibid. fol. 1314. Taking advantage of the increased demand for their services and the reduction of their numbers by the plague, chaplains (like labourers) demanded higher salaries, 10 or 12 marks a year, with the result that Parliament in 1362 fixed 6 marks as a maximum for parochial chaplains and five for those without cure of souls ; Rot. Parl. ii, 271. . ™ They were usually licenced vaguely imsistere studio generali, but in one case Oxford is specified ; Lich. Epis. Reg. Scrope, fol. 135. A rector of Walton in 1328 obtained permission to study for seven years “according to the canon,’ but two or three years was the average time allowed. In the case of Henry Halsall, who in 1395 was admitted to the family rectory of Halsall at the early age of 19, no licence appears on the registers ; ibid. fol. 594. He was described as Master H. H. however when promoted in 1413 to be arch- deacon of Chester ; ibid. Burghill, fol. 1034. ™! A rector of Leyland was given leave of absence in 1322 while an advocate in the Court of Arches ; a rector of North Meols in 1324 to serve the earl of Huntingdon, who was lord of Widnes ; ibid. Northburgh, i, fol. 124, 13. "a iia. Taneae: fol. 57. 3 Hist. of the Ch. of Wigan (Chet. Soc.), 38-45. 31 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE d him to render llustration of a church- that the terms of his tenure of the manor of Wigan boun military service to the earls of Lancaster when required—an 1 the ambiguous position in which such rectory manors might place man. Another beneficed priest with a son was Thomas de Wyk, rector of Manchester, already mentioned.”* The son was rector of Ashton-under- Lyne. It is perhaps not without significance that the only recorded case of deprivation in this century is that of a rector of Leigh, Henry Rixton, in 7928." As far as Lancashire was concerned the evil of pluralities does not seem to have been more glaring than in the previous century. No pluralist of Mansel’s magnitude occurs. As before, the worst cases were connected with Wigan and Preston, and for these the lay authorities were primarily respon- sible. The crown intermittently claimed the advowson of the former against the Langton family, and in 1350 Edward III presented his chaplain John de Winwick, who for a short time held the rectory of Stamford in Lincolnshire concurrently with Wigan, was provided by the pope at the king’s request to the treasureship of York, and enjoyed prebends in various cathedrals and collegiate churches.”* The patronage of Preston, which had passed from the crown to the earls of Lancaster, was exercised by Earl Henry in 1348 in favour of his treasurer Henry de Walton, who in the next year was provided to the archdeaconry of Richmond (with which was united the rectory of Bolton-le-Sands), and held stalls at Lincoln, York, Salisbury and Wells.” His successor Robert de Burton seems to have been also rector of Ripple in Worcestershire.** The popes sought to restrain at least the accumulation of benefices with cure of souls, and Urban V in 1366 issued a constitution against plurals, in accordance with which John Charnels, an old servant of the crown and principal executor of Henry, duke of Lancaster, then rector of Preston, exhibited to the bishop of Coventry and Lichfield a list of his ecclesiastical benefices and their values.** But the pope was not always stern and many dispensations were granted. The union even of cures of souls was not stopped. In 1388 John Fithler was admitted both to the vicarage of Rochdale and the rectory of Radcliffe.’* __ For the early part of the century at all events there is evidence that the bishops of Lichfield kept a watchful eye on the Lancashire part of their great diocese. Walter de Langton and Roger de Northburgh were not very spiritually-minded ecclesiastics ; but Langton, finding that the rectory of Prescot, held im commendam by Alan le Bretoun, treasurer of Lichfield, ee ** The marriage of the clergy in minor orders was n i : g ot forbidden. But i ibi from entering the higher orders. In 1313 Robert de Wigan, clerk, Agnes his ate nthe ee are ae at Warrington ; Annals of Warrington (Chet. Soc.), 142. : sk a ina poe eee: Cae vol. i, fol. 103. In 1360 William de Slaidburn, vicar of Kirkh oe or abuse of his office as dean of Amounderness, but received the duke of L i se : Hs a irkham (Chet. Soc.), 70. William de Hexham had to resign Eccleston in 1371 pe Baia cing the son of a priest he had obtained institution without a dispensation ; Cal. P pe a as ti ie, Fi oe 420-1, 460; Hist. of Ch. of Wigan (Chet. Soc.), 47 ‘ Ba aerate teens al. Pap. Letters, iil, 277, 290, 478, 542; Smith, Rec sm C - , > > > . of Preston Ch. “ 1 oe ot a been keeper of the Great Wardrobe and constable of Bee oe esti d Soke is ak at £50 a year; ibid. 36, from Add. MS, 6069, fol. 96. : Scape ae DEeMere rer a3 fats of Rochdale (Chet. Soc.), 22. For papal collations to Lancashire benefice i 308, 324, 384. In 1363 the vicarage of Kirkham was void so long as to la eee In 1357 the cardinal of Perigueux, papal legat lapse to the holy see (ibid. 451). ‘aie papal legate, gave the rectory of Standish to Gilbert de Standish ta 32 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY being neglected, threatened to take it from him ;*' while Northburgh made at least one personal visitation of this portion of his diocese (1330), and four years later corrected some disorders at Holland Priory.** His successor, however, was the illiterate Robert de Stretton, whom the Black Prince forced into the see after a good deal of resistance on the part of the pope and the archbishop of Canterbury, who both at first rejected him propter defectum literaturae ; he was unable to read _ his profession of obedience to the arch- bishop, and most of his episcopal work during the twenty-five years (1 360-85) he held the see was done by suffragans.** Richard le Scrope, on the con- trary, who presided over the diocese in the later years of the century until he became archbishop of York, was a man of learning and high character. The list of archdeacons of Richmond in the early part of the period affords good instances of the way in which foreigners were still provided for in England. This important office was held in close succession by Gerard de Vyspeyns, subsequently bishop of Lausanne ; Francesco Gaetani, Cardinal of St. Mary in Cosmedin, and Elias son of Elias de Talleyrand, count of Perigord and afterwards (1328) bishop of Auxerre.™* Of any opposition to the church system and doctrines there is in Lancashire no trace. Lollardy never got a footing so far north. In 1337, while Wycliffe was still a boy, Sir William de Clifton refused to allow those of his tenants who were living in open sin to be corrected or punished by the parish clergy of Kirk- ham, and had his infant baptized without the baptismal font of the church, but these were mere incidents in a bitter quarrel with the abbot of Vale Royal over the payment of tithe.” The unshaken attachment of the county to the existing ecclesiastical establishment is amplyattested by the many benefactions bestowed on it in the fifteenth century. It benefited largely by the prosperity which the landed gentry of Lancashire derived from the new and close connexion of the county with the crown, a prosperity of which the most conspicuous instances were the rapid rise of the house of Stanley and the high positions in Church and State attained by members of the local families of Booth and Langley. ‘Three sons of John Booth of Barton rose to episcopal rank ; John became bishop of Exeter *” (1465), William bishop of Coventry and Lich- field (1447-52) and archbishop of York (1452-64), and Laurence, bishop of Durham (1457-76), archbishop of York (1476-80), and Lord Chan- cellor. Thomas Langley of the Middleton family was bishop of Durham (1406-37), Lord Chancellor and a cardinal. With the exception of John Booth they were considerable benefactors to the Church of their native county. Langley rebuilt Middleton church, in which he founded a chantry, and William and Laurence Booth endowed two chantries in the church of Eccles. The foundation of chantries was more than ever the favourite form *1 Lich. Epis. Reg. Langton, fol. 22. 32 Thid. Northburgh, vol. i, fol. 1582. %88 Ibid. vol. ii, fol. 604. 4 Dict. Nat. Biog. lv, 47. "85 Cal, Pap. Letters, ii, §3, 218 ; Le Neve, Fasti Eccl. Angi. iii, 137. °86 Hist. of Kirkham (Chet. Soc.), 34-5. Clifton and his tenants drove the tithe collectors away by force of arms, assaulted the priests and clerks in the church, and scourged the abbot’s clerk in the streets of Preston even to effusion of blood. In the end Clifton had to make restitution and seek absolution, while the tenants had to present a large wax candle to the church, which was carried round it on the feast of palms, and to swear never more to injure Kirkham church. 37 He was previously rector of Leigh and warden of Manchester. 2 33 5 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE of benefaction. At least forty were endowed during the century, most of . : doubt given by the civil wars. them after 1450; a fresh impulse was no doubt g yu A novel feature of the fifteenth-century chantry foundations was their frequent association with charitable provisions. At Middleton, Preston, and St. Michaels-on-Wyre chantry priests were required to keep a free grammar school for poor children ; those of Lathom and Lancaster presided over small hospitals or almshouses for eight and four bedesmen respectively ; in other cases an annual distribution of alms formed part of their duties. Occa- sionally the founder bound them ‘to assist the Curate for ever (e.g. at St. Michaels-on-Wyre), or ‘to maintain the service in the quiere (choir) every holy day’ (e.g. at Standish). The priests of the two Eccles chantries were to live together in a manse built for them near the churchyard, and have a common hall and table.**' The most striking single benefaction to the church in Lancashire during this age, however, was the collegiation of the church of Manchester by Thomas la Warre. Last of his family in the direct male line, La Warre doubled the parts of patron and rector ; in 1421, moved by representations of the insufficient spiritual oversight of this large and populous parish, the rectors of which had been generally non-resident and indifferent, he arranged for the transference of his rights to a college to consist of one master or warden chaplain, eight fellow chaplains, four clerks and six choristers, and augmented the considerable revenues of the rectory with a sum of 200 marks and certain lands and tenements, including the Manchester manor-house of the La Warres and of the Grelleys before them, the proximity of which to the church made it a convenient residence for the college.” Warden Huntingdon, its first head, began the re-construction of the church on a scale propor- tionate to its new dignity. In less ambitious fashion a large number of the Lancashire churches were restored or rebuilt during this century and the first quarter of the next, and this with the chantry chapels imparted that generally ‘ Perpendicular’ character which now characterizes them. This building activity testifies to the increased prosperity of the county. The chapel of Littleborough in Rochdale parish was built about 1471, the Todmorden chapelry of Rochdale came into existence between 1400 and 1476, provision was made for one at Milnrow in the same parish in 1496, and in or before 1500 a chapel was erected at Lathom ; those in the town of Garstang, which was a mile and a half from the parish church, and at Windle (St. Helens) in Prescot parish, are first mentioned in this tae et ae then. Holme in Cliviger (Whalley parish) a oe . this age. These are all, not clearly earlier than -entury, that can be definitely traced beyond the sixteenth century ; but it is probable that a number of those which are first heard of in the reigns of Henry VII and Henry VIII were of earlier foundation. *8 Besides these there were chantries not monastic churches. ** The almshouse at Lancaster was near the eas chantry were to have a common seal. Gardiner, not connected with the chantry. *° This was 5s. at Hollinfare, 30s. at Eccles. > In the chantry certificate of 1547 they are called fellows *’ Hibbert Ware, Foundaticns of Manchester, iv, 1543 Halas Heyworth, fol. 112. The manor-house is now the Chetham Hospi 34 permanently endowed. Chantries were also endowed in some t end of the church, and still exists. The pri i > ; e€ priests of th the founder, also endowed a grammar aheol: but this ae d, M ae F a amecestre, 468 ; Lich. Epis. Reg. ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY With the exception of Garstang,™* Littleborough, Oldham, and Todmorden those mentioned above seem to have been originally mere chantry chapels. Some important changes in the relations of the parish churches to the religious houses took place. In 1414 Lancaster Priory shared the fate of other alien priories dependent upon foreign monasteries. Their possessions had from time to time been taken into the king’s hands during the wars with France, and now an Act of Parliament dissolved them altogether and vested their property in the crown.“* Henry V bestowed the priory of Lancaster upon his new Brigittine nunnery of Sion founded in the same year.™* Its advowsons and appropriate churches were included in the grant, with the exception of the advowson of Eccleston, which was granted (before 1463) to one of the Stanleys.“* As some compensation perhaps for its being with- held, Croston, of which the priory had only held the advowson, was appro- priated to the nuns of Sion ; *” a vicarage was ordained by Bishop Heyworth in 1420.%° Ten years later the archdeacon of Richmond ordained a vicarage in their church of Lancaster,** and in the same year the abbess augmented the vicarage of Poulton.” Three churches besides Croston were now first appropriated. St. Michaels-on-Wyre was given by Henry IV in 1409 as part of the endow- ment of the chantry (afterwards college) of Battlefield, founded in com- memoration of the battle of Shrewsbury, and a vicarage was subsequently ordained.*' In 1448 Prescot became appropriate to King’s College, Cambridge, which had received the advowson from its founder Henry VI in 1445," and in the same year William, Lord Lovel arranged for the appropriation of Leigh, the advowson of which he had inherited from the Hollands, to the Austin Canons of Erdbury in Warwickshire, of whose house he was a patron.** Vicarages were ordained in each case." Eccleston was not the only church which reverted to lay patronage. In 1433 or 1434 (12 Hen. VI) the canons of Nostell sold their rights in Winwick church, which in this case too passed into the hands of the Stanleys ; the purchaser was Sir John Stanley of Lathom, K.G., grandfather of the first earl of Derby.** The advowson of Walton-on-the-Hill was bought from Shrewsbury Abbey in 1470 by Sir Thomas Molyneux, knt., of Sefton. 43 In 1437 the inhabitants of Garstang had licence from the archdeacon of Richmond to have divine service performed in the chapel in that town for one year ; Not. Cestr. ii, 412. 4 Rot. Parl. iv, 22. ™5 Thid. iv, 243. See ‘ Religious Houses.’ “6 Lich. Epis. Reg. Heyworth, fol. 1204 ; ibid. Hales, fol. 101. Thomas, Lord Stanley, father of the first earl of Derby, presented in 1463. *7 Ratified by Pope Martin V on 18 Aug. 1418 ; Foedera, ix, 617. ™8 Lich. Epis. Reg. Heyworth, fol. 129. The vicar was bound to distribute annually ros. to the poor. 9 Not. Cestr. ii, 429. The vicar was required to maintain six chaplains, three in the parish church and one each in the chapels of Gressingham, Caton, and Stalmine. 79 Thid. ii, 456. *! Wylie, Hist. of Hen. IV, iii, 241 3 Hist. of St. Michaels-on-Wyre (Chet. Soc.), 43, 109. *? Rot. Parl. v, 92 ; Lich. Epis. Reg. Booth, fol. 64 ; Nor. Cestr. ii, 203. John of Gaunt obtained the advowson in 1391 from Ralph, Lord Nevill of Raby in exchange for that of Staindrop ; Lich. Epis. Reg. Scrope, fol. 57. *8 Lich. Epis. Reg. Booth, fol. 684. *4 The vicar of Leigh’s portion was 16 marks and a tenement. Besides the usual payments to the bishop and archdeacon he was bound to distribute annually 6s. 8¢. among the poor. %55 Nor, Cestr. ii, 261. ‘The priory reserved a pension of £5. ‘The incumbents were henceforth rectors instead of vicars. #86 Thid. ii, 222. The Molyneux family had always been patrons of the adjoining rectory of Sefton. 35 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE No very marked declension in character or devotion to their work on i ea ble, unless it be among the monastic the part of the parochial clergy is observable, De a Pa ale==ane vicars. Negligent and absentee parsons—some too, of indifferen en met with, but there is nothing to show that they were much more ee than before. The use of patronage to provide a career for een cae gitimate sons perhaps increased a little—a continuous sear ine - oe ie e.g., held the rectory of Wigan from 1370 to 1506—and t e a fe & Winwick became almost an appanage of the Stanley family. Crown patronage continued to be exercised in a way which led to non-residence. The rectors of Prescot, for example, before its transference to King’s College were men of high academic standing—two of them became bishops—but one of them, Philip Morgan, much employed by Henry V in diplomacy, and Aner wards bishop successively of Worcester and Ely, was certainly an absentee,” and probably others were. Royal nominees cannot, indeed, be said to have been the only offenders in this respect. In 1444 the archdeacon of Richmond had to admonish the rectors of Claughton and Chipping and the vicars of Lancaster and Garstang for non-residence.*® Instances occur of diocesan interference for graver reasons. The bishop of Lichfield ordered an inquiry in 1460 into the state of Walton church, whose church furniture and buildings were alleged to be notably defective by the fault of the late rector, Ralph Stanley.” In 1473 the archdeacon of Richmond inquired into abuses in the church of Tunstall." Bishop Hales in the following year collated to the vicarage of Eccles because John Bollyng, whom the abbey of Whalley had presented, was found to be ‘unsuitable and incompetent.’*” As the vicar of Tunstall was a canon of Croxton, the last two incidents are primarily a reflection upon the condition of the religious houses. This seems to have undoubtedly suffered a change for the worse. In 1454 the prior of Burscough and two of the canons, one of whom was the vicar of Ormskirk, were convicted of practising divination, sortilege, and the black art in order to discover hidden treasure. All three were suspended from the priestly office, the prior had to resign, and the vicar was deprived.** Towards the end of the century Holland Priory fell into a very unsatisfactory state. Complaints reached the bishop in 1497 that the monks did not observe the rule of St. Benedict, that their church was out of repair, their other houses ruinous, and their spiritual and temporal goods dilapidated or dissipated by their negligence and excesses,?* The result of the inquiry ordered does not appear, but the alleged neglect of the rule is borne out by the evidence as to the condition of the priory at the time of its dissolution forty years later. Records of visitations of Cockersand Abbey show that a considerable relaxation of morals and discipline prevailed in that house towards the close of the century. But the abbey seems to have recovered a healthier tone before the Dissolution.2“* From the episcopal registers it would appear that the number of regulars taking orders 2 Dict. Nat. Biog. xxix, 24; Lich. Epis. Reg. Catterick, fol. 19. * Smith, Rec. of Preston Ch. 38 ; Raines’ Lancs. MSS. XXll, 373. ARE, é 7 : ; ae ae Reg. Hales, fol. 125. Eccleston was vacant in 1493 ‘by cession or dismissal’ ; ibid. *! Lancs. Chant. 233. *? Lich. Epi - Epis. Reg. Hales, fol. 108. *® Ibid. Boulers, fol. 50, 655 ** Tid. Arundel, fol. 2364. ** See below, pp. 111, 112, * Ibid. p. 156, 36 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY had decreased in this age. In this period, too, the leper hospitals at Preston and Lancaster were allowed to fall into decay and disuse. What has been said of the ecclesiastical state of the county in the fifteenth century is generally true also of the early years of the sixteenth down to the abrupt changes of Henry VIII. The tendencies already noted became perhaps a little more marked, but that was all. Of the three chapels (all in Whalley parish) which are expressly recorded to have been erected during the first half of the sixteenth century | one only, Newchurch in Rossendale, preceded the breach with Rome. It was built by the inhabitants in 1511 as a chapel of easement, the way to their parish chapel at Clitheroe from the forest being ‘ penefull and perilous.’ Some, however, of the many chapels of which the first mention occurs in documents of the time of Edward VI may have been built under Henry VII and Henry VIII, while others no doubt were older.” Not all were parochial, but certain chantry chapels served as chapels of ease where the parish church was remote or difficult of access.** Until the very eve of the Reformation the foundation of chantries went on even more rapidly than before. In the course of a generation almost as many came into existence as in the whole of the previous century. Most of the founders were still drawn from the landed gentry and the clergy, but the Manchester chantries reveal the rise in that town of a class of merchants enriched by its nascent manufactures. Pre- eminent among them for his munificence was Richard Beswick the younger, who, besides founding a chantry for two priests, one of whom was to teach a free school—thus anticipating the larger endowment for education made some years later by his brother-in-law Bishop Oldham—bore part of the cost of the Jesus Chapel in which his chantry was installed, and restored at his own ex- pense the choir and nave of the church.” He was assisted in the erection of the chapel by the other members of the gild of St. Saviour and of the Name of Jesus ; Richard Tetlow, also a merchant, and others left money for the maintenance of a second gild, that of Our Blessed Lady and of St. George ;*” but neither these nor any other Lancashire gild, if such existed, seems to have received a separate and permanent endowment, for no associations of the kind are noticed by the commissioners of 1546 and 1548. A sign of the times is the provision made for grammar schools in connexion with chantries at Manchester, Liverpool, Warrington, Blackburn, Leyland, and Rufford. The chantry priest at Blackburn, for instance, was required to be ‘ sufficiently learned in gramer and plane songe to keep a fre skole.’ All seem to have *66 The others were Goodshaw (1540) and New Church in Pendle, built by the inhabitants and consecrated as a parochial chapel in 1544. * ‘They include: in Bury parish, Edenfield, Heywood, Holcomb ; in Deane parish, Westhoughton ; in Bolton parish, Rivington ; in Croston parish, Becconsall, Tarleton ; in Kirkham parish, Lund ; in Leyland parish, Euxton, Heapey ; in Middleton parish, Ashworth ; in Prestwich parish, Shaw ; in Ribchester parish, Longridge ; in Rochdale parish, Whitworth ; in Sefton parish, Crosby ; in Walton parish, Formby, Kirkby ; in Whalley parish, Accrington ; in Tunstall parish, Leck ; in Cartmel parish, Cartmel Fell, Flookborough. This list is doubtless incomplete. 768 Becconsall, e.g., being separated from Croston Church by an arm of the sea, was sometimes cut off from it for four days together (Lancs. Chant. 171), during which the chantry priests ministered the sacraments to the inhabitants. Rufford and Tarleton were in the same case. The rector of Ribchester sometimes could not visit Bailey chapel owing to floods in the Hodder (ibid. 212). We may here notice that the chapelry of Deane was now formed into a parish separate from Eccles (No. Cestr. 37) and that the ancient parochial chapels of Bispham and Goosnargh were now occasionally and loosely called parish churches. (Hist. of Bispham, 26 ; Lancs. Chant. 242). 769 Lancs. Chant. 48 sqq. 7 Ibid. 41, 44. 37 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE been free with the partial exception that at Liverpool the cantarist of St. Katherine was allowed ‘to take his advantage ’ of scholars saving those ‘that beryth the name of Crosse and poore children.’ ‘At Manchester (St. James’ chantry), Liverpool, and Warrington the foundation included an annual distribution of alms to the poor, and in the last case to the ministers of the church. The chantry priests at Blackburn and Standish were expressly bound to assist in the services of the church.?” Edward Stanley, first Lord Monteagle (fifth son of the first earl of Derby), to commemorate his success at Flodden left an endowment for a hospital at Hornby for two priests, one clerk, five bedemen, and a schoolmaster, but his intentions were never carried out. Better fortune attended an almshouse for a chaplain and eight bedemen founded at Lathom by the second earl of Derby in 1500. A number of the older churches and chapels were restored or rebuilt in this period. The state of the clergy remained much as before. Perhaps the evils of family livings and political influence may have become a little more accen- tuated, but the beginning of the century does not form a real dividing line. Stanleys, and in a less degree Molyneux and Halsalls, continued to be thrust into the richest benefices without much regard to their fitness. James Stanley (younger brother of Lord Monteagle), whose easy morals were afterwards made the most of by Protestant critics, did not resign the wardenship of Manchester until he had been bishop of Ely for four years, and he held Win- wick down to his death. He is not unfairly described by his nephew, the bishop of Sodor and Man, in his rhyming history of their house, as a man who If he had been noe prieste had bene worthier praise. Edward Molyneux, who in 1509 succeeded his uncle James, archdeacon of Richmond, as rector of Sefton, held the rectory of Ashton-under-Lyne and the vicarage of Leyland, and in 1528 was admitted rector of Walton on his undertaking to pay the late rector, who had resigned in his favour, £80 a year ‘as long as he should be employed in worldly affairs.” William Wall, probably the son of a law-agent of the second earl of Derby, died in 1511 rector of Eccleston in Lancashire and Davenham®*® in Cheshire. Pluralities and non-residence had, indeed, taken such deep root that even the best men of the time saw no harm in them ; the famous physician and scholar Linacre had no scruples in holding the rich rectory of Wigan (1519-24), though he never resided. As for the chantry priests, there is little evidence as to character, but the commissioners of 1546 could report that in almost ever case the duties prescribed by the founders were performed ; and if the priest at Goosnargh ‘did use to celebrate at his pleasure,’ the reason probably was that in this case no foundation ordinance could be produced?” There was much that urgently called for reform, but it is pretty clear that the drastic changes introduced by Henry VIII were regarded with no real sympathy in Lancashire, except among the few who hoped to share in the spoils of the monasteries, and that on the contrary they provoked a large amount of more or less active hostility, especially in the northern parts of ‘ie ™ At Blackburn ‘ he was to maintain one side of the choir every h a : oly day.’ that Chetham s cantarist at the altar of St. George in Manchester mney pe - cele of the cloke in the mornynge’ and to be a member of the gild of St. George *? Lancs. Crant. 112-13. ™ Tbid. 178-9. om Ibid. 243 38 It may be noticed here brate mass daily ‘at six ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY county. It was a priest who, on the proclamation of Queen Anne at Croston in July, 1533, cried out that ‘Quene Katheryn shulde be Quene, and as for Nan Bullen, that hore, who the Devill made her Quene? and as for the Kynge shall not be King but on his beryng ;’ nevertheless there can be no doubt that he voiced the opinion of large numbers of laymen.?* Grievances not directly connected with the royal divorce and the ecclesiastical changes which followed in its train swelled the rising tide of discontent,’ but the spectacle of the faith of which the king was entitled Defender ‘ piteously and abominably confounded,’ the dissolution of the smaller monasteries in 1536,"” and the fear of even more sweeping measures, opened the flood-gates.' Lanca- shire, however, as is shown below, played only a secondary partin the Pilgrimage of Grace. The south and west of the county did not join in the insurrection, though even there the loyalty of the commonalty, if not of the gentry, was considered somewhat doubtful. No profound indignation can have been aroused by the suppression of Holland and Burscough priories; they had fallen into utter decay, and at no time had they filled the same place in the life of their neighbourhood as the northern houses in their wilder surroundings. The priories of Conishead and Cartmel were included in the first suppression, and the great abbeys of Furness and Whalley fell after the Pilgrimage of Grace. The remaining houses did not long survive. ‘The results of the disappearance of the monasteries were not wholly beneficial. A good deal of charity, indiscriminate it may be, came to an end and the new owners of their lands raised rents. The parish churches which had remained conventual or quasi-conventual to the last—Lytham, Penwortham, Cartmel, and Ulverston—were left in an unfortunate position as compared with those appropriated churches in which vicarages had been endowed. It is true that the successors of chaplains or curates paid by the convent, though appointed without episcopal institution by the new impropriators of the rectories, were in future ensured life tenure, and so became ‘ perpetual curates’ ;° but they had no income except what the impropriators allowed them, and this was miserably low.” The order for the removal of superstitious objects from the churches was not more popular in Lancashire than the suppression of the religious houses. A few months after his appointment to the new see of Chester (1541) Bishop Bird informed the king that for lack of doctrine and preaching the inhabitants of his diocese were much behind His Majesty’s subjects in the south. ‘ Popish idolatry ’ was likely to continue by reason that divers colleges and places claiming to be exempt from the bishop though they had, in accordance with the proclamations, taken down idols and 75 Derb. Corres. (Chet. Soc.), 13. 8 See ‘ Political History.’ 7 The Act of February, 1536, provided for the suppression of monasteries with less than £200 a year. According to the revaluation of clerical property made in 1535 (Valor Eccl. printed by the Rec. Com.) five Lancashire houses were under this limit : Burscough, Holland, Cockersand, Cartmel, and Conishead. Royal Commissioners appointed 24 April, made a new survey of them, and on their report all but Cockersand were suppressed. For Cockersand see ‘ Religious Houses,’ p. 157. 378 Makower, Const. Hist. of Engl. Ch. 332. 779 Until the middle of the seventeenth century the curate of Cartmel had nothing but what the bishop’s farmers allowed him ; Not. Cestr. 499. The whole salary of the curate of Ulverston in 1560 was {10 ; ibid. 535. The curate of Lytham had then nothing but a grant fron the Committee of Plundered Ministers ; ibid. 447. 39 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE images accustomed to be worshipped, still kept them and suffered the els to offer as before.*” The suppression of the chantries 1n 1548, Av ate the faults of the chantry system may have been, undoubtedly diminis i ae efficiency of the church machinery in the county. The gn a Chantry Act might have been less open to criticism had it remaine ae Somerset’s hands. It is characteristic of his successors that they stretched it to cover the confiscation of the plate and bells of a large number of chapels in which chantries had never existed. II—FROM THE REFORMATION The Reformation period has a twofold importance for the County Palatine ; a special one in so far as it led to the erection of the see of Chester, and a general one in so far as it gave rise to a certain amount of disturbance among the parochial clergy and even among the laity. The former point can be dealt with summarily. The Act of 1539 for the dissolution of all monasteries *! was accompanied by the Act authorizing the king to make bishoprics by his letters patent.” Between the date of this latter Act and the actual issue of the letters patent erecting the new bishoprics a period of nearly two years elapsed, an interval which was probably occupied by the prepara- tory work of surveying the financial basis and drafting the general scheme of each intended foundation. From the record preserved it can be gathered that it had not at first been contemplated to erect a bishopric at Chester at all, but only to extend the foundation and resources of the abbey of St. Werburgh.** Abandoning this more limited idea, the letters patent erecting the see were signed by the king on 4 August, 1541, at Walden. Thereby the monastery of St. Werburgh at Chester was made an episcopal seat and cathedral church with a bishop, a dean, and six prebendaries. The whole of Lancashire was included in the new see, John Bird, bishop of Bangor, being nominated to it. The two archdeaconries of Richmond and Chester,” separated respectively from York and from Lichfield, were united and annexed to the new see with all their jurisdictions. Both archdeacons were to be collated by the bishop and to receive not more than {100 per annum from him. The archdeaconry of Richmond, hitherto under York, was taken into the province of Canterbury, thus bringing the whole see under that province. The chapter was incorporated and was to guide itself in its actions by statutes to be prescribed by the king in an indenture. These letters patent were followed on the next day by two other patents, granting respectively to the bishop and to the dean and chapter their endow- ments." The latter of these two patents has a curious history. By a clerical *™ L. and P. Hen. VIII, xvi, 1377. *! 31 Hen. VIII, cap. 13. 7? Thi ee The draft schemes are contained in vol. 24 of the Mie. Bks. of hee Off. at the ono ere id Pat. 33 Hen. VIII, pt. 2, mM. 23, reprinted in full in Rymer, Foedera, xiv, 717-24. _ ™ As already stated Lancashire north of the Ribble was in Richmond archdeaconry, and south of that river in Chester. The latter archdeaconry contained the deaneries of Warrington Wine better Blackburn and Leyland; that of Richmond the deaneries of Amounderness, Kirkby Lonsdale Kendal F d ia pomne others outside the county. , pee oth these patents, dated Walden, 5 Aug. 1541, are entered : That to the bishop granting him the renee) of a. in Lonsdale Ba sepa ae nani A ce is printed in abstract in Ormerod, Ces. i, 96. That to the dean and chapter do printed. . sessions in various counties €s not appear to have been 40 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY slip in the enrolment of the grant the name of Chester was omitted *” from the designation of the dean and chapter, so that the grant runs as follows: ‘ Dedi- mus et concessimus ac per praesentes damus et concedimus decano et capitulo ecclesiae cathedralis Christi et beatae Mariae Virginis per nos dudum erectis omnia illa maneria,’ &c. The omission proved of serious consequence, for under Edward VI the grant was impugned and the lands under a compulsory conveyance passed to Sir Richard Cotton, comptroller of the household, charged only with a fee-farm rent to the dean and chapter. The fee-farm rent of course remained stationary, whilst the lands themselves have increased in value. The practical result was to deprive the dean and chapter of the endowment intended for them by Henry VIII. At the time of the foundation of the new see of Chester both the arch- deaconries within its limits were held by Dr. William Knight, a well-known ecclesiastic and statesman, frequently employed by Henry VIII as his ambas- sador abroad. The licence for Knight’s election as bishop of Bath and Wells was issued on g April, 1541 ; he was confirmed on 19 May and con- secrated on the 2gth. He had previously, by a deed dated 10 February, 1541," resigned the archdeaconry of Richmond, while the other archdeaconry he resigned by a charter dated 20 May, 1541.% The jurisdictions hitherto appertaining to these archdeaconries were vested thenceforth in the bishop of Chester, who was empowered to delegate to the future archdeacons such and so much jurisdiction as he should please. As a consequence these dignitaries were henceforth shorn of that extensive and almost independent jurisdiction which had hitherto distinguished them. Under the terms of this authoriza- tion the first bishop, John Bird, kept the archidiaconal powers of Chester and Richmond in his own hands, and did not during his episcopate appoint any archdeacons. His successor, George Coates, did, it is true, appoint to each archdeaconry—at what exact date is not known, but probably in 1554 —and from that time onwards the succession of the archdeacons is unbroken, though the dates of some of them are not clear. But none of these officials possessed any jurisdiction, that anciently appertaining to their dignity being exercised by the bishop through his vicar-general or chan- cellor for the diocese generally, or by the bishop’s commissary for the arch- deaconry of Richmond in particular.” The arrangement by which the new see was placed within the province of Canterbury did not endure for long. By an Act of 1541-2* the bishoprics of Chester and Man were severed from the southern province and annexed to that of York. So much for the merely formative results of the first Reformation period. But that period, using the term in the widest sense, had a more 7 That the omission was a slip is proved by the fact that in the margin of the entry on the roll it is clearly stated that the grant was to the dean and chapter of Chester : ‘Decano et Capitulo ecclesie cathedralis Cestrensis.’ 88 Confirmed on 8 Mar. by a charter of Edward, archbishop of York. *89 Confirmed by a charter of Rowland, bishop of Coventry and Lichfield, dated 24 May, and by a charter of the dean and chapter of Coventry and Lichfield dated 26 May. 8 As to this latter a misconception seems to exist. The letters patent of 4 Aug. 1541 erecting the bishopric contain a proviso of reservation of the metropolitical and archiepiscopal prerogative within the see of Chester as usual and proper in other dioceses. This has been magnified by Whitaker (Richmondshire, i, 34) into a special reservation intended to exclude the quasi-independent jurisdiction and liberties of the ancient archdeacons of Richmond. There is no justification for this view. The clause is quite the usual proviso clause, with no special import, and the name of Richmond is not even mentioned. 71 33 Hen. VIII, cap. 31. 2 41 6 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE general effect on the county of Lancaster than the mere territorial ae ments of jurisdiction which followed on the erection of the as . th affected the parochial clergy and the parishioners themselves, thoug eon extent it is not easy to determine. It is clear that the Lance ae te gt and his Privy Council, was highly suspicious of the attitude of the northern ecclesiastics. This suspicion was possibly justified by the delay and Opposi- tion made during May, 1532, by the Convocation of York in the recognition of his supremacy.” In the next year, 1533, Dr. Nicholas Wilson of Cambridge, a north-countryman, on behalf of the * Popish clergy,’ travelled about Yorkshire, Lancashire, and Cheshire preaching against the supremacy. But on 1 June, 1534, the acknowledgement of the king’s claim by the ce province was duly made in Convocation, which had met at York on 5 May. In the course of the following months, July and August, this collective acknowledgement was followed by the individual subscriptions of the clergy throughout the country which are now known technically as ‘ renunciations of Papal supremacy.’ Only certain portions of the returns of these sub- scriptions have survived, and do not include those for the northern province at all, although Wharton asserts that to his certain knowledge the original subscriptions of the remaining dioceses were in existence.” The absence of any returns for Lancashire makes it impossible to say how far the clergy of this part of England actually acquiesced in the measure. If the argument from silence is safe the assumption is that acquiescence was general, for there is no hint of any refusal. In the following year the administration busied itself with a scheme of spreading the doctrine of the royal supremacy amongst the laity. Letters were sent out in June, 1535, from the Privy Council to all the bishops re- quiring them to see that the people in their respective dioceses were effectually instructed in this point. The replies from Edward Lee, archbishop of York, to this missive have been preserved.** Although they are somewhat enigmatic the archbishop informed the king clearly that he had spared no pains in distributing among the clergy of his diocese the ‘book’ containing the new order for preaching and for bidding the beads which contained the king’s new style as head of the Church, and he does not give the slightest hint of any opposition or dissatisfaction among either clergy or laity save only from the priors of Hull and Mountgrace. Incidentally the correspondence yields the informa- tion that there were not in the diocese of York at the time twelve preaching resident secular priests: a remark that may cover the archdeaconry of Richmond. The probability is therefore great that in the northern counties the supremacy was dutifully accepted, and that this question alone would not have raised a revolt. There is nothing to show that the riots and unlawful assemblies in Lancashire, Westmorland, Cumberland, and Craven which caused 2 Strype, Eccl Mem. i ; ee, ha rea em. 1 (1), 205; Cott. MSS. Cleopatra, E. 6, 216; Cabala, p. 2443 Fuller, *3 Rymer, Foedera, xiv, 492. © They are contained in two volumes at the Record Office ; Exchequer, cellaneous Books, 63-4. These portions concern only the Southern Province, any entries relating to the archdeaconry of Chester. , *5 Wharton, De Epis. et Decan. Londin. 286. The statemen on the Close Roll of 25 Hen. VIII is incorrect. * Cott. MSS. (Cleop. E. 6, 234-9, dated 14 June, 1535, and are summarized in Strype, Eccl. Mem. ii, 287-91. 42 Treasury of the Receipt Mis- and even these do not contain t that some of the subscriptions are entered and 19 July, 1535, and 14 Jan. 1535-6) ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY anxiety in this year, 1535, had a basis of religious discontent. They appear to have been purely secular.’” But when towards the end of this year the visitation of the monasteries began a very different popular feeling was at once aroused. As far as Lanca- shire is concerned the Pilgrimage of Grace is of importance only as indicative of the discontent at the threatened destruction of the monasteries. At first it was supposed that the forces in Lancashire would be available to put down the rebels in Yorkshire and Lincolnshire, and on 10 October, 1536, the king warned the earl of Derby to get his men together with this object. But almost immediately it was found that the commons in the West Riding and Lancashire were up. On the day named the commons of the north of Lancashire and of the West Riding forcibly reinstated the abbot and twenty- one monks in the Yorkshire abbey of Sawley, four miles from Whalley. Accordingly, on the twentieth of the same month, the king ordered the earl of Derby to go against the Lancashire rebels because of their ‘insurrection and assembly lately attempted in the borders of Lancashire specially about the abbey of Sawley.’ On the 28th the earl assembled a force of nearly 8,000 men at Preston, with the object of forestalling the rebels and of occupying Whalley Abbey. The commons received an accession of strength from the north. In Cartmel they had against his will reinstated the prior in the priory there; and another body from Kendal had joined hands with the commons in the neighbourhood of Sawley. Some time between the 28 and 30 October the earl sent the rebels word to disperse to their homes or else to meet him in battle on Bentham Moor, the place where they were accustomed to muster. The rebels, led by John Atkinson, captain of the commoners in Kendal, replied that they had a pilgrimage to do for the commonwealth which they would accomplish or jeopard their lives in that quarrel, and further that they would not fight with him unless he interrupted them of their pilgrimage. Before any further action the earl’s hand was stayed by the receipt of word from the earl of Shrewsbury announcing that the Yorkshire rebels had dispersed, and requiring him to disband his men. On their side too the rebel leaders had dispatched word to the commons of Cumberland, Westmorland, Kendal, the side of Lanca- shire and Craven and all others of the north to leave besieging of houses and disperse homewards. Evidently this command was not received in Lancashire in time to prevent the rebels making their attack on Whalley Abbey. After appointing a rendezvous at Stoke Green near Hawkshead kirk on the 28th, and another on Clitheroe Moor apparently on the 3oth, the commons of the borders of Yorkshire near to Sawley with some of the borders of Lancashire near to theym assembled theym together and with force then unknowen to me [the earl of Derby] sodenly toke the said abbey of Whalley. Immediately afterwards, however, hearing of the general disbandment, the rebels quietly dispersed. The proclamation of a general pardon for the town of Lancaster and northwards in Lancashire, with the exception of four ring- leaders of Tynedale, Ribblesdale, the borders of Lancashire and Kendal, was issued on 2 November, and the trouble was practically over. For *7 T. and P. Hen. VIII, viii, 863, 1008, 1030, 1046, 1108. 43 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE although on 6 November letters were sent from Aske to Lancashire and other parts moving them to insurrection—letters which were followed in the middle of the month by rumours that Kendal intended to come into Cartmel and Furness, and possibly to march through Lancaster to Preston—no further movement followed.” As far as Lancashire is concerned the Pilgrimage of Grace was of small importance. Only the wild northern borderland was affected by it, and its duration was a mere matter of weeks. The earl of Derby’s forces were in arms for not more than five days at the outside. Nor were the subsequent proceedings of much note as far as the county is concerned. The reinstated monks were still in possession of Sawley in December, but early in the following year, 1537, they were seized, and after a trial at Lancaster William Trafford, the abbot, was executed in March. After similar proceedings John Paslew, abbot of Whalley, and William Haydock, one of the senior monks, were also executed in the same month. Whilst the movement was thus insignificant in extent it is also clear that its basis was as much social as religious. The economic effect of the Dissolution touched the laity as closely as, if not more so than, the religious effects. This general conclusion is borne out by the survey of the action of the clergy themselves. For the wider evidence of the attitude of the latter towards the course of the Reformation in the years covered by these events we are obliged to fall back on the broken and not very trustworthy testimony of the statistics of the incumbents. At the time of the Valor Lancashire contained sixty rectories or vicarages, and within these parishes there were contained in addition ninety-three chapelries and sixty-nine chantries or stipendiary priests. Arguing, unsafely as ever, from silence it would seem that during the first period of the Reformation—that of the divorce, supremacy, and suppres- sion—the clergy of the county of Lancaster conformed easily and almost universally to the wishes of the king, and that in the southern parts of the county the laity also were equally docile. Such a conclusion is equally applicable to all the succeeding years of Henry’s reign. The numerous religious changes which followed each other swept in successive waves over the county without leading to any recorded disturbance or removal of the clergy or to any persecution of the laity. The simple fact of course is that except sentimentally and economically the suppression of the religious houses did not in most cases affect the people, the laity that is, as parishioners.** It did not touch the secular priests or the ordinary ministrations. But when towards the close of his reign Henry cast covetous eyes on the chantries,™ a very different result ensued. For they were supplied by secular priests, who in many cases performed the ministrations of baptism, marriage, and burial, and to lay hands on t to touch the parishioners themselves in a most vital spot. ordinary hem was It ig a speaking * For the whole of this episode see the Derby Correspondence (Chet. Soc.) . Exceptions have teen pointed out above—at Lytham, &c , ® By the Act 37 Hen. VIII cap. 4, the Parliament grante. ing (i j ACO 37 - Will, cap. 4, l granted to the K hte oe and stipendiary priests chargeable a tmeein eee fens en. Page 8) ane 25 Lee 47 Mens VII (ices) + and Gi all such i fee &e., as between 27 and 37 Hen. VII had been fraudulently tae diode oe ie oe as if only the latter of these two items was granted to the king. But Henry’s commi : eo epee recites that the Act gave him also the first-named items. - Se ASHES Se a 8) and L. and P. Hen. VIII. 44 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY testimony to the silent progress of the Reformation that whereas the dissolu- tion of the monasteries, which directly touched the laity hardly at all, should have provoked the Pilgrimage of Grace, the suppression of the chantries, which touched the laity closely and deeply, should have taken place without apparent protest from the people. Henry’s commission for an inquisition into the chantry foundations within the diocese of Chester was dated Westminster, 13 February, 1545-6, and directed to the bishop of Chester, Sir Thomas Holcroft, John Holcroft, Robert Tatton, John Kechyn, and James Rokeby.™ So far as relates to Lancashire the return is contained in the Duchy Records.** It is not dated, and we know nothing in detail as to the pro- ceedings of the commissioners.*%* Whether or how far Henry took steps to sell the chantry lands in Lancashire we do not know ;_ the Commission Book does not contain the record of any authority for such sale, nor is there record of any leases of chantry lands in the county earlier than 1548. In spite of strong opposition the scheme was again taken up after the accession of Edward VI. The first Parliament of Edward VI passed a similar Act to that above named, but much more explicitly and clearly drafted. This Act** granted to the young king all colleges, free chapels, and chantries existing then or five years before, excepting the colleges of Oxford and Cambridge, parochial chapels of ease, &c. Under the powers conferred by this Act Edward in 1548 issued commissions under the Great Seal. That for the counties of Chester and Lancaster and the city of Chester was directed to Sir Hugh Cholmeley, Sir William Brereton, John Arscott, James Sterkye, George Browne, and St. Thomas Carewes, esqs., and John Kechyn, Thomas Fleetwood, and William Leyton, gents.** The returns were probably made before Easter, and certainly before 11 August, 1548,°° for on that day the king signed a commission %” dated at Cranborough, giving Sir Walter Mildmay, one of the surveyors- general of the Court of Augmentations, and Robert Keylway, surveyor of the liveries in the Court of Wards, authority to assign pensions to priests and schoolmasters, &c., in the duchy in accordance with the provisions of the Act.* 501 Although the Act makes no mention of plate or ornaments the commission authorized the commis- sioners to make an inventory of them, and the returns accordingly contain such inventories. 502 Division 25, u. third portion, No. 45. %3 Tt is likely that the inquiry was held and finished and the report of the commissioners sent in by way of certificate to the Chancellor of the Duchy, at Westminster, before July, 1546, for in that month the commissioners for certain other parts of the duchy, viz. for Norfolk, were empowered by a fresh commission of 8 July, 1546, to make sale of certain chapels asin their certificate of survey thereof, which said certificate had been returned on the previous Ascension Day ; Duchy Rec. Bk. of Com. vol. 95, . 170. 0 1 Edw. VI, cap. 14. 8 Pat. 2 Edw. VI, pt. 7, m. 13. This and all the commissions were dated 14 Feb. 1547-8. °° These returns are preserved among the duchy records; Colleges and Chantries Certificates: (1) 37 Hen. VIII; (3) 2 Edw. VI. The printed text of these returns (Cher. Soc. vols. lix, Ix) does not follow either (1) or (3), but runs the two together. It is printed from an inaccurate transcript. The footnotes also are rendered valueless in numberless cases by the fact that the editor relied on Piccope’s confused transcripts of undated Chester visitations. 57 Duchy Com. Bk. vol. 96, p. 25. ; % This commission of 11 August is itself based upoa a previous one of 20 June, 1548, empowering the same two persons to make grants for grammar schools, pensions to priests, &c.; Pat. 2 Edw. VI, pt. 4, m. 334. 45 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE The commission laid down the proportions of the pensions to be allowed as follows : ion to be Value of living seized Pensi to the king Pegiies ri : ¢ @ © Below £5 ‘ ; ; ‘ 2 : ‘ ; Between £5 and £6 135. 4d. : : : ; ‘ ; : . Between £6 135. 4d. and {10 . : : ‘ ; . a Between {10 and £20 3 4 In accordance with their powers the commissioners on 28 August returned a list of the pensions which they recommended to the chantry priests and schoolmasters of the duchy;*” whereupon letters patent are to he made out in due form under the seal of the county Palatine of Lancaster and this warrant subscribed by the said Mildmay and Keylway to be a sufficient warrant to the Chancellor etc. of the Duchy to make forth the said letters patent. Before leaving these pensions there is one question calling for elucida- tion. A pension would in no case be granted before the endowments of the particular chantry had been seized into the king’s hands, and had either been sold or let on lease. Thus the Lancashire chantries had been sold or leased before the date of the above-named return, and in all probability before the preceding Easter. A more explicit date cannot, unfortunately, be given.*” ae The net result of an examination of the leases and pensions is as follows :— The return as to pensions accounts for sixty-six out of the full total of the sixty-nine chantries within the county. For these sixty-six confiscations there are forty-eight existing leases. Outside these chantries the county con- tained ninety-four chapelries, and there is no existing record of their having been touched at all. The present transaction was intended only as a first instalment. As a commencement the Privy Council had ordered £5,000 per annum of the chantry rents to be sold, and further instalments followed at later points in the reign ; but there is no record of any further general sale transaction in the county of Lancaster on the lines of that just recorded. There is not the slightest proof that chapelries had been touched by Henry VIII, for the only distinctive reference to proceedings on this head in Henry’s reign mentions only chantries.** The inevitable conclusion is that the chapelries remained untouched. There are few subjects on which greater confusion of view and error of statement abound than this subject of the chantries. The view ordinarily put forth is as follows :—(1) Henry VIII’s suppression of them was prevented by his death; (2) The suppression was undertaken de novo by Edward VI, and completed within the first and second years of his reign ; (3) Mary restored them ; (4) Elizabeth again suppressed them and seized their revenues ; (5) The pensioned chantry priests became * This list has often been referred to, mostly at second hand. Willis, Mitred Acéeys, ii, 107. The original is contained in the Du *° The draft leases still exist (Duchy Rec. Draft Leases, bdles. They generally end with the formula, ‘Make a lease of the premise at Easter, 1548, paying yearly at terms usual X Y Z rent.’ “There were many separate subsequent commissions relatin to indivi i goods, but no general survey and sale of = chapelries in bulk on the Pie at g ve e lines of this sale of the chantri F i si2 Acts of the P. C, ili, 74; Henry VIII resumed the chantries, ‘and did well change ane eae to other use; An incomplete abstract of it is given in chy Rec. Accts. Var. 28. 5 & 6), but these drafts are not dated. s to A B for twenty-one years, beginning 45 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY loafing out-of-works. Every one of these statements is doubtful or untrue, for (1) Henry probably suppressed some of the chantries ; (2) What was done in 1547-8 was only a first instalment, successive commissions of inquiry being issued all through his reign ; (3) Mary did not restore a single chantry : on the contrary, fresh commissions of inquiry were issued during her reign, and she herself gave leases of chantry lands to laymen; (4) In Elizabeth’s reign there were no chantries left to suppress—the bones had been picked too clean for that ; (5) There is evidence that some of the old chantry priests remained as pensioned clergy, performing service and administering the sacraments in the localities where they are supposed to have been thrown out of work, and the presumption is that many more of them did so than we have actual proof of. The series of commissions of inquiry relating to Lancashire which were issued in the time of Edward VI and Mary are recorded in an appendix (pp. 96-8 m/fra),** and other evidence on the matter will be found in the accounts of the churches in the topographical section of this work. Many of the chantry priests continued to enjoy their pensions long into the reign of Elizabeth, being paid by the separate local or county receivers of the various parts of the duchy.™* It is evident from the contemptuous way in which some of them are later referred to as ‘old popish chantry priests’ that a portion of them remained recalcitrant ‘papists.’ But such a statement applies to only a portion, possibly a small portion, and others remained on active service as priests administering the sacraments in the chapelries.* As to the larger question of the general attitude of the parochial clergy and of the laity of Lancashire towards the various phases of the Edwardian Reformation there is a remarkable dearth of information. There does not appear to have been any appreciable displacement of the clergy at any time during Edward’s reign, i.e., such a displacement as would argue revolt against the reforming measures of authority."° Nor is there any record of any protest on the part of the laity against the stripping of churches or the abolition of the chantries. Does this prove that the clergy of the county had become Protestant? By no means. It merely proves that the clergy clung to their livings, casting conviction to the winds. How then was the county taught the reformed doctrine? Of the actual process we catch few glimpses, but these, though mainly retrospective, are significant. An entry in Edward’s Diary under 18 December, 1551, affords the earliest form of the institution which was later to grow into the 518 By the aid of the list it will be possible in future to arrange the existing skins of returns in accordance with the actual commissions, and thus to give a scholarly account of both the suppression of the chantries and the sale of church goods, 514 Tt is on account of this method of payment that there is no general account of the payment of pensions preserved among the records of the duchy. In his annual account the receiver-general of the duchy only accounts for the net sum received by him from each separate or local receiver, and the subsidiary accounts of these local receivers have not survived. 515 A direct statement to this effect is contained in the chantry lease No. 2 (Duchy Rec. bdle. 5) with regard to the chapel of Bailey, near Ribchester, where it is said of Robert Taylor, late incumbent of the late dissolved chantry there, that the ‘said incumbent doth at this day [1548] celebrate there and doth minister to the inhabitants adjoining at such times as the curate of the parish church cannot repair to them for the floods of the river’ (See also Strype, Eccl. Mem. ii (1), 100). 316 Details as to the clergy will be found in the accounts of the parish churches. 47 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE king's or queen’s four Lancashire preachers ;*” but there is no record of any such preacher save John Bradford having visited Lancashire. If the scheme were carried out instantly and in full it could only have been in operation for a year and a half—from December, 1551, to July, 1553—and as the first payment to these chaplains on their £40 per annum was only made in October, 1552, it may be that they commenced their preaching tours later than the beginning of 1552. On the supposition that the first year’s course was carried out as outlined, then Bradford and another were preaching in Lancashire and Derbyshire during part or all of the year 1552, Bradford probably choosing Lancashire. Short though the time was, the ground covered by him seems to have® been remarkably small. Hollinworth says that ‘God gave good success to the ministry of the Word and raised up and preserved a faithful people in Lancashire, especially in and about Manchester and Bolton.’ In Bradford’s ‘ Farewell to Lancashire and Cheshire,’ dated 11 February, 1554-5, he enumerates the places in Lancashire where he had ‘truly taught and preached the Word of God’ as follows : Manchester, Ashton-under-Lyne, Bolton, Bury, Wigan, Liverpool, Eccles, Prestwich, Middleton, and Radcliffe. Looked at broadly, such a circuit and con- stituency is practically only a Manchester one. The farewell is addressed ‘to all that profess the true religion in Lancashire and Cheshire and especially abiding in Manchester.’ A similarly disappointing conclusion is deducible from the meagre biography of George Marsh.** He was charged with having preached heretically in January, February, or about that time in 1553-4 in Deane, Eccles, Bolton, Bury, and many other parishes in the bishopric of Chester. This statement of time and area is confirmed by his own account of his proceedings.* That the spirit of Protestantism had spread further afield than the Manchester district is, however, evident from the story of the mayor of Lancaster, who jeered at the rood which had been re-erected in the church of Cockerham.’ Marsh also hints that the schoolmaster at Lancaster was a Protestant. There is a very instructive story relating to the Reformation in Shackerley in Foxe,”' but it is not possible to date it exactly. It seems clear, therefore on the existing evidence that the reformed doctrine was as yet confined to the populous towns and to the south-east, and had made no impression on the moor country and the west. Putting aside the stories of Bradford, Marsh, Holland, and Hurst, there is less information concerning the religious history of the county under Mary than the reign of Edward yielded. The story of the riot in Billinge chapel in Wigan parish in August, 1§53, which ensued on the reading of Mary’s proclamation for the exercise of Catholic religion ** has a significance *” «Tt was appointed I should have six chaplai di ‘ aplains ordinary, two to be ever present and four al bsent os ee agian Wales, two in Lancashire and Derby, next a two in the Merche oe otland, two in Yorks the third year, two in Devon, and two in H i ge ee F ; in Hants, the fourth year, two in Norfolk and an Nothing is recorded as to the reasons which made Marsh one much earlier than Bradford’s visit to the county. Perhaps Le preached there. *° Foxe, Acts and Monuments (ed. Cattley), vii, 50. Ibid. vi, 564. Foxe describes thi ‘ aah ate » 564 escribes this man as ‘an old favourer of the Gospel—which is rare in that * Ibid. vill, 562. a Protestant, but he seems to have become ver and other Lancashire men had already *™ A good contemporary account of it is given in Chet. Soc. Publ. cxiii, 79 48 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY which is only half religious. The inhabitants speak as Roman Catholics, but apparently were concerned primarily about the property of the chapel. Beyond this episode almost the only evidence bearing on the attitude of the county towards the Marian reaction is afforded by the mere names of the clergy who vacated ** in the years 1553 or 1554 and the numbers ordained to supply vacancies.°* The cathedral clergy have hardly the same importance for this question as the parochial ; but the deprivation of Bishop Bird in 1554 is of account. For the story of the general legislative settlement of the Elizabethan Church Lancashire would have little importance were it not for the personality of the bishop of Chester, Cuthbert Scott, a native of the county.* Even before the passing of either the Supremacy Act or the Uniformity Act Scott had got into trouble for his uncompromising attitude both in Parliament and Convocation, and at the disputation at Westminster, 31 March, 1558-9, between the Protestant and Roman Catholic champions. But until the passing of those Acts no specifically penal proceedings were taken against him or his fellow bishops. Both Acts passed on 28 April, 1559, and on 23 May following, a royal commission was issued to the Privy Council to administer the oath of Supremacy. Between 21 and 26 June the oath was tendered to Scott, and on his refusal of it he was on the latter date deprived. After a four years’ imprisonment in the Fleet, he was allowed to live in Essex under surveillance, but escaped to Belgium, where he died in 1565. Having disposed of the Marian bishops, who were all** deprived by November, 1559, the administration turned to the general body of the clergy. On 28 May, 1559, a general visitation of all the dioceses was resolved upon. The articles of inquiry, which were practically those of the Edwardian Injunctions, were ready by 13 June, and on 24 June writs of visitation were issued to all the dioceses. Five sets of visitors were appointed for the southern province and one set for the northern province. The fourteen commissioners who composed this latter comprised noblemen, knights, divines, and lawyers: but the work fell mainly on Edwin Sandys, afterwards archbishop of York, Henry Harvey, a civil lawyer, Thomas Gargrave, speaker of the House of Commons, and Henry Gates. In the course of September they visited the dioceses of York and Durham, Carlisle in the first week of October, and then entered the diocese of Chester. On Monday, 9 October, 1559, Sandys and Harvey sat at Kendal to visit Kendal, Copeland, and Furness.*” There is no mention in their proceedings of any clergy refusing the oath in these deaneries. We are only told that the visitors heard two causes, one as between Cockermouth and Embleton, the other as between Crosthwaite and Heversham. On the 12th they sat at Lancaster, and at Wigan on the 16th, 8 These names include among the parochial clergy the following: Warrington—Edward Keble deprived, his successor instituted in Nov. 1554; and North Meols—Lawrence Waterward, deprived before Aug. 1554, when his successor was instituted. ™ See the Ordination Book, printed by the Record Society of Lancs. and Ches. There were no ordinations at all according to the new ordinal in the time of Edw. VI. The figures show that Bishop Bird ordained 48 priests in 1542, 41 in 1543, 38 in 1544, 22 in 1545, 44 in 1546, and 14 in 1547; Bishop Coates 12 in 1555; Bishop Scott 17 in 1557 and 68 in 1558. ‘The last number affords an indication that Scott had got his diocese into something like working order. 8 The earl of Derby’s attitude is related in V.C.H. Lancs. iii, 162. 6 Except Kitchin of Llandaff. The bishop of Sodor and Man was perhaps not touched by the Acts ; at all events he retained his bishopric and his three Lancashire benefices till his death. 37 The proceedings of this visitation are preserved in P.R.O. S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. x. 2 49 7 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE and here again we read of no refusers of the oath or articles. On 18 and 19 October they sat at Manchester, the visitors now being Sandys, Harvey, and George Browne. On the first of these days they heard a case of adultery between George Holme and Elizabeth Robinson, and on the last day they visited the college of Manchester. Instead of appearing, Lawrence Vaux, the warden, sent a deputy, Stephen Beshe (Beck), who stated that Vaux had gone to London.** John Coppage, a fellow of the church, appeared not. Robert Erlond (Ireland), another fellow, appeared and subscribed. Robert Prestwich, a stipendiary priest, appeared and also subscribed, but was threatened with suspension if he frequented taverns any more. Richard Hart, another fellow of the college, appeared and obstinately and peremptorily refused to subscribe the articles. The rest of the visitation concerns the county of Chester. In the whole diocese the visitors only made one institution, viz. the church of Langton in Yorkshire ; in Lancashire they specify (counting Winwick and Wigan as one) only eighteen clergy as absent (non comparentes) as follows :-— Leytanp Deangry.—Croston, Thomas Lemyng, vicar ; Leyland, Charles Wainwright, vicar ; Eccleston, John Modye, rector. Warrincton Dganery.—Winwick, Thomas Stanley, non-resident; Wigan, the bishop of Sodor and Man, non-resident ; Prescot, Robert Nelson, curate ; Aughton, Edward Morecroft, rector ; Halsall, Richard Halsall, vicar, and Henry Halsall, curate ; Sefton, Robert Ballard, rector; Ormskirk, Elizaeus Ambrose, vicar ; Walton, Antony Molyneux, rector. Furness Deranery.—Hawkshead, Richard Harris, curate (afterwards appeared) ; Thomas Syngilton, stipendiary priest ; Richard Ward, stipendiary priest (afterwards ap- peared) ; Hugh Kellete, stipendiary priest. Mancuester Deangry.—Prestwich, William Langley, rector (afterwards subscribed) ; Rochdale, John Hamson, curate.3# Of the seventeen non comparentes only Hamson of Rochdale was deprived. To these should doubtless be added Vaux, the warden, and Coppage, a fellow of the college of Manchester. James Hargreaves, the noted ‘ papist ’ rector of Blackburn, was not deprived until 1562. Inthe absence of any further notes of deprivations or resignations the presumption is that the rest of the Lancashire clergy quietly acquiesced in the Elizabethan settlement. The visitation thus described is to be regarded as a purely temporary outcome of the powers given by the Act of Supremacy to the queen to appoint commissioners who should exercise ecclesiastical jurisdiction. A more permanent outcome was the fixed ecclesiastical commission sitting in London which in its first form was created in July, 1559, and which began to sit in the November following. It was to this body that the temporary provincial visitors as just described bound the recalcitrant clergy to appear. Quite different from both royal commissions were the episcopal visitations which 8 He had in fact gone to Ireland, removing not only himself i college and the plate and vestments of the dak. The rf eee een Ei Spey Ne mata eeds he had already assigned to the care of Alexander *® The commissioners took from him a recogni S tor gnizance of {30 and a London ais the Ecclesiastical Commission] on 20 Noone. following. t was also presented to the commissioners that at Rad life ( not read the Gospel, Epistle, &c. according to the Poe masa i aaa Presentations of non-residence and dilapidations. Manchester and two of the fellow , the vi eee s, the vicars of Rochdale and Lancaster, and perhaps one or two others, lost 50 surety of £100 for his appearance in ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY followed in 1560 and 1561. As the see of Chester, vacant by Scott’s depri- vation, was not filled up till May 1561 by the appointment of William Downham,"™ the visitation in the northern province was delayed until that year. There appears to be no extant record of this visitation so far as the see of Chester is concerned, unless it is at York or Chester. On 20 July, 1562, the permanent Ecclesiastical Commission [in London], which had practically ceased to act after 1560, was revived in a different form. This second ecclesiastical commission had for its object no longer the enforcement of subscription from the general body of the clergy. That had been already accomplished by the first body. It was rather a precautionary institution created to watch the ‘papists,’ whose hopes had been roused by the events on the Continent, especially by the persecution of the Protestants in France. The first act of this new commission was to order the bishops to inquire after recusants*™’ in their various dioceses. ‘The outcome was the first small list of imprisoned recusants, which may be dated about August 1562. It yields three Lancashire names.** It is not to be understood that this diocesan inquiry just described was an episcopal one, relating only to the clergy and resting for its authority on the ordinary episcopal right of visitation. It was in each case a separately constituted local commission to the bishop and others, and was to cover the laity as well as the clergy in its purview.** In this instance a commis- sion was issued on 20 July, 1562, to the earl of Derby, the bishop of Chester, and others, appointing them commissioners for ecclesiastical causes in the diocese of Chester to enforce the Acts of Uniformity and Supremacy.** There was as yet, however, no evidence of the application of penalties to the body of the laity. The State was busied only with a minority of recalcitrant clergy. The first severe penal statute of Elizabeth’s reign ** was the outcome of the religious wars in France and of the discovery of a plot in favour of Mary queen of Scots.” The Act received the royal assent on 10 April, 1503" The clause in the Act which required justices of peace to inquire as to offences against the Act led to the Privy Council inquiry in the course of October, 1564, into the general well- or ill-affectedness of the justices of peace.” The certificate returned by the bishop of Chester shows that in 3! Stubbs, Reg. Sacr. Angi. (1st ed.), 84. 97 §.P. Dom. Eliz. Add. vol. 11, No. 45. 388 Lawrence Vaux to remain in co. Worcester ; Richard Hart and Nicholas Banester to remain in Kent or Sussex. *4 The appointment of these commissions by the civil power rested on the powers conferred on the crown by the Act of Supremacy. They were issued very frequently throughout Elizabeth’s reign, and cause much confusion to the student. These special, local, and temporary ‘ Commissions for Ecclesiastical Causes,’ as they were styled, have to be kept most jealously distinct, not only from each other, but also from the permanent Ecclesiastical Commission in London on the one hand, and from the various diocesan visitations on the other. 335 §.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 23, No. 56. ; 888 5 Eliz. cap. 1 an Act for the assurance of the queen’s royal power over all estates and subjects in her dominions. _ ™ Thid. 888 Besides prescribing a praemunire and treason for all persons upholding the jurisdiction of the see of Rome in England it enacted that the oath of Supremacy should be taken by graduates, schoolmasters, officers of courts, and members of Parliament as well as ecclesiastics. Except for office holders the Act affects the laity only by implication, viz. in the clause giving the Lord Chancellor power to issue commissions to administer the oath to such persons as the said commissioners should by their commission be empowered to tender the oath to. In the main it was directed against the clergy, and there is no evidence either of perse- cution arising on it or of any popular or lay disaffection as underlying it. An imperfect list of the clergy of the diocese who took the oath is printed in Ces. Sheaf (Ser. 3), i, 34-5. 3° The returns to this inquiry have been printed by the Camden Society (Ser. 2), vol. 53. 51 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Lancashire out of twenty-five justices only five were known to be favourable to the proceedings of the government in matter of religion, the remaining twenty being not favourable thereto, and as a consequence inclinable to the Papists. Among these twenty are some of the most representative and best- known names in the county. Later on the administration took steps to purge and reinforce the bench, but at the moment it would appear that the bishop found difficulty in suggesting Protestant names of standing in the county fit to be made justices. In the hundreds of Amounderness and Leyland he can suggest none, and in the remaining three hundreds only ten names. It is unfortunate that no clear indication of the immediate effect of the Act of 1563 can be given, as the 1564 visitation of the diocese of York did not extend to the see of Chester. The bishop of Chester compounded with the archbishop for it, and refrained from visiting his diocese, contenting him- self with collecting the procuration moneys by means of his servants.* So that all the information we possess relating to it is confined to the bishop of Durham’s letter to the archbishop of Canterbury on the state of his three parishes of Rochdale, Blackburn, and Whalley. It is probable that the Act of 1563 was enacted only in terrorem, and would have remained unused but for the events of the pontificate of Pius V. With his advent in 1566 a change came over the attitude of the English Roman Catholics. Hitherto the laity had so far acquiesced in the Church settlement as to attend their parish church, although a committee appointed by the council of Trent had decided against this practice. On his accession Pius V appointed two English exiles in Louvain, Dr. Sanders and Dr. Harding, apostolic delegates to make known to the faithful in England the papal sentence which declared it a mortal sin to frequent the Protestant church service. Accordingly Sanders wrote a pastoral letter which he entrusted to Lawrence Vaux, late warden of Manchester. Vaux crossed to England, and making for Lancashire, issued on 2 November, 1566, a circular to his Lancashire friends in which he gave the substance of Sanders’ pastoral. ‘What I write heare to youe I wold wysse Sir Richard Mollineux, Sir W. Norris and other my friends to be partakers.’ *” This letter appears to have reached the hands of the government in the following year. On 20 December, 1567, information was sent to the Privy Council that certain gentlemen in Lancashire had taken a solemn oath not to come to communion and rejoiced greatly at the report of a Spanish invasion.” Some three weeks or a month before Christmas, 1567, the bishop of Chester was also informed of great confederacies presently in Lancashire by sundry Papists there lurking who have stirred divers gentry to their faction and sworn them together not to come to church; and he was advised to execute the ecclesiastical commissions with the earl of Derby, or else it can- not be holpen, for many church doors be shut up and the curates refuse to serve as It 1s now appointed to be used in the church. The bishop replied he had heard Mr. Ashton, and would send for the offenders by precept.“ 240 Strype, Life of Parker, i, 361. “1 Thi 7 S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 41, No. 12, Nov. 1566. idly 92s *" Thid. vol. 44, No. 56. The | j i i i PN pea niche ed s e letter just quoted was probably an inclosure in this paper, and has been “4 Thid. vol. 48, No. 35, undated. 52 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY On Tuesday before New Year’s Day the matter was again pressed on the bishop by Sir Edward Fitton, who informed the bishop that Mr, Westby his kinsman had told him he would willingly lose his blood in these matters. Also he said that from Warrington all along the sea coast in Lancashire the gentlemen, except Mr. Butler, beginning with Mr. Ireland then Sir William Norris and so forwards other gentlemen there, were of the faction and withdrew themselves from the religion. The bishop again refused to execute the commission, but afterwards signed precepts for divers ‘ Papistical priests’ and some gentlemen to appear before the commissioners.“* A second paper, almost as confused, relating to this affair yields further details. Again Edmund Holme informed of a letter from Dr. Saunders to Sir Richard Molineux and Sir William Norris to exhort them to own the Pope’s supremacy. Hereupon Sir Richard Molyneux vowed to one Morne a/ias Butcher alias Fisher of Formeby and to one Peyle a/ias Picke (who reported that he had the Pope’s authority) and so received absolution at Picke’s hand. His daughters Jane, Alice and Anne and his son John did the same. And so did John Mollin of the Wood, Robert Blundell of Ince, Richard Blundell of Crosbye.*#° These informations stand curiously alone ; but on 3 February, 1567, Elizabeth dispatched a letter to the earl of Derby, the bishop of Chester, and others, commanding them to arrest persons who, under pretence of religion, draw sundry gentlemen from their allegiance.’ Before the receipt of this letter the earl had arrested all the persons in question ; but who they were we do not know. A fortnight later, 21 February, 1567-8, Elizabeth wrote to the sheriff to arrest certain deprived ministers.** And on the same day the queen dispatched a severe letter to Bishop Downham upbraiding him for the disorders in his diocese, ‘as we hear not of the like in any other parts,’™? and requiring him to repair into the remotest parts in Lancashire to see that persons most justly deprived be not secretly maintained. Accordingly in the summer following Downham visited the whole diocese ; and reported on 1 November, 1568,*° that he found the people very tractable and obedient. In the same letter in which he gives this report to Cecil the bishop furnishes a summary account of the proceedings which had been taken against certain Lancashire gentlemen, on the ground of their not repairing to church and their entertaining priests. From this report it appears that on 31 July, 1568 Edward, earl of Derby, the bishop, and others, Commissioners for Ecclesiastical Causes in the diocese, sat in the dining chamber at Lathom, where six Lancashire gentlemen appeared on their recognizance, viz., Francis Tunstall, John Talbott, John Westby, John Rigmayden, Edward Osbaldeston, and Matthew Travis, the last-named being a yeoman. With the exception of John Westby they proved submissive, acknowledged their fault in enter- taining priests, and promised to conform. By the queen’s directions they were, therefore, treated leniently. ‘Their punishment,’ adds the bishop, has done so much good in the county that I trust I shall never be troubled again with the like : beside (Nowell) the Dean of St. Paul’s, at his being in the county with his continual preaching in divers places in Lancashire hath brought many obstinate and wilful people into conformity.** 45 S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 48, No. 35. #6 Thid. No. 34. “7 Thid. vol. 46, No. 19. 48 Thid. No. 32. 9 Thid. No. 33; Strype, Annals, i, 254-5. 350 $.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 48, No. 36. %1 More instructive than the bishop’s meagre account are the papers appended to his letter. They are _ printed in Gibson’s Lydiate Hall. The concluding paper of these depositions is entitled ‘ Articles objected by the Commissioners against Sir John Southworth.’ But as Southworth’s name does not occur in any ot the prior proceedings herein the paper is probably misplaced. He had been examined before Parker at Croydon shortly before 13 July, 1568, but had refused to subscribe to a form of submission (S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 47, No. 12). 53 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE It is perhaps significant that just about this time a number of incum- bents disappear for one reason or another. In spite of the unusually vivid interest attaching to these early glimpses of Lancashire recusancy it cannot be said that they indicate the existence in 1568 of any very numerous or very virulent ‘ Papist party. The harvest which Allen was destined to reap was of slow growth. Until he had founded the seminary at Douay and trained a band of priests and sent them forth into England, thus inaugurating a new era in English Catholicism, the recusancy of the county palatine is to be regarded as little more than a survival of Marian Catholicism. Indeed, it is more than likely that the rebellion of 1569 in the northern counties had a steadying effect on the loyalty of the Lancashire Catholics, for we hear of no movement occurring, although at one time fears were entertained of them ;** and when in the course of the following year a fresh disturbance is traceable in the county it is to be attri- buted, as before, to the compulsive force of papal intrigue. The bull of Pius V, dated 5 Cal. March, 1569, was set up, or made known in London by John Fel- ton in March, 1569-70. In the national domain this bull, which denounced Elizabeth as a heretic and absolved her subjects from allegiance, was followed by Elizabeth’s proclamation of 1 July, 1570, against Papists bringing in traitor- ous books and bulls, and by the Acts of 1571 against imagining the death of the queen, and against bringing in bulls from Rome.“ A letter from the bishop of Carlisle to the earl of Sussex reveals the effect which the pope’s action had in Lancashire; how all things in Lancashire savour of open rebellion ; provision of men, armour; assemblies of 500 and 600 at a time; wanton talk of invasion by the Spaniards ; in most places most people fall from religion and refuse to hear service in English ; since Felton set up the bull the greatest there never came to any service, but openly entertained Louvainist massers.* The result of these commotions was a series of fresh admonitions from the Privy Council to the bishop of Chester to appear in London to answer for the disorders in his diocese, especially committed in Lancashire and Richmondshire in matters con- cerning religion.** As we hear nothing further of the matter it would seem that the effervescence died down, and until the advent of the seminary priests there is no further reference to recusant disturbances in Lancashire. The English college at Douay had been founded by Allen in 1568. From the first, doubtless in some part as a result of Allen’s connexion with the county, the number of Lancashire men who were attracted to the college was disproportionately large. For instance, in 1573 out of twenty-one new admissions no less than seven came from the diocese of Chester, almost entirely Lancashire men ; and when in the following year the first missionaries were sent forth from Douay into the English harvest, this high relative proportion of Lancashire men is again noticeable.*” Langley of Prestwich was deprived, because his conscience would no longer allow him to minister ; Cross of Childwall resigned on a pension ; Lowe of Huyton disa fc Ormskirk was deprived. There may have been other are Percents sete ns *°S.P. Dom. Eliz. Add. vol. 15, No. 113 ins i i » No. - 3 Eliz. cap. 1 and 2. a S.P. Dom. Eliz. Add. vol. 19, No. 16 ; S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 74, No. oe 21 and 27, 1570 ee He of the Sey 399 3 vill, 5, 12 Nov. 1570 and 13 Feb. 1570-1. : "Up to 1584 the college sent out 198 seminary priests. Out of these 31 were of i , : : the d Chester—practically all Lancashire men. From 1584 to the end of Elizabeth’s ee aeictopetin fl 2 in a most remarkable way, for out of a similar number of issi i exactly 198 missionaries sent out 1602) only five are of ascertainably Lancashire origin. ¢ ae ear 54 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY The other great source from which these missionary priests came was the English College at Rome, which was itself an offshoot from Douay. Unlike its parent institution this college was almost from the outset in the hands or the Jesuits. During its existence Lancashire sent to it over 200 students as against 133 sent from Yorkshire.** The first missionaries sent from it were dispatched in 1579, and out of five who composed this first batch one, Richard Haydock, was a Lancashire man; as was also another, Edward Rishton, out of the five dispatched in the following year. The influence of these priests was instantly felt in Lancashire. The administration seems to have been alive to the danger. In 1574, the very year of the first arrival of the Douay missionaries, the Privy Council wrote several times to Henry, earl of Derby, touching Popish disorders in the county, ‘ being the very sink of Popery, where more unlawful acts have been committed and more unlawful persons holden secret than in any other part of the realm.’** A fresh Commission for Ecclesiastical Causes for the county was issued some time before 22 November, 1574, and the earl of Derby and the bishop of Chester were bidden to execute it and to arrest all persons suspected of having reconciled themselves to the pope. For the following six years silence falls on the story of the seminary priests in the county, a silence broken only to-day by the records of the colleges of Douay and Rome. These six years were the seed-time of the harvest to be reaped in the county by Allen’s priests. Their proceedings must have been very secret and the bishop of Chester must have been very fast asleep, for it is clear that whilst the central government was still alive to the question of recusancy the local commissioners had no hint of the presence of seminary priests, and the recusant interest was supposed to be but small in the county." In 1580 Allen returned to Douay from Rome after having concerted with the pope and the Jesuits a new missionary expedition to England on a large scale. This expedition was to be headed by Parsons and Campion on the Jesuit side, and on the secular side by Goldwell, the aged Marian bishop of St. Asaph, and Vaux, the late warden of Manchester. The idea that Allen’s previous efforts had been brought to naught by the watchfulness of the queen’s administration, and that this was a last effort on his part, is wide of the mark. The recusancy returns soon to be quoted disprove it, as do also the records of the dispatch of missionaries during the years 1574-80. A much more sinister significance indeed attaches to this departure of the year 1580. It marks the capture by the Jesuits of the missionary organization, and the entry of the English Catholic world upon that path of political intrigue under the guiding genius of Parsons which ultimately did more than anything else to blast the permanent prospects of Catholicism in England. The government was awake to the danger, for it had complete information as to the wide ramifications of this political plot of Catholic Europe. Vaux was arrested at Rochester almost immediately on his landing, about 12 August, 1580. The broader story of 88 For the records of this college see Foley, Rec. of the Engl. Prov. vi, 67 seq. 389 Acts of the P.C. viii, 276, 302, 317. 36 There is no extant record of the outcome of these proceedings (unless it is at Chester or in some quarter sessions records). ; 31 §.P, Dom. Eliz. vol. 118, No. 45. It is printed by Gibson, op. cit. 55 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Campion’s fate does not oe y, wes kia we are told the names of who entertained him in Lancashire. te ae this date the Lancashire Roman Catholics had suffered a ee hardships as a body. The fines of the recusants in the cae! ha . granted to a courtier, Nicholas Anesley, and the Catholics had been i € boldened as to refuse to pay him their fines or even to make a mo erate composition with him, and the administration had looked on @ a time almost supinely.** But the new political danger brooked no suc ees Acting on information sent on 16 May, 1580, by Sir Edmund Trafford to the earl of Leicester as to the contemptuous and disobedient attitude of the Catholics in the county,** the queen issued a new Ecclesiastical Commission :n June to the archbishop of York, the earl of Derby, the bishop of Chester and others for the diocese of Chester to proceed against certain gentlemen and others in Lancashire lately fallen away in religion, and for the rest of the year the commission was active, the earl of Derby even lending his house in Liverpool as a prison for the recusants. But the existing mechanism of the law was not strong enough to cope with the growing danger.™® speordingly an Act was passed ‘ to retain the Queen’s subjects in their due allegiance.’* Besides strengthening the provisions of the Act of 1571 against bulls from Rome, this Act imposed the celebrated recusancy fine of £20 per month on persons neglecting to attend church, and empowered justices of the peace to inquire of offences herein. On 10 December, 1581, the Privy Council issued its mandate to the sheriffs and justices of peace of Lancashire to put the Act in execution, nothing having been done therein as yet, although six months before (28 May, 1581) a similar order had been sent by the Privy Council to Bishop Chaderton.* The local procedure under the Act was that the clergy were to present an oath to the custos rotulorum and the justices at the succeeding quarter sessions, and upon conviction the fines were imposed. The effect of the Act was instantaneous and extraordinary. Previously, up to as late as 6 December, 1581, the convicted recusants in the county were so few in number that two or three small prisons (Chester, Halton, Manchester, and Liverpool) sufficed for their detention. The fines hitherto imposed also were so insignificant as a source of revenue that they were entered miscel- laneously in the Great Roll or were granted out to favourites. But hence. forth they became so numerous and valuable that a separate roll was made of them. From the testimony of these Recusancy Rolls we can judge with absolute certainty of the success of the seminary priests from 1574 onwards. The activity of the Chester Ecclesiastical Commission was a subject for repeated thanks from the Privy Council, although that body did not omit at the same time to grumble at the slackness of some of the justices in the work.%” For greater safety such of the recusants as had been actually imprisoned were removed from Liverpool to Manchester.’ There they were placed under the guard of Mr. Robert Worsley, and when he petitioned ™ dets of the P.C. xiii, 148 184, 256-7; Peck, Desid. Cur.i, 1083 St ii . ? , > ’ ? - PRY > TYPE. Annals, 11 (2), 359- They were Mrs. Talbot, Thomas Southworth, Bartholomew Hesketh, Mrs. Allen, Richard Hoghton of the Park, Westby, and Rigmaiden. = tots of the P.C, x1, 446 5 xii, 103. 6 §.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 138, No. 18. 2 See Peck, Desid. Cur. i, 87 seq. 7 23 Eliz. cap. 1. a Peck, Desid. Cur. 1, 103, 111 5 Acts of the P.C. xili, 283, 284. © Acts of the P.C. xiii, 279. Acts of the P.C. xiii, 316-20 3 Peck, Desid. Cur. i, 112. ) Acts of the P.C. xiii, 279- 56 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY for payment of his expenses in the diet, &c., of the prisoners a local rate was ordered to be levied on the various parishes for their support.’ Decisive and disastrous as was the result already achieved, the political activity of the Jesuit Parsons (who sums up in himself the whole genius of the new Jesuit tendency of the Catholic missionary movement from this time onwards) was destined to bear even more potent and malignant fruit. The plots of 1584 produced the two Acts (1584-5) ** for surety of the queen’s person, and against Jesuits and seminary priests. The latter of these two Acts banished all such and imposed death on all of them found in or entering the country after a certain date. It is under this latter Act that the execu- tions of the Lancashire seminary priests took place from this date onwards.*” Between 1584 and 1590 there was a lull in the activity of the Roman Catholics and in the persecutions, a lull attributable either to the success of the repressive measures of the administration or to the absorption of the nation in the ever-impending struggle with Spain. But in 1590 a somewhat milder persecution broke out. In May of that year, as a precautionary measure against Sir William Stanley’s threatened invasion of the Isle of *? This rate led to much local disturbance and to an almost interminable correspondence between the Lancashire justices or the earl of Derby and the Privy Council ; see Peck, Desid. Cur. i, 118 et seq. passim ; Acts of the P.C. The returns of the prisoners in the New Fleet at Manchester for Feb. April, and Oct. 1582 and Jan. 1584 are given in Rambler (New Ser.), viii, and are abstracted in Lydiate Hall, 228, 237, and in the Introd. to Vaux’s Catechism (Chet. Soc.), p. Ixxvii. See also Challoner, Memoirs of Missionary Priests, 160, 162, 184. 83 27 Eliz. cap. 1, 2. %* At this point the material preserved in the S. P. Dom. relating to the fortunes of the Roman Catholics in the county is so great that it is impossible to do more than indicate its contents and position briefly. Some of the documents are printed in Lydiate Hall. §.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 169, No. 27, 22 Mar. 1583-4, names of Jesuits, &c. lately fled out of co. Lanc.; Bridgewater, Concert Eccl. Angl. 209; in 1584 no less than fifty Catholic gentlemen’s houses were searched in Lancs. $.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 175, No. 21 and 110, lists of recusants and suspects in Lancs. (? Nov. and Dec. 1584), printed in Lydiate Hall, 226. S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 167, No. 40, list of persons condemned at the sessions at Manchester, 23 Jan. 1584; printed ibid. 227, and in Foley, Rec. S. F. S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 184, No. 33, examination, &c. of James Stonnes, priest in the New Fleet, Manchester, Nov. 1585 ; printed ibid. 231. S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 185, No. 85, information con- cerning priests at large in Lancs. ?1585; printed ibid. 234. S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 183, No. 16, lists of recusants assessed to a levy, ? Oct. 1585, amongst them being twenty-three Lancashire names ; these latter printed ibid. 235. S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 187, No. 51, petition of John Westby of Mowbrick, Mar. 1586 ; printed ibid. 235. S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 190, No. 43, note of recusancy fines in Lancs. 1586; printedibid. 238. S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 153, No. 62, Roger Ogdeyne’s information about priests at Bold House, May, 1582 ; printed ibid. 221 S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 154, No. 76, information against Richard Haydock, priest at Cottam Hall, ? July, 1582 ; printed ibid. 222. S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 163, No. 84, Chaderton to Walsingham concerning recusants at Man- chester, and advising sessions to be kept about Preston, Wigan, and Prescot, where the people are most obstinate and contemptuous; printed ibid. Peck, Desid. Cur.i, 148, the Privy Council to the earl of Derby and Bishop Chaderton, 22 Mar. 1583-4. ‘Some priests in Manchester gaol had better be tried in serrorem at the assizes.’ 10 Sept. 1586, list of persons ill-affected to the State ; printed in Baines, i, 240, from Harl. MS. 360, and thence copied in Lancs. Lieutenancy (Chet. Soc.), ii, 188, and in Lydiate Hall, 239 ; the date doubtful. 7 Sept. 1587, Edward Fleetwood, rector of Wigan, to the Lord Treasurer, describing the religious state of the county and the effect of the new commission for the peace which had been issued in 1586; Cott. MS. Titus, B. ti, 238 (abstracted in Strype, Aunals, iii (2), 488 et seq). S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 200, No. 59, names of 128 recusants on bail in April, 1587. The Lancashire names are given in Lydiate Hall, 241. S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 235, No. 68, boldness of the recusants in Lancashire in [?]1590. No effectual execution of the penal laws. Jesuits increasing ; abstracted ibid. 242. S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 235, No. 4, state of religion in Lancashire [?] 1590 ; an important paper printed ibid. 243-50, concludes with a statement of recusant convictions. Before the last commission, presented at the quarter sessions 941, convicted 700 ; since the last commission, presented 800, convicted 200. S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 240, No. 138, report on the religious condition of Lancs. and Cheshire ; and No. 139, notes as to the Lancs. justices; printed ibid. 257, 262-5, S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 243, No. 52, Oct. 1592, notes as to schoolmasters ; printed ibid. 258-60. S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 266, No. 80 ; names of recusants assessed in Lancs., Feb. 1598, for the service in Ireland ; printed ibid. 262. S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 283, No. 86, Bishop of London to Cecil, April, 1602. Boldness of the recusants in Lancs. ; printed ibid. 267. S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 282, No. 74, Nov. 1601, names of seventeen gentlemen in hiding : wrongly printed ibid. 261 under date 1593. S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 287, No. 9, Cecil Trafford to Secretary Cecil, 17 Jan. 1603. 2 57 8 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Anglesey, the Privy Council wrote to the earl of Derby concerning the a seminary priests in Lancashire, and commanded him to arrest poses persons.%* The earl thereupon arrested Richard Blundell of Little Crosby, William his son, Robert Wodruff a seminary priest, and other recusants, and in July the council sent them to the gaol at Lancaster to be tried as an example, ‘the county being in many parts thereof so much affected by those kind of people.’ ** This spurt of activity on the part of the administration was soon over, and when in March and September, 1592, the Privy Council again turned its attention to the county in consequence of the discoveries of one John Bell a/ias Burton, a much more lenient tone pervaded its numerous letters.” Although the renewed agitation of these years led to the Act of 1592-3 against Popish recusants,” yet in the main this more lenient tone prevailed to the end of the reign, and in its later years the Roman Catholics became so emboldened that when in 1598 a special contribution was levied on them in the North the Lancashire Catholics refused to receive the letters and beat the messenger.*” In the religious life of Lancashire under Elizabeth recusancy plays a part so overwhelmingly important as to dwarf into insignificance the story of Puritanism in the county. As a matter of fact Puritanism as a distinctive feature of that history belongs rather to the Stuart than to the Tudor times. It did not become pronounced under Elizabeth. One glimpse which we catch of the first stage of the movement, viz. the Vestiarian controversy, relates to the action of the elder Midgeley at Rochdale. On 4 January, 1564-5 he, together with three ministers of the chapels of the parish and the master of the school, is said to have subscribed his promise to use the vestments. Of the second phase of Puritanism, that of the Cartwrightian Disciplinarian controversy, the county was even more innocent, as it was also of the con- comitant outburst of Separatism.*® This general result is possibly attribut- able to the fact that Lancashire had not in its midst any band of foreign refugees, as had the eastern counties, nor any of the extreme type of reformer ; for certainly Midgeley was not such, any more than was James Gosnell, the minister of Bolton. The controversy of which we hear in 1580 in the diocese of Chester concerning the method of administration of the sacrament gives a fair presentation of the standard of Puritan feeling in the county. Chaderton himself, the bishop, may be regarded as expressive “8 Acts of the P.C. xix, 155-65. is (Ibid. 267, 270, 310). On 25 July, 1590, the council wrote to the justices: ‘You shall receive the names of sundry recusants from the earl of Derby or the bishop of Chester amounting to 700 in Lancashire and 200 in Cheshire ; and yet the number doubted to be far greater. It is thought meet that such as have not been indited on the statute of recusancy be now presented. Deal with them so that they shall perceive they will hereafter be more severely looked to’ ; ibid. 334-40. su Miles Gerard of Ince was sent to us on the accusation of Bell for harbouring priests. He has made humble submission, We have licensed him to go home’... ‘We allow your release of the three entle- women (probably Ann Houghton of the Tower and Mistress Westby and another). As to the a the recusants now at liberty in their own houses the statute gives power to arrest them at any time,’ and so on; efcts of the P.C. xxii, 324-5, 367-9; xxi, 163, 354-53 xxiv, 9, 11, 26, 110, 231, 281 ‘ 334 Bell’s ee ee to pea eee in S.P. Dom. Eliz. vol. 243, No. 70, Nov. 1592 : : , “35 Eliz. cap. 2, the last of the pena 3 i ’s rei i sp le E Lee eae — ai of Elizabeth’s reign, and the one by which recusants °° Acts of the P.C. xxix, 112, 118, 220, 300, 604, 648. *° The connexion of Lancashire with the Martin Mar of the wandering Penry Press in Newton Lane, *! ders of the P.C. xii, 125. prelate episode was purely subsidiary, the seizing Manchester, being a mere incident. 58 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY of the type of the movement as well as its more immediate founder. He protected his diocese from the harsher repression which was practised in the south,*” and it was doubtless on his initiative that the attempt was made to establish regular exercises in Lancashire. The device was a state device, imposed from above, and its object was to promote the evangelization of the county with the idea of stemming the rising tide of Roman Catholic reaction.’ The following is an example: In February, 1585-6, exercises were to be held on successive Thursdays at Prescot, Bury, Padiham, and some place north of the Ribble, four of the neighbouring parsons being moderators in each case. We have it on Neal’s authority that the attempt was abortive.** If so, it could only have been because the type of Puritanism in the county was too moderate even for such an institution.** The general type of Puritan clergy there at this time was that of the painful, godly, but conformist kind, men who resided and preached diligently and whose Puritanism showed itself mainly in their attitude towards the Sunday sports and immorality of the people. The scattered State Papers which describe the want of preaching ministers in the county towards the end of Elizabeth’s reign emanate from these men ; mainly, probably, from Edward Fleetwood the rector of Wigan. Under the first Stuarts the religious history of Lancashire enters on a period of apparent quiet. But under the surface of that quiet a decisive change was slowly accomplishing itself. On the one hand the Roman Catholic reaction which had been inaugurated by the missionary zeal of the Elizabethan seminary priests lost its force and the Catholic interest decayed. On the other hand the forces of Puritan nonconformity gathered strength. The proof of the first of these assertions consists in the figures of recusancy and in scattered statements by justices and others as to the state of the county.*” Even as early as December, 1604, the justices of Lancashire, in a petition in favour of the Nonconformist ministers there, state that as a result of the preaching of these men the county, which in the beginning of Elizabeth’s reign was overgrown with Popery, is now so reformed that many are become unfeigned professors of the Gospel and many recusants are yearly conformed.” In 1609 Sir Edward Phelips reports to Salisbury his proceedings on the northern circuit, testifying to the quiet state of the four northern counties, 55? Brook, Lives of the Puritans, iii, 509. 53 The scheme of these exercises is printed in Strype, 4unals, ii (2), 547-8. 384 Hist, of the Puritans, i, 301. ; 3° With the exception of Midgeley, who was himself by no means extreme, there is hardly a provable instance of nonconformity. When William Langley, rector of Prestwich, was summoned before Bishop Chaderton in July, 1591, he made his submission. And again when Edward Walshe vicar of Blackburn was questioned at Chester in Sept. 1596, for the surplice, he did not refuse to wear it. Midgeley’s own resignation in 1595 was apparently quite voluntary. He gave up his rectory to his son. 388 §.P, Dom. Eliz. vol. 122, No. 21; ibid. vol. 31, No. 47 (wrongly calendered under the date 1563) ; vol. 266, No. 138; this latter printed in Lydiate Hall, 262, and the paper from the Tanner MSS. 144, p. 28, printed in Céet, Misc. vol. v. The signatures to this last-named paper probably give us the measure of the Puritanism of the county under Elizabeth. It has sixteen names of rectors, vicars, and others. Their names, otherwise comparatively unknown, are a guarantee of the non-militant and moderate type of the Puritanism of the county ; and such continued to be its characteristic throughout the remainder of Elizabeth 8 reign. It speaks volumes for the wisdom, not merely of the bishop, but also of the Privy Council, that the reign closed without any further attempt at disturbing them. , *7 Under James the practice of making grants to individuals of particular persons’ recusancy fines was resorted to frequently. For the particulars of such grants relating to Lancashire see Cal. §.P. Dom. Fas. I, i, 383-4, 389-90, 394, 416, 419, 486, 530, 587, 621; ii, 4405 11, 150. 58 §.P. Dom. Jas. I, vol. 10, No. 62. 59 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE ‘where only 13 persons have been executed and recusants decrease.” The in- ternal cause for such decay was undoubtedly the division among the Ramiamists themselves consequent upon the capture of the English mission by the Jesuits, a division which rent asunder the whole body from the closing days of Eliza- beth. But of these dissensions we catch few glimpses in Lancashire. Whilst Roman Catholicism in the county was thus entering on a period of decline, Puritanism was slowly gathering strength. But here again the process 1s almost invisible to us. The most decisive proofs, outwardly, of such a process, viz. the persecution of the Nonconformist clergy, are singularly few from the accession of James to the outbreak of the Civil War. Even these few existing instances possess none of those harsh features which characterize the action of the Ecclesiastical Commission under the lead of Laud. Whether or not any of the Lancashire clergy advocated the Millenary Petition at the advent of James we do not know. But incidental reference to them was made in the Hampton Court Conference itself. On the third day of the conference, 18 January, 1603-4, Lawrence Chadderton, himself a Lancashire man, requested that the surplice and the cross in baptism might not be urged on some godly ministers in Lancashire, particularly instancing the vicar of Rochdale, the younger Midgeley. Archbishop Whitgift said that he could not have moved for a more unlucky instance, because of his irreverent admini- stration of the Supper not many years before. In spite of the archbishop’s uncompromising attitude James consented that the bishop of Chester should be written to to give the ministers time and to confer with them with a view to induce them to conform. The conference was followed in March, 1604, by James’s proclamation enjoining conformity to the Prayer Book and by another proclamation of 16 July, 1604. Later in the year, 10 December, the Privy Council wrote to the bishops to give order that on the expiry of the time limited for conformity of ministers the refusers were to be deprived.** Two months later the judges stated their opinion to the Ecclesiastical Commission on the question of the legality of depriving such ministers.” It is not easy to construct a clear account of what followed. Neal says* that after James's proclamation of July, 1604, there were twenty-one Nonconformist or non- subscribing ministers in Lancashire. This has been magnified by later writers into a statement that the whole twenty-one were deprived. The discoverable evidence does not bear out the statement. On 3 October, 1604, the bishop of Chester (Richard Vaughan) summoned before him at least nine of the Lanca- shire clergy. They duly appeared, were admonished and ordered to conform before 28 November following. On that day they were to appear again and *2 §.P. Dom. Jas. I, vol. 48, No. 25. * The Jesuit missions, which at first had been governed by vice-prefects resident in England, were erected in 1619 into a vice-province, which three years later was divided into twelve districts or ideal colleges, certain revenues being allotted to each as the nucleus of a later college when the times should favour it. In 1623 the English vice-province was erected into a regular province and Father Blount became the first provisictal, _ Of the twe've quasi-colleges which had been outlined in 1622 only three came immediately into existence, Viz. those of London, Lancashire, and South Wales. The Lancashire district was known as the oe oa of — sa a : bi year 1661 it included Lancashire, Cheshire, Westmorland, and Stafford n that year Stafford was divi i i isti i 4 i : ae . an s divijed from it and made into a distinct residence, and subsequently in 1672 into a M Strype, Life of Whitgift, ii, ; Barlow, ‘S ” pri i ix, i : ee - 499 a w, ‘Sum of the Conference,’ printed in the Phoenix, i, 176. It would appear to be this order which d iti ire justi i Pre a ia qed iis produced the petition of the Lancashire justices to the king S.P. Dom. Jas. I, vol. 12, No. 73, 13 Feb. 1604-5. “8 Hist, of the Puritans, i, 418. 60 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY give an account of their conformity, but none of them did so. Before he could take any further proceedings with them Vaughan was translated and the Nonconformists were left to be dealt with by his successor, George Lloyd. This bishop’s decided leaning to the Puritans seems to evince itself in the delay in the subsequent proceedings.“* Out of the nine only two can be proved to have been deprived in 1605 or 1606. The only other clerical name mentioned in this episode was that of William Langley, the moderate Puritan rector of Prestwich. On 28 November, 1604, he appeared before _ the bishop and made submission, but being afterwards dissatisfied he resigned his living before 10 September, 1610. We are thus left with the result that in the early part of James’s reign the provable cases of deprivation for Nonconformity do not exceed six at the out- side, and may not exceed two or three. Such a result points to one of two facts: either that the bishop of Chester, as is known to be the case, was exceedingly lenient, or that the Nonconformist element in the county, although strong in the element of talent and missionary fervour, was singularly patriotic and non-militant. Under Thomas Morton, who succeeded Lloyd as bishop of Chester in 1616, there was a renewed attempt at questioning the Puritans. Of this episode we get a one-sided account in Thomas Paget of Blackley’s edition of John Paget’s Defence of Church Government, 1641. But this account simply mentions generally that divers Nonconformists in the diocese, including him- self, were summoned to the Ecclesiastical Commission at Chester, presumably in 1617 or 1618, and that after converse the bishop undertook their dismissal from the said court. Paget says further that Morton’s successor, John Bridgeman, bishop of Chester from 161g, did not move in the matter at first beyond suspending a few Nonconformists, until driven thereto by fear of the archbishop of York’s visitation. When he did move, his action was even more moderate than Morton’s, for he left Paget untouched at Blackley, and the later proceedings emanated from the Ecclesiastical Commission at York. The course of Puritanism in the county therefore under James, if not smooth, was certainly not exceedingly rough. Indeed, but for the publica- tion of the so-called Book of Sports, James’s reign would possess little signifi- cance in the religious history of Lancashire. As to this latter episode, a good deal of ex post facto misconception exists. The view has been advanced, even by historians of the highest repute, that the hostility to Sunday sports was clerical in its basis, i.e. was due to the moral fervour of a Puritanism which was, under James, changing its character—which was, that is, leaving the ground of the Vestiarian squabble and occupying the higher ground of missionary fervour against national immorality. As far as Lancashire is con- cerned there is no justification for such a view. The simple truth is that all through Elizabeth’s reign the civil power had attempted, both by legislation 3 Richard Midgeley the elder, formerly vicar of Rochdale and still a licensed preacher in the county, has no record of further proceedings against him. His son Joseph, then vicar of Rochdale and more uncom- promising in his Puritanism than his father, had no surplice, and the communicants at Rochdale received sitting. Action was taken against him and he was deprived. John Bourne, fellow of Manchester (the John Knox of Manchester), apparently remained untouched, though he was convened before the bishop of Chester in Dec. 1609, and was temporarily suspended in 1633. Ellis Saunderson, vicar of Bolton, James Gosnall, preacher at Bolton, and Thomas Hunt, minister of Oldham, were not disturbed, although the last-named was reported at the chancellor’s visitation in 1608 for not wearing the surplice. As to Richard Rothwell and James Ashworth, there is no evidence of proceedings in 1605. Edward Walsh, vicar of Blackburn, was deprived in 1606. 61 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE and by proclamation, to put down the more brutal forms of Sunday sports. When such action was taken in Lancashire in 1579, it was taken, not by the Puritans but by the Chester Ecclesiastical Commission, the local mouthpiece of the central executive. Similarly, the memorial of March, 1589, on the enormities of the Sabbath *7 did not emanate from the Puritan clergy but from the gentry of the county. When, therefore, on his progress through Lancashire in 1617 James was presented with a petition by divers peasants, tradespeople, and servants praying the removal of the restrictions of the late reign on their lawful Sunday recreation, it is clear that the movement was a civilian movement against a civilian ordinance. If it was not that, it could only have been a thinly-veiled Roman Catholic scheme to discredit the local Protestant justices. James appears to have been taken off his guard, and to have given his decision offhand by word of mouth. ‘On our return out of Scotland last year,’ he says in his proclamation of the following year, ‘ we did publish our pleasure touching the recreation of our people in those parts (Lancashire). The proclamation of 24 May, 1618, dated from Greenwich, containing the recital just quoted, merely made general to the whole kingdom the decision thus announced. There is no trace in James’s reign of an agita- tion in Lancashire against this proclamation. And when, on 18 October, 1633, Charles I republished his father’s proclamation, the only traceable instance of resistance to it in Lancashire was that of the magistrate Henry Ashurst of Ashurst. The agitation against the so-called Book of Sports only gathered significance later, when the combination of Puritanism with consti- tutional grievances was producing the rebellion. It seems probable that the comparatively lenient treatment of the Puritans in the county which characterized the episcopates of Lloyd and Morton would have endured under Bishop Bridgeman had it not been for the rising influence of Laud. Bridgeman’s early action against Paget of Blackley, just described, and against James Gosnell of Bolton and the Bolton parishioners in 1620 for not receiving the Communion kneeling had been moderate to a degree. But in 1630 Laud made himself felt in the county. In that year John Angier was twice inhibited at Ringley before he had run the race of twelve months there. The reputed conversation between Angier and Bridgeman rests on the authority of Oliver Heywood’s Life of Angier, but bears every mark of inherent probability. ‘Mr. Angier,’ said the bishop, I have a good will to indulge you but cannot, for my Lord’s Grace of Canterbury hath rebuked me for permitting two nonconforming ministers, the one within a mile on one hand, Mr. Horrocks of Deane, on the other yourself, and I am likely to come into disfavour on this behalf. As for Mr. Horrocks my hands are bound, I cannot meddle with him [it is thought by some promise made to his wife], but as for you, Mr. Angier, you are a young man and may doubtless get another place ; and if you were anywhere at a little further distance I could better look away from you, for I do study to do you a kindness, but cannot as long as you are thus near me. Angier accordingly moved to Denton, where he tell Hel, ae : e tells us (He/p for Better ra In 9 or 10 years I preached not above 2 separated years without interruption and in t i. time was twice excommunicated, though Sabbath assemblies were sundry times distrac- tedly and sorrowfully broken up and my departure from habitation and people often forced, no means left in sight for return, yet through r gh the fervent prayers of the church God was graciously and effectually moved continually to renew iiberee. 7 Lancs. Lieut. ii, 217. 62 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY Angier did not stand alone in feeling the results of Laud’s influence, any more than did Bridgeman himself. Richard Mather, minister of Toxteth, was suspended in 1633, and although restored six months after, was finally suspended by Dr. Cosin in the visitation made in the following summer by the archbishop of York’s visitors. In 1635 he accordingly sailed for America. In 1634, too, Murray, the warden of Manchester, exhibited a libel against Johnson, one of the fellows of the college of Manchester, for not wearing the surplice in Gorton Chapel.’ Besides the instances of persecution already quoted, there are others to which specific data of time or place cannot be assigned. John Harrison, afterwards the well-known Presbyterian rector of Ashton-under-Lyne, was, when at the chapel of Walmsley in Bolton parish, ‘exceeding harassed.’ *” William Rathband was silenced after exercising his ministry, though contrary to law, for many years at a chapel (Blackley) in Lancashire.*” In his own eyes Laud’s work was justified by its success.) When, in January, 1636-7, the archbishop of York made another report on the state of the northern province, he was able to state that Bridgeman had brought most of the churches in his diocese to uniformity. It sounds strange to find Neile in the same report claiming that in twenty-eight years he never deprived any man, though he was a great adversary of the Puritan faction.*” This necessarily imperfect sketch of the Puritan side of the Church his- tory of Lancashire under the first two Stuarts brings out very strongly two facts: (1) The extremely moderate action of the successive bishops of Ches- ter; (2) The paucity of militant irreconcilable Nonconformists. ‘The question therefore naturally arises, Why should the majority of the Lancashire clergy have become so decidedly Presbyterian as they did during the Civil War period? The answer would appear to be twofold: (1) Many of the clergy simply acquiesced in the action of the State and accepted Presbyterianism as tamely as their predecessors had accepted the various changes of religion from Henry VIII to Elizabeth ; (2) Those who became convinced and zealous Presbyterians did so because of the appeal which a Presbyterian system in- evitably makes to the merely selfish clerical class instinct. In no county of England did so large a proportion of the clergy become convinced and aggressive Presbyterians as in Lancashire, and in few counties was there less antecedent cause, either in the form of episcopal persecution or of actual Presbyterian propaganda. At the meeting of the Long Parliament, petitions on grievances poured in from the counties and separate petitions from the Puritan clergy. Some such lay petition from Lancashire was presented on g February, 1640-1; but of a clerical petition we hear nothing. For some time indeed the county gave little promise of the important part which it was afterwards to play in the religious domain. In the first two years of the Long Parliament's 88 These instances are traceable to the influence, not of Bridgeman, but of Richard Neile, archbishop of York, and it is evident from Neile’s report to the king on 1 Jan., 1633-4, that his hand was being forced by the imperious Laud. This report of Neile’s is important as affording an account of the religious state of the county at the time, and also an insight into the attitude of the executive in London ; §.P. Dom. Chas. I, vol. 259, No. 78. 5° Brook, Lives of the Puritans, ii, 443. $° Ibid. 470-1. 41 §.P, Dom. Chas. I, vol. 345, No. 85. The archbishop referred evidently to beneficed clergy. 2 Com. Fourn. ii, 81 ; Rushworth, Hist. Coll. iv, 188. 63 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE existence we hear of no nominations by it of Puritan lecturers in the county.* ; The mere military campaign in Lancashire, important as it was, may be considered to have been decided by midsummer of 1643. By that time the county was in the hands of the Parliament, and it practically remained so. The triumph of the Parliament meant on the one hand the tame acceptance of the Solemn League and Covenant throughout the county, and on the other the usual course of sequestration of the loyalist clergy. But comparatively speaking these sequestrations were few." The more general side of the story is occupied almost entirely by the changing fortunes of Presbyterianism as a church system in the county. Itis a little strange that although Lancashire was to attain notoriety among the counties of England for its thorough-going attempts at acclimatizing the Presbyterian system, the initial work of establishing that system cannot be so clearly traced there as in other parts of England. The Ordinance of August, 1645, known as ‘ Directions for the election of elders,’ prescribed that letters should be sent from the speaker of the House of Commons to the Parliamen- tary Committees in the various counties requesting them to draft the scheme of classical Presbyteries for each county and to nominate fit ministers and elders tor each. The Speaker’s letters were dispatched apparently in Sep- tember following, and the returns to them, the County Certificates, were made within no great time after. That for Durham for instance came in in December, 1645. There is no specific reference to the Lancashire Certificate, but the substance of it has doubtless been preserved for us in the Parlia- mentary Ordinance which passed the Lords on 2 October, 1646. It shows that the county was divided into nine classes, centring round Manchester, Bolton, Blackburn, Warrington, Walton, Croston, Preston, Lancaster, and Aldingham.* The enacting substance of this ordinance was completed by a further order of December, 1646, which constituted the several classes in Lancashire a province. There was thus a period of fifteen months between the Speaker’s "6 Aug. 1642, Com. Journ. ii, 707. The Long Parliament nominations to benefices in Lancashire, as preserved in the journals of both Houses, are as follows : g Oct. 1643, Lancaster sequestered from Augustine Wildbore to Nehemiah Barnett ; Com. Fourn. iii, 270. Q Oct. 1643, Eccleston sequestered from Richard Parr, bishop of Man, to Edward Gee; ibid. 270-1, Lordy’ Fourn. vii, 701; viii, 78. 14 Nov. 1645, Paul Lathom nominated to Standish ; Lords’ Fourn. vii, 701; viii, 78 5 Com. Fourn. v, 539. 26 Nov. 1646, "Tomes Whitehead put into Halton ; Lords’ Fourn. viii, 575. 26 Feb. 1646-7, Nehemiah Barnett nominated to Lancaster, void by death of Jeffery King ; Lords’ Journ. ix, 387. 1 Mar. 1646-7, Richard Walker nominated to Warton ; ibid. 44. 1 Mar. 1646-7, Sa Jones nominated to Much Hoole; ibid. 56. 12 Nov. 1647, John Strickland to Lancaster, void by the ejection of Dr. Wildbore by law ; ibid. 522. 24 Dec. 1647, same to he Eye ae cere Feb. 1647-8, Robert Dingley to Eccleston ; ibid. xX, 20. 1 Mar. 7-8, n smith to Melling ; ibid. 83. inati i Bieoet NIonisters, the Trustee for fon euiaiersiekyar tg e creme tess ae of Dr. Parr and Wildbore in 1643 have been already referred to. In the same year estan : o aria ejected from Sefton rectory. In 1644 Dr. Clare was sequestered from the rectory of oS R cter Travers was ejected from Bury and Halsall rectories in 1645. Ralph Brideoak was ejected ps Stan ish rectory, and William Lewis from the vicarage of Childwall in 1645. Other ejections were a crores by violence. John Warriner at Colne was dragged down by soldiers and Horrocks put in his ae reed ae are doubtful. ‘At Ashton-under-Lyne Dr. Fairfax is said to have been driven away by ee ss . yterian ae Harrison being inducted by soldiers in his place ; Isaac Allen was dragged from - ce ea or before 1646, and is said by Walker (Sufferings of the Clergy) to have been imprisoned : e € cases of Christopher Hindle at Ribchester, Robert Symonds at Middleton William othwell at Leyland, and John Lake at Oldham are of a different character. “S List of the ministers and lay é i i ea ay = aymen fit to be members of each of these classes are printed in Shaw, 64 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY letter and the final legislative enactment of the Presbyterian system. This interim period was no doubt mainly occupied by a severe triangular struggle between the few leading active Presbyterians, the generally apathetic body of the clergy, and the Independents. The leaders of the high Presbyterian faction in the county were Richard Hollinworth of Manchester, John Harrison of Ashton-under-Lyne, and John Tilsley of Deane. As against them such men as Warden Heyrick and John Angier of Denton represented the Latitudinarian type. The Independents were championed by Samuel Eaton and Timothy Taylor at Dukinfield, and John Wigan at Gorton and afterwards at Birch. The ensuing struggle is vividly described by Martindale.“ It found expression also in a small flood of pamphlet literature. Putting aside Charles Herle’s Independency on Scripture of the Independency of churches, which was published in 1643, the battle was opened by Richard Hollin- worth’s Examination of Sundry Scriptures, 1645 (17 December, 1644). This was replied to by Eaton and Taylor in 1645 by their Defence of sundry positions and scriptures alleged to justifie the Congregational way, 1646. Hollinworth in turn replied in 1646 by his Certain queries modestly pro- pounded to such as affect the Congregational way. To this Eaton and Taylor rejoined in the same year in their Defence of sundry positions . . . justified. To this Hollinworth replied in 1647 in his Rejoinder to Master Samuel Eaton and Master Timothy Taylor’s reply. The answer from the other leading Presbyterians was more practical. It took the form of a peti- tion to Parliament, which was set on foot in June, 1646. A true copy of the petition of 12,500 and upwards of the well affected gentlemen, ministers . of Lancaster... was published by John Tilsley in 1646. The petition is attested by Robert Ashton, John Tilsley, and William Booth, and it is evident that these were the three entrusted to deliver it to the Parliament. The Lords acknowledged the petition on 25 August, 1646, and Tilsley’s Paraenetick to Lancashire, with which the printed tract ends, is dated ‘From my lodging at the Golden Fleece,’ in Tuttle Street, Westminster, 27 August, 1646. The petition begged for a settlement of church government and for the suppression of all separated congregations. It was a demonstration of the harmony between the London and the Lancashire Presbyterians, being intended to answer the ‘new birth of the City Remonstrance’ and to voice the support of the Lancashire Presbyterians to the London Remonstrance. The same tone of vehement protest was continued by the Presbyterians in The harmonious consent of the ministers of the Province. . . of ‘Lancaster with . . . the ministers of the Province of London, 18 January, 1647-8. But the logic of events proved stronger than the logic of the press. For although it is known that the Presbyterian system in the county was so far established as that all the classes were constituted and also the Provincial Synod for the whole county, yet the power of the sword, which remained in the hands of the Independents, cut short the triumph of Presbytery. The new-born system indeed had to contend with a twofold opposition. In spite of the conversion of the bulk of the clergy there still remained a strong undercurrent of apathy or even of hostility on the part of individual parishes 108 4utobiography (Chet. Soc.), 61-4. 2 65 9 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE and clergymen.” The account of the mere indifference of a. arishes and clergymen could no doubt be greatly extended if the records of all the classes had survived, for we possess minutes of the proceedings of only two of them, those of Manchester and Bury. From 1653 onwards the apathy of the general body of the laity became so pronounced ene the decay of the classes could no longer be concealed. Until the end o the Commonwealth they remained practically merely local associations performing the work of examining and ordaining ministerial candidates. The second stream of opposition with which the system had to contend was the hostility of the central power. It was not merely that the more zealous of the Presbyterians felt the sharpness of that hostility in their persons when they refused the Engagement.** The triumph of the Independents in the temporal domain declared itself before the Presbyterians had had time to establish their organization. As a consequence their consistorial system, which was actually and sharply enforced or attempted to be enforced during the years 1647-9, was forthwith paralysed, and furthermore the classes were left powerless to deal with Separatist or Independent congregations 1n their midst. The result was not merely endless intestinal parochial confusion, but also a general cessation of the administration of the Sacrament. Finding that the wooden sword of discipline had been smitten from their hands, and that they could no longer safeguard the approach to the Sacrament, the Presbyterian clergy preferred to cease administration altogether. The slow lapse of years of disappointed impotence brought a little wisdom to the Presbyterians as the Interregnum drew to a close, and an honest attempt was at last made in 1659 to establish an accommodation between them and the Independents with the object of again setting on foot the regulation of sacramental admission. But if the agreement which was arrived at in the Collegiate church of Manchester on 12 July, 1659, was of any significance for the religious history of Lancashire, it was not so as bearing on the episode of Commonwealth Presbyterianism. It was only so as foreshadowing the process of fusion or confusion between Presbyterian and Independent which was to ensue upon the triumph of the Episcopal Church at the Restoration.*” In a résumé so necessarily hasty it has been found impossible to make specific reference to many other sides of the church history of this stirring period. But in respect of the Church Survey, the exercise of patronage, private and other, the Plundered Ministers’ Committee, the Triers, &c., the experience of Lancashire was in no way singular, being simply a replica of the experience of the country at large.‘ It is not in such matters as these that the importance of the church history of the Commonwealth lies for Lancashire. It is rather and indeed _ ©’ At Didsbury the elders elected were unwilling to undergo their office. At Blackburn the minister scrupled the lawfulness of ruling lay elders. At Gorton, Denton, Oldham, and Salford the election of elders was delayed for years by the mere inertia of the parishioners. At Flixton the minister and elders withdrew from their office. The minister at Whitworth contemptuously ignored the Bu Classis. near cota itself, the centre of the Second Classis, the minister of the town scrupled ue eS = not act; neither did the ministers at the chapelries of Whitworth, Rivington, Turton, ** See Manchester Minutes, 135, for this episode. tte) ‘ j For the story of this accommodation of 1659 see Manchester Minutes, t oO-1, “° For its : : local and personal aspects see various publications of the Lanc. and Ches. Record Soc 66 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY solely in the aftermath. For in no domain did the Restoration mark so profoundly vital a change in the national life as it did in the religious domain. After an interim of negotiation and agitation—a period during which many of the royalist clergy either quietly or by mere course of law resumed their former livings—the settlement imposed by the Uniformity Act definitely closed the doors of the national church to the Nonconformist, Presbyterian and Independent alike. From that moment there ceased to be in England even in theory a single all-embracing national church. Up to that moment, in the eye of the constitutional lawyer, the Church of England had covered every extreme of opinion whether of Roman Catholic recusant on the one hand or of Puritan Nonconformist on the other. The Erastian conception which underlay the English Reformation of the sixteenth century had endured till the seventeenth—the conception, namely, that the nation and the church were one in their extent and one in their subjection to the civil power. The mere fact that Separatist, Brownist, or other congregations on the one hand, or Roman Catholic missions on the other, actually existed (in secret) never for a moment shook the Tudor or Stuart conception of eccle- siastical unity. One and all they were considered to be as much within the church as they were within the civil state, and they were made to know it. From 1662, however, such merely statesman’s conception of unity was relin- quished, and a wider conception took its place, one which no longer made the nation and the church co-terminous, one which recognized that civil or national unity could be achieved without ecclesiastical unity. Henceforth the history of the Church of England no longer covers the whole of the ground, becoming the story of merely such portions of the community as elect to be of its membership ; and such as do not so elect occupy each their own ground. and have each their separate history. What has hitherto been a single thread of history is divided henceforth into strands, each leading far asunder. Of course such a result was not achieved in a night. The actual concrete institution or formula was everywhere achieved in practice long before the conception itself was nakedly expressed or accepted. It is perhaps natural too that the Church of England itself should have been the last and slowest in the process of conversion. Postponing for a moment the story of the Episcopal Church, a few words are necessary to guide us through the maze of later Dissenting and Free Church history. Two merely incidental starting points are afforded us in the ejections in 1662 and the licences granted in 1672. Some seventy ejections are recorded up to and including 1662, but not all for Noncon- formity. For this cause the principal sufferers were Nathaniel Heywood of Ormskirk, Edmund Jones of Eccles, Richard Goodwin of Bolton, William Bell of Huyton, Henry Finch of Walton, Robert Yates of Warrington, and Isaac Ambrose of Garstang.“ Some were ejected by force or by mere process of law before the Act of Uniformity. Many were merely curates of chapels of ease, without any endowment at all, or with but a scanty revenue; many of them, as John Angier at Denton, appear to have been allowed to minister in their old chapels without any “1 Among the more curious cases are those of James Starkie of North Meols, who retained his rectory and yet is reckoned among Nonconformists ; of Charles Hotham of Wigan ; as also of Joseph Thompson of Sefton, who gave way to the lawful rector in 1660, and afterwards acted as his curate. 67 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE legal title, but without interference.” Several chapels remained in the hands of the Nonconformists for thirty or forty years." The lists of licences of 1672 "* give us merely the personality of Lanca- shire Dissent, for the indication of the denomination 1s usually vague. The once potent and clear-cut terms Presbyterian and Independent are ee indistinguishable, and when the settled congregations subsequently emerge and definitely establish themselves it. 1S often very difficult to say whether we are dealing with a professedly Presbyterian or Independent or Baptist Church. As a matter of fact, whatever their professed polity, these churches are all henceforth Independent in the sense that each is independent of the rest ; there is no superstructure of organization binding them either together or to a uniformity. Whatever attempts at such an organization were subsequently made were until the nineteenth century voluntary, fortuitous, and invariably impotent. This is one main axiomatic guide to an under- standing of the subject. The other and accompanying guide is deducible from the first as a corollary. Bereft of the compelling force of an organization possessing authority over all, the various churches went each its own doctrinal way, and it cannot be matter for surprise that the rising tide of eighteenth- century scepticism carried so many of them through Arianism and Socinianism into Unitarianism ; for the movement affected the Church of England as well. Tue UNITARIANS Putting aside the isolated Unitarian movement of the Commonwealth period, which is epitomized by the names of John Biddle and Thomas Firmin, the recrudescence of Unitarianism is to be attributed to the controversy on the nature of the Trinity which started in 1690 within the Church of England. This formed the prelude to the Deistical controversy, which engaged the attention of radical thinkers in England for the next fifty years, 1696-1748. This, again, opened up a new issue, that of Rationalism pure and simple, and it is noticeable that in this debate the Unitarians stood firm for a miraculous revelation. There was subsequently a lull in the mere doctrinal controversy. The movement had in fact practically accomplished itself by the time when in 1778 Theophilus Lindsey formed a Unitarian church in Essex Street, London, a church which can only be held to be the first Unitarian church by the wilful ignoring of half a century of previous history. Between the limits of time thus indicated events in Lancashire had practically followed the same course as in every county of England. The majority of the old Presbyterian and Independent congregations had passed over into Unitarianism. But whereas in other parts of the county we can trace the course of the development,** in Lancashire we have no specific details. In the county Palatine the change accomplished itself “2 Henry Welsh of Chorley appears to have ministered in the chapel till his death, though he was not technically curate. The procedure there was probably that known to have been used elsewhere; the rector of the parish sending a deputy to read the Prayer-book service, after which the ejected minister would hold his own service and preach. “8 Chowbent, Failsworth, Gorton, Hindley, Platt chapel, Rivington, Darwen, Horwich, St. Helens, and Rainford. __** Nearly 200 licences were granted between 11 April, 1672, and 3 Feb. 1672-3. Some of the ministers, like Henry Newcome of Manchester, had been silenced since 1662. ““ In Devonshire and London the virtual starting point is afforded by the Exeter controversy in 1718. 68 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY gradually by quite unrecorded steps and degrees. ‘The only clue by which we can trace the process is afforded by the life story of the pastorate of each church and the scattered references to dissensions and divisions in the congregations themselves. As far as Lancashire is concerned the change occurred almost entirely in the eighteenth century. The churches of the Old Dissent which thus became Unitarian were Blackley, Bolton (Bank Street), Bury (Bank Street), Chorley, Chowbent, Cockey Moor, Croft, Failsworth, Gatacre, Gorton, Hindley, Knowsley, Lancaster (Nicholas Street), Toxteth Park, Liverpool (Hope Street and Renshaw Street) , Manchester (Cross Street), Monton, Platt, Preston (Church Street), Prescot (Atherton Street), Rawten- stall, Rivington, Rochdale (Blackwater Street), Stand, Walmsley, Wigan (Park Lane). The separate history of each of these churches is fully detailed in Nightingale’s excellent work, Nonconformity in Lancashire. The names of two of these churches are connected with notable controversy. The Man- chester Socinian controversy (1824) centred round Cross Street, Manchester. The Liverpool Socinian controversy (1829) centred round Gatacre church, and is dignified by the name of Martineau. The oldest association the Unitarian churches in Lancashire possess is the Provincial Assembly of Lancashire and Cheshire, which has some shadowy claim to a thin thread of historic connexion with the Association of the United Ministers of both these counties dating from 1690. But practically the only actual connexion consists in the formation in 1762 or 1764 of the Widows’ Fund, which was started in the old, almost moribund, provincial meeting, itself a ghostly and attenuated relic of the United Ministers’ Association. From about 1800, this Widows’ Fund became the nucleus of a local annual meeting, which from 1842 was known as the Provincial Assembly of Lanca- shire and Cheshire, and has become a stereotyped institution from 1865.*° The later organizations are of little account, such e.g. as the Manchester District Association, 1859, and the North Lancashire and Westmorland Unitarian Association, 1go1. The connexion of the county with the training colleges of the Unitarian body is more interesting. Manchester College, Oxford, is the direct descendant of Frankland’s Academy, founded in 1670, and of Chorlton’s Academy in Manchester up to 1712, which from 1786-1803 and again from 1840-53 was fixed in Manchester. The Memorial Hall (1866) also has always been a Manchester institution. On the other hand the Unitarian churches of modern foundation in the county possess no individual interest ; they will be found enumerated in the accounts of the several townships, among the other places of worship. Tue INDEPENDENTS OR CONGREGATIONALISTS Although so large a proportion of the chapels of the Old Dissent thus became Unitarian there were not a few found faithful to their doctrinal traditions. These congregations consist of (1) such as maintained a clear tradition of ‘orthodoxy’ throughout, straight from 1662 downwards ; (2) those which revolted and seceded from such of the Old Dissenting chapels as 45 See G, E. Evans, Vestiges of Protestant Dissent and also his Record of the Provincial Assembly of Lancs, and Ches. 69 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE became Unitarian. Both categories are represented in the Congregational churches of to-day. Passing over for the moment the story of the early attempts at a Sues organization, which will be better treated | under the Presbyterians, the individual churches of the Old Dissent which remained true and are now Independent, or which became extinct, include Elswick, Forton, Darwen, Horwich, St. Helens, Rainford, Hoghton Tower, Tockholes, Hesketh Lane, Altham and Wymondhouses, Ormskirk, and Greenacres. ' a Whenever a congregation of the Old Dissent became Unitarian and a secession ensued as a consequence, the seceding members being orthodox, it is a very disputable point as to which of the two represents the original church. Putting the dogmatic consideration on one side the reasonable conclusion can only be that both parties, that remaining in possession and that seceding, have a claim historically to descent from the original congregation. As a rule it is the Unitarians who remain in possession and the orthodox who secede. There are large numbers of such cases. The general revival of religious life which the dreary eighteenth century witnessed in Methodism and other forms seems to have reached the Inde- pendent churches comparatively late in the day. There is one thread of direct connexion with the wider movement in the personality of Benjamin Ingham. For after Ingham left the Moravians and his churches fell to pieces for want of organization many of them passed over to the Independents. The other precursor of the movement, the first wave of Evangelism among the hitherto dry bones of the Independent churches, ‘Captain’ Jonathan Scott, possesses an individuality all his own, and one which links him to the Independent churches apart from and regardless of any antecedents. The third stream of influence, namely, the churches which seceded under Bennet from the Methodists, merits less distinction. Most of the churches which originated during this phase of Independent history came into existence after 1780. The outburst of Independent evangelistic work which created the eighteenth-century Independent churches was but the prelude, in itself comparatively insignificant, to the more zealous and more widespread nine- teenth-century movement inaugurated by the formation of the Lancashire County Congregational Union. The beginnings of this Union are to be traced to the formation at Bolton, 7 June, 1786, of an association of different Congregational churches of Lancashire and the neighbouring counties. The object of this earlier association was the maintenance of the churches in purity of doctrine and discipline. But on 1 July, 1801, at a meeting at Manchester the association drew up a plan of an Itinerant Society for Lancashire, Cheshire, and Derbyshire ; and with this innovation a new spirit breathed upon the churches. William Roby was the secretary of the move- ment, and its first attempts at evangelism were made in the western parts of Lancashire, at Leyland, Ormskirk, &c. The association made yearly reports of the progress of its work until 1806. In that year its place was taken by a new association, the Lancashire Congregational Union, which was formed on 23 September, 1806, at a meeting in the vestry of Mosley Street Church, Manchester. The names of the twenty-four churches which formed the members of this union at its outset are given in Slate’s History of the Union. 7O ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY In 1817 the union was re-constituted under a ‘ revised plan,’ the county being for the purpose of its work divided into four districts : Manchester, embrac- ing Salford Hundred ; Liverpool, embracing West Derby Hundred ; Preston, embracing Amounderness and Lonsdale Hundreds; Blackburn, embracing Blackburn and Leyland Hundreds. In the magnificent outburst of evange- lizing work which followed the formation of this union three names stand out with signal and inspiring prominence, that of Roby and Sutcliffe in the southern, and of Alexander in the western and northern parts of the county, names which are the most honoured and cherished in the history of Lancashire Congregationalism. Many new churches were formed by the missionary zeal and maintained in whole or part for many years by the financial aid of the Union. The latest phase of church growth among the Independents has no dis- tinctive interest. It is simply on the same lines as the extension of all the other churches, representing the general trend and results of the growth in the county’s population and wealth. The missionary fervour which inspired the earlier movements in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries has yielded place to a propaganda which is as much social as it is religious. For the same reason no special interest attaches to the various organizations which the new order has evolved, the Congregational Mission Board, and the various more local associations, such as the Manchester and Salford Congregational Association. THE PRESBYTERIANS There is no greater crux in English religious history than is presented by the single word ‘ Presbyterianism.’ ‘There was a Presbyterian Church in England during the Civil War and Commonwealth period. There is a Presbyterian Church existing in England to-day. What connexion is there between the two? ‘To state the question thus nakedly is to present it as an insoluble enigma. ‘The first triumph of Presbyterianism as a national ecclesi- astical polity was frustrated in the days of the Commonwealth by the divisions between Independents and Presbyterians. In spite of the attempts at accom- modation in 1659 these divisions continued for thirty years after the Restoration. During those thirty years the Dissenting congregations had existed in secret and in isolation. When, therefore, with the Toleration Act they came forth without fear it was found that one-half the content of the Presbyterian idea, viz., the church polity portion, had vanished from the field. Frankly accepting the situation the Presbyterians no longer contended for a compulsive discipline and for a graduated system of synodical church organiza- tion. They recognized that of necessity the Dissenting churches were and could then only be separate units, each self-governing. They, therefore, con- ceded the idea of a gathered congregation. On this basis a short-lived agreement was made in London in 1691 between them and the Indepen- dents. The movement spread from London to the counties, and in Devon- shire, Northumberland, Cheshire, and Lancashire voluntary associations were formed of the united ministers, i.e. of Presbyterians (so-called) and Indepen- dents (so-called). The minutes of the Lancashire Association of United Ministers have been published.** They extend from 1693-1700, and "6 Cher. Soc. Publ. (New Ser.), 24. 7i A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE the complete change which had come over English ee The object of the association was to suppress if possible the terms ‘ Presby- terian’ and ‘Independent.’ It did not succeed in doing that, for the terms still survived. But it succeeded in doing something more: It broke down all the boundaries between the two terms, and made them almost indistin- guishable. For in the terms of the association *” the Independents gave up their root idea that in each congregation the seat of government lay not in the minister but in the fellowship of church members possessing power to ordain a minister. Such was the confusion of terminology in 1700. What followed next ? Presumably when the voluntary associations fell into abeyance from sheer indif- ference the component parts retreated each to the shadow of their old names. In Evans’ MS. list of the Dissenting churches 1715-27, preserved in the Dr. Williams’ library, the churches are marked P (Presbyterian), I (Indepen- dent), and A or B (Anabaptist or Baptist). In Lancashire he enumerates forty-eight Dissenting meeting-places. Of these he marks forty-three as Presbyterian, four as Independent, and one as Anabaptist. Throughout the country at large the assertion is made (and may be allowed) that half the Dissenting congregations were styled Presbyterian. All that these figures prove is the chaos that had descended upon the term itself. It had become a generic term almost devoid of specific meaning. Of the forty-three chapels which are styled Presbyterian in 1718 in the above list twenty-two at least became and now are Unitarian, and at least six became and now are Indepen- dent. Only three out of the whole list, Risley, Tunley, and Warton, are now represented by Presbyterian chapels.*” These are the links by which the modern Presbyterians of Lancashire can claim association with the hazy Presbyterian churches of the Old Dissent, and in the case of every one the link is broken by almost acentury’s intervening Independency. The simple fact would thus appear to be that the Presbyterian churches in Lancashire, so far from being the oldest, are actually the youngest there, and in addition represent a distinct importation. ‘The renaissance of Presby- terianism in England which marks the years 1820-76 was due to the Evan- gelical movement of 1812 in the Church of Scotland, though a few isolated attempts at a similar propaganda had taken place earlier in the county.” In 1831 a Lancashire Presbytery was formed by the United Secession (afterwards the United Presbyterian) Synod, but in 1836 this Presbytery only numbered five charges, and of these only four were in Lancashire, viz. Oldham Street and Rodney Street, Liverpool; St. Peter’s Square, Manchester ; and Ramsbottom. In the latter year a convention met at Manchester, and as a result the Lancashire Presbytery and the North-west of England Presbytery were formed into a synod, and from that moment the movement began to are evidence of He ‘ Heads of the Agreement’ of the London ministers in 1691. ; Risley Church became Unitarian in the eighteenth century and was only secured by the Presbyterians in 1836 by a Chancery decree. Warton Church became Congregational, and so remained up to 1847, when the deeds passed into Presbyterian hands. Tunley or Mossy Lea Church became Independent, and very possibly during apart of the eighteenth century (during at least the ministry of William Gaskell, 1776-7) Socinian or Unitarian. _ Its connexion with the Scottish Presbyterians was accomplished as a completely new departure during the ministry of Robert Dinwiddie, 1797-1835. These efforts were at Blackburn, Wigan, Liverpool, Bolton, and Manchester. 72 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY spread. Up to 1843 this Synod was in connexion with the Church of Scotland, but the Scottish disruption of that year forced it to assume an independent position as the Presbyterian Church of England. Tue Baptists There are comparatively few references to Anabaptists in Lancashire prior to the Indulgence of 1672. John Wigan of Birch became a Bap- tist in the later years of the Commonwealth, and there were Anabaptists or conventicles of Anabaptists, at Manchester in 1669; as also at Bury ; at Liverpool ‘a frequent conventicle of about 30 or 40 Anabaptists’ most of them rich people’; at Cartmel ‘some Anabaptists’ ; besides an undescribed con- venticle of ‘ Phanaticks’ at Lund chapel in Kirkham parish.“! With such a list before us it is a little strange that the only Baptist licence taken out in Lancashire in 1672 was one for the house of John Leeds in Manchester. There is no other discoverable reference to this body, and it seems almost impossible to suppose any connexion between this licensed house and the eighteenth-century Coldhouse Baptist church in Manchester. There is an assumption also of a Baptist interest at Warrington, dating from the Com- monwealth, but the church itself does not emerge until 1694, and when it does so emerge it appears as settled at Hill Cliffe on the Cheshire side of the river, though it had meetings also in Warrington. It was doubtless from the Hill Cliffe church that the Baptist cause in Liverpool was re-introduced. Looking upon Hill Cliffe as a Cheshire church it would appear that the Old Dissent bequeathed no indigenous Baptist church to the county of Lancaster. For when the denomination reappears after the Act of Toleration it is as a distinct importation from either Yorkshire or Cheshire, in the main the former. Between 1684 and 1692 the Yorkshire Baptist preachers, William Mitchell and Davis Crosley, preached in the Bacup district, and with few exceptions it may be said that it is from these men and from this centre that the Baptist churches of the county have sprung. The two preachers appear to have started the church at Bacup and that at Clough Fold simultaneously. The trust deed of the Bacup school-church is dated 16 April, 1692. For a time these two churches were united, being Styled generally the ‘church in Rossendale,’ but by 1710 they had again ‘become separate. Clough Fold (trust deed dated 1705) continued under Mitchell, and from his death (about 1706) has had a distinct sequence of pastors down to the present day. The separate history of the Bacup church is obscure for the early years 1710-18, but in the latter year David Crosley returned from London to Bacup, and a church was again formed under his pastorate which has had an equally continuous but more chequered history down to the present day. It is a moot question whether the church at Tottlebank, which is regarded questionably as the oldest Baptist church in the county, is to be con- sidered as an off-shoot of the church in Rossendale, or rather as a second parallel outcome of the work of these same Yorkshire pioneers. It would "0 A few congregations have remained outside this union, some of them being parts of the Established Church of Scotland. #1 Lamb. MS. 639. 2 73 Ze) A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE seem almost certain that under Gabriel Camelford (who was ejected from Staveley in 1662), Tottlebank was a Congregational church, and it ts possible that it only tended to become Baptist when in May, 1695, David Crosley was ordained as its minister. It was not actually a Baptist church till 1725, and has always remained an open-membership body. - But whatever may be said as to Tottlebank, it is certain that the remaining historic Baptist churches of east and central Lancashire have all sprung from the church in Rossendale. Some time after 1700 (probably in 1717) some members of this ‘church in Rossendale’ (as it was still styled, but probably meaning only the Clough Fold church) who lived about Todmorden and Hep- tonstall were formed into a distinct church. They erected two small chapels, one at Rodhill End near Todmorden in Lancashire, and one at Stone-slack near Heptonstall in Yorkshire. The chapels were only three miles apart, and service was held in them alternately. Under the pastorates of Thomas Green- wood, Richard Thomas, and John Dracup this church continued its separate existence, but a few years after the coming of John Dracup (1772) the church was dissolved ; the remaining members going to Hebden Bridge and other laces. . The church at Cowling Hill is to be regarded as an off-shoot from the Bacup side of the old Rossendale church. It originated either soon after 1732 or else in a division in the Bacup church which followed on the death of David Crosley in 1744. The Bacup church remained under Henry Lord from 1744 to 1759, while the scattered members in the outskirts of the town and at Cowley Hill chose Joseph Piccop as their minister in 1745. In the following year this Cowling Hill church moved into Bacup, where there ac- cordingly existed for the time being two churches which were not merely at enmity as to their ministers, but also divided as to their faith, the older church under Lord being Supralapsarian, and the younger under Piccop being Sublapsarian. In 1754 reconciliation was effected, and from the date of Lord’s departure in 1759 Piccop succeeded as pastor of the joint church. When this union had been accomplished Cowling Hill desired to become again separate, and from 1756 it accordingly enjoyed its own separate succession of ministers. Meanwhile Goodshaw church had started from the Piccop half of the Bacup church. In 1747 Mr. John Nuttall was baptized by Mr. Piccop. He subsequently preached at Lumb in the Forest of Rossendale, and there a meeting-house was built in 1750 and a church formed (1752). In 1760 this church was moved to Goodshaw, two miles away, and there it still exists. The Baptist cause in Blackburn originated from the same source. David Crosley, while pastor of Bacup, had preached at Blackburn in 1726. A generation later Adam Holden, a native of Bacup, settled at Feniscliffe, where his house was used as a Baptist meeting-place. A church was formed in 1760 and in 1765 a chapel was built for it in Islington Croft, Blackburn. The church at Accrington sprang even more directly from Bacup. Prior to 1759 (probably from 1744) the Baptists at Accrington had been supplied from Bacup. But in 1761 Charles Bamford (who had been baptized at Bacup b Henry Lord) moved to Oakenshaw, and in September of that year eee ordained minister over the church at Oakenshaw. In a few Rel aaa this elo pea its present representative being New Road . 769) has also the same origin. 74 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY In the case of Rochdale, though something is to be attributed to the pre- paratory work of Dr. Fawcett in 1772, the actual origination is again from Bacup. In 1773 John Hirst (who had succeeded Joseph Piccop at Bacup in 1772) baptized nine people in the river at Rochdale, and two years later a church was formed there under Abraham Greenwood as its pastor. The short-lived church at Crawshawbooth was an off-shoot from Rossendale. It was formed about or before 1779 under Henry Taylor, being first intended to be located at Rawtenstall, but was moved to Crawshawbooth even before the completion of the building at Rawtenstall. The church was quickly dispersed. Bolton church sprang directly from Bacup. For some years John Hirst of Bacup preached frequently in Bolton and took some of the Baptist converts there into his own church. About 1789 he advised them to take a room and meet together, and in 1793 ten members were dismissed from Bacup to form a church at Bolton. They erected a small chapel at the bottom of King Street. This chapel was sold in 1806. Besides the above enumerated churches which can thus be traced to one or other of the twin branches of the old Rossendale Baptist community, the Bacup church was interested in and possibly also in part instrumental in the opening of the Ogden church, 1783, Pendle Hill church, 1797-8, and Sutton (reorganized 1768). The list of the Lancashire Baptist churches in 1763 as given by Ivimey is as follows :—*” Lancaster, Rhode, Lumb, Tottlebank, Liverpool, Hawks- head, Bacup, Gildersome, Rodhill End, Blackburn, Goodshaw chapel, Cowling Hill, Carford, Manchester, Bolland, Accrington. Comparing this list with the chapels already noticed, it will be seen that with the exception of the Hill Cliffe, Hawkshead, Liverpool, and Manchester churches, the old Rossendale body had originated practically the whole of the Baptist interest in the county. As to the separate histories of the few exceptions named there is some obscurity. The Coldhouse Baptist church at Manchester was under Mr. Winterbottom as early as 1745. On his removal in 1760 a division occurred as to the election of a successor. Some of the Bacup Baptists who had settled in Manchester formed a separate body, styling themselves the Tib Lane Baptists, under John Harmer. From 1762 to 1765 this body resorted to Bacup for the Communion, but in the latter year they appear to have rejoined Coldhouse, then under the pastorate of Edmund Clegg. After moving in 1789 to St. George’s Road it is now in Rochdale Road. At Liverpool the Baptist cause is probably older (as far as a continuous history is traceable) than at Manchester. On 28 July, 1700, Dr. Daniel Fabius, an apothecary at Low Hill, obtained a licence from the Manchester Quarter Sessions for his house asa meeting-place. In 1714 a wooden meeting- house was built at Low Hill, but in 1722 the congregation moved to a barn of the Townsend House in Byrom Street, within Liverpool. In 178g it moved to another part of Byrom Street, and in 1835 to Shand Street. It is this church which in 1755 is spoken of as Dale Street. Apparently the only other eighteenth-century Baptist church in Liver- pool was Stanley Street, formed in 1747 by John Johnson. In1799 it moved to Comus Street, and is now at Bootle. Tvimey, Hist. of Engl. Baptists, ii, 17. “8 Ivimey, op. cit. il, $90. : 75 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE It must be understood that so far we have been dealing only with Par- ticular or Calvinistic Baptist churches, whether these were Supralapsarian or Sublapsarian. It seems quite clear that the old General Baptists or Arminian or non-Calvinistic Baptists of the seventeenth century never obtained a foot- hold in the county at all. The articles of the earliest Baptist Association in Lancashire, that of 1719, prove clearly that the churches were exclusively of the Particular Baptist type. This association comprised the following churches: Rawden or Heatton, Rossendale, Liverpool, Sutton, Barnoldswick,“* Rodhill End. This association survived, in the form of an annual meeting, till after 1740. Some time between that year and 1755 the division between High and Low Calvinists (Supras. and Subs.) led to the formation of separate associations.** It may have been the Sublapsarian association which de- veloped or degenerated into a mere annual lecture preached at different places under a loose organization, which is referred to in 1772 and 1775 as ‘the churches in association in Lancashire and Yorkshire.’ In 1776 this annual lecture was held at Preston, and there, in response to the wider move- ment amongst the Baptists throughout the country, it was proposed to form a more organic and coherent association. Accordingly, the meeting at Colne in May, 1787, is spoken of as the first meeting.** In 1790 this association met at Manchester, and in 1804 it started the Baptist Academy at Bradford. The association endured in its original form until 1837, when a change was made by which the Yorkshire churches became a distinct association (still existing), while Lancashire was united with Cheshire in a Lancashire and Cheshire association, also still existing. In one or other of these forms all these local associations now form part of the present Baptist Union of Eng- land—a union of (then) Particular Baptist churches which was founded in 1812, and which, after nineteen years of inchoate existence, was firmly and broadly established in 1832. The levelling and comprehensive work which the Baptist Union of Great Britain and Ireland has accomplished will be incomprehensible without a hasty glance at the parallel history of the General Baptists, for in the pre- sent Baptist Union the old terms of division and strife, which had been such potent solvents, are ignored. General Baptists, believing an Arminian type of dogma as opposed to Calvinism, existed in the seventeenth century, and obtained a footing in that century in Yorkshire at Sowerby and Shefheld, even if they did not do so in Lancashire. Their annual meeting, known as the General Assembly, met annually in London, and for 253 years has met practically without break. In 1697 the doctrinal differences in the General Assembly over the “* Sutton and Barnoldswick were Yorkshire churches, a fact which indicates that the association was not merely a Danese tre one. The church at Bacup was not admitted to it on account of some irregularity. ‘ At out 1755 these rival associations were composed as follows, each one covering in part both Lancashire and Yorkshire, and some touching other counties : Supralapsarian.—Wainsgate, Sunderland, Whitehaven, Bradford, H i 4 - ‘5 aworth, Juniper Dye House, Bacup (old meetin~‘, and Liverpool (Stanley Street, Mr. Johnson). This aisbiclation oe . Baap in 1755 or 1756, and at Bradford in 1757. It was dissolved before 1760. Sublapsarian.—Rawden, Nantwich, L-verpool (Dale Street, Mr. Oulton), and Bacup (new meeting). In ae this association met at Liverpool, and in the following year at Bacup, and again at Liverpool in 1761. “* The association included the Baptist churches of Leeds, Rawden, Gildersome, Halifax, Salendine hy 2. Nook, Hebden Bridge, Wainsgate, Rochdale, Bacup, Clough F i i i rear ona eves , up, Clough Fold, Cowling Hill, Sutton, Barnoldswick, Colne, 76 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY opinions of Matthew Caffin led to a secession and to the formation of a rival General Association, which retained its existence alongside the General As- sembly. The same train of intellectual movement which carried the Con- gregationalists and the Presbyterians of the Old Dissent into Unitarianism carried the General Baptists and the General Assembly into Unitarianism also. As opposed to this, the General Association was Trinitarian. In the subse- quent decline of spiritual life the General Assembly atrophied slowly. To- day it is represented only by a remnant of nineteen churches. None of these are in Lancashire, and the General Assembly type of Baptist church seems never to have been represented in the county Palatine at any time. For a part of the eighteenth century the General Association also experienced a decline, though not so fatally marked as in the case of the General Assembly. But in 1770 a revival occurred which took the shape of the formation of a New Connexion (of free-grace Baptists). Several churches in Yorkshire, the Midlands, London, and Kent divided off from the General Association as a protest against its doctrinal decline. In 1771 this New Connexion was divided into two branches, a northern-midland and a southern one. The first meeting of the northern-midland branch was held in 1772 at Loughborough, and it was this branch of the New Connexion which invaded Lancashire. In 1780 some Baptists from Worsthorne in Yorkshire (which had itself sprung from the Yorkshire mother church at Birchcliffe) started a church at Burnley, towards the formation of which twenty-two members were dismissed from Birchcliffe. In 1787 a chapel was built in Burnley Lane (now represented by ‘Ebenezer’ in Colne Road). The second New Connexion Baptist church in Lancashire sprang similarly from a derivative (Shore Church) of Birch- cliffe. The work was started at Lidgate, near Todmorden, in 1795, and there a church was formed in 1816. ‘There is a reference also to a shortlived General Baptist church at Bacup some time about or before 1793. The church at Stalybridge just over the border belongs to the same train of derivation, for it started from Birchcliffe in 1804, though in a more unauthorized way. These churches represent the total of the original New Connexion General Baptist churches in Lancashire. They are now all within the union. The question naturally arises, how a union which sprang from a Particular Baptist basis came to incorporate such General Baptist (New Connexion) churches. The answer furnishes the key to later Baptist history. It is simply that, under the irresistible influence of the spirit of the age, the Particular Baptist churches have in great measure moved away from their eighteenth-century Calvinism. There are comparatively few of them which are now genuinely ‘Particular’ in their creed, though there are still some in Lancashire which refuse all intercourse with the rest. The broadening of the dogmatic basis has therefore made it possible to achieve a union which could embrace churches hitherto sharply sundered by dogmatic differences. Whatever their differences, practically all the Baptist churches of Lancashire are now within the Union.#® In this section the writer has had the advantage of the assistance of the Rev. Dr. W. T. Whitley, who is engaged on a history of the Baptist churches in the North of England. 77 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Tue SoclETY oF FRIENDS Lancashire does not bulk so largely in the general history of the Quaker movement, either in the seventeenth century or to-day, as we should expect in view of the close personal connexion between George Fox and the Swarth Moor district. It would appear that Fox began his preaching in Lancashire. In 1647 he travelled thither from Derbyshire ‘to see a woman who had fasted 22 days,’ and passing on to Dukinfield and Manchester he stayed awhile and ‘declared truth among them.’ This earliest effort would appear to have been resultless, and it was not until five years later that he again entered the county. This time he came from Westmorland, reached Ulverston, and so on to Swarth Moor, the place which was to be a haven of rest for him throughout his life, and where he met the noble-spirited woman who was destined later to be his wife, Mistress Fell, then the wife of Judge Fell. The first society which he gathered round him was at the house of Judge Fell, and that house continued to be a meeting- place for the society for nearly forty years, until 1690, when a new meeting- house was erected near it. The ‘priest’ at Ulverston, Lampett, became a persistent foe and persecutor of Fox. Making Swarth Moor his centre Fox itinerated in the district round, speaking at Aldingham, at Rampside, where the ‘ priest,’ Thomas Lawson, became a convert, at Dalton, in the Isle of Walney, Baycliff, and Gleaston. On a second visit some short unstated time after (still in 1652) he preached in the streets at Lancaster, but met with a very rough reception. After again an apparently brief intermission in Westmorland he reappeared at Ulver- ston to dispute with the ‘ priests’ who were then assembled in great numbers at what Fox calls a lecture, but which can surely only have been a classical meeting. Both here and in Walney Island he was treated with great violence, and returned to Swarth Moor only to find a warrant awaiting him. He was tried at the sessions at Lancaster for blasphemy (‘1652, 30th of the eighth month’ (October)); but although forty ‘priests’ under their mouthpieces Marshal and ‘ Jackus’ appeared against him he was dismissed. The result of the proceedings was to raise up for Fox a following in Lancaster, including the mayor himself, and Thomas Briggs, the latter of whom ranks with Richard Hubberthorne as one of the two greatest Lancashire Quaker preachers. From 1652 for a time Fox was absent from the county—perforce, as he was in gaol at Carlisle. In his absence his cause was carried on by Thomas Briggs, who appears as being mobbed in Warrington church in 1653, and by Miles Halhead, the early Lancashire convert to whom was first given the name of Quaker, and who in the same year was preaching and meeting similar treatment at Stanley [? Staveley] chapel and in the Furness district. It was not until 16g? that Fox reappeared at Swarth Moor and Lancaster (where he visited the meetings of Friends), Liverpool, Manchester, and Preston, and his stay was evidently brief, for we hear no more of him in the county until 1660, when he was apprehended at Swarth Moor and committed to Lancaster Gaol. His subsequent connexion with Lancashire (his long imprisonment and trial at Lancaster . 1664-5, for refusing the Oath of 7 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY Allegiance, and so on), though very close and of strong interest, is mainly personal, for we catch very few glimpses of the growth of Quakerism in the county as compared with the detailed accounts of the personal sufferings of Fox himself, or other individual Friends. The ultimate source from which Quaker history can alone be reliably written (if ever it is written), viz. the records preserved at Devonshire House, have not even been opened or arranged in a preliminary way, and it is utterly impossible in their present condition to make any use of them for the purpose of historical research. Outside this central repository of records at Devonshire House the various local associations of Friends throughout the country (the quarterly meetings and monthly meetings) in great measure still preserve their own records, but these again in their present state are practically as good as a sealed book to the historical student. The connexion between these local associations and the central body in London was kept up by the double means of annual delegations to the yearly meetings, and of annual letters or reports on the state of the provincial churches sent up by the quarterly meeting to the annual meeting. But as a rule these annual letters are purely pastoral. They give no names of churches, no details either of church growth, or of personalities. Some idea of the possible wealth of material at Devonshire House is afforded by Mr. Penny’s First Publishers of Truth, in which the present librarian of the society has printed an early series of letters descriptive of the first establishment of Quakerism in the various counties. But here again the portion relating to Lancashire is disappointingly meagre. The only gathering referred to is that at Knowsley in Huyton parish, where, we are told, the first entry of truth was in 1654, the first Friends who published truth there being William Holmes, William Halton, Peter Laithwait, and James Fletcher.*” This last named, a husbandman of Knowsley, fills a large space in the story of the missionary spread of Quakerism, not merely in England, Wales, and Ireland, but also in America. Beyond further brief reference to the cause at Marsden (founded in 1653), at Rossendale (started by William Dewsbury and Thomas Stubbs), and Oldham and Ashton (started by John Tetlaw), the particular record yields practically nothing. Such silence is all the more regrettable because it is clear from the returns of conventicles in 1669 that the Quakers were exceedingly numerous in the county.” In addition Fox’s ‘fourna/ contains a reference under 1669 to a large meeting at William Barnes’s house about two miles from Warrington ; and under 1675 he refers to the men’s and women’s meeting at Lancaster, show- ing that the meeting there was organized in quite a large and systematic way. “7 The Knowsley meeting was held at the house of Benjamin Boult, husbandman. “8 Lamb. MS. 639. “9 The following particulars are given : ‘At Heights [in Cartmel], a place on the Moors, there useth to be a great assembly of Quakers, above 1,000. Haslingden—Quakers to the number of about twenty ; Burnley —several meetings of Quakers; Rossendale—Quakers ; Standish—monthly meeting of Quakers, their number about forty or fifty ; Manchester—Quakers, the persons are tradesmen and mostly women ; Bury—meetings of Quakers to a great number ; North Meols—several Quakers ; Ormskirk—Quakers ; Hauxhead—Quakers meet in great numbers ; Ulverston—Quakers ; Cartmel—Quakers, about thirty ; Cartmell Fell Chapel—Quakers ; Aldingham—some Quakers; Coulter [Colton]}—Quakers ; Tatham—meeting of Quakers, about forty or upwards ; Melling—Quakers to the number of twenty and upwards ; Larton—Quakers 3 Heightham— Quakers, about forty ; Kirkham—Quakers near Little Eccleston.’ The Visitation records in the Diocesan Registry at Chester contain numerous particulars. 79 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE A comparison of this doubtless very incomplete list here given with the later list of the Quaker meetings in the county points generally to the con- clusion that at the time of Fox’s death his cause was stronger in Lancashire than it has ever been since. The great period of decline and deadness was in the earlier half of the eighteenth century, but in the absence of authentic records only a fragmentary portion of this story can be recovered, and that merely from a few stray references to extinct meeting-houses, or to disused Friends’ burial-grounds. The revival which has taken place within the last half-century has been a very partial one, and means probably no more than that the Quakers as a body have shared (though in a minor degree) in the general movement of growth and awakening which has touched every phase of church life within the last two generations. The organization of the whole body in monthly, quarterly, and annual meetings was established during Fox’s lifetime, and from the time of his death became the firm polity of the body. In accordance with this scheme Lancashire and Cheshire form one quarterly meeting, and the Lancashire portion comprises the following monthly meetings :— Hardshaw East: Containing Didsbury, Eccles, Leigh, Manchester (three), Penketh, Warrington, and Westhoughton. Hardshaw West : Containing Liverpool, Southport, St. Helens, and Wigan. Lancaster : Containing Calder Bridge near Garstang, Lancaster (four), Wyresdale, and Yealand Conyers. -Varsden : Containing Bolton, Crawshawbooth, Marsden, Nelson, Oldham (two), Radcliffe, Rochdale (two), and Todmorden. Preston : Containing Blackburn, Preston, and Blackpool. Swarth Moor : The original centre and fountain head of Lancashire Quakerism, and Heights in Cartmel, are now in the Westmorland quarterly meeting. Of very few of these places can anything like a connected history be given, and in the case of the extinct meeting-houses the impossibility is even greater. THE MorAviIANs With the Quakers we take leave of the last form of seventeenth-century religious movement. On entering the much-maligned eighteenth century we are instantly struck by the change of note. In all the indigenous religious movements which that century originated the dominant and under- lying motive force is no longer either dogmatic or politic. The Calvinism of the seventeenth century is as absolutely gone as is the seventeenth-centur absorbing prepossession for a reconstruction of a church system on the basis of the New Testament history. In place of both these tendencies the eighteenth century supplies us with the first attempt which the modern world has witnessed at bringing the light of religion to bear on the social darkness and ferocity which gathered in the train of the industrial revolution. In their birth-time the Moravian Churches and the Methodist Churches were the only truly missionary churches. And if they are so no longer it is only because of the inevitable and foreordained curse which falls on every religious movement when, deserting the sure basis of mere pure spirituality, it builds itself up into a system, becomes a polity, and barters its immortal heritage of the soul of man for bricks and mortar. 80 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY In point of time the Moravian Church, or Unitas Fratrum, stands fore- most in this newer, truer movement, though in point of time only. For in the communistic spirit which underlay half the conception of this church it seems more akin to the twentieth century than to the eighteenth. As far as England is concerned the earliest phase of Moravian history is of no interest. It was not until the reconstruction or renewal of the Moravian Church in 1727 by Zinzendorf that this country enters the circle of its influence. In 1728 Johan Toeltschig was dispatched hither from Herrnhut, but his visit proved resultless. More important in its effect was the Moravian contingent which was sent in 1733 under Spangenburg to take part in the colonization of Georgia. For it was in the company of these men that the Wesleys sailed to Georgia to learn from communion with them not merely the witness of the inner light of the Spirit, but the value of that organization which John Wesley subsequently copied in his own Church. When five years later Wesley returned to London discontented, he for a time almost identified himself with the Moravian Society, which existed in embryo at James Hutton’s house in Little Wild Street, and from which sprang in 1742 the Fetter Lane Society, the first in date, and throughout the chief, of the Moravian churches in England. The spread of the movement to Yorkshire was partly due to accident. Benjamin Ingham, the evangelistic clergyman of Ossett, Leeds, invited the Brethren to assist him in the administration of the societies he had formed round him. Accordingly in May, 1742, twenty-six brethren and sisters were sent from London to Yorkshire, and making their head quarters at Smith House, near Wyke, spread their influence rapidly over the north of England. In eighteen months they had forty-seven preaching places, and the community at Fulneck had become a second Herrnhut. In 1743 the Moravians entered Lancashire, where the ground had been prepared for them since 1740 by the preaching of David Taylor. The society formed in 1743 at Dukinfield in Cheshire by Job Bennet is to be regarded in the main as an offshoot from Smith House; for though Bennet was himself a Derbyshire man and was assisted by Derbyshire people, he drew his light directly from a visit to the Moravians at Smith House. Dukinfield became the centre of the Moravian interest for the counties of Lancaster, Chester and Derby. In October, 1748, the house of John Kelsal was licensed as a meeting-place, but in 1751 a chapel was built, and an attempt was made to form a Moravian settlement at Dukinfield after the pattern of Fulneck. In consequence, however, of the uncertainty of the tenure of the land the society migrated in 1785 to Fairfield, near Manchester, and there, besides the church, communal buildings, brothers’ houses, and sisters’ houses, &c., were built. Fairfield is still the head and centre of the Brethren’s interest in Lancashire, but its communal character as a Moravian village, and the communal buildings and institutions, have long since gone. It is now practically only a church. Its missionary work was comparatively small and comparatively abortive. The cause which it started at Miles Platting and that at Liverpool (18 56) are both extinct, as is also its early work at Openshaw, for the existing church at this place is quite modern (1899). The intention at the time of the migration was to desert Dukinfield altogether; but this was found impracticable, and accordingly the cause at Dukinfield was retained as subordinate to or a ‘filial’ of that at Fairfield. 2 81 ee A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE It is with Dukinfield rather than with Fairfield that the evangelistic work of the Moravians is associated. The preaching tours which were organized from this centre covered Bolton, Shackerley (1752), Manchester (1755), Ashton, and Cheadle. None of these efforts took a permanent form, for the cause at Shackerley, after a languishing existence, was given up in 1800; and the cause at Manchester, which possessed a chapel in Newton Lane in 1773, replaced in 1777 by one in Fetter Lane, near the Infirmary, was given up in the same year (1800). But the preaching work at Greenacres, near Oldham (1776), and at Lees (1784-6, also near Old- ham), resulted in the establishment of the Salem church, still existing at Lees. The church at Westwood in Middleton Road, Oldham, originated in 1865 as a mission from Salem. The decay of Moravianism as an influence in English life is probably due externally to the competition of the more aggressive forms of Methodism, and internally to its own pietistic spirit, to the fact that it was throughout ruled in great measure from German head quarters at Herrnhut, and to the hesitancy of the leaders of the movement in declining to cut themselves loose from the Episcopal Church of England. Looking upon themselves as an episcopal church in union with the Church of England they refused to turn their preaching places into congregations, but adopted the idea of united flocks, which resorted once a quarter to the Church of England for Com- munion. When at last, in 1856, this system was thrown over, and the body declared itself a Church, its opportunity, as far as England is concerned, had gone for ever. MeETHODISM—THE WESLEYANS It may be asserted without fear that it was Methodism which saved, nay even created, popular religion in Lancashire in modern times. When it arose the clergy of the Established Church in general had reached the lowest depth of degradation as a spiritual force, and those in this county seem to have been no exception ; it was after the Methodist revival that the wonderful change took place in them which is visible to-day. The old Nonconformity had mostly become Unitarian, and useless for evangelizing the people, and it too was quickened. But this quickening was partly by antagonism, for while Methodism was Arminian, the other Evangelicals, whether Anglican or Non- conformist, were strongly Calvinist, and so remained till the middle of last century. John Wesley’s first visit to Lancashire in March, 1738, when he preached in Salford Church and St. Anne’s Church, Manchester, was a mere incident and without organic connexion with the systematic evangelization of the county which he commenced nine years later. When he again entered the county in May, 1744, it was in the company of John Bennet, at whose request he returned in April, 1745, to preach in several places in Langachine In later years he had reason to regret the connexion bitterly, for Bennet not only headed a revolt against him and by a secession almost broke up the earl Methodist Society in Bolton, but also married Grace Murra the node whom Wesley had desired to make his wife. In mere matter ae Bennet the convert of David Taylor and the friend of John Nelson, had a Wesley in the work of preaching in Lancashire, but after his eee in 82 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY 1751, when he became a Whitfieldite, he ceases to be of importance for the religious history of the county. From the moment when, in May, 1747, Wesley began a systematic evangelization, he held the field alone as far as his own organization was concerned. Widely as he travelled through the county there were a few fixed spots which served him as permanent centres of work and influence—Manchester, Liverpool, Warrington, Bolton, and Wigan. Although in date the Bolton cause probably precedes that at Manchester, the latter has always maintained a pre-eminent position in the history of Lancashire Methodism. The con- quest of the place was not instantaneous. On his first return to the town on 7 May, 1747, he preached at Salford Cross. A numberless crowd of people partly ran before, partly followed after me. I thought it best not to sing, but looking round asked abruptly, ‘Why do you look as if you had never seen me before ? many of you have seen me in the neighbouring church, both preaching and administering the sacrament.’ He was allowed to preach undisturbed until near the close, when a big man thrust in with three or four more and bade them bring out the engine. Wesley accordingly moved into a yard close by and concluded in peace. This yard was probably the ‘Rose and Crown’ yard, which seems to have been used as a preaching-room up to the time of the erection in 1751 of the first Methodist chapel in Salford—in Birchin Lane. A society was formed either on the occasion of this visit or shortly after, for in April, 1753, he speaks of examining it and notes that it contained seventeen of the dragoons. But the formation of this little nucleus of members did not ensure the instant conquest of Manchester, for when he preached there again in April, 1755, the mob raged horribly. ‘ This I find has been their manner for some time. No wonder, since the good justices encourage them.’ In August of the following year, however, he preached without the least disturbance. ‘The tumults here are now at an end, chiefly through the courage and activity of a single constable.’ As opposed to the unruliness of Manchester, it would seem that Liver- pool offered him quite a genteel reception. He first visited the place in April, 1755. Passing from Warrington he went on to Liverpool, one of the neatest, best-built towns I have seen in England... The people in general are the most mild and courteous I ever saw in a seaport town as indeed so appears by their friendly behaviour, not only to the Jews and Papists, who live among them, but even to the Methodists (so called). The preaching house is a little larger than that at Newcastle. It was thoroughly filled at seven in the evening . . . every morning as well as evening abundance of people gladly attended the preaching. Many of them I learned were dear lovers of controversy. The love of controversy as well as the gentility endured, for when he re- turned in April, 1757, he found that a certain James S. had swept away half the society, in order to which he had told lies innumerable. But when Wesley returned once more in March, 1758, he notes that the house was crowded with a rich and genteel people ‘whom I did not at all spare.’ Six years later he notes the same characteristics : In the evening, 14 July, 1764, I preached at Liverpool and on the next day, Sunday, the house was full enough. Many of the rich and fashionable were there and behaved with decency. Indeed I have always observed more courtesy and humanity at Liverpool than at most sea ports in England . . . only one young gentlewoman (I heard) laughed much. Poor thing. Doubtless she thought ‘I laugh prettily.’ 83 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE At Bolton Wesley was in a different constituency. When he first preached at the Cross in that town in August, 1748, he tells us that many of the people were utterly wild. As soon as I began speaking they began thrusting to and fro, endeavouring to throw me down from the steps on which I stood. They did so once or twice, but I went up again and continued my discourse. Then they began to throw stones; at the same time some got upon the cross behind me to push me down. But Bolton made amends, for in spite of the secession under Bennet in 1751, which rent the society in twain, the town became a stronghold and centre of Lancashire Methodism. In April, 1761, Wesley preached to a serious con- gregation there and notes in his diary, ‘I find few places like this. All disputes are forgot and the Christians do indeed love one another. When I visited the classes on Wednesday I did not find a disorderly walker among them.’ Three years later, as the room could not contain his hearers, he preached in the street to a calm congregation composed of awakened and unawakened Churchmen, Dissenters, and what not. In the evening the multi- tude again constrained him to preach in the street, although it was raining. Such brief and disjointed extracts from Wesley’s diary serve to convey an imperfect idea of the character of one or two of the Lancashire towns during the fatal transition period, when the industrial revolution was com- mencing its baneful influence in hardening and brutalizing the working classes. But they convey no conception whatever either of the progress of Methodism in the country villages or of the process of the building up of the system or polity of Methodism. The former indeed is impalpable. It is writ large in the history of the movement throughout England and has less special reference to Lancashire. But in the latter the county Palatine has played a most decisive part at the various periods of crisis in the Connexion. It must be remembered that this is a matter of locality rather than of personality. During his life Wesleyanism was Wesley, so dominating were his authority and influence, but after his death the rigorous application of the itinerating system, which limits the stay of a minister in any circuit to three years at the outside, prevented the permanent identification of any individual minister with any particular locality. The history therefore of the movement as a whole in the county reduces itself to an outline of the formation of the various societies and the ever fresh creation and subdivison of circuits. The broader movements which agitated the Connexion are of special interest to Lancashire only in so far as they either arose or came to a head there. At the twenty-second conference, which was held at Manchester, in 1 766, Lancashire appears on the minutes as one out of the twenty-five circuits in England, and in this circuit there were four appointed ministers. The number of members was then about 1,700. Three years later the Lancashire circuit was divided into north and south, each portion being supplied with still only two ministers. In 1784 a rearrangement was made in the circuits. Three circuits were constituted, the heads of them being fixed at Liverpool, Man- chester, and Bolton. The later process of growth is too tedious to be followed in narrative. But besides furnishing this remarkable growth Lancashire has played a striking. part in the internal history of the Connexion. Wesley’s life his influence had been great enough to restrain the 84 During grow- ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY ing desire to break away from the Church of England. The Wesleyans received the ordination of their ministers from the bishops and the sacrament from the clergy of the Church of England. At his death the separation move- ment could be no longer repressed. The next conference after his death, the forty-eighth conference, in July, 1791, was held at the Oldham Street chapel, Manchester. The controversy then blazed forth with a fierceness that threatened to shatter the whole society. On the mere question of separation from the Church of England and of independent administration of sacrament and ordination this important conference pursued a middle course, deciding not to separate and to permit independent administration of the sacrament only in the exceptional cases where Wesley had himself permitted it. The settlement was a mere compromise, and served by its lack of finality to bring to the front an even more vital question, viz. that of the representation of the lay element of Methodism in the hitherto purely clerical or ministerial conference. After four years of internecine agitation the conference of 1795, which also met at Manchester, arranged a compromise which saved Methodism from disruption. This conference is remarkable for the appear- ance of a delegated meeting of trustees (laymen of the Connexion) which was held independently of the ministerial conference. Negotiations between the two bodies resulted in the adoption of Thomas Thompson’s Plan of Pacification which left the question of the administration of the sacrament to be deter- mined by a majority of trustees, stewards, and leaders, with the consent of conference, with the proviso that it should not be administered in Wesleyan chapels on those Sundays on which it was administered in the Church of England. The larger question of the representation in conference of the lay element was left untouched, and when two years later the ministerial element obtained complete mastery and prevented any readjustment on this head, the first secession in Methodism took place. The champions of the rights of laymen withdrew under Kilham to form the New Connexion. Manchester has a personal as well as a local interest in this important episode in Methodist history, for Jabez Bunting, the pontiff of Wesleyanism, the man who, after Wesley himself, played the most decisive part in binding the chains of an oppressive hierarchy (practically still existent) upon the corpse of Methodism, was intimately connected with the place both personally and ministerially. Manchester played, if anything, an even more incisive part in the second episode of Methodist disruption, that which led to the formation of the Metho- dist Free Church. The immediate cause of dispute, the division in conference over the proposed establishment of a theological institute, was a compara- tively minor matter as compared with the discontent which it represented against the hierarchic polity of the Wesleyan body. This discontent found sharp expression in Manchester and Liverpool, and it was for his temerity in forming these elements into a ‘grand central association’ for the purpose of an organized attack on the Wesleyan polity that Dr. Samuel Warren was suspended by the Manchester District Meeting, and thereby excluded from ministering in Oldham Street chapel. He thereupon applied to Chancery for an injunction against the trustees of Oldham Street chapel and Oldham Road chapel, Manchester. The decision was given in favour of the District Meeting, and on appeal this decision was confirmed. In the following conference Warren was accordingly expelled, and thereupon formed the 85 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE “Grand Central Association’ into a new Methodist sect of the ‘ Associated Methodists,’ which subsequently grew into the United Methodist Free Church, This was to prove the last great schism in the Wesleyan body. From that day its internal history has been one of steady growth conjoined with a slight, but only slight, relaxation of clerical predominance in circuit and conference administration. In neither of these points of connexional history has Lancashire played any specially distinctive or individual part. The circuit growth and ramification or derivation of Wesleyan Methodism in the country is as follows :— 1765.—Manchester: Lancashire Circuit, 1765; Lancashire South Circuit, 1766- 17703; Stockport Circuit, formed 1786; Oldham Circuit, formed 1791-2; Irwell Street Circuit, formed 1813. 1766.—Liverpool : Lancashire North Circuit, 1766-70 ; Warrington Circuit, formed 1791; Prescot, now St. Helen’s Circuit, formed 1811. 1776.—Colne, from Haworth: Todmorden Circuit, formed 1799; Barrowford Circuit, formed 1865. 1784.— Bolton. 1787.—Blackburn, from Colne. 1791.—Oldham, from Manchester. 1791.—Warrington, from Liverpool : Northwich Circuit, 1792-1811. 1792.—Lancaster, from Colne. 1793.—Wigan, from Bolton: Preston Circuit, 1799-1800; Preston Circuit, 1802; with Bolton, 1805 ; Leigh Circuit, 1806-11. 1795.—Rochdale, from Oldham: Bacup Circuit, formed 1811 ; Heywood Circuit, formed 1853. 1799.—Preston : Chorley Circuit, formed 1858. 1799.—Todmorden, from Colne: Hebden Bridge Circuit, formed 1862. 1803.—Liverpool (Welsh). 1804.—Bury, from Bolton. 1805.—Leigh (Lancs.), from Bolton: Wigan, separated 1812; St. Helens, separated 1828 ; Cadishead Circuit, formed 1872. 1805.—Manchester (Welsh). 1807.—Ormskirk (North Meols Mission to 1809). 1808.—New Mills, from Stockport : Ashton-under-Lyne Circuit, formed 1811. 1810.—Burnley, from Colne. 1811.—Bacup, formed from Rochdale. 1811.—Garstang (Blackpool and Garstang Circuit, 1855-65). 1811.—St. Helens and Prescot, from Liverpool : Prescot Circuit, 1811-16 ; Liver- pool and Prescot, 1817; St. Helen’s Circuit, 1828-30. 1811-12.—Ashton-under-Lyne, formed from New Mills. 1812,—Clitheroe, from Skipton. 1813.—Manchester, Irwell Street, from Manchester : Salford Circuit to 1826 ; Gravel Lane Circuit, formed 1860; Regent Road Circuit, formed 1875. 1814.—Haslingden, from Bury : Accrington Circuit, formed 1863. 1819.—Chorley, from Preston: with Preston, 1820-57. 1824-5.—Manchester (Grosvenor Street), from Manchester: Oxford Road Circuit formed 1846; Longsight Circuit, formed 1879. ; 1824~5.—Manchester (Oldham Street): Grosvenor Street Circuit, formed 1824 ; Great Bridgewater Street Circuit, formed 1827; Cheetham Hill Circuit, formed 1863 ; Victoria Circuit, formed 1878 ; Oldham Road Circuit, formed 1882. 1826.—Liverpool (North) : Liverpool South Circuit, formed 1826 ; Waterloo Circuit formed 1859. ’ ; 1826-7.—Liverpool (South) : from Liverpool. 1827.—Manchester (Great Bridgewater Street) from Oldham Street: Altrincham Circuit, reformed 1838 ; City Road Circuit, formed 1872. 1846-7.—Manchester (Oxford Road), from Grosvenor Street : formed 1867. 185 3-4.—Heywood, from Rochdale. 1857.—Bolton (Bridge Street) : Bolton Wesley Circuit, formed 1857. 86 Radnor Street Circuit, ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY 1857-8.—Bolton (Wesley), from Bridge Street. 1859,—Waterloo, from Liverpool North. 1860.—Manchester (Gravel Lane), from Irwell Street. 1861-2.—Padiham, from Burnley. 1863.—Accrington, formed from Haslingden. 1863.—Liverpool (Wesley), from Liverpool South. 1863-4.—Liverpool (Pitt Street) : Wesley Circuit, formed 1863; Grove Street Circuit, formed 1875 ; Liverpool Mission, 1875-8 ; Liverpool Mission (Pitt Street), 1879. 1863-4.—Manchester (Cheetham Hill), from Oldham Street. _ _1865.—Liverpool (Brunswick) : Cranmer Circuit, formed 1865 ; Great Homer Street Circuit, formed 1883. 1865.—Liverpool (Cranmer), from Brunswick. 1865-6.—Bolton (Park Street), from Bridge Street. 1865-6.—Nelson, from Colne : Barrowford, head of Circuit to 1876, 1866.—Preston (Lune Street) : Wesley Circuit, formed 1866. 1866-7.—Rawtenstall, from Bacup. 1866-8.—Preston (Wesley), from Preston. 1867.—Manchester (Radnor Street), from Oxford Road. 1868.—Hyde, from Ashton-under-Lyne. 1868.—Rochdale (Wesley), from Rochdale. 1868-9.—Bolton (Farnworth), from Wesley. 1868-9.—Rochdale (Union Street) : Wesley Circuit, formed 1868. 1869-70.—Oldham (Manchester Street) : Wesley Circuit, formed 1869. 1869-70.—Oldham (Wesley). 1871.—Liverpool (Shaw Street Welsh), Chester Street Circuit, formed 1871. 1871-80.—Liverpool (Mount Sion Welsh), called Chester Street Circuit. 1872.—Cadishead, from Leigh, Lancashire. 1872.—Manchester (City Road), from Great Bridgewater Street. 1875.—Manchester (Regent Road), from Irwell Street. 1875—6.—Liverpool (Grove Street), from Pitt Street. 1878.—Blackburn (Clayton-le-Moors), from Blackburn. 1878.—Manchester (Victoria), from Oldham Street. ; a aaa (Clayton Street) : Darwen and Clayton-le-Moors Circuit, formed 1878. 1878-80.—Blackburn (Darwen), from Blackburn. 1879.—Manchester (Longsight), from Grosvenor Street. 1882.—Liverpool (St. John’s), from Wesley. 1882-4.—Manchester (Oldham Road), from Oldham Street. 1883-4.—Liverpool (Great Homer Street), from Brunswick. 1883-5.—Lytham, from Blackpool. 1888.—Rochdale (Littleborough), from Union Street. 1889.—Radcliffe, from Bury. 1892.—Millom, from Ulverston. 1893.—Manchester (Pendleton), from Union Street. 1894.—Morecambe, from Lancaster. 1895.—Woolton, from Liverpool (St. John’s). Tue New ConnexIon The origin of the New Connexion body, as the first schism within Methodism, has been already referred to. It originated from a desire to give to the lay element within Methodism equal rights of governance and repre- sentation in the administration of the church. That the polity of the new body ultimately took a Presbyterian shape, so that the New Connexion represents a Presbyterian Methodism as opposed to the Independent or Congregational Methodism of the United Free Churches on the one hand and to the hierarchical Methodism of the Wesleyans on the other, was inevitable from the underlying basis of the agitation itself. But the immedi- ately determining cause was probably the acquaintance which Alexander 87 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Kilham had made with the working of the Presbyterian principle when stationed at Aberdeen as a Wesleyan minister in 1793-4. The charges which at the time were fiercely brought against him of being a revolutionary, were due to the political excitement of an age pre-occupied by the meteor light of the French Revolution. Beyond the incidental part which Manchester played in being the scene of the drafting of the plan of pacification of 1795, Lancashire, asa county, has played no special or individual part in the history of the New Connexion, though it has always represented a very important element in the constitution of the body. ‘The secession in fact started not in Lancashire, but in York- shire during the meeting of the Wesleyan conference at Leeds in 1797, and the small body of fifteen clergymen and laymen who formed its nucleus met for the first time in Leeds. But two of the seven circuits which the seceders represented, viz. Liverpool and Manchester, were Lancashire circuits, and this relative proportion of strength has been since more than maintained. With the exception of the Barkerite secession in 1842 and the withdrawal of William Booth from the Connexion in 1861 (to start the work of the Salvation Army), the history of this church has been uneventful, and in Lancashire especially so, for neither of the last named events originated in it. Itis to be regretted that the want of a Connexional history makes it im- possible to trace the process of the growth of its circuits. The apathy of the body with regard to its own history is probably due to its stationary or declining vitality. At present, as far as Lancashire is concerned, it is organized as follows :— Liverpool District, comprising the Liverpool (two) and Southport Circuits, besides some Cheshire ones. Manchester District, containing the following Circuits—Manchester (two), Ashton, Bolton, Hurst, Mossley, Oldham, Rochdale, and two Cheshire ; together with three branches at Blackpool, Bury, and Morecambe, which are styled Home Mission Stations. Tue Primitive MEeErtTuHopists Historically and spiritually the Primitives represent by far the most noteworthy and interesting secession from the general Methodist body. As a church they may be said to have originated in 1811, in the union between the camp-meeting Methodists led by Hugh Bourne and the followers of William Clowes or the Clowesites ; although there were certain preparatory movements which had preceded it as early as 1799. As far as present polity is concerned the Primitives show the extremest revolt against the hierarchical system of Wesleyanism, for they have given preponderating influence to the lay as opposed to the clerical side of their organization. But in its origin the movement does not represent a polity secession. Its underlying basis is a revival of the original missionary spirit of Methodism, a return to the Primitive or original Methodism which preached in the fields and in the streets, and which only lost that primitive missionary zeal when it waxed fat and fell under the dominion of a clerical caste. Strictly speaking the camp meeting movement—open-air revivalist conventions held in camp meetings extending over several days—is more an American than an English institu- tion. For although Hugh Bourne held camp meetings on Mow Cop near 88 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY Burslem in 1801, the movement remained in abeyance until re-started in 1807 by the American meteor, Lorenzo Dow. From that moment it took root, the original centre being again Mow Cop. Unlike the other secessions which have convulsed Methodism the secession of the Primitives was never a Conference matter, but was dealt with by the inferior administrative court, the circuit quarterly meeting. In June, 1808, Hugh Bourne was expelled from the Wesleyan Connexion by the Burslem Circuit quarterly meeting, and in 1810 William Clowes was expelled by the same body. In both cases the alleged offence was the same, viz. attending and assisting the camp meetings. In 1811 the followers of these two men came together and started the new body, which on 13 February 1812, drew up its scheme of polity and adopted the name of Primitive Methodists. At the outset the movement was a Staffordshire one, and consisted of only one circuit, viz. Tunstall. But there was vitality in it, and during the middle period of its existence, 1811-43, it spread in successive waves over the whole of England. Working its way through the Midlands and York- shire it was not until 1820 that it entered Lancashire. In March of that year Thomas Jackson visited Manchester, and held the first meeting of the Primitives in a loft over a stable at Chorlton upon Medlock, somewhere about Brook Street, and also in a cottage in London Square, Bank Top. The meeting was subsequently moved to a room called the Long Room, in an old factory in Ancoats. In July a society was formed, in August Hugh Bourne preached in the town, and in September the first camp meeting in Lancashire was held on the Ashton Road. The result was an immense accession of numbers, and the society was compelled to open other rooms, one in New Islington and one in Chancery Lane. In 1821 the movement had spread to Ashton-under-Lyne. Samuel Waller, a Manchester cotton spinner, was sent to prison in that year for holding a meeting in the King’s highway at Ashton Cross. In the following year it reached Oldham, where the first camp meeting was held in May, 1822. By the time when in 1827 the conference of the body met in Manchester in Jersey Street Chapel (built in 1823-4), so much growth had ensued that it was decided to make Manchester the head of a circuit comprising Preston, Blackburn, and Clitheroe (which were taken from the North Lancashire Mission Branch of the Hull Church), and Liver- pool, Manchester, Oldham, and Bolton (which were separated from the Tunstall Circuit). During the four or five years following on the formation of this circuit a great expansion ensued in Manchester as a result of the determined street preaching or ‘remissioning’ led by Jonathan Ireland and Jonathan Heywood. A mission room in Oxford Road grew into the Rosamond Street chapel (now Moss Lane), which became the head of Manchester Second Circuit. Another, in Salford, opened originally in Dale Street, grew into the King Street chapel, 1844, now represented by Camp Street, Broughton. A third mission in Ashton Street, where now the London Road Station stands, grew into the Ogden Street chapel (1850), from which have sprung Manchester Fourth and Ninth stations. The growth was not confined to the limits of the town itself, for by 1832 the outer circle of the Manchester Constituency included Mosley Common, Walkden Moor, Middleton, Unsworth, and Stretford. 5 89 12 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE The cause at Bolton started contemporaneously with that of Manches- ter, and proceeded on parallel lines. Camp meetings were held in the town in 1821, and in the following year Bolton became a circuit. The chapel in Newport Street, built in 1822, moved in 1865 to Moor Lane, and is now the head of Bolton Second Circuit, leaving Higher Bridge Street chapel (built 1836), as the head of Bolton First Circuit. Bury was missioned in the same year as Bolton, 1821 (becoming an in- dependent station in 1836), as was also Ashton-under-Lyne, which, after being attached to the Oldham Circuit in 1825, became in 1838 the Staly- bridge Circuit. At Oldham, another strong centre of this church, camp meetings were first held in 1822, the impulse coming from Manchester. In 1862 the cause here was divided into two circuits: First, under Grosvenor Street chapel (now Boardman Street), and Second, under Lees Road (com- prising Lees, Bardsley, Waterhead, Elliott Street, Delft, and Hollinwood). In 1880 the last named, Hollinwood, became the head of Oldham Third Circuit. Rochdale was missioned in the same year, 1821, which saw the outburst of the Primitive movement in the greater part of south-east Lancashire. Its first meeting room of 1825 in Packer Meadow grew into Drake Street chapel in 1830. Rochdale remained part of the Manchester Circuit until 1837, when it became the head of a station. The mission wave which has been thus briefly described is to be regarded as proceeding from Tunstall, the original home of the Primitive movement. As distinct from this the evangelization of the Blackburn and Preston district was a Yorkshire movement. It was undertaken from the Craven district of the Hull mission of the Primitives. The work began in 1822 in the neigh- bourhood of Wigan. In 1823 Preston became a circuit, as did also Black- burn and Clitheroe (afterwards Burnley) in 1824. At Burnley the first chapel was built in 1834, in Curzon Street ; the second, Bethel,in 1852. In 1864, by subdivision from Burnley, Colne became Burnley second. From Burnley also sprang Haslingden in 1837, which in its turn gave birth, by division, to Foxhill Bank and Accrington in 1864. Preston was missioned comparatively later in the day, in 1829, and from Halton and Lancaster; but assuming greater importance it became the head, and Lancaster was only subsequently divided from it to form for a time part of the Settle and Halifax Circuit, but to become an independent circuit in 1868. This central constituency of the Lancashire Primitives is completed by Chorley (missioned in 1837), Hoole (missioned in 1824 from Preston), Southport (missioned from Hoole before 1833), and the Fylde (missioned from Preston in 1848). __The Liverpool church has a rather more composite and disputable origin. William Clowes himself preached in the streets there in 1812, and in 1821 John Rede was arrested for street preaching, but the actual inception of the church seems to date from the preaching of James Roles, who came from Preston in 1821. In the same year Maguire Street chapel was built, and Liverpool became a circuit two or three years later. But, comparatively speaking, the development in Liverpool is a late one. Mount Pleasant chapel (now Walnut Street) was not built till 1834, the Prince William Street and Seamen’s chapel not till later, and the Pentecost and Jubilee chapels not till 1860. go ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY Such a brief sketch of the mere ecclesiastical growth of Primitivism in Lancashire conveys very little idea of the social work of the church, for among all the forms of free churches in England this particular organization is honourably distinguished by its pioneer work in the cause of temperance reform. This phase of its work is closely identified with Lancashire, for James Stamp, the protagonist of that manly strife, ended his life at Teetotal Cottage in Deansgate, Manchester, and the first practical organized effort of the movement dates from the formation of the Preston Temperance Association in 1832. This denomination has now about sixty circuits in the county, including twelve in the Manchester district and five in Liverpool. Tue Unitep Meruopisr Free Cuurcu In turning to the United Methodist Free Churches we leave the breezy upland of the missionary and temperance propaganda of the Primitives to descend again to the chilly plain of theological strife. The basis of the United Free movement was that same protest against the close hierarchical polity of the Wesleyans which has accounted for most of the schisms from the parent church. Several constituent, and in their origin divergent, elements have gone to form the United Free Church. 1. The Arminian Methodists, who grew up in Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire, Leicester- shire, and at Redditch under Henry Breedon and others. 2. The Welsh Independent Methodists, who have a fragmentary history of their own. 3. The Wesleyan Methodist Association, which, after several incidental preliminary episodes—the fight about the establishment of an organ in Leeds Chapel in 1827, and the dispute in conference in 1835 about the proposed theological institute—was finally formed in August, 1836, at Manchester by Dr. Samuel Warren and Robert Eckett. The history of this schism has been already referred to in the account of Wesleyanism. At the formation of the association in 1836 the Protestant Metho- dists, who protested with Warren against itinerant ministers having such sole judicial administrative authority as the Wesleyan polity gave them, threw in their lot with it. 4. Wesleyan Reformers, a body formed in 1849 in consequence of the expulsion of James Everett, Samuel Dunn, and William Griffith from the Wesleyan Conference in consequence of their protest against Dr. Bunting’s pontifical administration of Methodism. The process of amalgamation of these different constituent elements was aslow one. The centre to which they gravitated was the Association. In 1837-9 the Arminian Methodists joined the latter, and the Independent Methodists of Wales threw in their lot in 1838. But it was not until 1854 that the question of union with the Wesleyan Reformers became practicable. The work was completed in 1857 at Rochdale, when the Association and the Reformers amalgamated, their foundation deed becoming the foundation deed of the United Methodist Free Churches. In the matter of polity this church represents the extremest revolt from the clerical bureaucracy of Wesleyanism. As opposed to the hierarchical system of that body, and the Presbyterian system of the New Connexion, the United Free typify the Congregational principle. The system of government is based upon the congregation, and the connexional principle is weak. Circuit independence is assured by making the circuit court supreme in circuit matters, and over this the union organization is a more or less loosely fitting cloak. gI A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Lancashire has played a decisive part both in the origin of the main constituent of this church and in the accomplishment of the final union. But in the want of a connexional history it is impossible to detail the progressive growth of the body in the county. The chronological course of circuit growth and subdivision is the only guide to that history. OTHER CHURCHES Many other religious organizations will be found at work in the county, such as the Irvingites, the Swedenborgians, ‘ Churches of Christ,’ Plymouth Brethren, and others. Non-christian bodies are also represented, as Mormons, Jews, and Mohammedans, but it is not possible to give their local history in this place. They have had no perceptible influence on the fortunes of religion in this county nor any distinctly organic connexion with the history of the county as a whole. Tue Roman CATHOLICS With the last of the Methodist bodies we bid adieu to the ultimate form of free church life in Lancashire. There remains, in order to complete the view of the religious history of the county, only the story of the two parent or original stems, the Roman Catholic and the Episcopal Churches. As to the former of these its history during the remainder of the seventeenth century, and through the whole of the eighteenth and part of the nineteenth is the history of a mission church lurking in secret with more or less of toleration or persecution according to the Auctuating spirit of the time. The mission side of Roman Catholic history has been already outlined, and until the separate history of these missions is given to the world? it is impossible to say more than that the majority of them survived all through the period of repression. How closely kept and secret they were is proved by the fact that when in 1669 a return of conventicles was furnished to Sheldon there is a reference to ‘ Papists’ only at Brindle (a weekly meeting), Oldham (a conventicle of Papists to the number of 20 or 30), Walton (a conventicle of Papists consisting of about the better part of 100 of divers qualities), Halsall (a meeting), North Meols (several Papists), Ormskirk, Altcar (many public meetings of Papists), Tunstal (several Papists), Claughton (about 20 Papists), and Kirkham (a conventical of Papists at Westhall, whither visibly and ordinarily resort some hundreds : another at Mowbrick: another at Plumpton: another at Salwick Hall, others at Singleton). A comparison of this meagre and merely skeleton list with the list of the Jesuit missions alone * will serve to show how comparatively ignorant the government was of the ramifications of the Roman Catholic missions in this county. In the absence, however, of reliable details as to the individual life of these missions through the eighteenth century we are obliged to content ourselves with the general account of the Roman Catholic organization of the county as a whole until the hierarchy was re-established in 1850. The Notes of some of them wi i : : Cath. Annual. Kelly, Hist. Dict. a eae i ee a ke gras oy Robert Smith of Nelson is about to publish a history of the Catholic missions in Salford Diocese ©! The list of 1701 shows twenty-five of these ; Foley, Rec. S.F. v, 320. 92 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY sacred congregation de propaganda fide, erected in 1622, divided the Roman Catholic mission world into thirteen provinces. The fifth of these, that of Belgium, included England, Scotland, and Ireland, as well as Denmark and Norway. Accordingly the rule of the archpriest in England was succeeded by that of the vicar-apostolic, the first of whom was William Bishop, bishop of Chalcedon. Bishop looked upon himself as an ordinary of the whole kingdom, and proceeded not only to divide England into portions, assigning an archdeacon to each, but also to the erection of a dean and chapter on his own authority (1623). The movement was bitterly opposed by the Jesuits in England and received no encouragement from Rome. While the Seculars (of whom in 1631 there were 500 as against 150 Jesuits and 100 Benedictines) desired the recognition of the dean and chapter and the appointment of a bishop, the Regulars fought against it simply in the selfish interests of their Orders. In the end the Jesuit contention prevailed and the pope decreed in 1627 that the vicar-apostolic of England was neither bishop of, nor even ordinary in, England. The limited rule of the vicars-apostolic, therefore, continued until the definitive establishment of the hierarchy. The decline of the Romanist cause, partly no doubt in consequence of this internecine strife, is witnessed by. the fact that in 1669 there were in England only 230 secular priests, 120 Jesuits, and eighty Benedictines, as compared with almost double that number in 1631. Whether this decline was equally marked in Lanca- shire or not we cannot say, but it would appear unlikely from the records of the vicar-apostolic John Leyburne. In 1687 he visited the northern counties to administer confirmation, and the recorded confirmations in Lancashire (3-21 September, 1687) number 8,958.” In 1688, in the hey-day of the Roman Catholic cause in England under James II, the Propaganda congregation, at the instance of the king, appointed three other vicars-apostolic to assist Leyburne with faculties like those of the old archpriest and similar to those enjoyed by ordinaries in their dioceses.“* The new northern vicariate comprised Lancashire, and the succession of vicars-apostolic for this district is complete from 1688. In 1773 Bishop Petre sent to the Propaganda statistics “* of his vicariate, which serve to show how relatively preponderating was the Roman Catholic interest in Lancashire as compared with the surrounding counties, thus : Residences Catholics Lancashire ‘ ‘ 69 14,000 Yorkshire : ; 36 1,500 “2 The details are as follows :—Leighton, 84; Lytham, 377; Myerscough Lodge, 439; Stonyhurst, 269 ; Preston and Tulketh, 1,153 ; Ladywell (Fernyhalgh), 1,099 ; Townley, 203 ; Euxton Chapel, 1,138 ; Wrightington, 464; Wigan, 1,332; Lostock, 86; Eccleston, 755 ; Garswood, 529; Croxteth, 1,030. It will be observed that the places named are nearly all in Amounderness, Leyland, and West Derby Hundreds. “3 The four vicariates thus established were the London, Midland, Northern, and Western districts. 4 1688-1711. James Smith, bishop of Callipolis i# partibus. In 1709 he visited Lancashire and informed Meynell at Paris that there was no Jansenism in the county. 1713-5. Silvester Jenks. 1716-25. George Witham, who worked himself to death by the labour of visiting the Roman Catholic houses in Lancashire. 1726-40. Thomas Dominic Williams, O.P. 1740-52. Edward Dicconson, of the Wright- ington family. He was buried at Standish. 1750-75. Francis Petre. He lived at Showley, near Ribchester, and was buried at Stidd chapel. 1775-80. William Walton, by birth a Manchester man. 1780-90. | Matthew Gibson. 1790-1821. William Gibson, brother to the preceding. 1821-31. Thomas Smith. His report to the Propaganda in Oct. 1830, gives a total of 82 stations in Lancashire. 1831-6. Thomas Penswick, a Lancashire man, born at the manor house, Ashton in Makerfield. 183 3-40. John Briggs. His report to Propaganda in Jan. 1839, gives Lancashire 95 stations and 160,000 Catholics. Brady, Epis. Succession, vol. iti. "5 Statistics compiled by the bishops of Chester show a great increase between 1717 and 1767, but this may have been due in great measure to concealment at the former period : Trans. Hist. Soc. (New Ser.), xviil. 93 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Bishop William Gibson’s report in 1804 gives proof of the great apparent increase of Roman Catholicism in the county within the preceding thirteen or fourteen years in consequence of the abolition of the penal laws. In Lancashire alone he had confirmed 8,000; the total number of Catholics in the county was nearly 50,000, and in Manchester alone there were 10,000, where fourteen years previously there had been scarce 600. He notes a similar growth in the Liverpool district, where thirty new chapels had been built within the same period. — In July, 1840, Pope Gregory XVI replaced the four vicariates by a fresh organization of eight vicariates, of which one took its name from the county. This Lancashire vicariate comprised also the Isle of Man and Cheshire. The first and (save for his coadjutor) the only vicar was George Brown, 1840-50, whose report to the Propaganda in 1841 gives a total for Lancashire of g2 chapels, 119 priests, 9,375 baptisms, 53,841 communicants, and 649 conversions. A long period of agitation preceded the definitive re-establishment of the hierarchy. That agitation was not caused by Catholic emancipation. It had lived, now smouldering, now fiercely burning, ever since the sixteenth century. All that Catholic emancipation did was to give added force to the agitation for it among the English Roman Catholics themselves. From 1838 this agitation had taken an intensely practical form. In that year the then existing four English vicars-apostolic drew up a scheme for the grant of ordinary episcopal government. The scheme was not immediately adopted. In its place, as a temporary makeshift, Gregory XVI decreed, as above described, the increase of the vicars-apostolic from four to eight. The disappointment caused by this makeshift led to the formation of a brother- hood in London (called the Adelphi), to agitate for the restoration of the hierarchy, and a long period of petitions and delegations to Rome ensued, coupled with abortive schemes for turning the vicariates, now into twelve bishoprics, now into eight, and soon. At last, in 1848, Ullathorne was sent to Rome, and succeeded in arranging an acceptable scheme. The issue of this scheme was only delayed from 1848 to 1850 by the revolution in Rome, but at last, on 2g September, 1850, the authorizing brief was issued. In accordance with the scheme two out of the total of thirteen bishoprics were erected in Lancashire, one with its seat at Liverpool, and covering Lonsdale, Amounderness, and West Derby Hundreds, and the Isle of Man; the other at Salford, covering Salford, Blackburn, and Leyland Hundreds. By a subsequent brief of date 27 June, 1851, Leyland was trans- ferred from Salford to Liverpool. This arrangement continues to the present time. The succession of bishops within these two sees has been as follows :<— LIvERPOOL 1850-6. George Brown, already vicar-apostolic of the Lancashire district. He was born at Clifton, near Preston, and his ministerial career was confined to the county. From 1850-1 he acted as administrator of Salford till the appointment of its first bishop. 1856-72. Alexander Goss; born at Ormskirk. He had acted as coadjutor to Brown since 1853. 1573-94. Bernard O’Reilly ; born in Ireland, he served the mission in Liverpool, distin- guishing himself by his devotion in the famine fever of 1847. 1894. Thomas Whiteside ; born at Lancaster of a local family. 94 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY ‘St. Nicholas Liverpool at present serves for a cathedral. The chapter consists of a provost and nine canons. The diocese is divided into thirteen deaneries: St. Thomas (Liverpool south), St. Edward (Liverpool north), Sacred Heart (Liverpool east), St. James (Waterloo), St. Joseph (Southport), St. Bede (Warrington), St. Mary (St. Helens), St. Oswald (Wigan), St. Gre- gory (Leyland), St. Augustine (Preston), St. Kentigern (Blackpool), St. Charles (Lancaster), St. Maughold (Isle of Man). Excluding the last-named there are in the diocese 326 secular priests, and 118 regular priests, who belong to five orders; the public churches and chapels number 177, and those of communities, &c., 61. SALFORD 1851-72. William Turner; born at Whittingham, near Preston. 1872-92. Herbert Vaughan ; afterwards archbishop and cardinal. 1892-1903. John Bilsborrow ; born at Singleton-in-the-Fylde. 1903. Louis Charles Casartelli ; born at Manchester. The diocese has a cathedral, St. John’s, at Salford, with a chapter consisting of provost and ten canons. There are twelve deaneries as follows : St. John (Salford), St. Augustine (Central Manchester), St. Patrick (North Manchester), St. Alban (Blackburn east), St. Peter (Bolton), St. Joseph (Rochdale), St. Mary (Oldham), St. Bede (South Manchester), St. Gregory (Burnley), St. Anne (Manchester), St. Cuthbert (Blackburn west), Mount Carmel (Bury). There are in all 139 public churches and chapels and 37 chapels of religious communities, &c. ; the secular priests number 237, and the regulars, of seven different orders, 84. Tue Cuurcu or ENGLAND In concluding this sketch of the religious history of Lancashire with a returning glance at the Episcopal Church, it is hardly to be expected that we should find in that Church the thousandfold incident and life that characterize Dissent and Free Church history. It is not so much that Dissent and Methodism took the vitality out of the Church of England—it may be that they put some vitality into it—but that the problem of life to an established church, with its existence comparatively unruffled by external pressure or internal schism, is a very much simpler one than that which awaits a mis- sionary church or a free church, whose very existence depends upon its own aggressive vitality. With the single exception of the Non-juring schism, represented by one or two small congregations under a bishop,“* none of the wider movements which ruffled the Church in the eighteenth century—the Bangorian Controversy, the Trinitarian and Deistic Controversy, the outburst of Evangelicalism—have any special bearing on Lancashire life, and find no special echo there. What little history the Church of England possesses in the county is limited to the personal history of the bishops of Chester and of the wardens of Manchester, and to the meagre story of parochial growth and subdivision and of church building. The nineteenth century, however, has more to tell. The enormous growth of population and wealth in the county has been reflected, not merely in an unprecedented outburst of church 86 Dr, Deacon of Manchester is the best known. 95 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE building and parochial subdivision, but also in the revision which it has necessitated in the ecclesiastical organization (see Appendix II). With this revision of ecclesiastical organization a new life began for the Established Church in the county. The creation of the diocese of Manchester in 1847 meant that possibilities of influence possessed by the Church, hitherto scattered and wasted in a diocese so vast as that of Chester, were now to be localized, concentrated, and organized. It was in this way that the Estab- lished Church, as well as the Nonconformist, could become a real factor in the life of the people. In the first few years under Dr. Prince Lee (1847-69) little progress was made, but in 1870 Dr. Fraser (1870-8 5) came to the diocese, and by his steady efforts and untiring energy, gave a new life to the Church both in active spirit and in organization. With later years under his successors, Dr. Moorhouse (1886-1903) and the present bishop, Dr. Arbuth- not Knox, the work of administration has so greatly increased, that two suffragan bishops have been appointed, one of them taking his title from Burnley. The beneficed clergy number 564, and the curates about 360. The latest phase of the ecclesiastical reorganization of the county was the creation of the new bishopric of Liverpool in 1880. Bishop Ryle (1880— 1g00) representing the Evangelical movement of the earlier years of the century found himself at the head of a comparatively homogeneous diocese. Dr. Chavasse succeeded to the bishopric on the death of Bishop Ryle, and within three years had set on foot the plan for a new cathedral to take the place of the parish church of St. Peter Liverpool, which had served as the pro-cathedral and episcopal seat since the foundation of the diocese. APPENDIX I 14 February, 1547-8; Pat. 2 Edw. VI, pt. 7, m. 13.—*‘ Commission to Sir Hugh Cholmeley, Sir William Brereton, John Arscott, James Sterkye, George Browne, Thomas Carewes, John Kechyn> Thomas Fleetwood, and William Leyton to survey what chantries, freechapels, brotherhoods, frater- nities and guilds, manors, lands, tenements and hereditaments in co. Chester, Lancashire and city of Chester ought to come to us by virtue of the Act 1 Edw. VI, and also the foundations, etc. of the same. . . Proceedings herein to be certified before the first of May next.’ The general returns for the country at large to be made into the Court of Augmentations at Westminster, but all returns relating to the Duchy to be certified into the Court of the Duchy of Lancaster at Westminster. 17 April, 1548; Acts of the P.C. ii, 184-6.—Sir Walter Myldmay and Robert Calway appointed Commissioners for the purpose of sale of £5,000 per annum of Chantry rents. Proclama- tion by the King, 14 May (Strype, Eccl. AZem. ili, 154); to prevent the: daily resort of chantry priests to London to the Court of Augmentations concerning their pensions commissioners shall repair shortly to every county to declare said pensions. 20 June, 1548; Pat. 2 Edw. VI, pt. 4, m. 33.—Commission to Sir Walter Mildmay and Robert Keylway to assign out of chantry lands to come to us pensions to Deans, etc., of colleges, incumbents, etc. of free chapels, etc. and stipendiary priests, etc., which shall be dissolved ; to assign lands, rents, etc. for thesupport of such grammar schools, preachers, vicars perpetual and hospitals as shall be appointed and finally for the maintenance of piers, jetties, walls or banks against the rage of the sea. In Strype, Eccl. Mem. ii (2), 402, is an account of the king’s sale of chantry lands in 1548 from King Edward’s book of sales 5 it contains inter alia a chantry in the parochial church of Kirkby, co. Lancaster; yearly value £6 155.; purchase price £148 10s. ; purchaser, Thomas Stanley. 15 October, 1552; Acts of the P.C. iv, 143.—Commissioners for sale of chantry lands to sell another £1,000 per annum worth thereof. 20 November, 1550; Duchy Commission Book, vol. 96, pp. 36-7.—Commission to enquire of chantry lands within the co. of Lancaster concealed from the king; also of chalices, vest- ments and other ornaments. Commissioners’ names: Thomas Carus, George Browne, Rauf 96 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY Assheton, Laurence Ireland, William Kenion, John Bradill, Laurence Raustorne, Richard Grenacres Laurence Lees. Undated commission (? between 28 May and 3 June, 1552); Duchy records, Commission Book, vol. 96, p.59.—Commission to enquire of lands, &c., stocks of kine, sheep, money, &c., which ought to have come to the king but are concealed or embezzled in cos. Lancs. and Stafford. | Commissioners’ names: Richard Woodward, Leonard Stephenson, Christopher Butler, John Smith junr., William Radclif, Marck Woorsly. Undated commission for the survey of church goods (? between 29 June and 24 November, 1552); Duchy records, Commission Book, vol. 96, p. 56.—‘To the earl of Derby, Sir Thomas Stanley, Lord Mounteagle, Sir Thomas Gerrard, Sir Edmunde Trayforde, Sir John Atherton, Sir Thomas Holte, Sir Richard Houghton, Sir Marmaduke Tunstall, Sir John Holcrofte, Thomas Carus vice-chancellor of the co. Palatine of Lancs., George Browne, the General Attorney there, Thomes Butler, Rauf Assheton, John Preston, Thomas Barton, John Grymediche, Hugh Anderton, John Wrightington, John Bradell, and the mayor and bailiffs of the towns of Wigan, Liverpool, Lancaster and Preston. We have at sundry times heretofore by our special commission and other- wise commanded a survey of all manner goods, plate, jewels, vestments, bells and ornaments within every parish belonging to any church, chapel, brotherhood, guild or fraternity within England, and thereupon surveys were made and inventories taken of which one copy remains with the Custos Rotulorum, the other with the churchwardens concerned ; yet we are informed that some part of the said goods are embezzled or removed.’ This enquiry is ordered for the county of Lancaster, and applies to parish churches as well as chapels. See also Strype, Ecc/. Mem. ii, 208. 24 November, 1552; Duchy records, Commission Book, vol. 96, p. 56.—Commission to enquire of the possessions of two (chantry) priests one in Brindle, the other in Chorley. Directed to William Charnock, John Charnock, Roger Charnock and Edward Houghton. 28 November, 1552; ibid. 57-8.—Commission to inquire of chantry lands, stocks of kine, &c. in co. Lancs. and forest of Bowland. Directed to Francis Frobisher, Thomas Carus, Rauf Greenacres, Edmund Assheton, Richard Breche, John Bradell, John Rigmayden, senr., William Kenear [Kenyon], William Mallet, Robert Shawe. ‘The preamble recites the commission of 20 November, 1550 (ut supra), and says that the commissioners therein had made certificates thereupon of more lands, bells, chalices, plate, jewels, stocks of kine, money, &c., not previously certified, and that some of said commissioners inform that there yet remain more such like still uncertified. Ibid. p. 67 (undated, but of same date doubtless)—An injunction to every body possessing such things as above to deliver them to the said abovesaid commissioners. 10 November, 1552; ibid. 5g-60.—Commission to inquire of chantry lands, &c. Directed to Sir Thomas Gerrard, Sir Richard Shirburne, Thomas Carus, Randall Manwering, Edmond Trafford, Milles Gerrard, Francis Bolde, John Norbery and John Cowper. Recites the commission ut supra (between 28 May and 8 June) on which the commissioners therein had made certificate before Michaelmas last returning divers lands, bells, chalices, plate, ‘joyelles,’ stocks of kine, money, ornaments, &c. previously omitted and uncertified, and that more remain uncertified by reason that they had not time for full inquiry ; therefore the said further inquiry is to be now made. ‘And you are to take the said things into your possession and deliver them to Edward Parker to the King’s use, but leaving one chalice or cup and one bell in each chapel of ease for the performance of divine service.” Ibid. p. 60, 12 December, 1552.—Command to everybody possessing chalices, bells, etc. to deliver them to the abovesaid commissioners. 7 May, 1553; ibid. 71.—A letter from the king about the lands given to a stipendiary priest in ‘Rufforth’ chapel. 2 March, 1552-3; ibid. 71.—Commission to inquire as to a chantry in Prestwich church called Walworth chantry informed about by Sir Thomas Holte, to which information Trustram Howlyng has made answer. Directed to Thomas Holte, William Mallet, Nicholas Savell and Robert Waterhowse. 20 June, 1553; ibid. 72-4.—Commission for the survey of chantry lands, tenements, stocks of kine &c. in co. Lancs. and Yorks. Directed to John Arscott the king’s surveyor, Thomas Carus, Francis Samwell, Hugh Seyvell, Edmond Asshton, William Mallet, Rycherd Ratclyff, William Kenyon, and Robert Shaw.’ The preamble recites a commission, which has not survived, to Thomas Carus, William Mallet, Edmond Asshton, John Rigmayden, William Kenyon, and Robert Shaw to inquire as above ; to which they had made due return by certificate not only of lands, &c. hitherto omitted, but also of unanswered improvements of the king’s waste, but did not make a perfect execution of said commission for want of convenient time. ‘You are therefore to enquire of the above and receive them into your possession and to make sale of all copes, vestments, or ornaments mentioned in said commissioners’ schedule to the king’s use and to deliver the proceeds thereof and the remains of said goods, cattells, jewels, chalices, plate, bells, ornaments &c. to John Bradyll ; leaving one chalice or cup and one bell in every chapel of ease. 2 97 13 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE 29 October, 1553; -fets of the P. C. iv, 360.—Council letter to the earl of Derby and other the commissioners tor church goods in Lancashire to restore the same goods to the churches from whence the same were reece is se ee ree ee ee ebruary, 1553-4 3 Duchy records, Commission Book, vol. 90, p. 91-— PN ee fe pane i. chantries and such like. Directed to Sir Richard Shirborne, George Browne, and John Bradyll. The preamble recites the commission (ut supra) of 10 No- vember 7 [sic, erratum for 6] Edward VI and states that the therein named Edward Parker upon his accompt taken of the premises has made surmise to the Chancellor of the Duchy of divers bells supposed to be delivered to his hands that of truth have never been so answered, but the same do yet remain in the said parishes where they were before the said commission, the parishioners refusing to deliver same. ‘ You are therefore to enquire hereof.’ 20 May, 1554; ibid. 108.—Commission to inquire of lands Xc. in Cheshire, Lancashire, and Staffordshire belonzing to chantries Xc. which should have come to Edw. VI and to us but are informed of by George Yonge as concealed, detained and withdrawn from us and that we are not answered thereof which is like to grow to our losse and disinheritance if remedy be not thereof provided. Directed to Sir John Savage, Sir Edward Aston, Sir John Warberton, Sir John Holcrofte, Thomas Charnock, Francis Bold, Roger Charnocke, Edward Parker, William Kenyon, and John Taillor. : 7 June, 15545 ibid. 97—Commission to survey all Duchy lands rents, &e. belonging to any colleze, chantry, guild, or such like in Lancashire and other counties. Directed to Sir Thomas Talbott, Sir William Wygston, Sir John Copledyke, Sir Robert Tyrwhit, John Beaumont, William Faunte, Thomas Carus, John Purvey, Francis Samwall, Clement Agarde, Rychard Blackwall, Thomas Seton, John Polesland. 7 December, 1554; ibid. 101.—Commission to enquire of lands belonging to chantries and such like in Lancashire, Cheshire, and Staffordshire. Directed to Sir John Warberton, Sir Richard Sherburne, George Irelonde, Thomas Charnock, Francis Bolde, Roger Charnock, Gylbert Parker, John Norbery. The preamble recites that information is given to the Chancellor of the Duchy that divers lands Xc, belonging to sundry colleges, free chapels and such like in said counties ‘are concealed and withdrawn from the crown and we not minding to suffer such loss and disherison appoint you to survey and search as to such premises which we ought to have in the right of our Duchy or by reason of the Act 1 Edward VI for dissolution of colleges.’ 26 November, 1554; ibid. 1045.—Commission to enquire concerning the late chantry of our Lady in the chapel of Farnworth as in the bill of complaint of Richard Bolde of Bold. Directed to Sir John Atherton, Sir John Holcrofte senr, Sir Robert Worsley, and Richard Gerrard clerk. 21 May, and 2 August, 1555; ibid. pp. 122 and 152.—Commissions to enquire of stocks of kine, plate Xc. of the late free chapel of Farnworth. Directed to Richard Bolde, and Miles Gerrarde. To enquire of same and to deliver same to the churchwardens there, it being appointed a chapel of ease. Undated (1554 or 1555); ibid. 127.—Commission to inquire of the lands given for the maintenance of a lamp in Tunstall church which had been certified in the late certificate of colleges, chantries Xc. Directed to Thomas Carus, George Browne, John Kechyn, and John Bradyll deputy receiver of our ancient possessions of the Duchy of Lancaster. Undated (? between 15 October and 16 November, 1555); ibid. pp. 138~9.—Commission to inquire of chantry lands concealed in co. Lancaster which ought to have come to the hands of Henry VIII or Edward VI and did not. Directed to Sir Thomas Talbot, Thomas Charus, John Beamount, Thomas Chernocke, and Raf Agard. 8 August, 1557; ibid. 168.—Commission to inquire of certain concealments of chantry lands in Lancashire and Yorkshire which ought of right to come to us either in the right of our Duchy or by the Act of 1 Edward VI and of the lands and stocks &c. of the chantry called Bolles chantry in the chapel of Farnworth in the parish of Prescot, &c. Directed to Sir William Molynex, Thomas Eccleston, Peter Anderton, William Chorley, Thomas Ashall, Thomas Assheton, . : Heyton, George Hough, Peter Charnock, Christof Anderton, Christof Mathew. 98 a8 qodpors k Se iissem O 4 jp Z | Hl suapeHas P ieed Aajsmouy 2 N oO aie, lem 4 vi | weg binegim IID y eed dg ae f ( | ee 3 Kaissomd J Aopen ys Yy | ea Ce IPUT HY j “Tz ‘¢ Aweypio @] SO cusiion sch y ’ ued 5 3 SUM teen ee, eng MADR b& ° Ss scyhoy . * eal es e YIIMSOH ee : : aoe "Voces ae fe 4 ZL °.. eo POETS. is or wEnaasang es eet a 4 ee cs ee re \ ee \ ; aoa = % Pe 244, s g | 2woregsuey } 4 = ss NS hi \ I jfrmcsa7 i 7 ugysce ( > qwaeay ne ae ; oe ja ee ao “SasnoH snoli9gnsay jo “aouesasay dVW 1V9ILSVIS31999 ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY APPENDIX II ECCLESIASTICAL DIVISIONS OF THE COUNTY Until the tenth century the churches of the present county were under the jurisdiction of the bishops and archbishops of York; from that date down to the Reformation those south of the Ribble were included in the diocese of Lichfield and province of Canterbury ; those north of that river remaining in the diocese and province of York. On the creation of archdeaconries they were respectively assigned to the jurisdiction of the archdeacons of Chester and Richmond. Henry VIII united them in 1541, with the rest of the two archdeaconries, in the new diocese of Chester, which on at first to the province of Canterbury, but transferred almost immediately to that of ork. The original number and limits of the rural deaneries are uncertain. In the diocese of Lichfield one Jordan occurs as dean of Manchester during the years 1178-96 ;? there is a record of proceedings in the chapter of Warrington early in the thirteenth century,” and about the same time or earlier a decision professing to be given by the chapter of Blackburn.? ‘The fact that the proceedings in the former case related to the chapel of Samlesbury, which was afterwards in the deanery of Blackburn, and that the decision in the latter was reported to the archdeacon by Priory of Penwortham, 112. * Ibid. p. lxix. > Lancs. Pipe R. 375. * Ibid. 411; Priory of Penwortham, p. xl. The editor of the latter makes Robert of Appleton precede William. Robert of Appleton,*? occurs between 1194 and 1207 Adam Sortes,! appointed 1207, resigned or withdrawn 1213 Roger Norris, appointed 27 November, 1213, removed about April, 1214, reappointed 1218, died 19 July, 1223 John # Thomas of Gloucester,‘ elected abbot of Evesham 1243 Philip of Neldesle * Walter of Walcote,*® occurs between 1282 and 1316 Ralph of Wilcote,*? occurs April, 1320 Thomas of Blockley,*® occurs May, 1321 Ralph of Wilcote,*® occurs 1332 and 1341 Ralph of Whately,® occurs 1350 Roger,®! occurs 1371 William of Merston,” occurs 1383 Thomas Newbold, occurs 1385 John of Gloucester, occurs 1397 [Thomas,” occurs 1399] John of Gloucester, occurs 1409 Thomas Hanford,” occurs 1422 John Power,®® occurs 1472 John Staunton, occurs 14.77 Robert Yatton,® occurs 1502 James Shrokinerton,® 1507 Robert Yatton,” occurs 1509 Richard Hawkesbury,® appointed 1515 or 1516, withdrawn before 1539 © Thid. “ Chron. Evesham, 224, 253. “ Thid. 251, 253 ; Priory of Penwortham, 89. © Reg. of Burscough, fol. 53. Prior John witnesses a grant made by Elias de Hutton (living 1226) and his wife Sapiencia, along with Robert Bussel, Robert son of Elias, Walter de Hoole and others. “Dugdale, Mon. ii, 6. He died 15 December, 1255. ** Priory of Penwortham, 53. Mentioned as a former prior in an Evesham charter executed between 1282 and 1316. ““ Ibid. 28. “ Tbid. 21. Ibid. 22. “Ibid. 54, 973; Cal. of Pat. 1330-4, p. 244. Doubtless a second term of office. ” Priory of Penwortham, 55. * Coram Rege R. 442, m. 24 d. ? Priory of Penwortham, 56. * Ibid. 57. * Ibid. 58. ” Cal. of Pap. Letters, v, 190. A papal provision, which may possibly not have been carried into effect. * Priory of Penwortham, 59. * Ibid. 60. A prior Thomas, perhaps the same, occurs 1436-7 (Final Concords, iii, 127). * Priory of Penwortham, 61. ® Tbid. 62. ” Ibid. 65. §! Ibid. 67. * Ibid. 69. A second term apparently. “Ibid. 71, 82. Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 5, No. 15. He seems to have held the office continuously until its extinction. 106 RELIGIOUS HOUSES 2. THE PRIORY OF LYTHAM The Benedictine priory of Lytham was founded between 1189 and 1194, during John count of Mortain’s tenure of the honour of Lancaster, by his knight, Richard son of Roger, of Wood- plumpton in Amounderness. Count John gave his licence to alienate the vill of Lytham, assessed at two plough-lands, to any religious he pleased in free alms, undertaking to remit its thegnage rent of 8s. 10d. Richard seems at first to have contemplated the establishment of an indepen- dent house with the help of one of the two great abbeys which had interests in his neighbourhood, Shrewsbury, the patrons of Kirkham church, and Evesham, the owners of a cell at Penwor- tham. Apparently he applied to each in turn, for two documents are extant in one of which Hugh, abbot of Shrewsbury, agrees to send his monk Robert de Stafford, as head of the new house, without founding thereon any claim to subjection,® while in the other Roger Norris, abbot of Evesham (1191-1213), accedes to a request that his ‘ familiaris’ William should ‘order (ordinare) the place called Lytham given to religion’ and institute there Benedictine brethren. But the idea of an independent house was soon abandoned in favour of the creation of a cell dependent on the priory of Durham. A certain religious connexion already existed between Ly- tham and Durham. The ancestors of Richard son of Roger, who built Lytham church, dedi- cated it to St. Cuthbert, and it is the scene of several of the twelfth-century miracles ascribed to the saint by the hagiographer Reginald of Coldingham.” Richard himself, when apparently sick unto death and carried into the church to die, marvellously recovered, and the life of his infant son was preserved in the same way. On both occasions he is said to have gone to Durham to return thanks, and Reginald professes to have had the story from his own lips. Doubtless he embellished it, but gratitude may have been among the motives which finally determined Richard to give the whole vill of Lytham with its church to ‘God and St. Mary and St. Cuth- bert and the monks of Durham’ for the founda- tion of a cell whose priors and monks were to be * Original charter in Durham Cathedral Treasury, 2a, 4ae, Ebor. No. 20; Farrer, Lancs. Ing. i, 46. ° Lytham charters at Durham, 2a, 4ae, Ebor No.11. 8 Tbid. 2a, 2ae, 4ae, No. 63. * Reginald of Durham, Lide/lus (Surtees Soc. i), 280-4. Richard’s grandfather Ravenkil is said to have pulled down the original wooden church and built a new one of stone; ibid. 282. He may perhaps be the Ravenkil son of Ragnald who witnessed the founda- tion charter of Lancaster Priory (¢. 1094); Lancs. Pipe R. 290. Reginald, utsupra. The son, however, must have died later, for Richard had only daughters surviving when he founded the priory. appointed and removable by the prior and convent of the mother house. His charter, granted between 1191 and 1194,” survives in two versions; the shorter and evidently the earlier form contains a very imper- fect description of the boundaries of the town- ship and no warranty clause. In the fuller version these defects are remedied.” Charters of confirmation were obtained from the founder’s two married daughters, Maud and Avice, with their husbands, Robert de Stockport and William de Millom, and a similar confirmation was exe- cuted jointly by his three unmarried daughters, Margaret, Quenild, and Amuria.”! Shortly after the accession of John, the founder added half a plough-land in Carleton to his en- dowment.” He died before 26 February, 1201, when the king, at the instance of his son-in-law, Robert de Stockport, confirmed his charter made when count of Mortain.% Roger of St. Ed- mund, archdeacon of Richmond, confirmed Richard’s foundation charter.” The founder’s widow, Margaret Banaster, gave the church of Appleby in Leicestershire to the Lytham monks,” but their right to the advowson was frequently disputed by the Vernon and Appleby families. In 1265-6, in 1288, and again in 1325, the king’s court decided in their favour,”® yet forty years later a rector presented by Sir Richard de Vernon was in possession.” Durham procured from Pope Innocent VI a bull appropriating the rectory, the net profits being estimated at £5, to their college at Oxford, and ®° After Roger Norris became abbot of Evesham (see above) and before the count of Mortain lost the honour of Lancaster. 7 The originals of both are among the fine collec- tion of Lytham charters at Durham. The revised version is classed 2a, zae, 4ae, Ebor. No. 57. It is printed from an inspeximus of 9 Edw. III in the Monasticon (iv, 282), and in Lancs. Pipe R. 346. The shorter version, which has the same witnesses, is pre- served in two originals classed 2a, 4ae, Ebor, No. 2, and 2a, 2ae, 4ae, No. 58. ‘They are identical in wording except for the omission from the ‘salute’ clause in the latter of et wxoris mee. As these words are also absent in the revised version, this was clearly made from the second of the two. The Lytham charters are being edited for the Chetham Society by Mr. Farrer. ™ Lytham Charters, 2a, 2ae, 4ae, Ebor. 59-61. ® Tbid. 2a, 4ae, Ebor. 3. 73 Chart. R. (Rec. Com.), 884. ™ Lytham Charters, za, 4ae, Ebor. 8. No. g is a grant to Durham of the church of Lytham ‘in usus proprios,’ for the sustentation of their monks living there, by Morgan, archdeacon of Richmond. No holder of the office of this name is otherwise known. Can it be an error of transcription for Honorius, the rival of Roger of St. Edmund? © Before 1226; Lytham Charters, 3a, 4ae, Ebor. 1, 2, 4-6. 7 Ibid. 2a, 4ae, Ebor. 51; 3a, 4ae, Ebor. 3. 7 Ibid. 26. 107 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE between 1364 and 1366 tried to buy out the rival claims ; the presentation of the vicar was reserved for the prior of Lytham.” The scheme broke down, however, and though the priors of Lytham presented rectors as late as 1422-5,” a compromise seems to have been subsequently arranged by which they resigned the patronage to the Vernons on payment of an annual pension of 135. 4d. from the church. The right of Durham Priory to the cell of Lytham itself was impugned, in 1243, by the abbot and monks of Evesham, who alleged that they had been in peaceful possession of the said cell by William of Lytham, their fellow monk, but that the prior and convent of Durham and Roger their monk usurped their just claim.“ The claim was prob- ably based upon Richard son of Roger’s arrange- ment with Abbot Roger of Evesham, already mentioned. Papal delegates induced Evesham, in 1245, to withdraw it, but Durham agreed to pay her 30 marks.®? his condition remaining unfulfilled the claim was reasserted in 1272, and two years afterwards delegates appointed by Gregory X enforced payment of the money and enjoined silence upon Evesham.® Disputed rights of pasture on the borders of Lytham brought the monks into conflict with their neighbours, the Butlers of Lytham,® the Beethams of Bryning and Kellamergh,™ and the Cliftons of Westby. In 1320 Prior Roger of Tynemouth complained to the earl of Lancaster that William de Clifton had invaded the priory with 200 armed men, rescued some impounded cattle, done damage to the amount of £100 and put him in fear of his life so that he dare not stir abroad.® Prior Roger’s relations with his superior at Durham were also strained. He was charged with oppressing the tenants and selling the stock to maintain an excessive household.” But times were bad ; Scottish raids had so reduced the value of the Lytham temporalities that they were rated for the tenth at £2 only, instead of £11 6s. 2d., the assessment of 1292.8 Durham itself was in difficulties and giving its creditors a lien on the revenues of its cells,®° so that possibly Roger was not wholly to blame. * Lytham Charters, 13-22, 26, 28; 4a, 4ae, Ebor. 4. Ibid. 2a, 2ae, 4ae, Ebor. 70. © Before 1493 (ibid. 27 ; cf. 2a, 4ae, 43). “Ibid. 2a, 4ae, Ebor. 15, 26. * Ibid. ‘* Tbid. 13, 15 ; Cartularium tertium, fol. 1326. “ Lytham Charters, 2a, 4ae, Ebor. 14, 24. * Ibid. 48. “ Ibid. 46 ; 4a, 4ae, Ebor. 7. * Dur. Misc. Chart. 5315, 5470, 5484, 5561-2. S Pope Nich. Tax. (Rec. Com.), 309. Comparison with the ‘compoti’ rolls shows that the rating of tem- poralities in 1292 allowed a liberal deduction from full value. * Dur. Misc. Chart. 5560. The priors sometimes rebelled against the complete subjection to the mother house upon which the founder had insisted. They were merely the agents of the convent of Durham,” and had to attend the general chapter there at Whitsuntide, bringing with them an inventory of the goods of the cell and a balance sheet for the year.’ Although instituted by the arch- deacon of Richmond,” and owing canonical obedience to him for the appropriated church of Lytham, discharging its burdens and ministering to the parishioners either in their own person or (usually) by one or two secular chaplains, they were liable to be recalled at any moment.” It was alleged that the frequent changes in the head- ship of the priory did it injury; that they were sometimes arbitrary is shown by the case of Richard of Hutton. Richard was sub-prior of Durham when Hugh of Darlington became prior in 1285, and having offended him was sent to Lytham as prior, only to be removed as soon as he began to make his mark there.** Robert of Kelloe, who became prior of Lytham in 1351, procured a papal bull some ten years later exempt- ing him from being removed from the office during his life without good cause shown. But he was compelled to renounce it and return to Durham.” About eighty years later Prior William Partrik procured a similar bull from Eugenius III, and royal letters patent condoning his action.” The reservation, however, of power to remove him for sufficient cause afforded a loophole of which his superiors took advantage. They ac- cused him of non-attendance at the general chapter, of omission to pay any contribution (collecta) to the mother house for two years, and of having set upon the bearer of their letter of * The title of warden (custos) which more clearly indicated this subordination was occasionally applied to them. In 1292 the prior being summoned to show by what warrant he claimed to have wreck of the sea at Lytham fell back on the authority of the prior of Durham, ‘who could remove him,’ but having pre- viously claimed the right in his own name was decided to be ‘in mercy’ ; Dugdale, Mon. iv, 282. *' Dur, Chart. Locellus, ix, No. 63 ; Hist. Dunelm. Scriptores Tres. (Surtees Soc.), App. p. xl. 133 of these ‘compoti’ rolls are preserved at Durham, forming a fairly complete series from the beginning of the thir- teenth century to the Dissolution. “ Lytham Charters, 3a, 4ae, Ebor. 31; 2a, 2ae, 4ae, Ebor. 76. * Ibid 2a, 4ae, Ebor, 18, 33, 40. This was con- trary to the usual practice. Normally, a prior insti- tuted by the ordinary could not be removed except for grave reasons, approved by him; Priory of Pen- wortham (Chet. Soc.), 99. The reason why the priors of Lytham were so instituted, while those of Pen- wortham never were, is probably to be found in the disinclination of the convent of Durham to be bound to canonical obedience to the archdeacon of Richmond. “ Hist. Dun. Script. Tres. 72. * Lytham Charters, 2a, 4ae, Ebor. 29. * Dugdale, Mon. iv, 282. 108 RELIGIOUS HOUSES admonition armed men, who threatened to make him eat it cum pixide.” On these grounds he was deposed, the prior and convent formally dis- claiming any intention of violating the writings granted to the said William by the Holy See or the crown.® The papal privilege was in any case personal to Partrik and did not, as Canon Raines asserts, secure life-tenure to his successors. With this exception the known history of the priory during the fifteenth century and down to the Dissolution was uneventful. It seems to have felt to some extent the effects of the anarchy of the reign of Henry VI. In 1425 certain persons unknown were threatened with excommunication for having destroyed and detained its property and withheld the tithes and mortuaries due to the church of Lytham. Twenty-three years later the services of Thomas Harrington, son of Sir James Harrington, had to be requisitioned to secure the recovery of a number of Lytham charters from one Christopher Bayne, into whose custody they came during a vacancy of the priorship. Bayne professed to have been offered by certain interested persons 100 marks and a large pension, and Har- rington tried to counteract the temptation by promising him for life an annual suit (toga) of the prior’s livery, and a pension of half a mark along with the favour of the priory for himself and a living for one of his servants ; }°! with what result is not recorded. The infection of disorder seems to have found entrance into the priory itself. About the same time a local justice of the peace requested the prior of Durham to recall Dan George his monk, who had been ryght mekill mysrewlet and mysgovernet and yet is in speciall in fightyng and strikyng of seculares and also in schrowet countenance makyng to Dan Thomas and to the priest of Lethum in drawyng of his knyves and lyftyng up of staves likely for to sle or mayne and hayme.’” The priors did not always refrain from worldly business. In 1472, Nicholas Bedall of Coventry, chapman, appointed Prior Cuthbert his attorney, to recover his debts in Lancashire.% Litigation arising out of the landed interests of the house still played a part in its annals. In 1428 the authority of Rome was invoked in a quarrel over tithes with the Cistercian abbey of Vale Royal, ” Dur. Chart. Loc. ix, 63. % Ibid. 64. The archdeacon of Richmond ordered an inquiry into the circumstances and temporarily sequestrated the goods of the cell. Heley the new prior was excommunicated for non-appearance, and did not receive institution for nearly a year ; Raines’ Lancs. MSS. (Chetham Library), xxii, 374—-5. °° Notitia Cestriensis (Chet. Soc.), 575. Dur. Chart. Loc. ix, 15. | Lytham Charters, 2a, 2ae, 4ae, Ebor. 65. 10? Dur. Chart. Loc. xxv, 39. "3 Lytham Charters, 2a, 2ae, 4ae, Ebor. 71. which had secured an appropriation of Kirkham church in the reign of Edward I.’ Fresh disputes with the Cliftons as to the boundaries of Westby and Lytham were settled in 1§07,!% and in 1518 and 1530 the priory was again at law with the Butlers of Layton over the old question of pasture rights at the north end of Lytham.!% On g May, 1530, the Layton people pulled down a boundary cross bearing a picture of St. Cuthbert and, according to the prior, though some denied this, would have destroyed the monastery, had not two monks gone out to meet them with the sacrament. Between 1535 and 1540 the prior and convent of Durham withdrew the monks from Lytham and let the property of the cell to Thomas Dan- net for eighty years at a rent of £48 195. 6d.” If this was an attempt to avert confiscation, it failed, for after the surrender of Durham Dannet paid his rent to the crown until Queen Mary on 23 July, 1554, gave the cell to that devourer of monastic lands, Sir Thomas Hol- croft, kt. The priory was dedicated to St. Cuthbert. Endowed by the founder with two plough-lands in Lytham and half a plough-land in Carleton it had received from other local families, mainly in the thirteenth century, numerous small parcels of land in the adjoining townships. Prominent among these benefactors were the Butlers of Warton. Its rent-roll in 1535 was £35 55. 74. and the site of the cell with its demesne land, estimated to be worth £8 135. a year, brought up its temporalities to a total of £43 8s. 74. The tithes! and offerings of Lytham church yielded £9 135. 11d.a year, and that of Appleby paid a pension of 135. 4d. After deducting the fees of the priory bailiffs and of its steward, the earl of Derby, who received £2 annually, a sum of £48 19s. 6d. remained available for the up- keep of the cell and any contribution to the mother house which this might allow. The priory, however, had a debt of £40.12 Two centuries earlier the gross income had been rather higher. In 1344 it reached £66 8s. 113d.) The expenditure was £61 85. 4d. Among its items were £1 65. 9d. for the journey of the prior and perhaps one or more of the monks to Tbid. 69. % Dur. Misc. Chart. 5489. 16 Lytham Charters, 2a, 2ae, 4ae, Ebor. 78 ; Lancs. Plead. (Rec. Soc.), i, 206. 107 Dugdale, Mon. iv, 283. 108 Tbid. 109 Charters in the collection at Durham. "N° 'Tithes of sea fish amounted to £1. ™ Valor Eccl. (Rec. Com.), v, 305. It will be noted that as Dannet the farmer had to defray all charges (though these were reduced by the recall of the monks) and pay £48 19s. 6d. to Durham, he cannot have made any profit without raising the income above the figure of 1535. "? L. and P. Hen. VIII, x, 364. "3 Compotus R. at Durham. 109 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE the general chapter at Durham, £3 135. 6d. on Lytham church (including the stipend of the chaplain), £4 10s. to three monks pro rebus ordi- natis,4 {10 on the kitchen, £3 95. 3d. on robes at Christmas for the steward and servants, £3 8s. 4d. on wages, and £6 135. 10d. in con- tributions towards the support of monks at Oxford and other gifts. The small balance was reduced by arrears to 145. 33d. Priors (or Warpens) oF LyTHAM William," occurs after 1205 and before 1226 [John,"* occurs before 1233] {Helias,"” occurs after 1205 and before 1240] Roger,'”® occurs after 1217 and before 1249 Thomas," occurs 1250 Clement,” occurs before 1258 Stephen of Durham,'! occurs January, 1259, and February, 1272 Richard of Hutton,’ occurs between 1285 and 1288 Ambrose of Bamborough,’ occurs 1288 Henry of Faceby (Faysceby),’™ occurs 1291 14 Robert of Ditchburn,!* occurs 1307 Hugh Woodburn,”® occurs 1310-11 Roger of Stanhope \*” Roger of Tynemouth,” occurs 1316-25 '4@ The number of monks (in addition to the prior) seems to have been usually two or three. In 1307 there was only one, if we may argue from Prior Ditch- burn’s grant of land ‘with the assent of his confrater, Geoffrey de Lincoln’ ; Misc. Chart. 5456. "® Lytham Chart. 2a, gae, Ebor. 51. The order of the priors before Stephen is to some extent con- jectural. "8 Perhaps a doubtful case. John, clerk of Kirk- ham, who witnesses a Lytham charter belonging to 1228-33 (ibid. 4a, 2ae, 4ae, Ebor. 2), is described as ‘condam (i.e. quondam) custode.’ "7 Ibid. 12 (witnessed by Helias Prior). But it is not clear whether he was a prior of Lytham or of Cockersand, whose abbot Hereward is the previous witness. "* Ibid. 3a, 2ae, gae, Ebor. 45 ; Dur. Misc. Chart. 5445. "9 Exch. Aug. Of. Misc. Bks. vol. 40, No. 6. 0 Lytham Chart. 2a, 2ae, 4ae, Ebor. 5. 1 Ibid. 36; 2a, 4ae, Ebor. 143 ta, zae, Ebor. 12. " Robt. de Graystanes, Hist. (Surtees Soc.), 72. "3 Lytham Chart. 1a, 2ae, 4ae, Ebor. 51. Ambrose is mentioned as a past warden (custos) in a deed dated Sept. 1296, Dur. Misc. Chart. 3668. '* Lytham Chart. 1a, 2ae, 4ae, Ebor. 13. We Assize R. 407, m. 3. ”8 Dur. Misc. Chart. 5456. 46 Compotus (Status) R. “" Tbid. for year 1338-9: ‘Debt to King for chattels of Henry Bol fugitive of the time of Sir Roger de Stanhope, 53s. 1¢. To same for chattels of John de Blauncheland of the time of Roger de Tynemouth, 125.’ *® Dur. Locellus xvi, 1; Lytham Chart. 4a, 4ae, Ebor. 1. 4ae, John of Barnby,' occurs 20 March, 1332, left 1333 Aymer of Lumley,’ occurs 1333 Hugh of Woodburn," occurs 1338-42 Robert of Camboe,? admitted 31 October, 1342, occurs until 1349, when he died, probably of the plague Robert of Kelloe,#* inducted 9 July, 1351, occurs until 1361 John of Normanby," inducted 3 July, 1362, left 1373 Richard of Birtley,'* instituted 29 October, 1373, left 1379 William of Aslackby,™* occurs 1379-85 Thomas of Corbridge,’ occurs 1388-1402 Richard of Heswell,!** appointed 1412, occurs until 1431 William Partrik or Patrik,!* admitted 20 June, 1431, removed 11 January, 1444-5 Henry Heley,™° appointed 17 April, 1445, instituted 21 March, 1445-6. John Barley,’ admitted 12 September, 1446, occurs 1456 William Dalton,” 1456-8 John Middleham,™° admitted 13 July, 1458, last occurs 1459 Thomas Hexham,™° admitted 16 May, last occurs 1465 William Cuthbert, occurs 1465-72 Robert Knowt,'° occurs 1474-9 William Burdon,” occurs 1479-84 William Cuthbert, occurs 1486-91 Richard Tanfield, occurs 1491-1510 Robert Stroder,!! occurs 1514-16 Edmund Moore," occurs 1525-30 Ralph Blaxton,' occurs 1533-5 ™ Tbid. 3a, 4ae, Ebor. 33 ; Compotus R. anno 1333. 9 Wharton, Ang/. Sac. i, 762. 1 Comp. R. ™) Thid.; Engl. Hist. Rev. v, 525. "Comp. R. ; Lytham Chart. 3a, 4ae, Ebor. 35-6, 39; 2a, 4ae, Ebor. 29. In 1355 Kelloe was accused of carrying away goods to the value of £27 from Colding- ham Priory when resident there, and also of adultery ; Dur. Misc. Chart. 1284 ; Coldingham Priory (Surtees Soc.), 33. ™ Lytham Chart. 2a, 4ae, Ebor. 34, 37. “ Prior of Finchale when appointed to Lytham on 29 Sept. 1373; admitted by Archdeacon Charlton 24 Oct., instituted 2g Oct. ; ibid. 3a, 4ae, Ebor. 31; 2a, 4ae, 31, 37- 8° Tbid. 2a, 2ae, 4ae, Ebor. 82 ; Comp. R. 187 Thid. 8 Presented to archdeacon of Richmond on 21 Feb. 1411 [-12]; Lytham Chart. 2a, 2ae, 4ae, Ebor. 76 ; Comp. R. “ Raines, Lancs. MSS. xxii, 407 ; Comp. R.; Dur. Chart. Loc. ix, 63-43 Coldingham Priory, 153. “° Comp. R._ For Heley, Barley, Middleham, and Hexham sce also Raines, Lancs. MSS. xxii, 375, 381, 399. “7 Comp. R. ; Lytham Chart. 4a, 4ae, Ebor. 10. “? Comp. R.; Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 5, No. 15; Lancs. Pleadings, i, 206. In the Rentals (loc. cit.) under date 1527 he is described as ‘incumbent and Keper for the space of 16 years,” which must be an exaggeration. : “8 Comp. R. ; Flor Eccl. (Rec. Com.), v, 305. IIo RELIGIOUS HOUSES An oval seal attached to a deed of Prior John of Normanby dated 1366 (Lytham Chart. 3a, 4ae, Ebor. 30) has at the top the Virgin and Christ seated; beneath, a female figure (? St. Catherine) crowned holding a crozier (?); at the base a half figure praying. Legend effaced. 3. THE PRIORY OF UPHOLLAND The Benedictine priory of (Up) Holland, near Wigan, founded in 1319, replaced a college of secular canons founded nine years before by Sir Robert de Holland, kt., who laid the basis of the fortunes of a noble house on the favour of Thomas, earl of Lancaster.“4 Bishop Langton, finding that the canons had deserted the place, whose wildness made it a more suitable resi- dence for religious than seculars, with the consent of Holland substituted (10 June, 1319) Bene- dictine monks for the chaplains and assigned the endowments of the college, including the rectories of Childwall and Whitwick (in Leicester- shire), to the new priory.“° Edward II added his confirmation and licensed the house to acquire in mortmain lands to the value of £20 a year."® The house has little history. Its endowment was small and the times were not propitious for further additions.47 Whitwick church was taken into the royal hands in or before 1323 by reason of the prior’s default ; 1° the nature of his offence is not further defined, but the first prior is known to have resigned or been deprived of his office, and this may have been the occa- sion. Possibly he was a partisan of Thomas of Lancaster, whose execution was then recent. The sequestration of Whitwick, however, was not per- manent. As early as 1334 the priory attracted episcopal animadversion. William of Doncaster,“ former prior, was living alone on the manor of Garston, ‘contra canonica et regularia instituta.’ In 1391 the priory became involved in a violent quarrel with Henry Tebbe of Thren- guston, who farmed part of the Whitwick tithes. “4 For the college see below, p. 166. Lancaster had himself given the advowson of Whitwick. His arms were conjoined with those of Holland in the priory seal. “8 Dugdale, Mon. iv, 401-11; Cal. of Pat. 1317- 21, p. 353. Childwall had been appropriated to the college for some time. Holland and the earl petitioned the pope to appropriate Whitwick, but the consent of John XXII was only given two months before the refoundation ; Ca/. Pap. Letters,ii, 188. It was thought prudent in 1321 to obtain a new papal order appro- priating it to the priory; ibid. 215. The rectory is here valued at 30 marks a year, but the earlier man- date makes its annual value 40 marks. In the Pope Nich. Tax. (646) it was assessed at 20 marks. M6 Cal, of Pat. 1317-21, p. 398. 47 No chartulary of the priory is known to exist. 48 Cal. of Close, 1323-7, Pp» 131, 135. “8 V.C.H. Lancs. iii, 125. Thomas of Doncaster was the name of the first prior according to Bishop Langton’s ordinance. Tebbe refused to pay, tore up the obligation into which he had entered when it was shown to him, drove the prior Robert of Fazakerley out of the church, carried off oblations to the amount of £5 from the altar, and menaced Robert with death if he tried to re-enter. Failing to get any redress from the sheriff of Leicestershire the prior brought the matter before Parliament. A sergeant-at-arms was sent to arrest Tebbe and his chief abettor, who, being produced in Parlia- ment, confessed their guilt and were clapped in the Fleet, but on paying a fine and coming to terms with the prior obtained their pardon and release.’ By an indenture dated 15 May, 1464, the prior and convent undertook that one of the monks should daily say mass in their church for the souls of Sir Richard Harrington, kt., and of his father and mother.!1 If the house was not belied the end of the century found it in a parlous state. Bishop Hales was informed that the monks did not observe their rule, that their church was out of repair, and their other houses ruinous and their spiritual and temporal goods dilapidated or dissi- pated by their negligence. In 1497 he appointed commissioners to inquire into the excesses of the monks and others, but unfortunately their report has not been preserved.) As the income of the house was less than £,100 it was dissolved under the Act of February, 1536. Some light is thrown upon its condition at that date by the ‘ Brief Certificate’ 1° of the royal commissioners, who then revalued it, and from their detailed inventory of its plate, jewels, and furniture.# The buildings were again in good repair, but the thirteen monks of the original foundation were reduced to five (in- cluding the prior), all of whom were in priest’s orders.© Three were desirous of ‘ capacities,’ the others seem described as ‘aged and impotent, desiring some living of the King’s alms.’ The list of rooms shows that the rule was laxly observed. Each monk had a separate bed- chamber, the common dorter being appropriated to the use of the sub-prior. With one excep- tion they were provided with feather-beds. To judge by the report of Doctors Legh and Layton, the visitors of the previous year, the morals of the prior, Peter Prescot, and two of his brethren were exceedingly loose.’® The testimony of the two visitors lies, as is well known, under some suspicion of hasty exaggeration.” But 99 Rot. Parl. iii, 2864, 298d. 3! BLM. Norris of Speke Chart. No. 645x. ? Lich. Epis. Reg. Hales, fol. 2360. 8 Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. fol. 5, No. 7. 4 Duchy of Lanc. Miscellanea, bdle. xi, No. 47. It was made on 15-17 May. %§ The priory had eight ‘ waiting servants’ and thirteen hinds. 6 L. and P. Hen. VIII, x, 364. 87 Gairdner, Hist. of the Engl. Ch. in the Sixteenth Century, 165. III A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE even if we make allowance for this, it is pretty clear that unless the monks were the victims of local spite things were worse at Holland than in some other houses, e.g. at Burscough.' Charity was not altogether neglected in the priory. It supported two aged and impotent persons, and there were two children at school “kept of devocion.’ The commissioners found that part of the plate of the priory had been recently pledged. Two silver reliquaries in the shape of arms from the elbow upwards, one containing a bone of St. Thomas of Canterbury, the other a bone of St. Richard of Chichester, worth £16 135. 4¢., and a chalice worth £6 13s. 4d. were in the possession of Sir Richard Fitton of Gawsworth, who had received them in the February previous as security for a loan of £10. The prior’s explanation was that the money had _ been wanted to pay the tenth and the king’s visitors. Two parcel gilt salts had disappeared altogether. During the prior’s absence in London in April, 1536, Elizabeth Bradshaw, brewer and daywoman of the priory, had entrusted them for safe keeping to William Topping, servant of the house. They were not forthcoming, and Topping and his wife lay in Lancaster Castle awaiting trial.’* The priory was dedicated to St. Thomas the Martyr. The patronage passed by marriage in 1373 with the manor of Holland to John, Lord Lovel of Titchmarsh, Northamptonshire, and Minster Lovell, Oxon. Forfeited in 1485 by the last Lord Lovel, the estates, and probably the patronage of the priory, passed to the earls of Derby. Its original endowment transferred from the college consisted of a plough-land in Holland and the appropriate churches of Child- wall and Whitwick.’®! Some additions had probably been made to their holding in Holland and Orrell before the Dissolution, and they then possessed a little land in Childwall parish, but the annual value of these temporalities in 1535 only amounted to {12 10s., Childwall Rectory was worth £38 135. 44., that of Whitwick (rent) £10.’ The net annual income of the house was £53 3s. 4d. This was increased to £78 125. gd. in the new valuation made at the Dissolution in May, 1536. '* On the supposition that the charges reflected more or less baseless local gossip the comparatively clean record of some houses might be attributed to a more friendly neighbourhood or the greater hurry of the visitors. But it is more probable that they did exercise some sort of rough discrimination. Here and there an accusation receives some independent support. See, for instance, a case at Furness, below, Pp. 124. 8° Duchy of Lanc. Misc. bdle xi, No. 47. 10 A different opinion might be gathered from the statement of Leland (Jsin. vii, 46), that ‘the Wottons were Founders there.’ But this lacks confirmation. 181 Cal. of Pat. 1307-13, p. 233. 1 Pal. Bech vy 227: The bells and lead were valued at £18; the painted glass in the church was sold for £13 to the inhabitants of Upholland, Orrell, Billinge, Higher End, Winstanley, and Dalton, to whom the church was transferred as a parochial chapel.'* The plate, church ornaments, furniture of the priory buildings, horses, cattle, and stock of corn, &c., with debts due to the house figured in the valuation at £114 25. 843% £18 185. 10d. was owed by the priory. In 1545 the priory was granted to John Holcroft. Priors oF UPHOLLAND Thomas of Doncaster,’ first prior, occurs 1319. Resigned? An unnamed prior,’ occurs 1334 John of Barnby,'®” occurs 1340 and 1350 William,'® resigned 1389 Robert of Fazakerley,! elected 1389, died 1403 John Cornewayll,!®’ elected 1403, resigned1 445 William Whalley,!” elected 1445, died 1466 John Topping,’ elected 1466, died 1470 Matthew Whalley,” elected 1470 Thomas,’ occurs 27 January, 1493-4 Peter Prescott,!”4 occurs 1535, surrendered 15 36 The seal of the priory attached to the deed settling the Harrington Chantry, referred to above,!”> is of brown wax, large and oval in shape. In the centre there is a figure on horse- back. Above, three figures approaching a person seated (murder of St. Thomas). Below, shields of Lancaster and Holland. 3 Duchy of Lanc. Misc. bdle. xi, No. 47 ; Not. Cestr. (Chet. Soc.), ii, 259. There was 780 ft. of painted glass worth 4d. a foot. ‘4 The furniture of the monks’ rooms varied in value from {£1 (the prior’s) to gs. 8¢. (Dan John Ainsdale’s ; he had no feather-bed). 8 Cal. of Pat. 1317-21, p. 353. William of Doncaster, who is described in 1334 as a former prior, is probably the same person. The method of election prescribed by the foundation was that the convent sent up three names to the patron, who presented one of them to the bishop for admission ; Dugdale, Mon. iv, 410. 6 Lich. Epis. Reg. Northburgh, vol. 2, fol. 604. 67 Coram Rege R. 321, m. 50d.; V.C.H. Lancs. ili, 125. Exonerated in 1349 of a charge of com- plicity in the abduction of Margery de la Beche two years before ; Cal. of Pat. 1348-50, p. 269; below, p- 150. 'S Lich. Epis. Reg. Scrope, fol. 54. '®° Admitted 9 Nov. 1403; ibid. Burghill, fol. gr. % Tbid. Heyworth, fol. 1274, This is a confirma- tion of the election by the bishop’s commissary in the chapel of Douglas ‘in the parish of Wigan’... ™ Thid. Hales, fol. 103. Confirmation of election (3 April). “* Tbid. fol. 105. Confirmation of election (23 July). 8 Towneley MS. penes W. Farrer, fol. 226. ™ Duchy of Lancs. Misc. bdle. xi, No. 47 ; Valor Eccl. v, 221. % See p. 111. 112 RELIGIOUS HOUSES HOUSE OF CLUNIAC MONKS 4. THE CELL OF KERSAL In the reign of Stephen Ranulf Gernons, earl of Chester, when in possession of the district “between Ribble and Mersey’ gave the hamlet of Kersal in the township of Broughton, parcel of his demesne manor of Salford, to the Cluniac priory of Lenton, near Nottingham, in free alms for the establishment of a place of religion. The gift, the date of which lies between 1143 and 1153, included rights of fishery in the Irwell and of pasture on and approvement of the waste. Ranulf’s tenure of ‘between Ribble and Mersey’ was a mere interlude, and between 1174 and 1176 Henry II regranted Kersal to Lenton Priory without mention of any previous grant? In his charter it is described as a hermitage which the monks of Lenton are to hold as freely and quietly as Hugh de Buron their monk held it.2 This seems to point to some interruption in their ownership. King John confirmed his father’s grant on 2 April, 1200. Whether Lenton at first kept more than a single monk at Kersal is not quite clear. ‘The papal delegates who, about the date of John’s confirmation, settled a dispute between the monks of Lenton and Albert de Nevill, rector of Manchester, in whose parish Kersal lay, ordered that the ‘prior sive alius qui apud Kersale pro loco custodiendo pro tempore fuerit’ should always promise to observe the rights .of the mother church. It is not, however, until the fourteenth century that the existence of a prior of Kersal is definitely attested. From a Cluniac visitation of that date it appears that there were then a prior and one monk in the cell. Mass was celebrated only once a day.4 The dispute with the rector of Manchester referred to above arose out of the diversion of tithes, offerings, and mortuaries to the chapel and cemetery of the cell. By the settlement arrived at the rector conceded the right of sepulture at Kersal in return for an 1 Farrer, Lancs. Pipe R. 326. Mr. Farrer assigns it to 1142, but see Tait, Mediaeval Manchester, 169. ? Lancs. Pipe R. 327; Pat. 17 Hen. VI, pt. 1, m.g. This was always regarded as the foundation charter ; Testa de Nevill, ii, fol. 827 ; Coram Rege R. No. 442. 8 The reference to Hugh’s time does not appear in Edw. II’s inspeximus of the charter of Hen. IJ, but it is given in that of Hen. VI, and was part of that charter when produced in court in 1371; ibid. Hugh was doubtless the hermit and may perhaps be identified with the Hugh de Buron whose gifts to Lenton were confirmed by Stephen or with his son ; Dugdale, Mon. v, 108. He is said to have stayed at Kersal until his death ; Coram Rege R. No. 442. 4G. F. Duckett, Visitations of Engl. Cluniac Founda- tions (1890), 43. annual gift of two candles, each of 13.1b. of wax, but no parishioner was to be buried or make offerings there without full compensation to the church at Manchester ; the admission of parish- ioners to the sacraments by the monks was forbidden.° Beyond this, a temporary seizure by the crown, about 1371, on the plea that the original gift bound Lenton to keep two monks there,® and one or two grants of land, the history of the cell is a blank. It might have come to an end in the fifteenth century had not Lenton, which as a filiation of Cluny ranked as an alien priory, secured letters of denization from Richard II in 1392-3.” Doctors Legh and Layton in their report confined themselves to the financial condition of the cell.2 As one of the larger monasteries Lenton escaped dissolution in 1536, but was already being bled. The prior wrote to Cromwell begging time to complete the payment of £100 to him, and adding, ‘I have accomplished your pleasure touching the cell of Kersal in Lan- cashyre.’® What Cromwell’s pleasure was there is nothing to show. In April, 1538, Thurstan Tyldesley, hearing that Lenton was about to come into the king’s possession, asked Cromwell to let him have the farm of Kersal, which he said was worth twenty marks a year—a considerably higher estimate than the king’s commissioners had made in 1535-6. The site and demesne lands of the cell, however, were leased by the crown on 3 February, 1539, for twenty-one years to John Wood, ‘one of the Oistryngers,’ at a rent of £i1 6s. 8d." On 23 July, 1540, the crown sold the cell to Baldwin Willoughby, sewer of the chamber, for £155 65. 8d. Kersal cell was dedicated to St. Leonard.® Its original endowment was augmented in the reign of Richard I or John by grants of two parcels of land in the parish of Ashton-under- Lyne ; Matthew son of Edith gave a portion of his land in Audenshaw, and Alban of Alt half 5 Lancs. Pipe R. 331. ® Coram Rege R. No. 442,m. 14, A jury found that though not bound to find more than one monk at Kersal, the priory for fifty years past had kept there two, and occasionally three, of their own free will. 7 Pat. 16 Ric. I], pt.2, m. 19. During the French wars it had been taken into the king’s hands with the other alien houses ; cf. Ca/. of Pat. 1389-92, p. 29. ° L. and P. Hen. VIII, x, 364. ® Thid. x, 1234. ” Tbid. xiii (1), 789. " Dugdale, Mon. v, 110. “ L. and P. Hen, VIII, xv, 942 (102). Sir John Willoughby, kt., was steward of Lenton in 1535. 8 Lancs. Pipe R. 330. 2 113 15 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Paldenlegh.* In the new valuation for the tenth, made in 1535, the income of the cell was stated to be £9 6s. 8d, the only deduction mentioned being an annual fee of £1 to the steward, Sir John Byron of Clayton, kt." Legh and Layton speak of a debt of twenty marks.'® The crown contrived nearly to double HOUSES 5. THE ABBEY OF FURNESS The abbey of Furness was founded in the year 1127 by Stephen, then count of Boulogne and Mortain and lord of Lancaster.1 Three years earlier Stephen had granted to the abbot of Savigny in his county of Mortain the vill of Tulketh in Amounderness ; and it was from this place that the Savigniac monks retired to the deep vale of Bekanesgill.?, The new grant com- prised the whole of the forest and demesne of Furness, Walney Island, the manor of Ulverston, the land of Roger Bristwald, the count’s fishery in the Lune by Lancaster, and Warin the Little with his land. The land of Michael le Fleming in Furness was excepted, but this limitation to the completeness of the abbot’s sway in the peninsula was removed early in the reign of Henry III. From the first the abbey, a bulwark of the honour of Lancaster, was under the special protection of the crown. Its rights and privi- leges were confirmed and enlarged by nearly every king from Henry I to Henry IV. The earlier royal and papal confirmations illustrate also the rapid increase in the possessions of the house during the twelfth century. Throughout the thirteenth the abbey slowly rounded off its possessions in Lancashire and Yorkshire, and this " Lancs. Pipe R. 328-30, 332. The endowments comprised in 1371 three messuages, 100 acres of land, 24 acres of meadow, and 40 acres of wood ; Coram Rege R. 442, m. 12, 8 Valor Eccl. (Rec. Com.), v, 147. SL. and. P. Hen. VIII, x, 364. Dugdale, Mon. v, 117. Assize R. 428, m. 2. Adam Le Reve of Broughton. ' Farrer, Lancs. Pipe R. 301; Coucher, A. 8, 21. The account prefixed to the coucher papers gives ‘nonas Julii’ as the exact date ; the metrical history says July 1st. The Chron. Reg. Manniae gives 1126, and another old manuscript dealing with Man, quoted by Dodsworth, says 1112, making it as old as Savigny itself ; Oliver, Monumenta de Insula Manniae, i, 144. *Symeon of Durham, Opera (Surtees Soc.), 120 ; Coucher, 21; cf. Leland, Collectanea (ed. Hearne), ii,357. Some early charters refer to the abbey as Bekanesgill. * Farrer, op. cit. 308, 317 ; Coucher, 122-30, 199, 216. Henry IV's confirmation (216) included privileges which had been allowed to fall into disuse. The abbot took advantage of this Acer clause in 1413 to recall suits of debt to his court, 220; the Patent Rolls also contain frequent letters of protection. Accused of wounding OF CISTERCIAN the income; the lessee paid £11 65. 8d., and other rents not included in his lease brought up the total to £17 145. 104.7 Prior oF KERSAL John of Ingleby," occurs March, 1332. MONKS process, if hindered, was not ended by the statute de Religiosis, The isolation of Furness increased rather than checked a power possessed by few religious houses in the north; and the abbot ruled vast territories with feudal independence and social advantage. The historical importance of the abbey springs from this feudal ascendancy. As a religious house it left no great monument of learning or piety, and trained no great man. Its documents are feudal deeds ; its instruction was confined to the children of the demesne ; its internal history must be written on the basis of legal disputes ; on the other hand, its independent lordship over a large self-contained tract gave political import- ance to the abbey for more than two centuries. So far as England was concerned Furness was like an island;® the abbot’s relations with Scotland were, as will be seen, those of a border baron ;° for long he took a responsible share in the conflict of north and south, of lay and ecclesiastical influences, which gave significance to the Isle of Man. Ireland was his granary in times of need,’ his granges of Beaumont and ‘ The protection of Eugenius III (Coucher, 591-5) shows that before 1153 the abbey had gained a foot- ing in Copeland and Man. For papal privilegia sce 538 sqq. especially the full confirmation by Innocent IV, in 1247 ; 603-7. * So called in Rot. Parl. iii, 6574. * Among the Sackville MSS. is a document dated 31 Hen. VIII, which seems to be an inquiry into the validity of a grant by the abbot that his tenants hold by border service for the maintenance of a fort called Pile la Foudre, upon the borders of Scotland ; Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. vil, 258. For the peel of Fouldrey see p-118. The ‘marchers’ of Copeland, Cartmel, and Kendal were summoned to perform military service in Scotland in 1258; Cal. Scot. Doc. 1108-1272, Pp. 409. ’ The Furness continuation of William of Newburgh refers especially to periods of pest and famine, or to ‘magna fertilitas frumenti in Hybernia’; Chron. of Stephen (Rolls Ser.), &c. ii, 560, 562, 570. The licences to trade with Ireland and to bring corn from the abbey lands there extend from the days of John to those of the Tudors. In early times the abbot frequently visited Ireland or obtained official sanction for his attorneys (e.g. Pat. 24 Edw. I, m. 2); but later he had longer leaves of absence. Ric. II granted this exemption in time of war together with release from military service, provided that the abbot left one or two monks to pay subsidies like the other religious in Ireland ; Pat. 12 Ric. II, pt. 2, m. 15. 114 RELIGIOUS HOUSES Winterburn were stations on the way to York and the south; his messuage in Beverley gave shelter to his bailiffs as they mixed with the traders of the east. It is this combination of solitary base and wide-spread connexion which gives meaning to the frequent but not very clear or well-defined appearance of the abbot and his convent upon the political stage. Until the settlement of England under the strong rule of Henry II, the new abbey was busied in maintaining its precarious position in the north. But the political storms of the period were at first less embarrassing than the problems raised by its relations with the monastic world. The events which led to a settlement of Savi- gniac monks in the domain of Stephen are not known ; perhaps we can trace the first settlers by the Ribble in the enthusiasts who helped to arouse the reform party at York to retire to Fountains.’ In any case the abbey was certainly of Savigniac origin,® and soon became involved in the disputes to which the union of Savigny and Citeaux gave rise. Savigny was surrendered five years after King Stephen confirmed his original grant of Furness, and in 1148 thirteen English abbeys joined the Cistercian order.’® Furness did not submit without a struggle. Ignoring the charter of subjection to Savigny, the fourth abbot, Peter of York, hurried to Rome to appeal against the new order. Accord- ing to the abbey tradition he procured a confir- mation from Eugenius III of the existing state of things, but upon his return was detained at the mother house, and forced to give up his position. ‘ He entered Savigny, where he stayed, a most excellent monk, learning the Cistercian rule. Thence he was promoted to be fifth abbot of Quarr.’"' The records of Savigny tell a more authentic story. Peter returned from Rome with letters appointing a commission to decide the case in Normandy. He succeeded in getting the date of the trial postponed, but failed to appear upon the day fixed. Whether he was detained at Savigny or was contumacious cannot be decided. The judges, after waiting in vain for the missing abbot, went into the case. The abbot of Savigny showed that Furness had been built and main- tained at the expense of his monastery. Peter was forced to submit, and his fellow monks, ® Walbran, Mem. of Fountains Abbey, i,20. ‘These, if the founders of Furness, must have been already settled for three or four years. ® Stephen, both as count and king, seems to have made a double grant to the monks settled at Furness and to the abbot and convent of Savigny ; Coucher, 24, 122, 1243; Farrer, op. cit. 301, 3043 Fourn. Brit. Arch. Assoc. vi, 419. The last document is printed by M. Delisle from the chartulary of Savigny and is translated in Round, Cal. of Doc. in France, 291. It belongs to c. 1142, and explicitly grants the abbey of Furness to Savigny. Engl. Hist. Rev. viii, 669. 1 Coucher, 8-9. under their new abbot, Richard of Bayeux, a learned monk of Savigny, joined in the transfer of their house to the Cistercian order.” Although the authority of Savigny could not, in the nature of things, last very long or retain much force,!® the decision had important results. The English abbey had to find its place in the Cistercian ranks. A dispute, finally settled in 1232, arose with Waverley about the right of precedence in the two orders.’4 As the middle ages wore on, our scanty authorities seem to show that Furness maintained the high position which it then secured. But the event of most immediate importance to Furness was the loss of all possible influence at Byland. The story of the first colony at Calder, of its failure, repulse at Furness, and settlement at Byland must be sought elsewhere. ‘The prosperity of the new abbey caused the older to claim superiority. The claim was disregarded, and Furness was rejected in favour of Savigny. A general council deputed the case to Ailred of Rievaulx, who called a large assembly of abbots and monks. The immediate tie between Savigny and Byland was confirmed.!® Meanwhile the abbey passed through troublous times in the north. In the days of King Stephen % Fourn. Brit. Arch. Assoc. vi, 420-23 see also Coucher, 9. The date is about 1150. The abbot of Savigny appears as mediator (c. 1208) in the dispute between Furness and Conishead (Lancs. Pipe R. 362), but after the twelfth century very little is heard of him. Mr. St. John Hope thinks he can identify ‘the original camera for the father abbot of Savigny, or his deputy, when he held his annual visitation of the abbey’ (4ddey of St. Mary in Furness, 68), but as this is marked ‘early fifteenth century” on the plan, the suggestion is not very probable. Ann. Mon. (Rolls Ser.), ii, 311 5 Engl. Hist. Rev. vill, 641-2. The precedence of Waverley was main- tained in general chapters of the order of Citeaux and in the order of Savigny abroad ; the abbot of Furness was to have ‘ prioratum in tota generatione Elemosinae in Anglia et in generatione Saviniaci in Anglia tantum.’ The general position of the Savigniac houses, retro- spective and independent in its nature, is defined in Maurique, Aan. Cistercienses, ii, 104 ; A. du Moustier, Neustria Pia, 684 (cf. Gir. Camb. Opera (Rolls Ser.), iv, 114.3 Hist. de France, xiv, 518). When Boniface IX exempted the Cistercians in England from the juris- diction of the anti-papal abbot of Citeaux, he addressed the abbots of Furness and Waverley; Ca/. Pap. Letters, v, 358. Tn the fifteenth century the abbots of Fountains and Byland were visitors in the province of York ; Foed. O. xi, 93. On the other hand, the abbot of Furness was one of the presidents at the general council of Combe in 1407 (Beck, dan. Furn. 95) and visited Whalley in 1418 as reformator of the order (ibid. 289). Again, in 1441 the abbots of Furness and other Cistercian abbeys appear as orators of the order, Proc. of P.C. v, 151. 6 Fourn, Brit. Arch. Assoc. vi, 423-4; Dugdale, Mon. v, 349-53. 115 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Furness was thrown violently into the conflict which made the whole of Northumbria and Cumbria a battle-ground between the scarcely defined nations. The sympathies of the monks themselves were as much Scottish as English. The Furness historian Jocelin wrote under the patronage of Scottish and Irish prelates the lives of northern saints. Pilgrims from Furness journeyed to their shrines.” As late as 1211 an abbot of Furness was consecrated at Melrose by a bishop of Down.!8 And when Carlisle was handed over to King David of Scotland, Furness must early have been included in a sphere of influence which embraced the barony of Skipton and the honour of Lancaster itself.* The abbey did not share in the peace which the Scottish king gave to more northern parts of England. In the year 1138, some months before the battle of the Standard, David’s nephew, William Fitz Duncan, invaded Yorkshire and cruelly wasted Craven, where his own honour of Skipton lay ; the lands owned there by the abbey of Furness were not spared.” A few years later the monks suffered from the tyranny of a man whose strange career stands out in history in a light only too fitful and puzzling. Among the earliest disciples of the new abbey was a youth named Wimund. He was of humble birth, but a lad of ready mind and strong memory, of noble presence, and with a latent power of stirring speech. He began his career as a copyist for some monks, and entered the abbey of Furness, where he soon made his mark, and when it was needful to send men to manage the affairs of the abbey in the Isle of Man, Wimund was chosen as leader. He won such favour with the islanders that they begged for him as their bishop, and bishop he became. The exercise of authority revealed his powers of speech and leadership ; his desires and ambitions grew apace. Throwing aside his episcopal duties he collected a host, equipped a fleet, and sailed for the shores of Scotland. For long he ” Reginald of Durham, Lide//us (Surtees Soc.), c. lvi. Jocelin’s life of St. Waltheof of Melrose illustrates the intimate connexion between Scottish and English houses of the order; Acta Sanctorum, Aug. i, esp. 264 E, 276A. 'S Chron. de Mailros (ed. Stevenson), 111. ® John of Hexham, Hist. (ed. Raine), 163 ; Robert- son, Scotland under her Early Kings, i, 223; see ‘ Poli- tical History,’ 185. There was no break in the Scottish occupation of Carlisle from 1136-57. Abbot Peter was entrusted with papal letters to the king of Scots c. 1149; Fourn. Brit. Arch. Assoc. vi, 420. As late as 1174 the abbey received letters of pro- tection from King William of Scotland, Lancs. Pipe R. 314. ” Ric. of Hexham, Hist. Reg. Stephani, 82 ; Whita- ker, Hist. of Craven, 13. This is interesting for the light it throws on early acquisitions of the abbey in Yorkshire. It was William’s daughter Alicia de Rumeli who afterwards gave Borrowdale to the abbey. was a terror to the people, and a thorn in the side of King David. David at last handed over to his care the province of which the monastery of Furness was lord. The raids ceased, and Wimund ruled over the scene of his earlier and less worldly life with the power of a king and the insolence of a bandit. The people rose, with the ready consent of the lords of the district ; and one day, as the warrior followed his host on foot, they burst out upon him. Blinded and mutilated ‘pro pace regni Scottorum,’ Wimund ended his life at Byland, an object of curiosity to visitors, confident and boastful to the end. ‘Even then he is said to have exclaimed, that if he had but the eye of a sparrow, his enemies would have small cause to rejoice over their work,’ 7! If we accept William of Newburgh’s account of Wimund’s youth,” we must date his mission to the Isle of Man soon after 1134, when the important connexion between the abbey and island began. In that year King Olaf granted land in the island for the foundation of a daughter house. The grant had apparently first been made to Rievaulx, but was not acted upon, nor indeed was the abbey founded until a century later. In the same charter Olaf gave to the abbey the control of elections to the new bishopric of Sodor and Man; and this curious privilege was exercised by Furness with papal approval, but with growing opposition until the | William of Newburgh, Chron. of Stephen, &c. (Rolls Ser.), i, 73-6. William, who saw him at Byland, brings Wimund into his story before the acces- sion of Malcolm IV in 1153 ; his successor as bishop of Man was elected in 1152 (CAron. Steph. [Rolls Ser.], iv, 167) ; Mr. Skene tries to identify him with Malcolm Macbeth (Fordun, C&ron. Gentis Scotorum, il, 428-30) ; but since Malcolm was imprisoned for twenty years before 1156 (Robertson, op. cit. i, 219-21), and Carlisle was surrendered in 1157, this is obviously impossible. Again, Ailred of Rievaulx, in his account of David, quoted by Fordun (op. cit. i, 242), distinguishes the bishop from Malcolm. There is no need to reject the story altogether, with Beck. * Both Robert of Torigni (CAron. [ed. Delisle], i, 263) and Roger of Wendover (Flr. Hist. [ed. Engl. Hist. Soc.], ii, 250) seem to identify him with a monk of Savigny. ‘Primus autem ibi fuerat episcopus Winmundus, monachus Saviniensis, sed propter ejus importunitatem privatus fuit oculis et expulsus.? At this time Furness was still Savigniac; but, on the other hand, the tradition about Wimund’s career is by no means easy to understand, and recalls suspiciously the history of Donaldbane. It is impossible to re- concile the Newburgh version with the statement in the Chron. Pontif. Eccl. Ebor.: ‘Winmundum quoque Insularum episcopum idem Thomas [d. 1114] ordi- navit, qui ei professionem scriptam tradidit, quae sic incipit—Ego Winmundus sanctae ecclesiae de Schith? ; Hist. of Ch. of York (ed. Raine), ii, 372. This state- ment, however, is also opposed to the account of King Olaf’s creation of a bishopric in 1 134. * Chron. Manniae, a. 1134 3 Coucher, 11, 594. 116 RELIGIOUS HOUSES end of the thirteenth century.* Wimund was hardly a happy choice, and the popular feeling which, we are told, caused his election was not always in such accord with the desires of the monastic patron. Early in the thirteenth cen- tury Nicholas of Argyll was elected by the clergy and people in spite of the loud protests of the monks, and his successor Nicholas of Meaux, the abbot of Furness himself, was never able to hold ground against the rival bishop Reginald.** The quarrels between Olaf II and his brother, king Reginald, no doubt produced this discord; the bishopric was a pawn in the game played be- tween the two, a game in which the forces of north and south, of popes and _ kings, were called into play.* In 1244 came a fresh papal confirmation of the right, but in 1247 Laurence was elected without reference to Fur- ness, and although he was not accepted, his successor was appointed by the archbishop of Trondhjem.”” After the subjection of Man to the king of Scotland, the abbot of Furness made a vain attempt to recover his right of election. The king received him with smooth words, but secretly forbade the clergy and people of Man to receive any of his elect, under pain of severe punishment (1275).°8 In the next century William Russell and John Duncan were elected by the islanders; the former was abbot of Rushen and the abbot of Furness only interfered so far as to give his consent as father superior.” During all this time the abbey maintained less contentious relations with the island. It was appropriator of the ancient churches, Kirk Michael and Kirk Maughold. In the isle the monks found a market; in the abbey the kings and bishops could find a burying place.3® Once, ** Oliver, Monumenta, ii, 1; Beck, op. cit. 123; Olaf asked Thurstan of York to consecrate the first bishop (Oliver, op. cit. 4; Munch’s edition of the Chron. Manniae (ed. Goss for Manx Soc.), ii, 269 ; Raine, op. cit. ii, 58). Papal confirmation of elective power by Celestine III (Coucher, 667) about 1194 ; Oliver, op. cit. ii, 21. ® Munch, op. cit. il, 272 ; Chron. Manniac, a. 1217 ; Beck, op. cit. 169 ; see below, note 232. © Reginald seems to have favoured Furness, as the friend of the pope and Henry III. He was to pay annual tribute at the abbey, after his surrender to the pope ; Oliver, op. cit. ii, 53; Cal Pap. Letters, i, 69. Olaf oppressed the abbey ; Close R. 11 Hen. III, m. 16. 7 Chron. Manniae, a. 1247; Munch, op. cit. ii, 315. The letter of Innocent IV in 1244 is in Raine (op. cit. ili, 157). Archbp. Gray is to confirm election by the abbot and convent, with the consent of the archbp. of Trondhjem, and to consecrate the bishop elect, the voyage to Trondhjem being long and dangerous. 8 Cont. Will, Newb. (Rolls Ser.), ii, 569. ° Munch, op. cit. ii, 336. ®° King Harald took the vessels and goods of the abbey under his protection, with use of mines, free transit, and three acres apud Ballevaldevath ad Burgag. faciendum. He also granted freedom from customs under Edward I, the abbot appears as warden of Man. The external history of the abbey from the accession of Henry II tothe Dissolution is scanty. There is reason to believe that the monks availed themselves of the power of John during King Richard’s absence to drive out the upstart family of Lancaster from the Furness fells ; * and John, when he became king, bestowed his usual attentions of privilege and extortion upon the abbey.*® In 1205 the abbot incurred the large fine of 500 marks in a plea of the forest.** The thirteenth century saw a quiet accumulation of privileges and estates. The Scottish wars brought a change. The abbot of Furness placed political before ecclesiastical questions in 1297, and received special protection in return for his help against the machinations and invasions of the Scots.** A few years later the abbey felt the effects of the general distress so much that it fell into debt, and a royal bailiff was appointed to apply the revenues of the house to the dis- charge of its obligations.3® In 1316 the Scots devastated Furness, and carried off much plunder and many captives.*7 Six years later Robert Bruce made a more elaborate invasion. Cope- and tolls (a. 1246); Oliver, op. cit. ii, 77-80. Furness was the port for the island, and the abbey a stopping-place for the kings; ibid. ii, 88. King Reginald was buried at the abbey in 1228; also bishops Richard (d. 1274) and William Russell (d. 1374). See Chron. Manniac, passim, and Cont. Will. Newb. (ii, 568). Duc. Lanc. Anct. D., L.S. 112 (1299). Cf Oliver, op. cit. il, 134 ; Goss in Munch, op. cit. i, 251. In Pope Nich. Tax. (fol. 3094, 3294) the abbey of Man appears under the archdeaconry of Richmond. * The story in Reginald of Durham’s Life of St. Gushbert (Surtees Soc. 112) starts with the seizure of a long strip of land (35 miles by 4) by the fundator ecclesiae, against whom John the abbot appealed in vain both at home and in Rome. This is too vague to be worth much, but may have some reference to the grant to William of Lancaster by Earl William of Warenne. Anyhow, Earl John granted back Furness Fells to the abbey and forced the inhabitants to respect his arrangement ; Coucher, 418-19. Gilbert son of Roger Fitz Reinfred retaliated in 1194 by taking 1,000 sheep ; and the abbot proffered 500 marks for a settlement ; Lancs. Pipe R. 78, 86. The Lancaster interest was restored by the final concord of 1196, two or three years later. (See below note 165.) %8 Rot. Claus. (Rec. Com.), 644; Rot. Par. (Rec. Com.), 1593 cf Cont. Will. Newb. ii, 513. * Lancs. Pipe R. 204. % Pat. 25 Edw. I,m.14. The share of Furness in the grant of a fifth shows that in 1299 the house was not very rich—62s.; see Vincent, Lancs. Lay Subsidies, i, 217. %* Pat. 33 Edw. I,m. 14. Probably the subsidies for which the abbot failed to account in 1295. 8” Chron. de Lanercost (ed. Stevenson), 233. Yet in this year the abbot went to the general chapter at Citeaux ; Close, 10 Edw. II, m. 28 d@. 117 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE land and Cartmel were wasted, and Furness was only saved from a second disaster by the per- suasions of the abbot, who went out to meet the invader, and entertained him at the abbey.*8 Next year the abbot was ordered to deliver the peel of Fouldrey to the sheriff of Lancaster, when required, and to cause it to be garrisoned and guarded.?* After this we hear of no more troubles of this sort. The fort was maintained in repair until the days of Abbot John of Bolton, who caused it to be thrown down. Local opinion held that its maintenance was necessary in virtue of Stephen’s grant of Walney, and a protest resulted in the seizure of the island by the royal escheator. The officer was removed by Henry IV after an inquiry, but the peel was restored." It is in casual official references and commands that the part played by the abbot of Furness best appears. As a member of the Cistercian order he is of course found at the general chapters, and as a visitor at dauzhter abbeys.*! He assisted in negotiation with the king upon financial matters.” He received special protection from the pope against the infringement of Cistercian liberties," and was entrusted with commissions by pope and archbishop.“4 The situation of his house made it a fit prison for offending monks. In 1533 Gawyne Boradalle, a monk of Holm Cultram, accused of poisoning his abbot, was sent to Furness while it % Chron, de Lanercost, 246. His followers did some damage. %® Close, 16 Edw. II, m. 14; cf. Pat. 1 Edw. III, pt. 3, m. 21, permission to crenellate house on ‘ Foulney.’ “ Pal. of Lanc. Chan. Misc. bdle. 1, file 9, m. 7 (4 Hen. IV) ; Coucher, 215. Its repair and upkeep were considered important after the Dissolution ; L. and P. Hen. VIII, xii (2), 1216. The surveyors of 29 Hen. VIII say £300 would be needed for its repair ; Rentals and Surv. R. 376. Close, 10 Edw. H, m. 28¢.; 6 Edw. III, m. 20d.; Cont. Will. Newb. ii, 565; Cal. of Pup. Letters, v, 346. © Cont. Will, Newb. ii. $71, a. 1275. “The papal privi/cgia define extent of freedom from tithes (Coucher, 540, $49, 597); grant exemp- tion from procurations and provisions (ibid. 585, 602, 669); forbid excommunication of benefactors and servants, and allow brethren of the house to bear witness in all causes to which the abbey is party (614). Honorius III ordered the archbishop of York to allow the monks a private chapel in the chapel at Hawkshead, and protected their vicars in Furness from crossing the sands in winter time to attend unnecessary chapters. In 1256 Alex. IV released the abbey from the attempts of Peter d’Aigueblanche to saddle it with the king’s debts (545). This cannot refer to 1161, as Mr. Atkinson concludes; see Stubbs, Comst. Hist. 1, 72. “eg. In 1254 Innocent IV appointed the abbot conservator of the order of Sempringham ; Ca/. Pap. Letters, i, 301 3 see also il, 93, 280; iv, 73. For abbot in diocese of York cf. Testamenta Eboracensia (ed. Raine), i, 314. was decided how to proceed against him. He was a masterful man and caused the abbot some trouble. Roger asks Cromwell how he shall keep him; at present he is put in the prison at night, and in church during the day, where he ‘melleth with no person’ except the prior.*® The abbot was an important person at court when the king came north.4® He collected subsidies,” assisted the royal officers and judges,*® and acted as arbitrator.*® He appears in the judicial records as the creditor of royal clerks and distant merchants. From early days his wool was sent from the fells of Lancashire and Yorkshire to the markets of the East Riding.’ King Edward III used the ships in his harbour.°? The power of Furness outside prepares us for the fulness of monastic authority within its borders. From the first it was privileged as a tenant of the honour of Lancaster. Stephen’s foundation charter had granted the usual powers of jurisdiction ; Count John protected the abbey from defending its demesne lands elsewhere than in the court of the honour; Earl William had | granted freedom from tolls and customs in the port of Wissant ; this was extended by Henry II, and King Richard ‘de rebus ad usos proprios’ to freedom in the whole kingdom, by land and sea. Henry III confirmed all the grants of his “© L. and P. Hen. VIII, vi, 1557 ; cf. ibid. 287. ‘© When Edw. I in 1307 sent the great seal to the new chancellor from Carlisle, the abbot of Furness attached his seal to the purse in which it was inclosed ; Madox, Hist. of Exch. i, 74. In 1306 he was called to the Parliament of Carlisle ; Rot. Parl. 1, 189. "e.g. clerical moiety, 1294 (Pat. 22 Edw. I, m. 8); tenth of 1295 (Pat. 24 Edw. I, m. 22). In 1294-5 the abbot’s arrears as collector amounted to £788 115. of¢.; perhaps this is the debt referred to above. In 1313 he was ordered to pay most of this to the executors of Isabella of Forz; this he seems to have done, but, owing to a mistake in the allocation of the debt, he could not get a receipt. If his claim is correct, the episode is a curious instance of red tape; Close, 7 Edw. II, m. 15; 10 Edw. II, m. 21 ; 10 Edw. III, m. 27. ® In 1272 the abbot was appointed first justice in eyre at Lancaster, but was excused. The others, however, ‘omnia faciebant cum consilio dicti abbatis’ ; Cont. Will, Newb. ii, 561. In 1357 he was appointed with three laymen to lay the decisions of the Common Council before the men of Lancaster at Wigan ; Pat. 11 Edw. III, pt. 2, m. 3. As a baron he took oaths of fealty for the king (Pat. 4 Ric. II, pt. 2, m. 5), and made arrest of found treasure; L. and P. Hen. VIII, vii, 432. © Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. x, App. pt. iv, 228. e.g. Close, 3 Edw. J, m. 524. ; Duchy of Lance. Assize R. Class xxv, 3, Nos. 57, 238, 347. 5! Close, g Hen. HI, m. 18. In 1390 a commission of inquiry was issued into wools shipped beyond the sea from Furness without licence and payment of customs and subsidies; Pat. 14 Ric. II, pt. 2 m. 444. * Close, 7 Edw. III, pt. 1, m. 162. 2 118 RELIGIOUS HOUSES predecessors. The abbey paid dearly for this renewal of their charters and the grant of Michaell Fleming and his land; but the price was not too high for the first explicit definition of its judicial rights.“* From the Fleming fief, as from its other Furness lands, the sheriff was to be excluded. The abbot’s bailiff was conservator of the peace. Before the end of the century custom had established complex immunities on the basis of these charters. In 1292 the justices -at Lancaster heard an elaborate plea in answer to the writ of quo warranto. The abbot vindicated his right to the proceeds of assizes of bread and ale, to freedom from attending the courts of county and wapentake,®® to market and fair. He had rights of wreckage™ and waif, could take cognizance of thieves and erect his gallows in Dalton. In two cases the claim of the abbot was not allowed. He was found to be liable to common fines and amercements ; and he was deprived of any control he had exercised in the sheriff’s tourn. This had, according to the jurors, been first held in 1248, and as no sheriff entered Furness was held by the coroner. The coroners had apparently been somewhat lax in making records and accounts ; and this perhaps gave rise to the authority claimed as a right for the abbot’s bailiff. Three years later the rights and proceeds of the tourn were handed over to Earl Edmund, and in 1336 Earl Henry of Lancaster, with the royal assent, gave it formally to the abbey.®® The abbot now asserted that if he could hold a tourn, he could deal with cases of bloodshed. This privilege also was granted in 1344. A second obvious deduction from the right of sheriff's tourn was the grant of a local coroner. ‘The royal officer was now so shorn of his powers, and the sands were so dangerous, that the local courts might be entrusted with the election of their own. So in 1377 Edward III consented to save many valuable lives by granting the right to appoint a coroner for the return of all royal writs.” A 53 Lancs. Pipe R. 303-6, 309, 315-16; Coucher, 29, 122-9. Henry II also granted freedom from tolls in certain Norman ports; Vincent, Lancs. Lay Subs. i, 38”. The abbot gave 400 marks for the renewal of the charters in 11 Hen. III. * Coucher, 130; Chart. R. 11 Hen. III, pt. 1, m. 20; Pat. 11 Hen. III, m. z. 5 Coucher, 131-7. 5° Coucher, 127. The abbey was careful to obtain freedom from suit for its lands outside Furness ; Coucher B. Add. MS. 33244, fol. 1004. 7 Except in Aldingham. 58 Coucher, 137. This is a late date; Pollock and Maitland, Hist. of Engl. Law, i, 559. 59 Coucher, 139, 143. The sheriff disregarded the grant, and was ordered by the king to desist ; ibid. 164. 8° Coucher, 141, 148. 51 Close, 11 Edw. III, pt. 1, m. 29; Coucher, 157-9. The petition of the abbey is in Rot. Parl. i, 436. The number of deaths by drowning is so formal return to a writ for the election of a coroner which is preserved ® gives some idea of the attendance at a full court of the abbot. The lord of Kirkby was there, and the descendants of the Bardseys, Boltons, Boyvills and the rest who appear so often in the early deeds of the abbey. Up to our own days the lords of the manors of Dalton and Hawks- head have preserved the old forms. In quieter times, indeed, suit at the abbey court was the most burdensome part of the service paid by the great tenants. The abbot was exempt from all feudal dues, except in Aldingham and Ulvers- ton,“ and did not press very hardly upon those below him. At the same time the more power- ful vassals often chafed against the constant presence of a lord who never died, and disputes between the abbey and its feudatories were frequent. In Ulverston as early as 1224 William of Lancaster III maintained with success his right to erect gallows in Ulverston and to attend the superior court only by special summons. In 1292 it was found that the bailiffs of Ulverston and Aldingham could claim a court for the trial of assizes of bread and ale ; the lords of these manors also had control of thieves. In 1320 John of Harrington acquired freedom from all tolls for his men of the same manors except in the abbey demesne; John’s court, moreover, acquired jurisdiction over offences which did not involve the shedding of blood. Before Aldingham came to the Har- ringtons it had been the subject of several disputes as to the right of wardship between the abbot and the families of Fleming and Cancefield, who contested his claim to custody on the ground that they did not hold by military service. After two lawsuits the abbot’s right was in 1290 fully recognized. In public opinion at great that ‘ pite deust prendre chescun Cristien.’? On a similar plea the abbot asked for leave to appoint at- torneys to answer vexatious pleas in Yorkshire (1411); Rot. Parl. iii, 657. The road over the sands was neces- sary, but not without danger. For the subject in general see Trans. Cumb. and Westmld. Antig. Soc. vii, 15-16. 8 Coucher, 685 ; cf. p. 161. 3 Pal. Note Book, iv, 13; Baines, Hist. of Lancs. iv, 637, 703. * This was decided 30 Edw. III ; Coucher, 153-7; cf. 217. Three years later a sumpter horse for the king’s wars was given, but it was not to be a pre- cedent ; p.176. In 21 Hen. III, Roger of Essex took the abbey lands into his hands after the abbot’s death, but he was ordered to give them back in peace, except the barony of the Flemings; Close, 21 Hen. III, m. 15. In the borough of Lancaster the abbot’s men were exempted from payment of tallage, 33 Hen. III; Lancs. Ing. i, 176. When Duke John’s daughter was married the abbot paid the aid for Aldingham and Ulverston ; Coucher, 224. ® Curia Regis R. 83, m. 18. ; Coucher, 394. 8 Coucher, 213, 386. Coucher, 81, 464-72, 474, 483. But the abbey gave £400 to William of Cancefield for a settlement. 119 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE least, however, the victory of the convent was in reality the price paid by William of Cance- field for the murder of a monk by one of his followers. Hence in an assize two years later, the jury refused to regard the case of Aldingham as conclusive evidence of the general custom of the barony ; and the abbot failed to secure the custody of John of Kirkby. But here also the corporate body overcame the single person in the long run.” In the case of Pennington” and Kirkby ** there was a further quarrel about services; like the rest, their lords attended the abbot’s court every three weeks and paid annual money service. But just as they wished to be free from the bur- dens of military tenure on the one hand, so on the other they fought against the customary dues which were probably paid in less important parts of Furness. All this was but a small part of the disputes to which the abbey was party. Some of these only illustrate the ordinary history of a great fief. We have the usual list of charges against persons who detained cattle and set up or broke down inclosures or failed to render their accounts. There are the usual suits and agree- ments about right of way, the usual endless series of quarrels about lands and houses. These were often complicated by acts of violence. Thus in 1338 the abbot accused Abbot Thomas of Jervaulx, together with some of his brethren and other evildoers, of breaking down his fences at Horton in Ribblesdale, and of carrying away goods to the value of £2,000. They had made a night assault with swords and staves, bows and arrows.’* And there are graver episodes in the domestic history of Furness, dark tales of murder and wantonassault. In 1282 brother Wil- liam Pykehod was accused of aiding in the mur- der of Walter Morsel, in Cumberland.’* The Scottish wars provided a good opportunity to settle old scores without the delay of courts. When William of Pennington returned from the wars in 1315, he found his lands untilled, because Abbot Cokesham had forcibly impounded the plough-beasts ; his tenants were too im- poverished to pay rent or service.’® Some 8 Coucher, 313. “Ibid. 310-14. “Ibid. 315. "In 1318 William of Pennington admitted the right of the abbot to the services of a reaper for each house, and a ploughman for each plough in the manor of Pennington. In 1329 this privilege was surrendered by the abbot; Coucher, 491-5; De Banco R. 273, m. 111d. 7 In 1420 the same was claimed in vain in Kirkby, together with the right of the abbot’s bailiff to food and drink in the hospice of Kirkby at the lord’s cost ; Duchy. of Lanc. Grants in Boxes, box B, No. 143. *® Coucher B. fol. 127-1294; Pat. 12 Edw. III, pt. 3,m. 164. ™ Pat. 10 Edw. I, m. 5 d. * Pat. 8 Edw. II, pt. 1, m. 2¢.; 9 Edw. II, pt. 1, m. 234. Ofcourse we do not know the other side in these cases. years later it was the abbot’s turn. Alexander of Kirkby took advantage of the king’s absence in 1336 to go and ride around the abbey by day and night plotting to kill the abbot. He and his companions seized provisions coming to the abbey, hunted without licence in the chase of Ireleth and Dalton, and carried off the deer; men and servants were assaulted, ‘so that the abbot dare not go out of the chace of the abbey nor can he find any to serve him.’’* But per- haps most exciting is the arrest (1357) of Thomas of Bardsey in Ulverston. One day, when Roger Bell the bailiff went to perform his duties, Thomas seized and beat him. The hue and cry was raised ; and Roger Bell went with a company, including Abbot Alexander, to avenge the insult. “Thomas took refuge in the house of his father Adam; doors and windows were closed and barred. Bailiff, monks, and the rest made a grand assault, the door was forced, and Thomas carried off to gaol in Dalton. So in this case justice and might went together.” As time went on the local importance of the abbey grew, and its domestic economy became more elaborate. An exhaustive writ of 13 Henry VII, if it is not of a formal nature, shows that the abbot had availed himself of his judicial independence to take over the whole process of legal activity.”® There is but little to say about the more definitely religious side of monastic life. The relations between Furness and the neighbouring religious houses seem to have been as friendly as territorial interests would admit. The foundation of Conishead caused some opposition in early times, but a lasting settlement was arranged.”? In York- shire there were lawsuits with convents who shared the privileges or bordered upon the lands of the Lancashire abbey ; and the fishery in the Lune produced considerable friction with the priory of St. Mary at Lancaster. The usual problems of tithes had to be settled,®’ and the position of the churches in the gift of the abbey decided. Its internal history is equally scanty. In the church a chaplain who celebrated daily for the souls of the faithful departed Pat. 10 Edw. III, m. 142. ” Coucher, 159-62. ® Pal. of Lanc. Writs de Quo Warranto, 13 Hen. VII; cf. Kuerden MS. 4to vol. fol. 60 (Chet. Lib.). See p. 141. * e.g. Jervaulx (Coucher B. fol. 1264) ; prioress of St. Clement’s York; 30 Edw. III (fol. 1294) ; Sara, prioress of Ardington, 1241 (Anct. D., L. 477). *! See p. 170. * In spite of privilegia, they were sometimes paid by way of compromise ; e.g. for Newby and Clapham : Anct. D., L.S. 133. John of Eshton reserved the sa due to Gargrave in Craven ; Coucher B. fol. 167. “Especially Dalton ; Coucher, 654, 699, &c. 120 RELIGIOUS HOUSES was supported by the proceeds of a messuage and six shops in Drogheda.*4 The occasional visit of a Scottish bishop would remind the monks in pleasanter fashion than did the ap- proach of the Scottish kings of their proximity to the northern kingdom. A more striking witness to the extra-national character of Furness is the long list of indulgences, granted by fifty- one Irish, Scottish, Welsh, Manx, as well as English bishops, to penitents who should make a pilgrimage to or endow the monastery or any of its churches and chapels.® The charters of the abbey illustrate several interesting elements in the Furness economy. In the Yorkshire moors and dales the monastic granges, Winterburn the most important, were the centre of a busy pastoral life. The great slopes of Whernside and Ingleborough were dotted with sheep belonging to the abbey ; and many a powerful baron of Lancashire and Yorkshire gave them protection on their way from pasture to pasture, or shelter when sick or astray.” Along the shore of Morecambe Bay vassals of Furness dug turf and dried salt. In the fish booth at Beaumont Grange the abbot’s bailiffs stored the fish dragged from the waters of the Lune. Beaumont Grange was, indeed, a large and important colony. We hear of an abbot’s court for the neighbourhood.® The monks shared the fishing with the priory of St. Mary at Lancaster. In St. Mary’s pot the Lancaster monks had every third throw, elsewhere every other throw. When the priory passed to the convent of Syon, the latter house made over the whole fishing rights to Furness. Its total assessment for tenths about 1300 was rather lower than that of Whalley Abbey, but included a much larger proportion of temporals.’%° In the new valuation of 1317, '" Coucher, 646,650. Both the parson of Ulverston and Conishead Priory gave up claim to Hawkshead ; Lancs. Pipe R. 362. Early in the thirteenth century it was severed from Dalton except for secular purposes ; Coucher, 649. See also above p. 22 note. '® Coucher, 318, 653 ; Lancs. Final Concords, 52-3, where the abbey claimed that Abbot John Cancefield had been seised of the church as of his fee, and had presented Roger, his clerk. 1 Coucher B. fol. 207; Coucher 653, 671; Thos. of Burton, CAronica de Melsa (Rolls Ser.), ii, 126. The abbey got back the half on condition of paying the expenses of the chaplain (34 marks) as a perpetual ferm. On the plea of warand pestilence it sought to reduce this, and a long suit ensued, which was taken even to Rome, and was settled by the chapter of York in 1362 (Coucher, 672-9). The rent was reduced to 28 marks, which was paid in the sixteenth century (Valor Eccl. v, 270; Page, York. Chant. Surv. ii, 434). '? Duchy of Lancs. Anct. D., L.S. 112. At first (1339) it was held at farm (Pat. 13 Edw. III, pt.1,m.35. 1 Raines, Lancs. Chant. 222. 5 In the ‘courtesy’ of 1277 Furness contributed £38 35. 4d. and Waverley (262 tos. ; Pat. 5 Edw. I, m. 10, 15. In 1347 the abbey lent £40, as did Peterborough and Westminster; Pat. 21 Edw. III, pt. 2, m. 23. “ The respective totals were roughly £197 and £2255 made after the Scottish raids, the temporalities were charged on the basis of 20 marks only. The Taxatio had fixed the annual value at £176, but as the monks kept much of their property in their own hands, this was not all realized. According to detailed returns of this year (1292) which are preserved in the Coucher the annual income was £40 145. 8d. This included, besides rentals, the proceeds of live-stock, pleas, and, most important, of mines. When all ex- penses had been met this last source gave £6 135. 4d. Lonsdale, including the Beaumont Grange, and Borrowdale sent the largest revenues from cattle. Since the fisheries, turbaries, dove- cotes, and two or three vaccaries were reserved for the monks’ use, these are not estimated. In 1317 the assessment of spiritualities was reduced from £21 6s. 8d. to £6.." Two documents preserved in the Coucher give the proportionate payments of the Cistercian abbeys to certain con- tributions. Furness, Rievaulx, and Fountains agreed to pay the same to provincial aids, nearly one-third of the aids in all. To a Cister- cian contribution of £12,000 Furness is to pay £44 6s, 8d.; Fountains £66 165s.; Stanley £68 125.’ For the time of the Dissolution we have three documents, the official Valor of 1535, the rental of Roger upon which this is based, and the survey of the commissioners of 1536. The survey gives of course a greater value, since there was nothing to reserve for private use ; the difference between Roger’s rental and the Valor is almost entirely on the debit side, due to the gifts to great men. Roger accounted for close on £950, and disbursed about £300 annually. Beck estimates that the possessions in the immediate occupation of the monks yielded fLto4 155. 8a. The monastic officers, except the master of the fells,” call for no remark. Of the lay officers the rentals give a fairly complete list. 7 Pope Nich. Tax. 308-9; Coucher, 633-7. At Dalton and Millom the reduction amounted to three- fourths, at Urswick to about two-thirds. ® Ibid. 637-8 ; e.g. 205. each to an aid of £10. Tbid. 639 (no date). ™ Vahr Eccl. v, 269-70 ; Rentals & Surv. ptfo. 9, No. 733; and R. 376; also Beck, op. cit. 325-34 and App. vi. Roger’s rental amounts to exactly £948 115. 34, with deductions of £300 15. 5¢., of which about £100 were incidental. The Valor gives £203 45. 9d. to this head. The net estimate of the commissioners (Rentals and Surv.) was £1,052 25. 33d. The rentals give such an excellent picture of the economy of Furness that one can only refer the reader to Beck’s reprint and comments. An independent rental of certain lands and tenements belonging to the late monastery in Lonsdale, in the possession of Mr. W. H. Dalton, of Thurnham, gives for these lands £112 45. 64¢. The places are not exactly the same as in the rental, which gives {110 18s. 11d. (e.g. Beaumont is included in the former). ™ Land P. Hen. ¥ 111, xii (1), 841. 128 RELIGIOUS HOUSES The highest of these was the high steward, the protector of the abbey and its representative in the lay world. ‘The office never seems to have been really important, although it was the source of some disputes at the time of the Dissolution.”” At this time the Earl of Cumberland was steward of the Winterburn lands, which had needed special protection throughout.”% The rental mentions eighteen bailiffs, of whom the chief was the bailiff of the liberty, who received £8 per annum. This officer had originally been the judicial deputy of the abbot, together with the coroner,” and probably still performed the duty, but as the time of danger drew near, the abbot seems to have bought off opposition by the increase of offices. Apart from the bailiff’s fees we read of grants pro custodia sessionum and pro custodia curie Birelay*®® et Sheryftorne ; also of a general receiver.” A master mason is also mentioned. Thirty monks signed the deed of surrender, and two were in Lancaster gaol. Sussex mentioned thirty-three. Beck calculates, very fairly, that this number implies about one hun- dred servants in place of conversi. The full complement of the abbey in its best days is not known, but perhaps the decrease in 1536 was not very marked. The daughter houses of Furness were Calder (1135) and Swineshead (1134 or 1148) in Eng- land ; Rushen (1138), in the Isle of Man; and in Ireland, Fermoy (1170), Holy Cross (1180), Corcumruadh (1197), and Inislaunaght (1240). This last was subjected to Furness some time after its foundation. A Furness colony in Wyres- dale removed to Wotheney in Limerick c. 1198.” The Coucher of the abbey was compiled in 1412 by the monk John Stell, at the command *0? See previous notes. Sir Robert de Holland appears in 13 Edw. III; and Sir W. Compton and Lord Monteagle preceded the Earl of Derby ; Beck, op. cit. p. cv; Lancs. Pleadings, i, 69; L. and P. Henry VIII, xii (2), 1151 (2) 3 Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. ili, 24.7. It is possible that Cromwell’s reference to the Earl of Northumberland may only refer to Borrow- dale and Winterburn, as the Derby Corres. (pp. 115, 127) would suggest. 08 Beck, op. cit. Coucher B. fol. 116. 4 The bailiff is called steward in the custom of Low Furness (West, Antig. of Furness, 153), unless the deputies of the high steward had taken over some of his functions. For the coroner see above. °° Beck, op. cit. 337. On the fly-leaf of the rental is written in a later hand, ‘the offes of vater bayle and bayle arround is oun onest mans levying in yat contre.” 6 For the Burlaw see notes on Coucher, 84, 459. *7 Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 9, No. 73; Beck, op. cit. 8. ms Beck, op. cit. 350-52. 99 Coucher, 11-12 ; Chartularies of St. Mary’s Abbey, Dublin (Rolls Ser.), ii, 105-110; for Wyresdale see below, p. 131. Rot. Parl. iii, 657; 3323 of Abbot Dalton. A companion, probably Richard Esk, wrote the verses which relate the story, and drew up the #abula sententialis.?!° Perhaps this John is the monk of Furness who occupied one of the fellows’ chambers in Univer- sity College, Oxford, in 1400, at a rent of 13s. 44.71 The second part of the Coucher, which deals with the Lonsdale, Yorkshire, and Cumberland lands, has not been printed.” The first and more important part has always been among the Duchy documents, and has been edited by Mr. Atkinson.” The Coucher is based upon deeds, very many of which still exist and are calendered in the appendices to the thirty-fifth and thirty-sixth reports of the Deputy Keeper. In the introduction the compiler of the Coucher refers to a /ibellus vetus et de vetusta iittera as his authority for the foundation of the abbey.”44 The monastic library also included a register and chronicles of Ulster.2° Celtic literature, indeed, seems to have been well known there in the early days. Jocelin, the only Furness chronicler whose name has come down to us, wrote lives of St. Patrick and St. Kenti- gern, under the direction of the archbishop of Armagh and the bishop of Glasgow. For the latter his authorities were a life used in the church at Glasgow, and another codiculum, stilo Scottico dictatum. ‘The same monk also wrote the life of St. Waltheof, abbot of Melrose, in which he reveals a sympathetic knowledge of northern monastic history." ‘Jocelin is a close imitator ° Coucher, 23. 71 Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. v, 4.78. 3? Robert Treswell used it in 1597 ; Harl. MSS. v, 294, No. 70. In 1637 it was penes auditorem Bullock ; Dodsworth MSS. 66, fol. 124. See also Dep. Keeper's Rep. xxxvi ; Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. i, 1143 Clarke, Repertorium Bibliographicum, 263. It is now Add. MS. 33244 in the British Museum, which acquired it from the Hamilton Library. 713 For the Chetham Society (New Ser.), vols. ix, xi, xiv. Unfortunately the editor has not used any of the original deeds, and is rather arbitrary in the use of notes. ‘This is the more to be regretted since the Couchers, though beautiful in appearance, are not very carefully compiled. 4 Coucher, 8. 75 Thid. 12. 6 Pits (De Scriptoribus Anglicis, 884) gives him on the authority of Stow and Fitzherbert. He thinks he was Caméobritanus, and speaks of many books de Britonum episcopis. Tanner (Bibliotheca, ed. 1748, PP- 429-30) gives a good account of Jocelin and the history of his writings ; see also ‘ Life of St. Kentigern,’ (ed. Forbes, in Historians of Scotland, v, 63, 312) ; Hardy, Descript. Cat. i, 34, 63, 207. The ‘ Life of St. Patrick,’ which was printed by Messingham and Colgan, was, according to Zimmer’s theory, written in the interests of Armagh (Ce/tic Church, 104 3 cf. Tripartite Life of St. Patrick, i, 132). The prologue would allow us to date the author in 1185 (see Tanner), but the dedication of the life of St. Waltheof (Acta Sanctorum, August, i, 246) to William of Scot- land and his son Alexander makes it difficult to identify him with the abbot Jocelin. a 129 17 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE of the style of William of Malmesbury, whose phrases he often adopts.’ *’ A later Furness chronicle is based on William of Newburgh, of whom, together with the Stanley entries, it is called the Continuation. It is a purely Furness chronicle from 1263, and seems to have been written up at intervals from memoranda ; per- haps, as Mr. Howlett suggests, in order to fulfil the king’s commands in 1291, when Edward sent a transcript of the submission of the Scotch claimants to Furness, with the desire ‘ quod eadem faciatis in cronicis vestris ad perpetuam dei gesti memoriam annotari.’7!8 The chronicle ends in 1298, and contains several records of local and monastic interest. In a heraldic visitation of 1530 the arms of the abbey are given: Sable, a bend checky argent and azure. Behind the shield is a crozier through a mitre.” The common seal attached to the deed of surrender bears the legend, ‘Sigillum commune domus beate Marie de Furnesio.” It represents the Virgin under a canopy, sublimis inter sidera, holding in her right hand a globe, while her left supports the infant Christ. On each side is a shield, dexter with the arms of England, sinister with those of Lancaster, suspended from sprigs of nightshade, and upheld by monks proper. Beneath is a wyvern, the device of Thomas, second earl of Lancaster.*”? ABBOTS OF FURNESS (* According to the Furness custom, only those abbots were put in the mortuary roll who died as abbots after ten years’ successive rule; Coucher, 10. These, previous to the date of the Coucher, are marked with an asterisk. Names not annotated only appear in the list in the Coucher.) * Ewan d’Avranches (de Abrincis), 1127 7 Eudes de Surdevalle, occurs 1130, 1134?” Michael of Lancaster Peter of York, occurs 1147 73 7 Hardy, op. cit. 208, "8 See Chron. of Stephen, &c. (Rolls Ser.), ii, pp. Ixxxvili, 503-83. The contrast between this chroni- cle and the Chron. Manniae is so marked that there can be no connexion. It is unlikely that a lost Furness chronicle could be the basis of the Manx (Oliver, Monumenta, i, xii), to which Munch gives a Melrose origin (op. cit. ed. Goss, i, 34). A letter of March, 1538, refers to ‘a book of the decisions of disputes heretofore in Furness,’ in the possession of the deputy steward; L. and P. Hen. VIII, xiii (1), 27 ‘ *19 Surt. Soc. Publ. xli, 92. West, op. cit. App. xiii; Beck, op. cit. 351. Beck also gives a plate of the abbot’s seal. *\ Coucher, 10. In spite of Mr. Atkinson’s argu- ment (Introd. xxvii), it seems better to assume that Ewan was appointed abbot by the Savigniacs before the foundation of Furness, or even of Tulketh. ™* Coucher, 9 ; Oliver, op. cit. il, 4. *8 Coucher, 9; Journ. Brit. Arch. Assoc. vi, 420-22. Richard de Bayeux,” elected ¢. 1150 * John of Cancefeld, occurs 1152, 1158 Walter of Millom, occurs 1175 7° Jocelin of Pennington, ¢. 11827” Conan de Bardonle * William Black (Niger), occurs 1190, prob- ably ruled ¢. 1183-93 78 Gerard Bristald, c. 1194 °” Michael of Dalton, ¢. 1196 7° Richard de St. Quentin * Ralph of Fletham, ruled c. 1198-1208 *! John of Newby Stephen of Ulverston Nicholas of Meaux, consec. 1211, resigned Page 2 eae * Robert of Denton, elected 1217, alive in 1235 333 Laurence of Acclorne * William of Middleton, occurs 1246, died 1266-7 *4 * Hugh le Brun, elected 1267, occurs 1282: William of Cockerham, occurs 1289, 1294288 Hugh Skyllar, occurs 1297, deposed 1303 7%” * John of Cockerham, elected 1303, died 1347" * Alexander of Walton, elected 1347, died I 367 239 ™ See p. 115. ™ Coucher, 591 ; Lancs. Pipe Rolls, 308. © Coucher, 9, 539- 7” Coucher, 613 ; Anct. D., L. 374. > Atkinson, Introd. xxxix. * Anct. D., L. 4409. * Coucher, 9, 666. *: Coucher, 647 ; perhaps ‘R. Abbas’ of the deed in Lancs. Pipe Rolls, 339 (c. 1198). Chron. Manniae, s. a. 1189, has the wrong entry, ‘Obiit Rodulfus, Abbas de Furness in Mellefonte.’ *? The dates of previous abbots make it almost certain that it was Nicholas who was consecrated in 12113 Chron. de Mailros, 111. He was elected about 1217 to the see of Man (Chron. de Meka, i, 380 ; Journ. Brit. Arch. Assoc. vi, 328), which he resigned about 1224 (Cal. of Pap. Letters, i, 97). Some confusion has arisen from the fact that his predecessor as bishop seems also to have been called Nicholas ; Chron. Manniae, which dates his episcopate 1203-17) ; Journ. Brit. Arch. Assoc. u. 8.3 cf Anct. D., L.S. 111). ™ Coucher, 254. ‘G. abbas,’ ibid. 246, is prob- ably an error. ™ Anct. D., L. 451; Cont. Will. Newb. ii, 552. *" Coucher, 5, 381. Apparently it was Hugh who had been scholaris et discipulus of the archbishop of York ; see Robert de Graystanes, Hist. (Surt. Soc.), ix, 62. Pat. 17 Edw. I, m. 133 Coucher, 400 : Coucher B. fol. 1174. os gees *” Coucher, 478 ; Beck. op. cit. 245. In the De Banco Rolls he appears 32~4 Edw. I; R. 151, m. 974.3 159, m. 188. *8 He professed obedience to the archbishop of York on 18 November, 1303; Beck, op. cit. 245. See also De Banc. R. 155, m. 1334; 348, m. 427 (20 Edw. III) ; Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. iv, 392. ® Beck, op. cit. 267, 274. 130 Cartmgt Priory (Counterseal) CockERSAND Priory CarTMEL Priory Wituiam, Prior oF Lancaster AsgoT oF Furness BurscouGH Priory Furness ABBEY Waa ttey ABBEY LancasHirE Monastic Sgats RELIGIOUS HOUSES John of Cokan’, elected 1 367 = * John of Bolton, occurs 1389, 1404 4 William of Dalton, occurs 1407, 1416-7 22 Robert, elected c. 1417, occurs 1441 7% [Thomas or William Woodward] ™4 John Turner, occurs 1443-60 ™8 Lawrence, occurs 1461-91 7° Thomas Chamber, elected 1491, occurs 1496 247 aks al Banke, occurs 1505, 1531 8 John Dalton, occurs 1514-16 "9 Roger Pele, elected 1537 died surrendered 1531, 6. THE ABBEY OF WYRESDALE The Cistercian abbey of Wyresdale, an off- shoot of Furness, was founded towards the close of the twelfth century, on land perhaps given by Theobald Walter, lord of Weeton, and (from about 1192) of all Amounderness. Between 1193 and 1196 Theobald, with the consent of the archdeacon of Richmond, appropriated to the new house the church of St. Michael-on-Wyre, subject to the appointment of a vicar.”! But some years later (before 1204) Theobald re- moved the monks to Wotheney, on his Irish lands in Munster, in the present county of Limerick.” The site of the short-lived house in Wyresdale is not known, but is supposed to be indicated by the name Abbeystead in Over Wyresdale near the confluence of Tarnbrook Wyre and Marshaw Wyre. * Beck, op. cit. 274. "1 Coucher, 14, 351. ™3 Beck, 95; Coucher, 226. A_ brief-roll of 18 March, 1417, refers to the late Abbot William ; it is addressed by Robert ; Surt. Soc. xxxi, 102. In Anct. D., L. 396, is a document dated 1410 in which a Robert, abbot, appears. The Coucher stops with Dalton’s reign. #43 See last note, and Beck, op. cit. 289; Anct. D., L.S. 116; Pal. Lancs. Plea R. 3, m. 1. "4 Given in the older lists, upon authority not traced by Beck or Atkinson ; cf. Introd. p. liii. #8 Beck, op. cit. 296; Anct. D., L.S. 128. *8 Beck, op. cit. 296 ; Coucher, 13. *7 Beck, op. cit. 299 ; Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. x, App. iv, 228 ; Duchy of Lanc. Misc. Bks. xxi, a, 26d. *8 Beck, op. cit. 300; Lancs. Plead. i, 68, 98; West, op. cit. 154. *9 Lancs. Plead. i, 983; L. and P. Hen. VIII, ii (2), p. 1529; Beck, op. cit. 311. 9 1, and P. Hen. VIII,v, 657. The last three abbots had disputes about tithe ; and John, though he got papal support, did not maintain his hold. An inventory of the goods of Roger Pele, ‘late parson of Dalton,’ was made 24 May, 1541; Richmondshire Wills (Surt. Soc.), 21. *! Farrer, Lancs. Pipe R. 336. For the interesting agreement between the abbey and the vicar, see ibid. 337 and above, p. 14. 7 "82 Ibid. 340; Dugdale, Mon. ti, 1025, 1034. 7, ABBEY OF WHALLEY The abbey of Stanlaw, afterwards of Whalley, was founded by John, constable of Chester (died 1190) on a site of more than Cistercian aus- terity in the mud-flats, at the confluence of the Gowy with the Mersey, a spot until then in the parish of Eastham. The founder’s charter, in which he expresses a wish that the place should be re-named ‘Benedictus Locus,’ is dated 1178.2" Several chronicles, however, ascribe the foun- dation to 1172, which may be the date when the first steps towards the creation of the new monastery were taken.”* The monks were doubtless drawn from Combermere Abbey, of which Whalley was afterwards considered a filiation.?5 Besides the two vills of Great Stanney and Meurik Aston,” and a house in Chester, the founder gave them exemption from multure in his mills and from toll throughout his fief. Hugh, earl of Chester, confirmed his gifts, and added freedom from toll on goods purchased in Chester for their own use.” Earl Ranulf de Blundeville ratified his father’s grants, freed the monks from all toll, even that on salt, throughout his lands, and disafforested the site of the abbey and its grange of Stanney.” Cheshire tenants of the constable and earl added further endowments, including the whole vills of Acton (Acton Grange) *® and Willington.?° But the rising fortunes of its patrons were already transferring the centre of the abbey’s interests to Lancashire. The constables of Chester had long held a fief in the south-west of that county, and Roger, the founder’s son, in or before 1205, gave Stanlaw the vill of Little Woolton in his Widnes fee.*' The abbey’s rights were, however, contested, and ultimately with success, by the knights of St. John.”” Roger’s inherit- 58 Coucher, 1. ‘The extant ‘Coucher Book’ or chartulary of Whalley was drawn up in the time of Abbot Lindley. A few later deeds were inserted. It was edited by W. A. Hulton for the Chetham Society, 1847-9, in four volumes. A large number of documents, many of which are not in the Coucher, were transcribed by Christopher Towneley (d. 1674) into a manuscript volume now in the possession of W. Farrer. Another of Towneley’s MSS., now also in the same hands, contains the original accounts of the abbey bursars for the years 1485-1506 and 1509-37. References to other materials may be found in Tanner’s Notitia Monastica. “4 Ann. Mon. (Rolls Ser.), i, 187 ; Tanner, op. cit. sub Stanlaw. One MS. carries the foundation back as far as 1163; Whitaker, Hist. of Whalley (ed. 4, 1872), i, 83. *8 Ormerod, Hist. of Ches. ill, 403, *6 Probably Aston Grange ; Ormerod, op. cit. i, 730. = Coucher, 8-9. 8 Ibid. 385. "4 Thid. 801. 28 Thid. 10-12. °® Ibid. 467. *? Thid. 809. 131 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE ance of the great honours of Pontefract and Clitheroe, on the death in 1193 of his kinsman, Robert de Lacy, whose surname he assumed, opened a new epoch in the history of Stanlaw. From Roger himself, who died in 1211, the house received a grant of the valuable rectory of Rochdale °°? and lands in that parish.*°* The appropriation of the church was confirmed, sub- ject to the rights of the existing incumbent, by Pope Honorius III in 1218,” and by Bishop Cornhill of Lichfield, who in 1222 ordained a vicarage of 5 marks with 4 oxgangs of land and a house." A few years later Bishop Stavenby instituted the first vicar, and the abbey entered into full possession of the rectorial tithes.?7 Roger’s son John de Lacy, who became earl of Lincoln in 1232 and died in 1240, was an even greater benefactor of the house. In or before 1228 he gave the advowson of one of the two medieties of the rectory of Blackburn, which Bishop Stavenby appropriated to the uses of the abbey,”*® and some years later he conferred the second mediety upon the monks, to whom it was appropriated by Bishop Roger Longespée in 1259, subject to the ordination of a vicarage of 20 marks.”®° John de Lacy was also the donor of the advowson of the church of Eccles. A licence for its appropriation to the abbey was obtained from Bishop Stavenby in 1234.77 These gifts led to grants of land by various persons in the three parishes. Another instance of John de Lacy’s generosity, the gift of the vill of Staining (with Hardhorn and Newton) in Amounderness,”" involved the abbey in fre- quent litigation over the tithes with Lancaster Priory, the appropriators of Poulton, in which parish it lay. In 1234 Stanlaw undertook to pay 5 marks a year for them. As the area of cultivation extended the question was re-opened and the commutation was gradually raised to 18 marks (1298).”* Edmund de Lacy gave the whole township of Cronton near Widnes.273 °83 Coucher, 135. * Including the hamlet of Marland, which be- came a grange of the abbey ; ibid. 591. The Lacys and their tenants gave at one time or another much land in Castleton, Rochdale, Whitworth, and Spot- land ; ibid. 595, sqq. ; 637, sqq. Several members of local families were monks of the house in the later years of the thirteenth century, and one of them (Robert Haworth) abbot. This no doubt tended to divert land there into the possession of the abbey. 8 Coucher, 168. *® Thid. 139. 7 Tbid. 4.6. *8 Tbid. 72, 78. * Ibid. 74, 80. The appropriation followed a re-grant by Edmund de Lacy in 1251 which was afterwards regarded as the title ; ibid. 77, 252. 7 Thid. 36-7. ™ Tbid. 419. *9 Thid. 425-42. *3 Ibid. 811. The preponderance of the Lancashire pro- perty of the house among its possessions increased the growing discontent of the monks with the desolate and sea-beaten site of their monastery. A more than usually destructive inundation in 1279 perhaps brought matters to a head,** and four years later Henry de Lacy, third earl of Lincoln, consented to the removal of the abbey. On the plea that none of their existing lands afforded a suitable site, they persuaded him to grant them the advowson of Whalley with a view to the appropriation to their use of the whole of the tithes of this extensive parish (of which they already held a fourth part as par- cel of their rectory of Blackburn) and to the reconstruction of the monastery on its glebe, which comprised the whole township of Whalley. A licence in mortmain was obtained from the king on 24 December, 1283, °° and on the first day of the new year Lacy formally bestowed the advowson and authorized the translation on condition that the ashes of his ancestors and others buried at Stanlaw should be removed to the new abbey and that it should be called Locus Benedictus de Whalley.° ‘The bishop of Lichfield’s consent to the transference was not granted until two years afterwards ;°”" the papal approval was still longer delayed. A draft petition to the pope recites that the land on which the house stood was being worn away by every tide and must in a few years become totally uninhabitable and that each year at spring tides the church and monastery buildings were flooded to a depth of three to five feet.?”® This asser- tion contained obvious exaggeration, the rock on which the principal buildings stood being 12 ft. above the level of ordinary tides,””® and it was afterwards softened into a statement that the ofhices, which lay below the rock, were inundated toa depth of 3 ft.78 Other considerations laid before the pope were that the greater part of their possessions were situated near Whalley, that the new site, lying in the midst of a barren and poverty-stricken country, would afford great scope for hospitality and almsgiving, and that it was proposed to increase the number of monks by twenty, whose duties would include prayers for his soul. Three or four monks were to be kept at Stanlaw so long as it remained habitable? On this understanding Nicholas IV granted a licence on 23 July, 1289, for the translation of the abbey and the appropriation of Whalley church on the death or resignation of its aged rector, Peter of Chester, who had held the ** Ormerod, Hist. of Ches. ii, 398. *° Coucher, 186. * Tbid. 189. *7 Thid. 195. “8 Ibid. 191. *° Ormerod, op. cit. ii, 400. ™ Recital of the petition in Pope Nicholas’s bull. *8 Coucher, 192. 132 RELIGIOUS HOUSES benefice for 54 years. A vicarage, however, was to be endowed out of its revenues. The rector could not apparently be induced to resign and did not die until 20 January 1294-5."1 Even then fourteen months elapsed before the monks were transferred to Whalley. Certain formalities must be gone through and preliminary arrangements made; some difficulties were raised. Between February and August the Earl of Lincoln, the bishop of Lichfield, and the king confirmed the appropriation and translation.” But the bishop, the archdeacon of Chester, and the chapters of Coventry and Lichfield had to be compensated for the loss entailed by the disappearance of secular rectors. The patron exacted from the monks a renunciation of the rights of hunting in his forests hitherto enjoyed by the parsons of Whalley and of all claims upon the castle chapel at Clitheroe,”** and his officers took possession of some lands which belonged to the benefice.”® As early as March William, lord of Altham, entered a claim to the advowson of its church, which Stanlaw held to be one of the chapels of Whalley, and obtained a writ for an assize of darrein presentment.*> Meanwhile the bishop and archdeacon sequestered its tithes and offerings and excommunicated the monks when they tried to take possession. The abbot appealed to the archbishop, whose official ordered the ecclesiastical authorities in question to sus- pend their action and appear before his court in October.”8” Some even questioned the validity of the appropriation of Whalley itself.* The claims 950 Coucher, 1823 Cal. Pap. Letters, i, 499, 501. Nicholas fixed four as the number of monks to remain at Stanlaw. The ing. p.m. of Abbot Eccles (c. 1443) speaks of an obligation to maintain twelve chaplains there to celebrate divine service ; Ormerod, op. cit. li, 399. %81 Coucher, 293. The chartulary of St. John’s Priory, Pontefract, gives 15 Dec. 1294 as the date of death. *83 Coucher, 198, 196, 202. 83 (100 was ultimately paid to the bishop, though, if we can trust a hostile writer, thrice that sum was at first demanded and agreed to; Dugdale, Mon. v, 642 ; Whitaker, Hist. of Whalley, i, 176. *4 Thid, i, 174, 258 ; Towneley MS. fol. 388. 285 Coucher, 280. ‘They were restored by Thomas, earl of Lancaster, in 1313. #6 Ibid. 302. The abbot had tried to buy off this claim ; Cal. of Chse, 1288-96, p. 440. It had been dismissed by a papal delegate in 1249 on the appeal of Peter of Chester ; Coucher, 298-300. *7 Thid. 304. 8 The Cluniacs of St. John’s Priory, Pontefract, claimed to be the true patrons of Whalley in virtue of a grant by Hugh de Laval during the temporary dispossession of the Lacys in the reign of Henry I. Their pretensions were antiquated, for those who asserted that they had presented Peter of Chester could easily be refuted ; Coucher, 292. It is note- of Pontefract Priory could not, however, be regarded very seriously, and on the monks of Stanlaw presenting John of Whalley for in- stitution as vicar, Bishop Roger on 6 December ordered an inquiry into the value of the benefice with a view to fixing the vicar’s portion ; *° but Roger’s death ten days later caused further delay. The inquiry was begun on 20 April, 1296, by the instructions of Archbishop Winchelsey.”” By that time the monks, no doubt anxious to secure the advantage of actual possession, had removed from Stanlaw to their new home. On 4 April, St. Ambrose Day, they made their entrance into Whalley.” ‘The foundation stone of the new monastery was laid by their patron the earl on 12 June.?” The monks who entered into residence in the parsonage and temporary buildings under the rule of their abbot, Gregory of Norbury, num- bered twenty. Robert Haworth, who had recently resigned the abbacy after holding it for twenty-four years, remained with five other monks at Stanlaw, which continued to be a cell of Whalley down to the Dissolution. One monk lived at the grange of Stanney, two each at those of Staining and Marland, and another was a student at Oxford.” The delays which the monks experienced might have been prolonged had news reached England earlier of a step taken by Pope Boniface VIII, who was elected a month before the death of Peter of Chester. One of his earliest acts was to quash all provisions and reservations to take effect on a future vacancy which Nicholas IV worthy that they retained the advowson of Slaidburn although it was part of Hugh de Laval’s gift, and in 1250 presented Peter of Chester (already rector of Whalley) to that benefice as ‘ our clerk’ ; Towneley MS. fol. 267. There is no evidence that they actively pressed their claim to Whalley at his death, but about 1357 they obtained a writ of ‘ quare impedit’ in the Duchy court against Whalley Abbey. On 21 Sep- tember in that year, however, they resigned all their claims on the benefice; ibid. 267-8. Their char- tulary contains a rather malicious account of the difficulties of Stanlaw in obtaining possession. The bishop’s action at Altham, for instance, is distorted into a sequestration of Whalley; Dugdale, Mon. v, 642. 289 Coucher, 202. * Thid. 204. 71 Whitaker, op. cit. i, 86. But the ‘Status de Blagbornshire’ gives 7 April as the date ; Coucher, 188, The unfriendly Pontefract writer says they were greeted by a crowd crying, ‘Woe to ye, Simoniacs.’ *®? Dugdale, Mon. v, 639. 22 Ormerod, op. cit. ii, 404, from Cott, MS. Cleop. C. 3, ‘with some additions from an obituary of the convent.’ Whitaker (op. cit. i, 88), following Cott. MS. Titus, enumerates thirty-five monks. Most of them bore Cheshire names, but five seem to have come from places in Rochdale parish, The maximum number at Stanlaw was forty, which was to be raised to sixty at Whalley. 133 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE had granted.?“* Nicholas’s bull appropriating Whalley church to Stanlaw on the death or demission of the rector could therefore be held to be annulled.?* As soon as this new difficulty was grasped the good offices of the king and the Earl of Lincoln were secured, Richard of Rudyard, one of the monks, was sent to Rome, and after some negotiation and considerable disbursements obtained a renewal of the grant from Boniface on 20 June, 1297.7 Meanwhile the king’s court had upheld their contention that Altham was a chapel of Whalley, not a parish church.”” This involved further expense ; altogether the abbey spent £300 in England and at Rome in making its title to Whalley and Altham secure.*"S Even now they were not at the end of their troubles. The older Cistercian abbey at Sawley, six miles to the north-east, complained to the general chapter of the order that the new house was nearer to their own than their rules per- mitted, that its monks consumed the tithe corn of Whalley parish which the late rector used to sell to Sawley, and that the increased demand for corn and other commodities had so raised prices that their monastery was permanently poorer to the extent of nearly £30 a year. Arbitrators appointed by the chapter arranged a compromise in 1305 ; each house agreed to pro- mote the other’s interests as if they were its own ; monks or conversi of either doing injury to the other were to be sent there for punishment ; Whalley was to give the monks of Sawley the preference in the purchase of their corn provided they were willing to pay the market price.” Some years before this settlement the abbey entered on a long dispute, or series of disputes, with Roger Longespée’s successor as bishop of Coventry and Lichfield, Edward I’s well-known minister Walter de Langton. ‘The details of the quarrel are obscure, but it perhaps originated in an attempt of the monks to recoup themselves for the heavy expenses which their acquisition of Whalley had entailed. From May, 1301, to June, 1303, Bishop Langton was suspended from his office by Pope Boniface, pending the hearing of serious charges against his character.° About this time the vicarage of Whalley fell vacant, "4 Coucher, 207. *8 Ibid. 208. It was taken for granted that Boni- face’s constitution preceded the death of Peter of Chester. He accepted assurances that the monks were unaware of it when they removed to Whalley. *° Whitaker, op. cit. i, 162-5 ; Coucher, 209. *" 13 October, 1296; ibid. 303. Nevertheless the abbey thought it prudent in 1301 to buy off the claim from Simon of Altham at a cost of £20; ibid. 305 ; Towneley MS. fol. 486. 8 Whitaker, op. cit. i, 176. The editor of the Ccucher (305), who mis-read the sum as 3004., took it to be the cost of the Altham litigation only, but this was not carried to Rome. * Dugdale, Mon. v, 641 ; Whitaker, op. cit. i, 84. °° Dict. Nat. Biog. xxxii, 130. and the monks, seizing their opportunity, ob- tained the pope’s permission to appropriate the vicarage to their own uses.! On 26 May 1302, the abbot of Rewley, in virtue of a papal commission, put them in possession, but the bishop or his representatives apparently appealed to the Court of Arches, which launched sen- tences of excommunication, suspension, and interdict against the intruders. Early in De- cember the abbot of Rewley instructed the abbots of Furness and Vale Royal to pronounce these sentences null and void.8° The order was carried out, but Langton’s reinstatement and the death of Boniface proved fatal to the abbey’s ambition. Not only did it lose the appropriation, but Langton obtained judgement against the abbot and convent for 1,000 marks, which seems to have included the estimated value of the revenue of the vicarage, which ought to have gone to the bishop during the vacancy, and the bishop’s costs.*°? A letter of Abbot Gregory is preserved in which he complains bitterly that though they have paid 100 marks on account their goods are to be sold to meet the rest of the debt.*4 In the absence abroad of their patron he writes to his son-in-law Earl Thomas of Lancaster that, owing to the bishop’s long ill- will they are unable to carry out the provisions of their founders and benefactors, and begs him to use his influence with the king to secure them a grant of some ‘convenable cure.’ 5 Langton was imprisoned by Edward II from 1307 to 1312, but it was not until Abbot Gregory had been dead nearly three months that he at last consented (11 April, 1310) to withdraw his claims against the abbey.*”° At one moment in the course of this quarrel the abbot and convent had seriously contem- plated leaving Whalley, but Pope Clement V ordered them (January, 1306) to remain, or the church would revert to the presentation of the Earl of Lincoln.*” They were still dissatisfied, however, with their new home, and ten years later made another attempt to remove elsewhere. Thomas of Lancaster, in consideration of the lack of timber at Whalley to rebuild their mon- astery and of fuel for their use, together with the difficulties of transporting corn and other 'Towneley MS. fol. 268. The wording of the document points to an attempt to get rid of the en- dowed vicarage and to serve the church by monks or chaplains. ‘ Appropriation’ would hardly be applied to a temporary sequestration of the vicarage in their favour during the vacancy. A passage in the Ponte- fract chartulary may perhaps refer to this transaction ; Dugdale, Mon. v, 642. “? Towneley MS. fol. 268-9, *3 Tbid. 262 ; Whitaker, Op. cit. i, 150. 4 Ibid. 6 Tbhid. 150-1. ** Towneley MS. fol. 262-3. He received the new abbot’s profession of obedience next day ; See below p. 139. *” Cal. Pap. Letters, ii, 7. 134 RELIGIOUS HOUSES necessaries in that neighbourhood, gave them (25 July, 1316) Toxteth and Smithdown, near Liverpool, part of his forest, with licence to translate their house thither. The king con- firmed the grant,** but, perhaps owing to episcopal or papal opposition, no action was taken upon it. In 1330 the abbey induced Bishop North- burgh to cut down the vicar of Whalley’s portion, as fixed in 1298, on the ground that it was excessive. Northburgh also allowed them to present three of their own monks in suc- cession to the vicarage.! A general licence for this practice was obtained from Pope Inno- cent VI in 1358 on the plea that the residence of secular clerks within the monastic inclosure led to disturbances. The vicars continued to be taken from the monastic body down to the Dissolution.3! The troubles in which the abbey became in- volved by its acquisition of Whalley were not even yet exhausted. Among the direct consequences of this aggrandizement were disputes with its mother house of Combermere and with its own lay patrons. With Combermere it came into conflict over its assessment to the Cistercian levy. In this order the filial tie was strong; ** not only had the mother house the right of visita- tion,*5 but the contributions imposed by the general chapter at Citeaux were partitioned among the groups (generations), consisting of a mother house with its daughters, and re-par- titioned by the abbot of the former. Abbot 508 Dugdale, Mon. v, 646. 8° Towneley MS, fol. 222. 3° Coucher, 217. He was henceforth paid £44 in money. ‘The receipts under the old ordination can hardly have been much more, but the vicar had now to find chaplains for eight chapels, which, with some other new deductions, left no great margin. The glebe and rights of common were also reduced. In 1411 the value of the vicarage was said not to be above 12 marks ; Cal. Pap. Letters, vi, 276. By 1535 the abbey compounded by a payment of £12, rather more than half of which was absorbed by fixed charges ; Val. Eccl. vy, 220. The building of the abbey church was begun in the year of Northburgh’s reduction of the vicarage ; Whitaker, op. cit. i, 93. 5 Cal. Pap. Letters, iii, 595. 318 Ibid. 518 'The presentation of monastic vicars was pro- hibited by statute in 4 Hen. IV, but this was held not to apply to appropriations prior to the Act; Phillimore, Eccl. Law, 276. In the fifteenth cen- tury the abbey occasionally put in monks as vicars ot Blackburn and Rochdale. 514 Buel. Hist. Rev. viii, 642. 516 For an undated visitation of Whalley by the abbot of Combermere in the first half of the fourteenth century, in which charges were brought against the abbot and the question of his retirement raised, see Whitaker, op. cit.1, 175. This may belong to the attempt to supersede Abbot Lindley in 1365 ; see below. Norbury of Whalley complained that the abbot of Combermere had raised their share to a figure out of proportion to the increase in their income. The possession of Whalley was attended with so many expenses that it yielded little net profit.*" After appealing to the abbot of Savigny, the mother house of Combermere, and to the general chapter, Norbury secured an undertaking from the father abbot to consult the filial abbots before fixing their contributions.2” The matter was reopened in 1318, when the abbot of Comber- mere in apportioning a levy of £212 upon his ‘generation,’ called upon Whalley to pay as much as Combermere and its other filiations, Dieulacres and Hulton, put together. Whalley appealed, and in 1320 delegates appointed by the abbot of Savigny reduced its share to £80.88 The question at issue between the abbey and its patrons related to the status of the chapel of St. Michael in the Castle at Clitheroe. The Earl of Lincoln, having obtained a quitclaim of it from the monks before they settled at Whalley, treated it as a free chapel and not one of the chapels of Whalley church which he conveyed with that church to Stanlaw. On the next vacancy of the chaplaincy he gave it to his clerk William de Nuny, ‘not without grave peril to his soul,’ in the opinion of the monks.*! There is nothing to show, however, that they ventured to put forward their own claim in Lacy’s lifetime or that of his son-in-law Thomas of Lancaster. After the attainder of the latter and the forfeiture of his estates, Edward II appointed two chaplains in succession,**° and when Edward III conferred the honour of Clitheroe on his mother Queen Isabella she filled up several vacancies. But in a petition to the king in 1331 Abbot Topcliffe claimed that St. Michael’s had always been a chapel dependent upon Whalley until the earl of Lincoln wrong- fully abstracted it, and that possessing no rights of baptism or burial it could not be a free chapel. An inquiry was held, and on 51. Whitaker, op. cit. i, 175. Norbury reckoned the increase in their ordinary annual expenses at £93 185. 9¢., of which £66 135. 4d. was the cost of maintaining twenty extra monks. But it is doubtful whether the number of monks had been raised to the maximum promised. For Norbury’s dealings with recalcitrant monks see ibid. i, 153. 97 Thid. i, 153, 177. Ormerod (op. cit. ili, 403) gives the date as March, 1315, probably a mistake for 1305. Norbury died in 1310. Licences for abbots of Whalley going to the general chapter occur on the Close Rolls. $18 Whitaker, op. cit. i, 177. 51° Coucher, 227. It is here asserted that they were in possession until the appointment of Nuny, but it was not included in the chapels of Whalley in the valuation made for the vicar’s portion in 1296 ; ibid. 206 ; cf. Whitaker, op. cit. i, 258. 889 Whitaker, op. cit. i, 257. 51 Coucher, 227. 135 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE 18 March 1334, the king conceded the superior right of the abbey,*? which nevertheless had to pay 300 marks for the recognition.” In addition to this Richard de Moseley, to whom Queen Isabella had given the chaplaincy a fortnight before Edward’s letters patent, had to be bought out by a pension of £40 a year for life.?” The abbey’s title was afterwards several times attacked and the convent put to much trouble and expense. In 1344 an inquiry was ordered into allegations that Peter of Chester had held the chapel in gross, not as a dependency of Whalley, and that the abbey had quitclaimed its pretensions to the Earl of Lincoln.2% It was not until May, 1346, that Abbot Lindley in- duced the king to confirm his recognition of its rights.°® The question was reopened when Queen Isabella’s tenure of Clitheroe determined and it reverted to Henry, earl and afterwards duke of Lancaster, nephew of Earl Thomas. Henry did indeed resign his claims on the ad- vowson in 1349,**’ and collated at least one chaplain.*8 Several clerks also had obtained papal provisions of the chaplaincy,*” and after °” Coucher, 229, confirmed by Isabella on 13 May. The extant evidence is rather conflicting. The chapel was separately endowed by Robert de Lacy towards the end of the eleventh century with half a plough-land in Clitheroe (reduced later to two ox- gangs), and the tithes of his demesne lands in Black- burnshire and of animals, &c. in the forests of Bow- land and Blackburnshire. A chaplain named William obtained letters of protection for the chapel (described as ‘justly collated to him’) and its endowments from Pope Urban II (1088-99), or Urban III (1185-7), probably the former; Towneley MS. fol. 210. Whitaker, however, says (op. cit. i, 257) that Richard de Towneley held the chaplaincy about 1215 by gift of his brother Roger, the dean of Whalley. But no authority is given for this statement. *° In the inquisition after the death of the Earl of Lincoln in 1311 the annual value of the chapel is given as {14 6s. 8d. ; Three Lancs, Doc, (Chet. Soc.), 5. If this be correct the transaction of 1334 practically amounted to a purchase of the advowson by the abbey. The pension granted to Moseley suggests, however, an understatement ; see above. In 1380 the yearly income of the endowment was estimated to be £27 135. 4¢.; Towneley MS. fol. 212. The Pontefract Chartulary no doubt exaggerates in stating its annual value as 100 marks ; Dugdale, Mon. v, 642. °* Coucher, 234. A dispute at once arose with the vicar of Whalley as to who was responsible for the cure of souls and the provision of a chaplain. The bishop decided in 1339 that the cure belonged to the vicar but the abbey must find the chaplain and clerk ; Whitaker, op. cit. i, 178 ; Coucher, 235. ** Cal. of Pat. 1343-5, p. 425; Coram Rege R. 342, m. 78d. * Cal. of Pat. 1345-8, p. 85 ; Coucher, 331. =" Towneley MS. fol. 381; Cal. of Pat. 1348-50, p- 469. *° Whitaker, op. cit. i, 2573 cf. Cal. Pap. Letters, ivy FO: ™ Ibid.; Cas. Pap. Pet. i, 264, 324, 384. the death of Duke Henry Edward III put in John Stafford on the plea that the duke had alienated the advowson to the abbey without his licence.*® On 12 December, 1363, he restored the advowson to Duke John and his wife. In 1365 Abbot Lindley was pro- ceeding in the Court of Arches against Staf- ford,*%! and three years later Urban V ordered an investigation of the claim of John de Parre, who had a papal provision.*? The rights of Whalley seem to have been upheld.* In 1380 they were once more, and as far as we know for the last time, called in question. ‘The officers of John of Gaunt, duke of Lancaster, alleged the existence of an endowed chantry in the chapel which Queen Isabella, they said, gave to Whalley on condition of its maintaining daily service therein. As service was only held three times a week and the chapel had become ruinous the abbey, it was urged, had forfeited its rights. A local jury, however, decided in its favour.**4 The heavy expense to which the convent was put in defence of its claims may perhaps help to explain the slow progress of the new monastery buildings. In 1362 the monks were excused their contribution to the Cistercian levy until their church should be finished and the dormitory and refectory built.* But despite this and some valuable gifts of land the financial position of the house continued to be precarious. In 1366 its expenditure exceeded its receipts by £150 and its debt amounted to over £700. Much of this was incurred in consequence of the unsuccessful attempt made in October, 1365, by Richard de Chester, abbot of Combermere, supported by a party among the monks and ‘other malefactors’ to get rid of Abbot Lindley and replace him by William Banaster. Lindley called in the civil authorities against his opponents,who for amoment held the monastery against the sheriff and § posse comitatus” with ‘watch and ward.’38° There were only twenty-nine monks instead of the sixty contemplated on the removal to Whalley.” An attempt to secure the appropriation of another valuable benefice had not been successful. Henry, earl of Lancaster, who died in 1345, or his son and namesake before he was raised to the ducal dignity, bestowed upon them the advowson of the *° Whitaker, op. cit. i, 257, 261; Stretton, fol. 464. *" Towneley MS. fol. 215-16. ™ Cal. Pap. Letters. iv, 70. *° But at a heavy cost. Duke John exacted £500; Whitaker, op. cit. i, 97, 262. ™ Towneley MS. fol. 212-14. The stipend paid to the chaplain in 1521 was £4; Whitaker, op. cit. i, 257. * Ibid. i, 96. Part of the church was in Occupation by 1345 ; Lancs. Final Concords (Rec. Soc.), ii, 135 m. *° Coram Rege R. 426, m. xv; Whitaker, op. cit. i, 97. Banaster was probably a kinsman of John Banaster of Walton, one of the ‘ malefactors.’ “7 Ibid. But those resident at the granges are per- haps not included. There was only one ‘ conversus.” Lich. Epis. Reg. 136 RELIGIOUS HOUSES rectory of Preston in Amounderness, and the archbishop of York was petitioned to allow its appropriation, reserving a vicarage of {20a year.3%8 But he did not give this permission and even the advowson was not retained. A hermitage for female recluses in the parish churchyard founded and endowed by Henry, duke of Lancaster, and supplied with pro- visions from the abbey kitchen led to some disorders. In 1437 Henry VI dissolved the hermitage on representations from the convent that several of the anchoresses had returned to the worldand that their maid-servants were often ‘misgoverned.” The endowment was applied to the support of two chaplains to say mass daily for the souls of Duke Henry and the king and for the celebration of their obits by thirty thaplains.*9 In the last quarter of the fifteenth century a fierce quarrel raged between the abbey and Christopher Parsons, rector of Slaidburn, who disputed its right to the tithes of the forest of Bowland and of certain lands in Slaidburn. Though in the county and diocese of York and completely isolated from the parish of Whalley these districts formed part of the ancient demesne of Clitheroe and their tithes were in- cluded in the endowment of the Castle chapel of St. Michael. The two parties soon came to blows. On 22 November, 1480, while engaged in driving away tithe calves from the disputed lands Christopher ‘Thornbergh, the bursar of the abbey, was set upon by a mob instigated by the rector with cries of ‘Kill the monk, slay the monk,’ and severely beaten. Par- sons made the forest tenants swear on the cross of a groat to pay no tithes except to him.**! As each party appealed to his own diocesan the dispute was ultimately referred to Edward IV, who in May, 1482, decided in favour of the abbey.* The rector was ordered to pay all arrears and £200 towards the expenses in- 88 Whitaker, op. cit. i, 168; Towneley MS. fol. 384. The monks pleaded that their new build- ings would cost £3,000, that they had lost 200 marks a year by the inroads of the sea at Stanlaw, that their other Cheshire lands were unprofitable, and ‘malefactors’ there had caused them to lose £200 a year. In 1339 the officers of the king’s eldest son, created earl of Chester in 1333, had seized one of the lay brethren and distrained the abbot’s cattle on the ground that the abbey had been removed from Stanlaw to Whalley without the earl’s licence. The king interposed in their favour; Cal. of Close, 1539- 41, p. 246. 38° Whitaker, op. cit. i, 97, 102. #4 Thid. i, 104; Towneley MS. fol. 208. 341 Thid. 3® Tbid. fol. 206. In January 1481 a statement of the abbey’s case was drawn up and attested by a representative body of Lancashire clergy and laymen, the mayors of Wigan and Preston attaching their borough seals ; ibid. fol. 207-9. curred by the convent. Richard III in 1484, and Henry VII in 1492, confirmed the find- ing,?"* but Parsons was still giving trouble in 1494,°4 and nine years later a royal order commanded the men of the forests to pay their tithes to Whalley.** Little is known of the state of the abbey on the eve of the Dissolution. John Paslew, the last abbot, was afterwards accused of having sold much of the plate of the house to defray the cost of his assumption of the position of a mitred abbot and of a suit for licence to give ‘bennet and collet” in the abbey.* A comparison of its accounts for the years 1478 and 1521 shows a large increase of expenditure in the latter year, especially in the items of meat and drink, though this may possibly have been due, in part at least, to an increase in the number of monks or to some exceptional hospitality. It is noteworthy that the income derived from the appropriated rectories in 1521 exhibits a more than pro- portionate augmentation.**” Only one of the monks was singled out for immorality by the visitors of 1535.548 Crom- well subsequently relaxed in their favour the injunctions laid upon them by the visitors. Some restrictions on their movements were removed and only three divinity lectures a week were insisted on.*#9 In the autumn of the next year Abbot Paslew became implicated in the Pilgrimage of Grace. The abbey of Sawley, close by, was the centre of the movement in Craven and the adjoining parts of Lancashire. At the end of October, 1536, Nicholas Tempest, one of the Yorkshire leaders of the rising, came to Whalley with 400 men and swore the abbot and his brethren to the cause of the commons.” Paslew is alleged to have lent Tempest a horse and some plate ;#*! Aske, however, said he had no money from the abbot as he had from other abbots and priors, but intended to have.*? It may be that Paslew yielded reluctantly to the 8 Tbid. fol. 206, 207. 8 Thid. fol. 228. “8 L. and P. Hen. VILLI, xii (1), 621. 5” Whitaker, op. cit. i, 116-31. Owing to some error or misreading of a rubric Dr. Whitaker refers the whole meat and fish bill of the abbey (which in 1478 was over £97, in 1521 nearly £144) to the abbot’s own table. Comparison with the manu- script ‘Compoti’ of the bursars for 1484-1505 and 1507 to the end, preserved in a Towneley MS., leaves no doubt on this point. 48 L. and P. Hen. VIII, x, 364. 548 Whitaker, op. cit. i, 107. *° This step was decided on as early as 22 Oc- tober (L. and P. Hen. VIII, xii (1), 1020), but the only recorded occupation of Whalley by the rebels took place on the last day of the month ; ibid. xi, 947. They dispersed the same day on hearing of the truce concluded at Doncaster. 351 Tid. xii (1), 853, 879. 54 Thid. fol. 225. % Thid. 853. 2 137 18 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE disaffection by which he was surrounded. A grant by the convent of arent of £6 135. 4d. to Cromwell on 1 January, 1537, perhaps marks an attempt to make their peace with the government.**? But such offences as theirs were not overlooked. Yet as they were covered by the pardon granted in October there must have been subsequent offences. Shortly after Paslew sent a message to the abbot of Hailes that he was ‘sore stopped and acrased.” His letter was intercepted and may have contained something incriminatory.** Doubt- less he involved himself in the last phase of the ‘ Pilgrimage.’ °° He was tried at Lancaster and executed there on 10 March.*° His fellow monk William Haydock shared his fate, but was sent to Whalley for execution.*’ The Earl of Sussex, royal commissioner with the Earl of Derby, wrote next day to Cromwell the accomplishment of the matter of Whalley was God’s ordinance; else seeing my lord of Derby is steward of the house and so many gentlemen the abbot’s fee’d men, it would have been hard to find anything against him in these parts. It will be a terror to corrupt minds hereafter.** The possessions of the house were held to be forfeited by the abbot’s attainder, and the king gave orders that as it had been so infected with treason all the monks should be transferred to other monasteries or to secular capacities. He wrote vaguely of a new establishment of the abbey ‘as shalbe thought meet for the honour of God, our surety and the benefit of the county,’ *°® but it remained in the hands of the crown until 6 June, 1553, when the site and the manor of Whalley were sold to John Braddyl (to whose custody they had been committed after the forfeiture and who had 8 Whitaker, op. cit. i, 108. “" L, and P. Hen. VIII, xii (1), 389. *° This seems implied in L. and P. Hen. VIII, xii (2), 205. *° Stow, Chron. 574. Whitaker (op. cit. [ed. 3], 82, 140, corrected ed. 4, i, 109) accepted the tra- dition that he was executed at Whalley and gave the date as 12 March, referring to a register of the abbey. But Stow’s accuracy is established by Sussex’s letter from Lancaster on 11 March and the king’s reply; L. and P. Hen, VIII, xii (1), 6303 SP. Hen. VIII (Rec. Com.), i, 542. A letter of Paslew is in Bodl. MS. 106, fol. 22. *? Stow, loc. cit. He adds that John Eastgate, another monk of the house, was executed with the abbot and his quarters set up in various Lancashire towns. But he seems to have confused him with Richard Eastgate, a monk of Sawley ; L. and P. Hen. VIII, xii (1), 632; SP. Hen. VIII (Rec. Com.), i, 542. “8 TL. and P. Hen. VIII, xii (1), 630. *° S.P Hen. VIII (Rec. Com.), i, 542. An inventory of its goods made on 24 March is in the Appendix to the Coucher 1255. A letter to Cromwell implies that the monks were given 40s. and their ‘capacities’ to enter secular life; L. and P. Hen. VIII, xii (2), 205. leased them since 12 April, 1543,) and Richard Assheton.*’ A partition was at once arranged by which Braddyl took most of the land and Assheton the house. The abbey was dedicated to St. Mary. The most important of the new endowments bestowed upon the house in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries have already been noticed. Few additions were made after the acquisition of Whalley. Thomas of Lancaster gave half the adjoining township of Billington in 1318,**! and the other moiety was granted with the manor of Le Cho in 1332 by Geoffrey de Scrope.*” The gift of Toxteth by Earl Thomas seems to have been cancelled when the project of removing the abbey thither was abandoned. A third of the manor of Wiswell and a tenth of that of Read, both in the vicinity of the abbey, were acquired respectively in 1340 and 1342.5 Some smaller gifts of land were made to the abbey in the parish of Rochdale. Its temporalities before the removal to Whalley had been assessed in 1291 for the tenth at just over £75.5* In 1535 they were worth £279 a year, almost exactly the figure at which they had appeared in the ‘compotus’ of 1478.5 Its four appropriated churches, Eccles, Roch- dale, Blackburn, and Whalley, were rated in the taxation of 1291 at something less than £150 a year, but their real value was greater.*** In the ‘compotus’ of 1478 the income derived from them is stated to be £356, which rises in 1521 to £592." In 1535 it was £272 75. 82.3% The gross income of the abbey’s temporalities and spiritualities in that year amounted therefore to £551 45. 6d. After the deduction of certain fixed charges the abbey’s new assessment for the tenth was £321 9s. 14d. The fixed charges included £43 10s. in pensions to the four vicars of its churches, a contribution of £2 3s. 4d. to the Cistercian College of St. Bernard at Oxford,?® © Coucher,1175. The purchase-money was £2,132. Braddyl was a servant of that devourer of monastic lands Sir Thomas Holcroft ; Lancs. Pleadings, ii, 215. *! Coucher, 939. ” Thid. 998. ** Ibid. 1082, 1092. ® Pope Nich, Tax, 259, 309. * Valr Eccl. v, 229 3 Whitaker, op. cit.1, 117 sqq. Their most valuable lands were those of Staining, Bil- lington, Rochdale, Stanney, and Cronton in the order given. Their manors were Stanney, Ashton, Acton, and Willington in Cheshire; Whalley, Marland, Stain- ing, Cronton, and Billington in Lancashire. For their ecclesiastical jurisdiction see ibid, 174-5, 263, 270; Coucher, 1173 ; Act Bk. of Whalley (Chet. Soc. [New Ser.], xli). “* Pope Nich. Tax. 249. “Whitaker, op. cit: 1, 116. ‘The latter year was probably exceptional. : °° Valor Eccl. v, 227. Whialle 1 65. 8d. *° Tn addition to the keep 7 = a scholar from the abbey, which seems to have cost £5 a year, and the expenses of his graduation. The bachelor gradua- tion expenses of a scholar in 1478 appear in the accounts as f1, but in 162] 65s. 8d. i 3 Whitaker, loc. cit. eehae ee ga 138 RELIGIOUS HOUSES over £46 in fees to stewards and other officers headed by the Earl of Derby, chief steward, with £5 6s, 84. The abbey employed five receivers and eleven bailiffs. Over £116 was allowed for almsgiving and the support of the poor. By a provision of John de Lacy the house was bound to keep twenty-four poor and feeble folk. This cost nearly £49, the relief of casual poor coming to the monastery over £62, and the residue came under the head of alms on special occasions.*”1 The abbey produced no chronicle. The ‘Liber Loci Benedicti de Whalley,’ a miscel- laneous register extending from 1296 to 1346, includes two political poems of the early years of Edward JII.8* An account of the early history of Whalley church is well-known under the title of Status de Blaghornshire®™ ABBOTS OF STANLAW AND WHALLEY °? Ralph, first abbot, died 24 Aug. 1209 Osbern Charles,*”? occurs 1226-44 Peter Simon,*”* occurs Oct. 1259, died 7 Dec. 1268 Richard of Thornton,*” died 7 Dec. 1269 Richard Norbury *”* (Northbury), died 1 Jan. 1272-3 Robert Haworth,*” resigned before 8 June, 1292, died 22 April, 1304 Gregory of Norbury *8 (Northbury), occurs 1292, died 22 Jan. 1309-10 Eliasof Worsley,*”? S.T.P., resigned ; died 1318 John of Belfield, died 25 July 1323 3% The fees given to gentlemen who did not hold abbey offices—referred to by Sussex in the letter quoted above—may be seen in the ‘compoti.? In 1521 Lord Monteagle, Master Marney, Hugh Sherborne, esq., John Talbot, and others received sums from {2 downwards ; Whitaker, op. cit. i, 121. 31 Valor Eccl. v, 230. sla Add. MS. 10374; Whitaker, op. cit. i, 155; a Whalley lectionary is printed, ibid. 193-9. 3b Coucher, 186. 378 Where not otherwise stated the authority for the following names and dates is the professedly complete list of abbots in Cotton MS. Titus, F. 3, fol. 258, printed (with some discrepancies in detail) by Whitaker (Hist. of Whalley [ed. 4], i, 88 sqq), and [abbots of Stanlaw only] by Ormerod (Hist. of Ces. ii, 398 sqq.). 573 Cal. of Pat. 1225-32, p. 71 3 Coucher, 883. 374 Ormerod, loc. cit. 85 Ormerod is inclined to affiliate him to the family of Le Roter of Thornton near Stanlaw. 376 ¢ Nocte circumcisionis’ ; Whitaker, op. cit. i, 88; 7 Kal. Jan.; Ormerod, loc. cit. °” Coucher, 810. 38 Tbid. Summoned to the Parliament of 6 Jan. 1300 ; Whitaker, op. cit. i, 151. By an error with regard to the feast of St. Vincent Martyr observed in England the editors (ibid. 91) place his death on 9 June, 1309. 979 He made his profession of obedience to Bishop Langton on 12 April, 1310; Lich. Epis. Reg. Langton, fol. 574, According to the Cotton MS. he died at the monastery of Bexley, which may be iden- tified with the Cistercian abbey of Boxley in Kent. Robert of Topcliffe,*® resigned in or before 1342, died 20 Feb. 1350-1 John Lindley,**! D.D., occurs 1342-77 William Selby,’® occurs 19 March, 1379-80, and 25 April 1383 (?) Nicholas of York,?* occurs 1392, died 1417 or 1418 William Whalley,*** occurs 7 April, 1418, and 5 Aug. 1426, died 1434 John Eccles,**° died 1442 or 1443 Nicholas Billington,**° occurs ¢. 1445 and Aug. 1447 Robert Hamond *” William Billington Ralph Clitheroe (or Slater),3*° occurs 1464-7 Ralph Holden,*®® elected 1472, died 1480 or 1481 Christopher Thornbergh,™ elected 1481, died 1486 or 1487 William Read,*" elected 1487 ; died 13 July, 1507 John Paslew,*” elected 7 August, 1507; executed 10 March, 1537 The common seal of the abbey was round ; in the middle the Virgin seated with the Child on her left knee under a Gothic canopy; on each side of her a shield, that on the dexter bear- ing 3 garbs with a star over it (Chester), the one on the sinister a lion rampant (Lacy), over it a crescent surmounted with a fleur-de-lys; in a niche beneath, the abbot with pastoral staff.°% Legend :-— S$ . COMVNE . ABBIS . ET . COVENTVS LOCI BNDICTI . DE . WHALLEY 5 Sub-prior in 1306 ; Whitaker, op. cit. i, 93, 95. 8 Thid. i, 95. 8° Towneley MS. fol. 273, 324-6. The date 1323 must be an error. Previously vicar of Whalley. %° ‘Whitaker, op. cit. i, 100, from Inq. p.m. 5 Tbid. ; Towneley MS. fol. 264. $86 Whitaker, op. cit. i, 103, from Ing. p.m. 886 Lich. Epis. Reg. Booth, fol. 454; Pal. of Lanc. Plea R. 10, m. 73. 587 Whitaker (op. cit. i, 103) suggests that this is a mistake for Harwood, but Hamond or Haymond is a name which occurs at Combermere ; Ormerod, op. cit. ili, 404). 588 Pal. of Lanc. Plea R. 4 Edw. IV, m. 22. Whita- ker places him before the three preceding abbots. * Part of 1479 fell in his seventh year (Whitaker, op. cit. i, 104). % His fourth year extended into 1485 ; Towneley Compoti, sab anno. °°! His first year extended into 1488 ; ibid. ; Whit- aker, op. cit. i, 105. 2 Ibid. His execution took place in the thirtieth year of his abbacy. Stow (4am. 574) reckons him as the twenty-fifth abbot. He was between 60 and 70 in 1530 and his health was already broken ; Lancs. Plead. i, 204-5. 393 BLM. Cat. of Seals, i, 806. Figured in Whitaker, op. cit. i, 201. See ibid. for the canting arms of the abbey, three whales with croziers issuing from their mouths. 139 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE HOUSES OF AUSTIN CANONS 8. THE PRIORY OF CONISHEAD The Augustinian priory of Conishead was originally founded as a hospital in the reign of Henry II and before 1181, the year of the death of Roger, archbishop of York, who licensed the appropriation to the brethren of the churches of Pennington in Furness and of Muncaster and Whitbeck in Cumberland,’ the gift of Gamel de Pennington.? Gamel, who also gave the church of Orton in Westmorland and the vill of Poulton in Lonsdale and whose manor of Pennington adjoined the estate on which the hospital was built, was probably its founder ; he is so described in several late mediaeval docu- ments.? That honour has, however, been claimed for William de Lancaster II, baron of Kendal (1170-84) and tenant of the manor of Ulverston under Furness Abbey, who granted to the house all Conishead, the church of Ulverston, and 40 acres in its fields; a salt-work and rights of turbary, pasture, pannage, and timber-taking in his wood of Furness and manor of Ulverston ; and whose descendants held the advowson or patronage of the priory. But Mr. Farrer sugzests that as far as Conishead was concerned he was only confirming as superior lord an original gift of Gamel de Pennington.° This suggestion is open to the objection that he does not mention Gamel and that Conishead is not enumerated among the latter’s gifts in Edward II’s inspeximus. Possibly the true explanation of these contradictions may be found in a remark dropped by a visitor to the priory in 1535. After stating that it was founded by Gamel de Pennington in 1067 (21167) he adds :—‘ It was in strife for some time being built upon the land of William Lancaster, baron of Kirkby Kendal and Ulverston.’® If there was a dispute William de Lancaster may have ignored Gamel’s grant and made a new one. 1 Duchy of Lance. Anct. D., L. 291 ; Farrer, Lancs. Pipe R. 366. 7 Pat. 12 Edw. II, pt. 1, m. 22 (which also con- firms his gift of Orton church and Poulton). A grant of Muncaster and its chapel of St. Aldeburge by his eldest son Benet with the consent of Alan his heir (Duch. of Lanc. Anct. D., L. 579) is regarded by Mr. Farrer (op. cit. 360) as a confirmation of his father’s gift, to which, however, it makes no reference. 8 Dodsworth MSS. (Bodl. Lib.), cxxxi, fol. 1-84; Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 5, No. 15 ; L. and P. Hen. VIII. ix, 1173. ‘In the absence of an original and of a chartulary of the house this charter is only known in an abbre- viated form from the general inspeximus by Edw. II, of the priory’s evidences. (See note 2 above.) Mr. Farrer attempts a reconstruction ; Lancs. Pipe R. 356. 5 Tbid. 357. ° L. and P. Hen. VIII, ix, 1173. On the death without issue in 1246 of William de Lancaster III, and the division of his iands between the sons of his sisters Heloise de Bruce and Alice de Lindsay, the patronage of Conishead formed part of the Lindsay moiety and so passed by marriage into the possession of the family of Couci (or de Guines).? William de Couci dying childless in 1343 it may be pre- sumed to have followed the fortunes of ‘this fief, which was frequently regranted by the crown and as frequently escheated again. The last subject who held it before the dissolution of the monasteries was the illegitimate son of Henry VIII, Henry, duke of Richmond, but in 1536 it was once more in the hands of the crown. William de Lancaster II followed up his charter by further gifts, and before his death in 1184 the promotion of the house to the dignity of a priory seems to have taken place.® His grandson William de Lancaster III was also a generous donor, and finally gave the advowson and custody of the leper hospital of St. Leonard at Kendal on his death-bed. Other early benefactors were John son of Punzun, who gave the church of Ponsonby in Cumberland to the priory while it was still a hospital; Maldred son of Gamel de Pennington, Alexander son of Gerold and his wife, Alice de Romilly, William de Bardsey, John de Copeland, and Anselm son of Michael (le Fleming) de Fur- ness, from whom they obtained the chapel of Drigg, near Ravenglass on the Cumberland coast.® Most of these grants are only known from the general confirmation of their charters which the ’ Cal. of Pat. 1330-4, p. 560 and 1340-3, p. 70. It went with a moiety of Ulverston. It is true that in a division of the Bruce moiety of the barony of Kendal effected in or before 1297 (ibid. 1292-1301, p- 304) between William de Ros and his cousin Marmaduke de Twenge, the patronage of Conishead is included in the share of the latter. But this must surely be an error or a baseless claim ; in the later division of 1301 it does not appear ; Lancs. Final Concords (Rec. Soc.), i, 213-15. For the descent of the Lancaster estates see Cal. of Pat. 1381-92, p. 4173 Lanes. Inquests (Rec. Soc.), i, 168, 2403 Ferguson, Hist. of Westmld. 118 ; Nicolson and Burn, Hist. of Westmld. and Cumb. i, 40. * His grant of Gascow was made ‘Deo et ecclesiae B. Mariae de Conyngeshevede et canonicis ibidem Deo servientibus’” (Lancs. Pipe R. 359), while earlier bene- factions were made to ‘the hospital (or house) of St. Mary of C. and the brethren there.’ * Drigg, now a separate parish church, may have been a chapel in the parish of Ireton ; Nicolson and Burn (Hist. of Westmld. and Cumb. ii, 25) needlessly question its identification with the ‘capella de Dreg’ given to Conishead, on the ground that part of the manor of Drigg belonged to Calder Abbey. 140 RELIGIOUS canons secured from Edward II at York in 1318.” In 1256 Magnus, king of Man and the Isles, had freed ‘his special friends the prior and convent of Conishead’ from all toll throughout his dominions.” That so considerable a part of their endow- ments lay remote from the priory in South Cum- berland (Copeland) was not wholly an accident. The monks of Furness were naturally jealous of the rise of another religious house so close to their own and on land of which they were chief lords. Earl William de Warenne had, indeed, at their instance forbidden the establishment of a second house within the bounds of Furness,” and the original form of a hospital may possibly have been intended to get round this prohibition. The abbey and the priory were soon involved in a dispute, the former claiming the churches of Ulverston and Pennington as chapels of their appropriate church of Urswick, and the canons asserting their right to Hawkshead chapel, as dependent upon the church of Ulverston,’* and to the fishery at Depestal. An amicable settle- ment was, however, arrived at in 1208 by the mediation of certain magnates and the advice of the abbot of Savigny and other heads of Cister- cian houses. The claims in question were respec- tively abandoned and the opportunity was taken to impose restrictions on the younger house which would avert future quarrels. The number of canons was never to exceed thirteen without the permission of Furness Abbey ; no woman must dwell in the house, and any future acquisitions of land in Furness must be confined (except by the abbey’s consent) to the Ulverston fief, and even here were not to amount in the total to more than a third of its area. Monks and canons agreed to live in relations of brotherly affection, each giving the other advice and help when need arose. This settlement being considered specially favourable to the priory, it was required to pay to Furness an annual pension of 50s.4 Yet the affair did not end here. The rector of Ulverston still asserted the rights of his church over Hawks- head chapel; the monks of Furness apparently thought they had got the worst of the compro- mise. But the former ultimately admitted their contention on condition of being allowed to hold the chapel from Dalton for the rest of his life,> and the archdeacon of Richmond com- pleted the pacification by raising the pension payable by the canons to Furness to £6.'° Pat. 12 Edw. II, pt. 1, m. 22; Dugdale, Moz. vi, 556. N Ibid. 558. ? Furness Coucher (Chet. Soc.), 126. 8 Furness contended that it wasa chapel of Dalton. “ Duchy of Lanc. Anct. D., L.. 400 ; Lancs. Pipe R. 362. The Furness Coucher (437) supplies the date. ® Tbid. 651. 6 In 1230 according to Nofit. Cestr. li, 533; no reference is given. This was certainly the amount paid in 1292 (Pope Nich. Tax. 308), and down to the Dissolution ; Valor Eccl. (Rec. Com.), v, 271. HOUSES Henceforth the two houses seem to have lived on good terms. It was part of the arrangement of 1208 that the priory should enjoy the same rights in the churches of Ulverston and Pennington as Furness had in Urswick. Archbishop Roger had, we have seen, already appropriated Pennington to the house, but the archdeacon of Richmond was in- duced to confirm his charter.” He proceeded to appropriate Ulverston to the use of the canons at the instance of the patron, Gilbert Fitz Reinfred, son-in-law of William de Lancaster II.%% No vicarage was ever ordained here or indeed in any of the Conishead churches in the diocese of York. With the exception of Ulverston, whose proximity to the priory supplied a ground for appropriating it in spirituals as well as temporalities, none of them was worth more than {10 a year.” They were served by stipendiary chaplains.” At Orton ° in the diocese of Carlisle, which was more valua- ble, Bishop Hugh (1219-23) in sanctioning an appropriation insisted on the appointment of a vicar, but the living was sometimes held by canons of the house.21_ In 1220 Orton, in spite of the appropriation, was withheld from them by one J. de Rumeli, clerk, but a commission named by Pope Honorius III decided in their favour.” Early in the fourteenth century the priory’s right to Orton church was again assailed. The abbot of Whitby claimed it as a chapel of his appro- priate church of Crosby Ravensworth, and in 1309 took forcible possession. Next year both parties agreed to arbitration, which resulted in favour of Conishead. The priory suffered severely during the Scottish invasion of 1316. The taxable value of Ulverston rectory had to be reduced by five-sixths, and its other churches in the archdeaconry of Richmond entirely relieved 7 This seems the natural point to place Archdeacon Honorius’s confirmation of the appropriation of Mun- caster, Whitbeck, and Pennington ; Lancs. Pipe R. 366. 8 Ibid. 364. i In 1292 Ulverston was taxed at {29 65. 8¢.; Pope Nich. Tax. 308. 9 Boniface IX, in 1390, granted an indult that the churches of Ulverston and Muncaster and the chapel of Drigg should be served ‘as has been done from time immemorial’ by stipendiary priests removable at their pleasure ; Ca/. Pap. Letters, iv, 367. 1 Duchy of Lanc. Anct. D., L. 292, 293; Nicolson and Burn, op. cit. i, 482, 483. In admitting Simon of Horbling as vicar in 1281, Bishop Ireton stipulated that the rule which forbad the canons to go into the outer world alone should be observed by associating with him a fellow canon and a secular chaplain and that he should not personally administer the sacraments. ™ Duchy of Lanc. Anct. D., L. 563. They claimed to have possessed the appropriation ‘aliquamdiu,’ so that Bishop Hugh may only have been confirming an earlier assignment. The papal order implies that Orton was not the only possession of which Conishead had at this time been unlawfully deprived. 8 Cal. of Pat. 1307-13, pp. 245, 246; Duchy of Lanc. Anct. D., L. 294. 141 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE of taxation.* In 1341 a royal licence was granted to the canons to appropriate the church of Hale in Copeland, the gift of Adam son of Richard of Ulverston.” A century later (1440) they were obliged to go to law to recover their rights in the hospital of St. Leonard at Kendal, of which they had been disseised by Sir Thomas Parr, who inherited part of the Bruce moiety of the Lancaster estates.” As early as 1525 the house was threatened with dissolution. Certain persons brought pressure to bear on Wolsey to take it into the king’s hands, apparently as one of the small monasteries which the cardinal was authorized by Pope Clement VII to suppress in order to endow his college at Oxford. The Duke of Suffolk intervened on its behalf ; ‘the house,’ he said, ‘is of great succour to the King’s subjects and the prior of virtuous disposi- tion.’ ” For the moment the danger passed. The next prior, Thomas Lord, was represented in a much less favourable light in 1533. Dr. Thomas Legh, afterwards too well known as the visitor of the monasteries, accused him in a letter to Cromwell as having contrived the murder with circumstances of great barbarity, on 18 July in that year, of his (Legh’s) kinsman, John Bardsey, a neighbour of the priory. The crime had been reported to Mr. Justice Fitz Herbert at the ensuing Lancaster assizes, but no indictment was put in as the matter was ‘colourably borne by divers gentlemen,’ *® Legh does not mention the motive of the assassins, and the charge against the prior can hardly have been sustained, for no action seems to have been taken against him. The only corroboration, if it can be called such, is contained in a petition to the chancellor of the duchy from Richard Johnson, who asserted that the prior had maliciously ejected him from the office of ‘Carter or Guyder of Levyn sands in Furness,’ which his father and grandfather had held before him, because he arrested Edward Lancaster, who by the prior’s command had murdered the petitioner’s master, John Bardsey.” Having an income of less than £200 a year, the priory was dissolved under the Act of Feb- ruary 1536. There were then eight canons including the prior, an ex-prior with a pension, and one canon who was ‘ keeping cure’ at Orton * Pope Nich. Tax. 308. There must have been a considerable recovery by 1390 when the priory was said to be worth 340 marks a year; Ca/. Pap. Letters, iv, 367. * Cal. of Pat. 1304-43, p. 195. The archdeacon of Richmond gave his consent in 1345 ; Nicolson and Burn, op. cit. ii, 31. In 1292 it was taxed as worth £6 135. 44. reduced in 1318 to £2. *® Duchy of Lanc. Class x 3, ii, 31. 7 L. and P. Hen. VIII, iv (1), 1253. 8 Thid. vi, 1124. * Duchy of Lanc. Misc. bdle. 158, No. 22. John Hartley held this office of ‘ Conductor of all the king’s people across the sands of the sea called Leven sands’ at the Dissolution. church, but revocable. “The two latter desired to be released from their vows.*° If Doctors Legh and Layton, the visitors of the previous autumn, are to be believed, five of them were guilty of incontinence, two in an aggravated form.*! Two persons, one a widow, ‘had their living’ of the house. Alms to the amount of nearly £9 a year were given to the poor, the greater part by the direction of the founder. Nine waiting servants, fourteen common officers of household, and sixteen servants of husbandry were employed. Church and buildings were found in ‘ good state and plight.’*? The prior was provided for by the vicarage of Orton, the others were allowed pensions of £1 17s. 8d.*° They were not yet dispersed or had returned when on 16 October, 1536, they wrote to certain of the northern rebels asking for their help.*4 The priory was dedicated to St. Mary. Its original endowments as a hospital had since been largely increased by successive benefactors, chiefly in Furness, Westmorland, and Copeland. William de Lancaster III extended their demesne lands in the parish of Ulverston, and his other gifts included fishery rights in Thurstan Water (Coniston Lake) and the rivers Crake and Leven.** In Furness, lands were given at Bardsey by the family of that name,** at Torver, by John son of Roger de Lancaster,” in Copeland, lands at Whitbeck by the Morthyng family and others,®® at Hale by Adam son of Richard de Ulverston.*® In Westmorland, besides Kendal hospital and Baysbrown in Langdale, another gift of William de Lancaster III, they possessed a moiety of the vill of Patton, the gift of John son of Richard de Coupland,” the manor of Haverbrack (in Beetham parish), given by Margaret de Ros,*! niece of William de Lancaster III, and other lands. Poulton in Lonsdale was alienated by the priory in 1235, but at the Dissolution it had some valuable property in Lancaster.4? These tempo- ralities were valued for the tenth in 1535 at * Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 5, No. 7. In 1390 the number of canons had been nine 3 Cal. of Pap. Letters, iv, 367. " L. and P. Hen. VIII, x, 364. * Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 5, No. 7. * Ibid. ptfo. 5, Nos. 8, 11. * L. and P. Hen. VIII, xi, 1279. " ta ee Mon. v, 55 ; Duchy of Lance. Anct. D., . 578. * Dugdale, Mon. v, 55. % Duchy of Lanc, Anct. D., L. 565. * Ibid. L. 568, 569, 571-4, 584, 586 ; Nicolson and a cit. li, 16, al. of Pat. 1340-3, p. 19¢. “ Pat. 12 Edw. I, bed : en " Ibid. ; Nicolson and Burn, Op. cit. i, 227. * Lancs. Final Con. (Rec. Soc.), i, 63. * Duchy of Lanc. Rental and Surv. ptfo. 5, No. 11. The priory had bailiffs at Blawith (par. of Ulverston), Baysbrown, Whitbeck, and Haverbrack, and a fifth for its Lancashire lands. 142 RELIGIOUS HOUSES about £52, seven churches and the chapel of Drigg at a little over £72, and after all deduc- tions the clear annual income of the house was estimated to be £97.44 The commissioners who made a re-valuation at the Dissolution raised it to £161 5s. 9d.“ They valued the bells and lead at £44 18s., and movable goods at over £288. The debts owed by the house were nearly £88. Thomas Burgoyn, one of the commissioners, sought to purchase the site of the priory and other lands,** but the negotiations fell through, and the demesne lands were at first farmed by Lord Monteagle, and in 1547 granted to Sir William Paget.‘ Priors oF CoNnIsHEAD R. prior,*® occurs between 1194 and 1199. Thomas,“ occurs before May, 1206, and in 1208 John,” occurs 1235 and 1258-9 Thomas of Morthyng,* occurs between 1272 and 1292 Robert,°" occurs 1292 William Fleming,” occurs 1309 and 1318 John,® occurs March 1343 Richard of Bolton,®* occurs 1373, 1376, and 1401 John Conyers,® occurs ¢. 1430 “ Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 5, No. 2; Valor Eccl. (Rec. Com.), v, 271. In 1390 the esti- mated income had been 340 marks; Ca/. Pap. Letters, iv, 367. This was no doubt the gross amount, but even allowing for this there seems to have been a con- siderable drop subsequently, if the figure is correct. * Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 5, No. 7. The increase was chiefly on thechurches. In a rental of Sept. 1536 (ibid. No. 11) the temporalities figure at £60, the spiritualities at £110, so that the estimate of the pre- vious May had been more than realized. Ulverston church was farmed at just double the amount (£21) at which it was valued in 1534-5. This was said to leave the farmers a profitof £10; ibid. No. 8. Easter offerings and tithes realized three times as much as the estimate of 1535. 6 Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 5, No. 9. *’ Duchy of Lanc. Misc. Bks. xxiii, 10d. “8 Lancs. Pipe R. 339. ® Ibid. 362; Cockersand Chartul. 1039 ; Hist. of Lane. Ch. (Chet. Soc.), 385-6. 5° Lancs. Final Concords, i, 63 ; Duchy of Lanc. Anct. D., L. 590; Coram Rege R. 160, m.9 4. 187, m. 44. 51 Duchy of Lanc. Anct. D., L. 564. 5la Assize R. 408 m. 40¢. A predecessor named John is referred to. ® Duchy of Lanc. Anct. D., L. 565 ; Cal. of Pat. 1307-13, p. 246; Pat. 12 Edw. II, pt. 1, m. 22. 53 Assize R. 1435, m. 41. 5 Duchy of Lanc. Anct. D.,L. 1191, 1127. This assumes that prior Richard of 1401 (Lancs. Plea R. No. 1, m. 264) is Richard de Bolton. 55 Co, Plac. Div. Cos. No. 34. Described as late prior on 9 April, 1431. John, occurs 1505 and 1507 George Carnforth,” occurs 1515-16, pen- sioned 1527 Thomas Lord,’ occurs 1535, surrendered 1536 g. PRIORY OF CARTMEL The Augustinian priory of Cartmel was founded shortly after the accession of Richard I by William Marshal, afterwards earl of Pem- broke.*® He endowed the house with the whole district of Cartmel, between Leven and Winster, granted to him out of the demesne of the honour of Lancaster by Henry II in 1185 or 1186,” and confirmed by his son John, count of Mortain, on his investment with the honour by Richard I immediately after his accession ; John also giving Marshal permission to found a house of religion there and endow it with the entire fief. The first canons were brought from the priory of Bradenstoke near Malmesbury in Wiltshire,® founded in 1142 by Walter of Salisbury, whose grandson, William earl of Salisbury, was one of the witnesses to Marshal’s charter. This, however, expressly excluded any dependence upon the mother house. Included in the original endowment was the parish church of Cartmel and its chapels, With the consent of the ordinary the old church, dedicated to St. Michael, was appropriated to the use of the canons, pulled down and replaced by the new priory church of St. Mary, in which an altar of St. Michael was 5° Duchy of Lanc. Misc. bdle. 158, No. 22; Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 4, No. 4. ’ Probably resigned. His pension of £10 (with food and drink to amount of {5 a year) was granted 15 June, 1527; ibid. ptfo. 5, No. 11. He was alive in 15363; ibid. 58 Valor Eccl. (Rec. Com.), v, 271. Became vicar of Orton (ibid.). According to Nicolson and Burn , (Hist. of Westmld. and Cumb. i, 483) he was vicar in 1534, but quaere. The original charter is lost, but is recited in an inspeximus of 17 Edw. IL; Lancs. Pipe Rolls, 341. Tanner and Dugdale, owing to a misdating of a final concord which really belongs to 1208, assign it to 1188, but its mention of Marshal’s wife makes it later than his marriage in Aug. 1189 ; ibid. 70. Com- parison with John’s two charters (ost) renders it probable that the grant belongs to the late months of that year or to 1190, and certainly not later than 1194. 8 Ibid. 66, 70. It contained g carucates worth £32 a year. 6 Ibid. 343. Robert de Breteuil, one of the wit- nesses, became earl of Leicester in Aug. 1190, and was invested with the earldom 1 Feb. 1191. ® Harl. Chart. 83, A. 27. Probably preceded the foundation charter, though Mr. Farrer (Lancs. Pipe R. 345) places it ‘shortly after.’ 8 Testa de Nevill, ii, fol. 835. 143 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE reserved for the use of the parishioners, the cure of souls being exercised by a hired secular priest or by one of the canons in priest’s orders, ap- pointed and removed at the convent’s sole pleasure.™ The founder granted the compact fief of Cartmel with all his seignorial privileges therein, and John in confirming Marshal’s charter on becoming king (1 August, 1199) specifies in detail the extensive immunities conveyed—in- cluding sac, soc, toll, team, infangenthef and outfangenthef, freedom from suit to hundred or shire courts, exemption from pleas of murder, theft, hamsoken and forestel, from scutage, geld, danegeld, dona, scots and aids, from toll, tallage, lestage and pontage, from castle-work and bridge- work, and from all other customs and secular exactions. These privileges at first attached only to the demesne lands of the priory, but six weeks after granting Magna Carta John was induced to extend them to their tenants. The addition of the four words et omnes tenentes sui cost the house 200 marks; the king had ex- torted this sum from them during the interdict, and they now agreed to set off the debt against his new concession. Later sovereigns several times inspected and confirmed the priory charters.” In 1292 on the other hand it was called upon by a writ Quo warranto to show evidence for its immunities. Some rights it was said to claim were not covered by the charters ; that of hold- ing the sheriff's tourn the prior disclaimed ; in regard to wreck of the sea and waif judgement went against him and the crown reserved these rights and granted them to Edmund, earl of Lancaster. The assize of bread and beer was allowed as appendant to the market William Marshal had had at Cartmel.® Confirmation of their charters was also obtained from Rome. Gregory IX, in 1233, took the priory and its property under the papal protection and bestowed a number of the privileges usually conferred on monasteries, such as the right to celebrate divine service during an interdict, and the right of sepulture in their church, provided the parish church of the defunct did not lose its dues. To the founder’s acquisition (by his marriage) of the vast Clare estates in Leinster the priory * Cal. Pap. Letters, iv, 366. In 1208 we hear of the ‘ rights of the prior of Cartmel and of the church of St. Michael of Cartmel’ (Lancs. Final Conc. i, 39), though the priory was from the first dedicated to St. Mary. Rot. Chart. (Rec. Com.), 8. * Ibid. 215 (25 July, 1215) ; Lancs. Pipe R. 247. * Hen. III in 1270 (Duchy of Lanc. Roy. Chart. No. 124) ; Edw. If in 1323 (Harl. Chart. 51, H. 2); Henry IV in 1401 (Cal. of Pat. 1399-1401, p. 419); Walter Marshal, earl of Pembroke (1231-45), con- firmed his father’s grant (Harl. Chart. 83, B. 38). “ Plac. de Quo. Warr.; Pat. 21 Edw. I, pt. 1, m. 6; Rot. Chart. 23 Edw. I, m. 4. © Baines, Hist. of Lancs. (ed. Croston), v, 628. owed a connexion with Ireland which gave it a less purely local position than other Lancashire houses save Furness. By a charter in which he styled himself Earl of Pembroke, Marshal granted to the canons the vill of Kilrush in Kildare (with the advowson of its church) and the church of Ballysax and chapel of Ballymaden in the diocese of Kildare to be appropriated to their own uses.”? The latter part of the gift involved them and the donor in a quarrel with the Augustinian canons of St. Thomas’s Abbey, Dublin, who claimed these two benefices. A compromise was arranged by papal commissioners in 1205, the Dublin house surrendering its claim to the disputed churches, but being consoled by a grant of lands in their vicinity.” These Irish estates of Cartmel frequently required the pre- sence of some of their body, an interesting memorial of which is contained in an undated charter of fraternity in which the prior and convent of the cathedral church of Holy Trinity at Dublin agree to entertain any canon of Cartmel visiting Dublin as one of themselves, to celebrate masses for the souls of all members of that house and inscribe their names in the ‘Martyrology’ of Holy Trinity. During the first half of the thirteenth century the prior of Cartmel ‘staying in England’ frequently had letters nominating attorneys, one of whom was usually a canon, to represent him in Ireland. The hospitality of the Dublin canons must have mitigated the dangers of these absences from the house, and the clause of the rule which forbade a canon to go into the world unaccom- panied by a fellow canon may not have been wholly disregarded. Nevertheless their wander- ings can hardly fail to have had an unsettling effect, and it is perhaps significant that the priory had been in existence barely half a century when disorders within it called for papal intervention. A number of the canons and conversi had been excommunicated, some for using personal vio- lence to each other, others for retaining property and refusing obedience to the prior ; the excom- municated canons took holy orders and celebrated the divine offices while still unabsolved. Pope In- nocent IV, in 1245, empowered the prior to give the less heinous offenders, if penitent, absolution and dispensation, and to suspend the recalcitrant for two years. Those guilty of violence were ® Dugdale, Mon. vi, 455 ; Cal. of Pat. 1343-5, p: 193. ‘The priory also had land at Callan in Tippe- rary ; Lancs. Chart. No. 2. Cf. Chart. of St. Mary’s Abbey, Dublin (Rolls Ser.), App. 401-3. ” Reg. of the Abbey of St. Thomas (Rolls Ser.), 118, 337-8. Two years after the settlement of this Irish dispute Cartmel was involved in litigation at home with Ralph de Beetham, lord of Arnside, over fishing rights in the River Kent, which then as now was in the habit of shifting its course in the estuary from the Cartmel or Lancashire side to the Westmorland shore and vice versa. An agreement was come to in Jan. 1208 ; Lancs. Final Conc. i, 39. 144 RELIGIOUS HOUSES to be sent to him for absolution.” These mea- sures do not seem to have been entirely successful, for three years afterwards the archbishop of York commissioned the abbot of Furness and the pre- centor of Beverley to inquire into alleged irregu- larities in the house and, if necessary, to deprive the prior and his subordinates.’® In 1250 an old dispute with the patrons, as to their control over the election of the priors and rights of custody during vacancies, reached a final settlement in the royal court. The founder provided in his charter that on the death of a prior the canons should choose two canons and present them to him or his heirs ‘ ut ille quem communis assensus noster elegerit, Prior effici- atur.’’4 From other sources we learn that the prior-elect was then presented by the patron to the ordinary for admission. In 1233 the founder’s son, Richard Marshal, earl of Pembroke, was proclaimed a traitor, and the canons seized the opportunity to get this method of election de- clared invalid by Pope Gregory IX.” But the speedy death of Richard and the succession of his brother Gilbert to the title and estates doubt- less endangered this decision, aided perhaps by the fact that it had been obtained by misrepre- sentation, the canons having led the pope to understand that the form of election just described was ‘a custom which had grown up in their church.’ 7 Ultimately in 1250 a final concord was made at Westminster between the prior and William de Valence and his wife Joan, grand- daughter of the founder, who had inherited the patronage, whereby the canons were in future to choose their prior freely, the patron’s share being limited to the grant of a licence to elect and the presentation of the new prior to the ordinary— neither of which could be refused ; his rights of custody during a vacancy were made equally nominal. For this latter concession the convent gave 40 marks.” ” Harl. Chart. (B.M.), 83, A. 23 (5 April, 1245). It is dated at Lyons, where Innocent was staying for the general Council of that year. 3 Baines, Hist. of Lancs. (ed. Croston), v, 630 (without reference). ™ Lancs. Pipe R. 341. His further stipulation that the priory should never become an abbey was prob- ably intended to protect this control from abrogation. ®™G.E. C. Compltte Peerage, vi, 201 ; Cal. Pap. Letters, i, 135. 7 Ibid. ™ Lancs. Final Conc. i, 111. The patronage passed on the death (1324) of Aymer de Valence, earl of Pembroke, son of William and Joan, to his eldest daughter, who married John, Lord Hastings, and whose grandson was created earl of Pembroke in 1339 ; it remained in that family until the death of the last earl in 1389 (Cad. of Pat. 1377-81, p. 620), when it was inherited by his cousin and heir male Lord Grey de Ruthin, and the Greys (earls of Kent from 1465) held it down to the Dissolution; G. E. C. Complete Peerage, vi, 211; Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 5, No. 15. 2 145 In 1300 the patrons of the church of Whit- tington in Lonsdale desired to transfer the advowson to the priory which had long claimed it in virtue of a grant of Robert son of Gil- michael, lord of Whittington in the time of John, and drew a pension of two marks a year from the church. A jury of inquest, however, found that the transfer would be to the prejudice of the king or the Earl of Lancaster, and the idea was abandoned.’® Cartmel suffered severely from the Scottish raids of 1316 and 13223 so much so that the valuation of the rectory for the tenths was reduced from £46 135. 4d. to £8.” At the beginning of the last decade of this century complaints of misconduct on the part of William Lawrence, who had been prior for nine years, reached the ears of the pope. He was accused of dilapidations, of simony in the admis- sion of persons applying to make their profession in the house, and of spending the proceeds in depraved uses and too frequent visits to taverns. The buildings were said to be in ruin, divine worship and hospitality neglected, and scandal given by the prior’s too unhonest life.®° Appar- ently the inquiry which Boniface LX ordered in 1390 sustained these charges, for the archbishop of York was ordered to deprive the prior of his office and have a new election made (1395).*! In spite of this, unless there is some error in the record, Lawrence was still prior five years later.® Apart from what may be contained in the Vatican archives still uncalendared the history of the priory during the fifteenth century is a blank. There is here a great gap in our list of priors. William Hale, who was prior in the last years of the century, appealed to Pope Alexander VI against a decision of Christopher Urswick, arch- deacon of Richmond (1494-1500), depriving him of his office and sequestrating the revenues of the priory on the ground of certain alleged “excesses” not particularized. Hale asserted that evidence had been trumped up against him.® The result of the inquiry ordered by the pope is not known. But Hale was still prior in 1501, when the archbishop was requested by the house 7 Lancs. Ing. (Rec. Soc.), i, 306. The church was worth 20 marks. Prior Walton is alleged to have presented in 1299, and in 1334 the priory secured legal recognition of its right, but does not seem to have been able to maintain it. (Co. Plac. [Chan.], Lanc. No. 26.) ” Pope Nich. Tax. 308. Its temporalities were similarly reassessed. See below, p. 147. * Cal. Pap. Letters, iv, 371. In 1385 two of the canons and some servants of the prior found surety of the peace towards the king; Pal. of Lanc. Docquet R. 1, m. 2d. 8! Cal. Pap. Letters, iv, 382 ; ‘To allow the con- vent for ¢his turn only to proceed to the election of a new prior and to confirm the same.’ * Tbid. v, 32. Indult to have plenary remission on his death-bed from a confessor of his own choice. ® MS. Corp. Christi Cant. 170, fol. 144. 19 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE to compel the return of two of the canons, Miles Burre, afterwards prior, and William Payne, who had left the monastery without leave and engaged in secular disputes. The archdeacon had been appealed to but took no action.** James Grigg, the last prior but one, confessed on his death-bed that he had lent £70 of the money of the house to certain persons, one of whom appears to have been a poor relation of his own.® This was still owing when the hand of King Henry fell upon the priory. In February, 1536, an Act of Parliament authorized the dissolution of all reli- gious houses with less than twelve inmates, the clear annual income being under £200, and five commissioners were appointed on 24 April to make a new survey of certain Lancashire monas- teries. They spent the first week in June at Cartmel. There were only ten canons, and the net revenue of the house, according to the valua- tion made in the previous year for the tenth, was far below the limit of the Act; but the com- missioners more than doubled the estimated income and brought it slightly above the mini- mum." Strictly speaking this discovery ought to have excluded the house from the operation of the Act, but its wording perhaps left it open to the crown to fall back upon the old valuation. Compared with some of the smaller monasteries Cartmel was not without a claim to con- sideration, Eight of the canons were ‘of good conversation.” Those in whose case this testi- monial was withheld are doubtless the two canons unnamed reported by the visitors of the year before as guilty of incontinence, one of them having six children.” Richard Preston, the prior, aged forty-one, was one, and the other was William Panell, aged sixty-eight, to whom the convent had given licence to live where he pleased and a pension of £5 13s. 4¢., which Doctors Legh and Layton had revoked. With these exceptions all were desirous to ‘continue in religion’ either here or, if the house was dissolved, in some other monastery, and even Panell was resigned to that fate if he were not allowed a ‘capacity’ to go into the world.® The servants of the priory numbered thirty-seven, of whom ten were waiting servants, nineteen household and estate officers, and only eight servants of husbandry.’ A stipend of £6 135. 4d. “MS. Corp. Christi Cant. 170, fol. 123. * Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 4, No. 12. ‘© Ibid. and ptfo. 5, No. 7. * L. and P. Hen. VIII, x, 364. “ The eight were James Eskerige, sub-prior (aet. 36), John Ridley, formerly cellarer (aet. 32), Brian Willen, last cellarer (aet. 28), Richard Bakehouse (aet. 41), Augustine Fell (aet. 33), Thomas Brigge (aet. 30), Thomas Person (aet. 25), and John Cowper (aet. 25). All the canons were priests. “* The wages of the waiters ranged from 65. 8d. a year to 20s., those of the officers from 85. to £1 6s. 84., those of the hinds from 85. to 16s. The whole wages bill was £25 145. The officers were brewer, baker, a year was paid to the parish priest of Cartmel. From time immemorial the priory had been bound to provide guides for those crossing the Cartmel Sands on the west of the peninsula and the Kent Sands on the east side. The ‘Con- ductor of the King’s people over Cartmel Sands’ was paid £6 a year.’ To the ‘Cartership of Kent Sands’ were attached a tenement at Kent’s Bank called the Carterhouse and certain lands and wages. It had recently been the subject of a dispute between the priory and one Edward Barborne, ‘ King’s serjant in the office of groom porter,’ which was settled by arbitration in Feb- ruary, 1536. Barborne was to occupy the office peaceably for life, binding himself to exer- cise it properly.®? It looks as if he had been forced upon the canons by outside pressure. The tenants of the priory were required by their tenure to assist the prior and canons when necessary in the passage of the sands on pain of forfeiture. When the valuation for the tenth was made in 1535 the house claimed exemption on £12 6s. 8d. defrayed annually in alms, £12 to seven poor persons praying daily for the soul of the founder, and the rest distributed on Easter Day among divers boys and others. But for some reason not stated the larger sum was dis- allowed. The commissioners of 1536, whose mandate limited them to inquiry, left the canons still ignorant of what their fate was to be, referring it to the pleasure of the king, whom the Act authorized to except any house from its opera- tion.* Their suspense cannot, however, have been of long duration, for by the autumn the priory had been surrendered and the canons dispersed. Early in October Sir James Layburn reminded Cromwell that he had been promised the farm of a benefice belonging to Cartmel or Conishead.* But the Pilgrimage of Grace was barber, cook, scullion, butler of the fratry, 2 wood- leaders, keeper of the woods, 2 millers, fisher, wright, pulter, fosterman, maltmaker, 2 shepherds, and a hunter. The wright received the highest wages, the butler of the fratry the lowest. ® Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 4, No. 12. The Vabr Eccl. (v, 272) only mentions two lay clerks in Cartmel church, to whom they were bound by charter to pay £2 a year. Perhaps a portion of the tithes was set aside for the stipend of the parish priest. ” Valor Eccl. v, 272. *’ Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 4, No. 12. The cartership does not appear in the Valor, probably because of the endowment. On the dissolution of the priory the appointment passed into the hands of the Duchy of Lanc. and the office was held for many generations by a family who derived from it their name of Carter ; Baines, Hist. of Lancs. (ed. Croston), v, 626. * Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 4, No. 9. 7 Stat. of the Realm, iii, 575. © L. and P. Hen. VIL, xi, 608. 146 RELIGIOUS HOUSES already afoot in West Yorkshire, and the move- ment soon spread into the northern part of Lancashire. In the course of October the commons of Cartmel restored the canons to the priory. The prior, however, more prudent or less staunch than his brethren, stole away and joined the king’s forces at Preston.** This was before he heard of the general pardon and promise of a northern Parliament granted to the rebels at Doncaster on 27 October. Apparently the canons now withdrew, or some of them had not yet re-entered, for on 12 December John Dakyn, rector of Crosby Ravensworth, Westmorland, and vicar-general of the archdeacon of Rich- mond, wrote to the prior from York informing him that all religious persons by the king’s consent were to return to their suppressed houses until further direction should be taken by Parlia- ment. He trusted their monasteries should stand for ever.” If this permission had been given by the king’s representatives it was cer- tainly not with his consent. Nevertheless all the canons went back to Cartmel, save ‘the foolish prior,’ as Dakyn afterwards called him. This did not take place, it would seem, until February, 1537, when the commons of the north —especially Westmorland and the West Riding of Yorkshire—were again in arms.** On the suppression of the revolt several canons of Cart- mel and ten laymen of that district were executed. Some of the ringleaders among the canons, James Estrigge, John Ridley, and the late sub-prior, were still at large in the middle of March, in Kendal it was thought.*® Prior Preston’s com- pliance obtained him the farm of Cartmel rectory, his profit on which was estimated at £13 6s. 8d. ‘in good years of dear corn,’ and less than £10 in bad years.’ The priory was dedicated to St. Mary, our Lady of Cartmel.” William Marshal’s original endowment of Cartmel and the Irish property enumerated above had received no very consider- able additions. Henry de Redman in the reign of Richard I gave a moiety of the vill of Silver- dale and fishing rights in Haweswater."” Some property at Hest and Bolton-le-Sands was held by the house at the Dissolution. The canons’ %° Land P, Hen. VIII, xi, 947 (2). % Ibid. xi, 1279 5 xii (1), 787. % Ibid. xii (i), 914. Estrigge appears as Eskerige in the Survey of 1536 (ante) and was then himself sub-prior. ® Ibid. 632. 10 Duchy of Lanc. Mins. Accts. bdle. 158, Nos. 8 and 10. 101 Tt possessed a relic of the true cross, the offerings to which amounted to £1 yearly ; L. and P. Hen. VIII, x, 3643 Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 5, No. 1. 102 Rot, Chart. (Rec. Com.), 8. Pope Gregory’s bull of 1233 speaks of a ce// of Silverdale ; Baines, op. cit. v, 628. Perhaps a canon or two may at that time have been kept there. 108 Valor Eccl. v, 272. demesne in Cartmel was extended by various gifts, the most important of which was the grant in 1245 of six oxgangs of land in Newton and land in Allithwaite by Peter de Coupland. A pension of 2 marks (afterwards doubled) from Whittington rectory was acquired before 1233.1” Their total annual income from these tem- poralities (excluding the Irish lands, of which no valuation is extant) was estimated in 1535 at £88 16s. 3d. derived almost entirely from Cart- mel. The tithes of Cartmel (£23 10s.) and the Whittington pension brought their gross revenue up to nearly £115. After deducting various fixed charges there remained a clear annual income of £91 65. 3d.°% This was increased by the commissioners of 1536 to £212 125. 104d." How this great difference was accounted for does not appear in detail, but the rectory of Cartmel was now estimated to be worth close upon £57 a year. The bells and lead of the priory churchand buildings were valued at £15 10s. 4d.1° and its movable goods at £185 145. 53d.1 Debts due to the house amounted to £73 95. and it owed £59 125. 8d. The site of the priory was granted in 1540 with much other monastic property in Lancashire and Cheshire to ‘Thomas Holcroft..! The lordship of Cartmel reverted to the duchy of Lancaster, to which the manor still belongs. Philip and Mary impropriated the rectory to 14 Duchy of Lanc. Anct. D., L. 559-60. 10 Baines, Hist. of Lancs. (ed. Croston), v, 629. Cross Crake Chapel in the parish of Heversham, West- morland, is said to have been given to the priory by Sir William de Strickland of Sizergh ¢. 1272 (Stockdale, Ann. of Cartmel, 13), but does not appear in the Valor. The estates officers comprised bailiffs of Cart- mel and Silverdale, an auditor and a receiver, whose salaries are recorded in the Valor (v, 272). Cartmel was one of the monasteries for which the Earl of Derby acted as chief steward ; he took an annual fee of £2. There was also a steward of the court of the riory. “6 Valor Eccl. v, 272. In 1292 the temporalities were assessed at {21 11s. 8d. ; reduced in the ‘New Taxation’ to £3 65. 8¢.; Pope Nich. Tax. 308. 7 Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 5, No. 7. 108 Its taxable value in 1292 was £46 135. 4d. ; reduced in the ‘New Taxation’ to £8 (Pope Nich. Tax. 308); in 1527 it had been found to be really worth £40; Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 5, No. 15. Probably the valuation of 1535 for the tenth was a compromise between its previous low rating and its actual value. 109 The parishioners claimed the lead on the part of the church used for parish purposes. N° Plate, etc. £27 35. 1$d., ornaments of the church (not claimed by parishioners), £9 65. 84., glass and iron bars in windows, {12 19s., cattle, £73 65. 82., household stuff and implements, £18 135. $¢., and corn, £54 5s. 8d. 4 Dugdale, Mon. vi, 454. He almost immediately exchanged it for lands in the south (Stockdale, un. of Gartmel, 31). 147 A HISTORY OF the new see of Chester. Not content with the south part of the church, which had always been set apart for their use, the parishioners purchased the whole. The priory’s Irish manor of Kilrush was granted in 1558 to Thomas, earl of Ormond.” Priors OF CARTMEL Daniel, occurs between 1194 and 1198 William,! occurs 1205 and 1208 Absalon,’® occurs 1221 and 1230 Simon,"® occurs 1242 (f) Richard,” occurs 1250 John 18 William of Walton, occurs 1279, 1292, and 1299 (*) Simon,’ occurs 1334 William of Kendal,” occurs July, 1354 Richard of Kellet,”? died 1380 William Lawrence, elected 1381, deprived (?) 1390, died after December, 1396 William, occurs 1441 William Hale,!’® occurs 1497-8, 1501 "? Cal. of Pat. (Ireland), i, 385. The grant in- cluded a castle, garden, six messuages, 360 acres of arable land and eleven cottages. A ce/l of Kilrush is spoken of in Gregory IX’s bull of 1233 (Baines, op. cit. v, 628). The canons sent to manage the Irish estates doubtless resided here. "3 Lancs. Pipe R. 339 3 County Placita (Chancery), Lance. No. 26. ™ Lancs. Pipe R. 365; Hist. of Lanc. Ch. (Chet. Soc.), 386 ; Lancs. Final Conc. 39 ; Beck, dun. Furn. 169; Add. MS. 33244, fol. 60; Harl. MS. 3764, fol. 5842. "5 Tbid. fol. 38; Furness Coucher, 442; Add. MS. 33244, fol. 118. "6 Stockdale, dan. of Cartmel (1872), 13. It is possible, however, that an error in the date has dupli- cated the later prior of this name. "7 Lancs. Final Cone. i, 111. "® Duchy of Lanc. Anct. D., L. 290. '' Lanes, Final Conc. i, 1563 Assize R. Edw. I, Lanc. m. 53 dorso. In 1334 a jury found that he presented to the rectory of Whittington in 27 Edw. I (County Placita (Chancery), Lanc. No. 26). His tombstone is still in the church, 1° Coram Rege R. 298, m. 27. Simon or a suc- cessor seems to have died in 1349 ; Pat. 23 Edw. III, pt. 3, m. 25. ™" Duchy of Lance. Assize R. 3, m. 1. "9 Cal. of Pat. 1377-81, p. 584. 8 Ibid. 584, 605, 620. Licence by the crown (as guardian of John de Hastings) to elect, 22 Jan. 1381; royal assent to election of W. L. signified to archdeacon of Richmond, 26 Feb. ; mandate to Duke of Lancaster to restore the temporalities to Lawrence, whose election has been confirmed by the archdeacon and whose fealty the abbot of Furness is ordered to take, 24 Apr. 4 Pal. of Lanc. Plea R. 3, m. 21. % Ibid. 86, m. 3 ¢.; MS. Corp. Christi Cant. 170, fol. 123; Tanner, Notit. Mon. sub Cartmel. A prior William who can hardly be Hale occurs 1466-7 (Pal. of Lanc. Plea R. 28, m. 11 24). LANCASHIRE Miles Burre,!?* occurs 28 September, 1504, and 2 February, 1509 James Grigg,’ occurs 1522, died before 1535 Richard Preston,” occurs 1535, surrendered 1536 The seal of the priory is attached to a docu- ment, apparently of the thirteenth century, among the Duchy records in the Rolls Office. It repre- sents the Virgin seated, with the infant Christ in her lap. The Virgin is crowned and has in her left hand a staff with a dove on top. Part only of the legend remains, viz. : . IGIL... VEN... MARIE. DE. KERMELE!” Leland attributes to the priory the arms of the Marshals slightly varied.)% 10. THE PRIORY OF BURSCOUGH The Augustinian priory of Burscough was founded about 1190 by Robert son of Henry, lord of Lathom and Knowsley, and endowed with land in Burscough, the whole adjoining township of Marton, the advowsons of three churches—Ormskirk, Huyton, and Flixton—the chapel of St. Leonard of Knowsley, and all the mills on his demesne.*!_ The presence of the prior of the Augustinian house at Norton, near Runcorn, as a witness, coupled with the fact that Knowsley was held of its patron, the con- stable of Chester, makes it not unlikely that the first canons of Burscough came from the Cheshire priory.’** Simon, the founder’s father-in-law, became a brother of the house. Hugh, bishop of Coventry and Lichfield, con- firmed the charter, as did his immediate succes- % Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 4, Nos. 7 and 12. "7 Thid. ; L. and P. Hen. VIII, iii (2), 2578. Val. Eccl. v, 272; see above, p. 146. In the church is the tombstone of a prior whose black letter inscription (probably of a date between 1350 and 1530), now illegible, was read by Whitaker (Hist. of Richmond) as ‘Hic jacet Wills. Br. . . . quondam Prior.’ % Dugdale, Mon. vi, 554. A twelfth-century seal with counterseal representing St. Michael and the Dragon is in the British Museum ; Cat. of Seah, i, 496. Also the seal of a Prior William (ibid.). 89 Collectanea, i, 102. %! Foundation charter in the register of the priory (P.R.O. Duchy of Lancs. Misc. Bks. No. 6, fol. 1) ; the charter is printed by Farrer, Lancs. Pipe R. 349. Its date lies between July, 1189, when John, count of Mortain, who is included in the movent clause, received the honour of Lancaster, and November, 1191, the date of Bishop Hugh de Nonant’s con- firmation ; Reg. of Burscough, fol. 684. '? Farrer, op. cit. 352. Prior Henry and Robert, archdeacon of Chester, attested Bishop Hugh’s con- firmation as well as the founder’s charter. “ Lancs. Final Conc. (Rec. Soc.), ii, 138. 148 RELIGIOUS HOUSES sors, Geoffrey de Muschamp ™! and William de Cornhill (in 1216), and, finally, in 1228 Pope Gregory [X.%® Gregory also gave the canons licence to celebrate the divine offices during a general interdict, and to admit those who desired it to burial in their church, saving the rights of their parish churches. No canon was to leave the house without licence except for a stricter rule. Difficulties had arisen with regard to Robert son of Henry’s gift of Flixton church. During the episcopate of Geoffrey de Muschamp (1198-1208) the right of the priory to the advowson was disputed by Roger son of Henry, apparently the founder’s brother, and Henry son of Bernard, probably a nephew, who claimed as the heirs of Henry son of Siward, the founder’s father. An assize of darrein presentment being held, they obtained a verdict in their favour and presented Henry son of Richard [de Tarbock], which Richard was another brother of the founder.” Henry de Tarbock afterwards re- leased his rights in the church to the canons subject to the payment to him of 2 marks ayear during the tenure of the benefice by Andrew ‘phisicus,” who was perhaps his vicar. He also promised his good offices in obtaining the appro- priation of the church to the priory, which in case of success was to allow him a pension of 3 marks for life.¥8 No appropriation took place, but either before or after the arrangement with Henry the canons secured a pension from the church.° ‘Towards the end of the thirteenth century the advowson passed into the hands of Bishop Roger Longespée, who appropriated the church, about 1280 it is said, as a prebend in his cathedral. ‘The canons were more successful in obtaining the appropriation of the other two churches whose advowson had been granted to them. Bishop William de Cornhill (1215-23), ‘in con- sideration of their religion, honesty, and im- moderate poverty,’ gave them Ormskirk church, saving a competent vicarage.1 A few years later Alexander de Stavenby, his successor, 1 Reg. of Burscough, fol. 69. 18 Tbid. Duchy of Lanc. Anct. D., L. 271. 86 Reg. of Burscough, fol. 63. 87 Lancs. Pipe R. 353-6. It is not easy to see how the claimants had a better ‘hereditary right’ to the patronage exercised by Henry son of Siward than the eldest son and his heirs. %§ Duchy of Lanc. Anct. D., L. 617. The date is after 1232. About the sametime Robert de Hulton resigned to the priory all right and claim in the pre- sentation of Flixton church ; Duchy of Lanc. Cart. Misc, i, fol. 17 ; Dep. Keeper's Rep. xxxvi, No. 347. The rights of the priory are described by Bishop Alexander de Stavenby as‘ Jus quam habent tam a patronis quam predecessoribus nostris in ecclesia de Flixton’ ; Duchy of Lanc. Anct. D., L. 272. 89 Ibid. L. 618. 4 Le Neve, Fasti Eccl. Angi. i, 602. ” Duchy of Lanc. Anct. D., L. 108, granted Huyton church to the priory in proprios usus, the gift to take effect after the death of the rector in possession, when he reserved the right to ordain a vicarage.” It was not, however, until 1277 that a vicarage was ordained, with a portion taxed as worth ten marks.’ Eight years later the bishop, in view of the proximity of Ormskirk church to the priory, from which it was distant about three miles, con- sented that on the death or cession of the present vicar the canons should for the future be allowed to present one of their own number, being a priest and suitable.* On a subsequent vacancy the convent, ‘ by negligence,’ presented a secular priest, and in 1339 thought it necessary to obtain a renewal of the privilege from Bishop North- burgh, ‘in relief of the charges with which they are heavily burdened.“® Henceforth down to the Reformation the vicar of Ormskirk was always a canon of the house. In the fifteenth century several canons held the vicarage of Huyton. Disputes between the priory and the vicars as to their portions were not thereby obvi- ated. An episcopal inquiry was held in 1340 on the petition of Alexander of Wakefield, vicar of Ormskirk ;1° a dispute with John Layet, vicar of Huyton, was settled by arbitration in 1387; and in 1461 Ralph Langley, vicar of Huyton, a canon of the house, secured a revision of his portion, which he alleged to be too small,“ Pope Boniface VIII in 1295 empowered the prior for the time being to nominate six of the canons, even if etate minores, provided they were over twenty years of age, to be promoted by any bishop to sacred orders and minister in them lawfully. On promotion to be priests they were to be allowed a full voice in filling up any vacancy in the office of prior—to which they might themselves be elected.“ The same pope granted a general confirmation of the priory’s privileges in 1300.1° A few years before the prior and convent had bestowed borough rights on their town of Orms- kirk, and obtained (in 1286) from Edward I and Edmund of Lancaster a grant of a market and five days’ fair there.! The grant and 1? Reg. of Burscough, fol. 698. “8 Tbid. fol. 67-684. Three selions of land and a competent manse ‘which the chaplains used to have’ were included. ™ Ibid. fol. 1064. * Ibid. fol. 107; Duchy of Lanc. Anct. D., L. 275. “6 Ibid. L. 588; Reg. of Burscough, fol. 108. The vicarage was declared to consist of a manse, 4 acres of land, and £10 a year in money, the priory bearing all charges. “7 Reg. of Burscough, fol. 1044 ; Duchy of Lanc. Cart. Misc. iii, fol. 74. “8 Reg. of Burscough, fol. 66d. “9 Thid. fol. 103. © Thid. fol. 15, *) Chart. R. Edw. I, No. 23; Duchy of Lanc. Cart. Misc. i, fol. 45 ; Reg. of Burscough, fol. 13. 149 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE other gifts were confirmed by Edward IT when at Upholland on 19 October, 1323. In virtue of its market rights the priory claimed to take fines for breach of the assize of bread and ale; this led to friction with the officers -of Henry, earl of Lancaster, who in 1339 con- ceded the privilege for an annual payment of 65. 8d. A curious episode in the history of the priory is the indictment in 1347 of Thomas of Lither- land, then prior, for alleged participation in the lawless proceedings of Sir John de Dalton, who on Good Friday in that year, assisted by many Lancashire men, violently abducted Margery, widow of Nicholas de la Beche, from her manor of Beams, in Wiltshire, killing two per- sons and injuring others, though the king’s own son Lionel, keeper of the realm in the king’s absence abroad, was staying there. A number of Lancashire gentlemen came forward and declared that the prior was innocent. On their bond he was admitted to bail, and seems to have satisfactorily disproved the charge as he retained his office for nearly forty years.’ It was during his priorship that a benefaction intended to extend university education was diverted to the priory and its church of Huyton. John de Winwick (d. 1360), a Lancashire man who enjoyed the favour of Edward III, and held the rectory of Wigan and treasurership of York, ‘desiring to enrich the English church with men of letters,’ left an endowment including the advowson of Radcliffe on Soar for a new college at Oxford, whose scholars were to study canon and civil law, and, on becoming bachelors or doctors, to lecture on these subjects.'° Difficulties arose, however, not perhaps unconnected with the refusal of the pope to sanction an appropriation of Radcliffe church ; permission was obtained to transfer the endowment to Oriel College, but ultimately, twenty years after the testator’s death (1380), his executors got a licence from Richard IT to alienate the advowson of Radcliffe to Burscough Priory,!’ and in the following year Alexander Neville, archbishop of York, allowed its appropriation to relieve the poverty of the house caused by the pestilence, bad sea- sons, and other misfortunes, and to increase divine worship by the foundation of a chantry for two priests in Huyton church.’ The chantry was established in 1383, the bishop of Coventry and Lichfield fixing the stipend of each 1? Reg. of Burscough, fol. 56. 188 Thid. fol. 134, Cal. of Pat. 1345-8, pp. 310, 312, 436. “S John de Dalton, in his flight north, perhaps took refuge in one of the prior’s houses; see the account of Upholland. 8 Cal. of Pap. Letters, i, 458. 7 Cal. of Pat. 1377-81, p. 560; Reg. of Bur- scough, fol. 73. “8 Tbid. fol. 764. chaplain at 10 marks.%® The surplus revenues of the rectory (from which a vicar’s portion had already been set aside) yielded a small annual income to the priory.'” A somewhat mysterious letter of Pope Urban, dated November, 1386, refers to certain un- known ‘sons of iniquity’ who were concealing and detaining the lands and goods of the monas- tery, and orders the abbot of Chester to enjoin restitution on pain of excommunication.’ — Pos- sibly the persons in question had taken advantage of the political disturbances of that year. Boniface LX granted a relaxation of four years and four quadragenes penance to penitents who on St. Nicholas’s Day should visit and give alms for the conservation of the church of the priory." A scandal which came to light in 1454 affords a curious glimpse into the state of the house at that date. Charges of divination, sortilege, and black art were brought against the prior, Robert Woodward, one of the canons, Thomas Fairwise, and the vicar of Ormskirk, William Bolton, who. is described as late canon of the priory. An episcopal investigation revealed strange doings. One Robert, a necromancer, had undertaken for #10 to find hidden treasure. After swearing secrecy on the sacrament of bread they handed it over in the pyx to Robert. Three circuli trianguli were made, in each of which one of them stood, the vicar having the body of Christ suspended at his breast and holding in his hand a rod, doubtless a diviner’s rod. The story ends here, but all three denied that any invocation of demons or sacrifice to them had taken place. Bishop Boulers suspended them for two years from the priestly office and from receiving the sacraments except in articulo mortis.™ Bolton was deprived of his vicarage and the prior had to resign.'"' In a few months the bishop removed the suspension in their case, but they did not recover their positions. The ex-prior was allowed a pension of 10 marks, with a ‘ competent chamber’ in the priory, and as much bread, beer, and meat as fell to the share of two canons.} The election of a prior always needed con- firmation by the diocesan, but the range of choice in a small house was limited. Half a ' Ibid. fol. 88, 914. So many interests were in- volved that the documents beginning with Winwick’s acquisition of the advowson and ending with Urban VI’s consent to the appropriation, which was not granted until 1387, fill over sixty pages of the Register (fol. 71-1024). ® Just before the Dissolution the Tectory was leased by the priory at a rent of [20a year ; Mins. Accts. bdle. 136, No. 2198, m. tod. ** Reg. of Burscough, fol. 1044. Cal. of Pap. Letters, iv, 397. Lich. Epis. Reg. Boulers, fol. 55. 4 Tid. fol. 38. ‘8 Ibid. 70. ‘* This was sometimes given by a commissary on the spot. 150 RELIGIOUS HOUSES century later another scandal occurred, apparently more serious, for Prior John Barton suffered deprivation (1511) instead of being allowed to resign. The nature of his offences is not dis- closed, but that the priory was not in a healthy state is evident from the fact that the bishop pre- ferred a canon of Kenilworth, a house of the same order, to the vacant office.)* As the income of the priory was less than £200 it was dissolved under the Act of February, 1536. It then contained only five canons (in- cluding the prior), all of whom were priests. ‘One had been reported by Legh and Layton, the visitors of the previous year, as guilty of in- continence. At first only one expressed a desire to continue in religion, but the others seem afterwards to have changed their minds. The church and other buildings were found to be ‘in good state and plight.2!”° The Earl of Derby was anxious to save the church, in which many of his family lay buried.’”! His intention was to find a priest there at his own cost ‘to do divine service for the souls of his ancestors and the ease and wealth of the neighbours.’!”? But he complained that the king’s commissioners valued not only the glass and bars in the windows and the paving, but all other goods at a higher price than ‘they be well worth,’ and his plan fell through. In November, 1536, during the disturbances of the Pilgrimage of Grace, he urged delay in pulling down and melting the lead and bells as ‘in this busy world it would cause much murmur,’ 17 ‘The priory was dedicated to St. Nicholas, and its first endowment by Robert son of Henry con- sisted of three churches and a plough-land, com- prising part of Burscough township (including the hamlet of Ormskirk) and the vill of Marton.’” In the next century Robert de Lathom gave a fourth part of the township of Dalton, near Wigan,’ and a large number of small rents and parcels of land were added chiefly by the leading 167 Robert Harvey. He was summoned to convo- cation in 1529 ; L. and P. Hen. VII, iv (ili), p. 2700. 8 Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 5, No. 7. They had twenty-two waiting servants and household officers and eighteen ‘ hinds of husbandry.’ Two persons enjoyed board for life. 9 TL. and P, Hen. VIII, x, 364. ™ Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 5, No. 7. 1” Lancs. Chantries, 68. His uncle Sir James Stanley was steward of the priory and received an annual fee of £5 from the house ; Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 5, No. 2. The first Earl of Derby was a great benefactor of the priory ; Testamenta Vetusta, 459. 7 L. and P. Hen. VIII, xi, 517. "8 Thid. xi, 1118. In May, 1537, the earl was endeavouring to obtain a lease of the priory and its demesne lands ; ibid. xii (1), 1115. 4 Lanes. Ing. (Rec. Soc.), i, 16. 4 Reg. of Burscough, fol. 314. local families in the surrounding district.”* In 1283, for instance, Henry de Lathom, lord of ‘Tarbock, gave a place called Ridgate, which Richard son of Henry his ancestor had originally set apart for the use of lepers, but which the parishioners had diverted to their own use.1”7 The only property of the house north of the Ribble was at Ellel, a little south of Lancaster.’ These temporalities were estimated in the valua- tion for the tenth made in 1534-5 to be worth £56 15. 4d. a year.” The three rectories of Ormskirk, Huyton, and Radcliffe-on-Soar yielded an income of £73, and the net revenue of the house after fixed charges had been deducted was stated to be £80 7s. 6d. The new survey made at the Dissolution raised it to £122 5s. 74.1 Inter aha the Commissioners disallowed a fixed charge of £7 for alms distributed yearly for the souls of Henry de Lathom and his ancestors. The buildings with the bells and lead were valued at £148 10s., the movable goods at £230 3. 4d." Debts due to the house amounted to {40 6s. 84., but it owed rather more than double that sum. The site and demesne lands were granted to Sir William Paget on 28 May, 1547.18 Priors oF BurscouGH Henry,'® probably first prior, occurs between 1189 and 1198 William,!™ occurs before 1199 Geoffrey,’® occurs before 1229 Benedict,!®° occurs 1229 and 1235 6 The Register contains numerous charters of donation, the originals of some of which are extant among the ancient deeds of the Duchy of Lancaster in the Record Office. “7 Reg. of Burscough, fol. 454. The priory kept up a hospital for lepers. Henry de Lacy, earl of Lincoln (1272-1311), stipulated for a perpetual right to admit to it one of his tenants in his fee of Widnes ; Trans. Hist. Soc. (New Ser.), v, 131. 178 In leasing a messuage and land here in 1338, a solar and stable were reserved for the canons’ visits to Lancaster and Ellel; Duchy of Lanc. Anct. D., L. 644. 19 Valor Eccl. (Rec. Com.), v, 222. 10 The ‘Brief Certificate’ of the Commissioners, whose instructions bear date 24 April, 1536, is in Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 5, No. 2, and, with some additions, in Duchy of Lanc. Mins. Accts. bdle. 158, No. 7. '8|'The ornaments of the church were valued (omitting shillings and pence) at £97, plate and jewels £27, chattels of all sorts £37, stuff and imple- ments of household £31, stock of corn £35. 18 Duchy of Lanc. Misc. Bks. xxiii, 10 d. 183 A prant of lands by him was confirmed by the founder, Robert son of Henry, who died in 1198 or early in 1199 5 Lancs. Pipe Rolls, 353. 18! Ormerod, Lathom of Lathom, 66. 185 Mentioned as a predecessor of Benedict ; Reg. of Burscough, fol. 75. 186 Ibid. fol. 5, 6; Final Concords (Rec. Soc.), i, 60. 151 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE William,’ occurs 1245 Nicholas,'®8 occurs between 1260 and 1272 Warin,'® occurs between 1272 and 1286 Richard,’ occurs 1303 John of Donington,’ occurs 1322-44 Thomas of Litherland? occurs 1347-83, resigned 1385 John of Wrightington,’ elected 1385, died 1406 or 1407 Thomas [of ] Ellerbeck,' elected 16 February, 1406-7, died before May, 1424 Hugh Rainford,’® election confirmed May, 1424, died before July, 1439 Robert Woodward,’ election confirmed July 1439, resigned 4 October, 1454 Henry Olton,’” elected 28 February,1454-5, died before g October, 1457 Richard Ferryman,'® elected before 9 October, 1457, occurs down to 1478 Hector Scarisbrick,!® occurs 1488, died 1504 John Barton,™ election confirmed 6 Decem- ber, 1504, deprived 1511 Robert Harvey,” preferred 12 May, 1511, on ‘just deprivation’ of Barton, died before 17 April, 1535 Huzh Huxley,”” election confirmed 17 April, 1535, surrendered 1536, buried at Orms- kirk, 1558. ‘7 Reg. of Burscough, fol. 44. '8 Ibid. fol. 194; Duchy of Lancs. Anct. D., L. 592, 601. 9 Tbid. L. 6o1, 610. % Dep. Keeper's Rep. xxxvi, 199 ; Reg. of Burscough, fol. 20. ' Ibid. fol. 11; Assize R. 1435, m. 384. '! Cal. Pat. 1345-8, pp. 384, 436, and next note. "3 His election (on resignation of Litherland) was confirmed by the custodian of the spiritualities of the diocese of Lichfield after the death of Bishop Stretton on 28 March, 1385; Reg. of Burscough, fol. 110. He was sub-prior as early as 1381 ; ibid. fol. 84. ' Cellarer in 1383; Reg. of Burscough, fol. 874. Sub-prir at time of his election, which was confirmed on 26 July, 1407; Lich. Epis. Reg. Burghill, fol. 52. aa Lich. Epis. Reg. Heyworth, fol. 1134, 125. "S$ Tbhid. and Reg. Boulers, fol. 38. Resigned the priorship into the bishop’s hands on being convicted of necromancy ; see supra. ‘7 Sub-prior before election; Lich. Epis. Reg. Boulers, fol. 384. "8 Public proclamation of his election was made in the priory on Sunday, g October, and in Ormskirk church on the following Thursday. Certificate of confirmation by bishop’s commissary dated 31 Octo- ber; ibid. fol. 42. He is last mentioned under 1478; Pal. of Lanc. Plea R. 48, m. 5 @. 9 Tbid. 88. *® Lich. Epis. Reg. Blyth, fol. 574. *! Canon of Kenilworth (ibid. fol. 56). Lich. Epis. Reg. Lee, fol. 34%. At Whitsun- tide 1536 the farmer of Radcliffe rectory was excused half his rent, which was expended on the necessaries of Hugh Huxler, late prior ; Mins. Accts. bdle. 136, No. 2198, m. 10d. The seal of the priory was round, and bore a representation of the south front of the monastery buildings with the roof and tower of the church rising above them. On each side of the tower is a six-pointed star.* Legend :— + SIGILLVM SANCTI NICHOLAI DE BVRC- ASSGVHE The priory arms, adapted from the Lathom shield, were: indented per fesse azure and or, in chief between two croziers three annulets argent.™4 11. PRIORY OF COCKERHAM This cell of the abbey of St. Mary in the Meadows (de Pratis) at Leicester, served by Austin Canons, was established in 1207 or 1208. William de Lancaster I on his marriage to Gundreda daughter of Roger, earl of Warwick, cousin of Robert, earl of Leicester, founder of the abbey (1143), had given the canons between 1153 and 1156 his manor of Cockerham, its church with the dependent chapel of Ellel, and the hamlets of Great and Little Crimbles.”® Henry II in the latter year confirmed the gift, to which William before 1160 added a grant of common of pasture throughout his fee in Lons- dale and Amounderness.”% His son William de Lancaster II (died 1184) dispossessed the abbey and founded the hospital (afterwards abbey) of Cocker- sand on part of the manor. The Leicester canons obtained judgement in the court of John, count of Mortain, when lord of the honour of Lancaster, between 1189 and 1194, against William’s widow Heloise and her second hus- band Hugh de Morvill, who thereupon con- firmed the original gift, as did also Count John.” This was followed by an agreement between the two houses by which the site of Cockersand was cut out of the manor and parish of Cockerham, Leicester Abbey conveying it in free alms to the hospital. Further litigation between the abbey * Figured in Vetusta Monumenta, and in Trans. Hist. Soc. (New Ser.),v, 144; xii, Plate xxii, No. 5 ; cf. vol. xiii, 194. See also B.M. Cat. of Seals, i, 471, and for a different seal, Dugdale, Mon. vi, 458. ™ Ibid. Watson MS. 5, fol. 123, gives argent per fesse between three annulets saé/e, and throws doubt on the two croziers having been part of the blazon. ”° Farrer, Lancs. Pipe R. 391. The evidences of the manor were destroyed bya fire there before 1477, but these and other deeds are recited ina rental drawn up in that year embodied in the cartulary of the abbey; Bodl. Lib. MS. Laud, Misc. 625 (olim H. 72), fol. 45-524, 1674. ** Lancs. Pipe R. 392 3 Dugdale, Mon. vi, 467. *” MS. Laud, Misc. 625, fol. 45-456. 8 Cockersand Chartul. (Chet. Soc. new ser. 38), xiii. The abbey had also to recover its rights in the King’s Court against several tenants in Cockerham and Crim- bles between 1206 and 1209 ; MS. Laud, Mise. 625, fol. 474; Final Conc. i, 24. 152 RELIGIOUS HOUSES and William de Lancaster’s daughter and heiress, Heloise and her husband Gilbert son of Roger Fitz Reinfred ended (13 May, 1207) ina final concord ; Heloise and Gilbert renounced all claim on Cockerham and Crimbles, in considera- tion whereof Abbot Paul and the convent under- took to place three of their canons in the church, which had hitherto been served by a chaplain, on whose death the number of canons was to be raised to four. A prior of Cockerham is mentioned in 1208.22 The new cell never became conventual. Its canons remained under the authority of the abbot, its prior or warden was no doubt removable at his pleasure and acted merely as agent of the chief house, which by the middle of the four- teenth century put an end to its existence. The introduction first of a stipendiary and then (between 1281 and 1290) of a perpetual vicar paved the way for the withdrawal of most of the canons. — Christiana de Lindsay, wife of Euguerrand de Guisnes, lord of Coucy, in con- firming (1320) the grant of her ancestor William de Lancaster to the abbey, stipulated for their retention,” but after her death, some fourteen years later, the abbey abandoned all pretence of observing the undertaking of 1207. In 1366 and again in 1372 its title to Cockerham manor was questioned on this ground by royal officers, but the courts decided in its favour because the original gift imposed no conditions.2% The final concord was apparently ignored. But Christiana’s great-great-granddaughter Philippa de Coucy, widow of Robert de Vere, earl of Oxford and duke of Ireland, formally renounced any claim derivable from its non-observance, and this waiver was confirmed by Henry IV and Henry VI.74 The Lancashire estate of Leicester Abbey was still managed by a warden (custos, gardianus), *0° Final Conc.i, 26. There is nothing to show that the foundation of a cell was an unexpressed condi- tion of William de Lancaster’s original gift, unless the fact that he seems to have appropriated the church en- tirely to their own uses may be regarded as evidence of such an intention. If we could suppose that this was the case and that the abbey ignored his wishes, a motive would be supplied for his son’s disseisin of the canons. ° Lancs. Pipe R. 365. 711 A prior and a vicar of Cockerham witness a document dated 1275 ; Hist. of Lanc. Church (Chet. Soc.), 380. Ordination of a vicarage in MS. Laud, Misc. 625, fol. 51. "13 Cockersand Chartul, (Chet. Soc.), 299. 713 Coram Rege R. 446, m. 13 ; MS. Laud, Misc. 625, fol. 475. 4 Tbid. Baines quoting ‘Duchy Rec.’ dates Philippa’s renunciation 1400, that of Henry VI, 1423 3 Hist. of Lancs. v, 492. 2 153 probably always a canon of Leicester.2% In 1477, however, it was leased to one John Calvert at a rent of £83 6s. 8d.,2"° and was apparently still farmed for that sum in 1535.7!” The original gift of William de Lancaster I comprised two plough-lands,?"* to which some small parcels were subsequently added. The gross value of the property (including the rectory) in 1477 was estimated to be £99 10s. gd. with- out reckoning perquisites of courts and some other ‘commodities of the manor.’”® In 1400 an extent which included these gave a total in- come of £117 75. 8d. The pestilence of 1349 is said to have about halved the return from the rectory tithes of Cockerham.”! Priors oR WarDENS OF COCKERHAM Al 1,” occurs 1208 Henry,” occurs circa 1250 715 See below. "6 Calvert was required to find provision for one or two canons and their horses for a week’s stay ; MS. Laud, Misc. 625, fol. 51. *” Valor Eccl. (Rec. Com.), iv, 1473 cf Duchy of Lanc. Mins. Accts. No. 33, m. 22. 318 Final Conc. i, 26. 21° MS. Laud, Misc. 625, fol. 524. ° Tbid. fol. 49-50. Its temporalities (bona) had been taxed at £13 in 1292; reduced to £3 6s. 8d. after the Scottish raid ; Pope Nich. Tax. 309. In 1366 the yearly value of the manor ‘ultra reprisas’ was estimated at £40; Coram Rege R. 446, m. 13. Xn MS. Laud, 1524, 1674. They were worth, £22 §5. 8d.in 1477, their value before the Black Death being then estimated to have been £40 or £50. The rectory was assessed for tithe at £17 65. 8d. in 1292 and this fell to {5 in the ‘ New Taxation.’ 28 Tancs. Pipe R. 365. 8 Hist. of Lanc. Church (Chet. Soc.), 431. He witnesses a deed which is clearly prior to 1275, for another witness is Alexander, rector of Poulton, where a vicarage was ordained in that year. If this Alexander was the Alexander of Stanford who seems. to have resigned the rectory in 1250 (Exch. Aug. Of. Misc. Bks. vol. 40, No. 6) the date is considerably earlier. Philip, rector of Croston, a third witness,. attests documents about 1250. ‘The unnamed prior among the witnesses to the ordination of Poulton vicarage in 1275 (Hist. of Lanc. C4. 380) may be this Henry or a successor. Brother William of Cockerham. who was sued with the abbot of Leicester in 1302 for a disseisin in Garstang may possibly have been prior ;. Assize R. 418, m. 14. Sir Gilbert, a canon and keeper of Cockerham, is mentioned in 1330; Coram Rege R. 297, Rex. m. 21. John of Derby is described as ‘canon and custos of Cockerham’ in 1360 (ibid.. 451, m. 2), but the other canons had probably been. withdrawn before this. 20 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE HOUSES OF 12, THE ABBEY OF COCKERSAND The Premonstratensian abbey of Cockersand was originally founded as a small hospital of that order of canons. William de Lancaster, second baron of Kendal and lord of Wyresdale, who died in 1184, gave the site! and was usually considered the founder, but the foundation seems to have been really due to the efforts of Hugh Garth, a hermit ‘of great perfection,’ who is said to have collected the alms of the neighbour- hood for the erection of the hospital and to have become its first master.” The canons came from Croxton Abbey, Leicestershire,*? which, probably about this time, established a cell at Hornby. The site, bleak and exposed, consisted of moss- land forming the seaward portion of the town- ship of Cockerham to the north of the Cocker sands ; the house was at first styled St. Mary of the Marsh on the Cockersand.! Some richer land in the adjoining township of Thurnham was added by William de Furness, lord of Thurnham from 1186.5 In 1190 Pope Clement III took the ‘ monas- tery hospital’ under his protection, confirmed gifts of land by various donors, some of which were in Cumberland, Westmorland, and South Lancashire, and bestowed upon it the privileges which the popes were accustomed to confer on fully established religious houses ; among them free election of their priors and exemption of their demesne lands from tithe.® The hospital benefited by the widespread con- nexions of the Lancaster family, but was presently involved in a serious dispute with the Austin Canons of Leicester Abbey. The Cockerham manor, which included the site of the hospital, had been given with the church tothe Leicester canons by William de Lancaster I, but resumed by his son before his grant to Hugh the Hermit.” Between 1189 and 1194 the abbey recovered the manor in the court of John, count of Mortain, then lord of the honour of Lancaster, against Heloise widow of William de Lancaster II and " Chartul. of Cockersand (Chet. Soc. New Ser.), 758. * William de Lancaster’s grant was made to ‘ Hugh the Hermit.’ His surname and the other details come from a ‘ visitation’ of the north by the herald Norroy in 1530; Harl. MS. 1499, Art. 69; Cf L. and P. Hen. VIII, ix, 1173, (2) According to the ‘visitation’ there were two canons in addition to the master. The head of the hospital was called prior as early as 1190; Chartul. 2. ° Collectanea Anglo-Premonstratensia (Camden Soc.), i, 224. The abbot of Croxton as ‘ father abbot ? pre- sided at elections of abbots of Cockersand. «De Marisco super Kokersand’ ; ibid, 327. ® Ibid. 757. ® Ibid. 2-6. ” Farrer, Lancs. Pipe R. 391, 395 ; see above, p. 152. PREMONSTRATENSIAN CANONS her second husband Hugh de Morvill.§ This decision introduced a defect into the hospital’s title, and though Leicester Abbey may not have been disposed to press this to the utmost it resisted the ambition of the canons to have the priory promoted to abbatial status, and even con- tested some of the privileges granted by Clement III. Under these circumstances the canons seem to have contemplated removal to another site if they did not actually remove for a time. Theobald Walter, who obtained a grant of Amounderness from John, count of Mortain, about 1192, issued a charter within the next few years bestowing Pilling Hay in free alms on ‘the abbot and canons of the Premonstratensian order there serving God . . . for the erection of an abbey of the said order.’® The canons undoubtedly had an abbot before 1199, and the style ‘abbas et conventus de Marisco’ without mention of Cockersand, which seems confined to this period of uncertainty, may have been adopted in defer- ence to the Leicester objections.” It suited a site on the verge of Pilling Moss even better than the original one. That no abbey of Cockersand was recognized until Leicester withdrew its opposition seems fairly clear from the terms of the settlement arranged apparently in the sixth year of John (1204-5). Abbot Paul and the convent of Leicester granted to the canons of Cockersand ‘locum in quo domus hospitalis de Kokersand sita est,’ with permission to build an abbey and have an abbot.’ No tithes to Cockerham church were to be exacted from the site of the house, but this exemption was not to extend to any other land it might acquire within the parish. Cockersand undertook also not to acquire any further land within the manor of Cocker- ham.” Subsequent disputes between the two abbeys over boundaries, tithes, pasture and pannage, and the administration of sacraments at Cockersand to parishioners of Cockerham, were the subject of compositions in 1230, 1242-5, 1340, and 1364.’? King John showed some favour to the canons. While the dispute with Leicester was still undecided he confirmed them (1201) in . Ibid. ° Chartul. 375. " Thid. 332 3 Lancs. Pipe R. 339; Harl. Chart. 52,1.1. Roger, who is called ‘ abbas de Marisco’ in the last mentioned charter, signs as ‘ abbas de Cocker- sand’ in a document dated 1205-6 and subsequent to the agreement with Leicester described above ; Hist. of Lance. Ch. (Chet. Soc.), 386. " Chartul. 376. ” Ibid. 377. Ae Ibid. 379-390. For Cockersand’s litigation with Lancaster Priory over the tithes of its lands in the parishes of Poulton and Lancaster, see below, Pp. 170. 154 RELIGIOUS HOUSES possession of the site of the hospital together with the pasture of Pilling.* On 28 July, 1215, he granted them two plough-lands of his own demesne at Newbigging near Singleton in Amounderness, and freed them and their tenants from suit to shire and hundred courts, from pleas of murder, theft, hamsoken and forestel, and from every kind of tax, toll, and due.® Three weeks later he confirmed some important gifts by Gilbert son of Roger FitzReinfred, the husband of the founder’s daughter Heloise de Lancaster.!6 These comprised Medlar_ in Amounderness,” and the advowson of the parish church of Garstang.’® William, who became archdeacon of Richmond in 1217, gave permis- sion for its appropriation to the abbey, reserving the power to ordain a perpetual vicarage.!® John le Romain, archdeacon of Richmond, ordained a vicarage * apparently in 1245.7! In the bishop of Norwich’s Taxation (1254) the rectory was assessed at £22, the vicar’s portion at £5 6s. 84.” Thurstan Banaster gave to the canons the valu- able advowson of Wigan between 1213 and 1219, but his gift does not seem to have taken effect.2 The advowson of Claughton was acquired in two moieties between 1216 and 1255 by grant of Godith of Kellet and her niece’s son Roger of Croft, but though the abbey’s right of presentation was successfully maintained against the widow of Roger’s son in 1273,4 the advow- son went back to the Crofts in the fourteenth century.” The only advowson except Garstang which the abbey held till the Dissolution was obtained in the same period. Between 1206 and 1235 Robert son of Hugh, lord of Mitton, granted the right of presentation to its church, which stood on the Yorkshire side of the Ribble, part of the parish, however, being in Lancashire.” In 1314 the abbey secured from Edward II ata cost of £40 licence to appropriate the church to their own uses.” Permission to serve the church by a secular or a regular priest, appointed or removed at the abbot’s pleasure after the death or resignation of the existing vicar, was granted by Pope Boniface IX in 1396.” During the thirteenth century down to the passing of the Mortmain Act in 1279, the " Chartul. 44. 8 Ibid. 40-2. 6 Ibid. 46. Tbid. 168. 8 Ibid. 278. Ibid. 281. Confirmed by the archbishop of York and (in 1231) Pope Gregory IX ; ibid. 25. * Thid. 282. *! Thid. 284. 2 Tbid. 286. Before 1254 the assessment of the rectory had only been £13 6s. 8¢. The figures of 1254 were raised in 1292 to £26 135. 4d. and £13 6s. 8d. respectively, but reduced after the Scottish ravages to Lio and £5; Pope Nich. Tax. 307. 3 Chartul. 674. 5 Notitia Cestr. ii, 480. 6 Chartul, 520. 8 Cal, Pap. Letters, v, 19. * Ibid. 884, 892. *"Thid. 524. abbey received an unusually large number of grants of land. It is calculated that on an aver- age they amounted to forty or fifty a year, but they were mostly small parcels. Cockersand was one of the forty-eight houses whose abbots were summoned to the famous parliament of Carlisle in January, 1307,” but this was probably a solitary summons and its head did not become a mitred abbot. The abbey suffered severely in the Scottish raid of 1316. Its assessment for tenths was reduced shortly after by five-sixths.” Robert of Hilton, canon of the house, received a pardon in 1327 for the death of one of his brethren. In 1347 Robert of Carlton, then abbot, was accused of using violence to one John de Catterall. Catterall alleged that the abbot with four of the canons, a lay brother, and four- teen other persons had assaulted and maimed him at Lancaster, and a commission of oyer and terminer was granted.” No record of its inquiry seems, however, to have survived. Troubles of another kind assailed the abbey from the middle of the fourteenth century. In 1363, owing to the ravages of the plague, a dis- pensation had to be obtained for several of the canons to be ordained priests in their twenty-first year.* Half acentury later (1412) a permanent dispensation to this effect for all their canons was granted in consideration of the remote situation of the house, which at times made it difficult to find men prepared to receive the regular habit there.*4 ‘The sea continually wore away the walls which protected its buildings. In 1378 the abbot and convent begged Richard II to con- firm their charters without fine, in view of their poverty and the fact that ‘each day they are in danger of being drowned and destroyed by the sea.” °° There is no evidence that their request was acceded to, but Pope Boniface in 1372 granted a relaxation for twenty years of a year and forty days of penance to all almsgivers to. Cockersand,** and in 1397 the kmg granted them the farm of the alien priory of Lancaster during the war with France at a rent of 100 marks a year. With some difficulty and at an expense, as was afterwards alleged, of 500 marks they obtained possession, only to be turned out on the * Rot. Parl. i, 189. The summons of so many abbots may be accounted for by the fact that legisla- tion against payment of tallages to foreign superiors. was intended. See below, p. 158. %° Pope Nich. Tax. 308. *! Cal. of Pat. 1327-30, p. 54. Ibid. 1345-8, p. 387. A similar, charge was. brought against Carlton by William of Shirbourn in 1349; ibid. 1348-50, p. 387. 3 Cal. Pap. Letters, iv, 32. * Ibid. vi, 389. 3% Rot. Parl, iii, 525. It was not until 1385 that Richard granted a confizmation of their charters ;, Dugdale, Mon. vi, 906. %° Cal. Pap. Letters, iv, 179. 155 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE arrival of Henry IV.*’ Their representations procured on 4 November, 1399, a grant of restitution of the profits for the year just ended, but a fortnight later it was revoked.*8 Fear of violence from parties with whom they were in litigation induced them to obtain letters of protection from Henry in 1402.%° The three quarters of a century following is a blank in the history of the house. Fresh light comes with the election of a successor to Abbot Lucas in 1477 ; this was not accomplished with- out dissension, one of the canons being charged with inviting lay intervention. The state of the abbey during the last quarter of the fifteenth century is recorded with some fulness in the extant visitations of Richard Redman, bishop successively of St. Asaph, Exeter, and Ely, and visitor of the English province of the Premon- stratensian order. These inquisitions were as a rule triennial and the records of eight such visitations of Cockersand between 1478 and 1500 are preserved.4? Until 1488 Redman detected nothing more reprehensible than some laying aside of the claustral mantle (capa) at meals, and garments girded high like those of travellers and labourers.*? The house was £100 in debt in 1478, but this had been paid off by 1484. Some relaxation of discipline was disclosed at the next visitation in April, 1488. Redman excommunicated two apostate canons, forbade the brethren to reveal the secrets of the order and the plans of the house to great lords, or to use their influence to obtain promotion, and enjoined them to be satisfied with the food provided, attend all the hours, and refrain from wandering * Cal. of Pat. 1399-1401, p. 49. * Ibid. 150. * Add. MS. 32107, fol. 261. The general chapter intervened on behalf of a canon who was apparently at odds with the abbot (Sloane MS. 4934, fol. 654, Feb. 1402-3). Abbot Burgh had absented himself from two chapters and ‘quaedam gravia’ had been found against him in the last visitation of the abbey (ibid. 4935, fol. 1314). “ Cclectanea Anglo-Premonstratensia (Camd. Soc.), 1, 95-6. “ Bodl. Lib. MS, Ashmole, 1519. They are to be printed in the second part of the work mentioned in the previous note. “MS. Ashmole, 1519, fol. 104, 24, 65. The record of the visitation of 1484, is, however, lost. The number of canons at this period was twenty to twenty-two, of whom nearly all were priests. Of these six had offices which compelled them to live away from the monastery, the vicars and procurators of Mitton and Garstang and the cantarists of Middle- ton and Tunstall (or Thurland). The other officers included a ‘ circator,’ a ¢ servitor comventus,’ a ‘ custos infrmorum,’ and a ‘ provisor exteriorum.’? The abbey consumed weekly 16 bushels of wheat, 4 of oats, and 24 of malt. They used 50 oxen and 120 sheep yearly ; ibid. fol. 654, about the country.** In December he was re- called to deal with two of the canons, William Bentham the cellarer and James Skipton the cantor and grain master (granatorius), who were accused of breaking their vow of chastity. Ben- tham admitted his guilt, and Skipton, who denied the truth of the charge, could get none of his brethren to support him. The visitor imposed forty days’ penance on both, and ordered Ben- tham to be removed for three years to Croxton Abbey, and Skipton for seven to Sulby Abbey in Northamptonshire.“ The term of banishment must have been relaxed in Skipton’s case, for at the next visitation in 1491 he was cellarer, Bentham being sub-prior.** Skipton afterwards became abbot. To prevent similar scandals in future Redman forbade drinking after compline, and the employ- ment of women to carry food to the infirmary or refectory. The evil of evening drinking was not, however, rooted out, for in 1500 the bishop attributed various diseases from which a number of the brethren were suffering, to inordi- nate potations and sitting up after compline.*® In 1494 Thomas Poulton, who had been can- tarist at Tunstall, was found guilty of two cases of incontinence,‘” and in 1500 Robert Burton and Thomas Calet were removed from their stalls for some offence not stated.48 Burton was afterwards restored.” The visitations reveal a number of minor disorders—disobedience to the abbot, lingering in bed during mattins, neglect of services on pretext of illness, frequenting of wed- dings, fairs, and other secular assemblies, and the wearing over the white habit of a black garment with black or various-coloured ‘liripipes’ or streamers, and (in 1491) the use of ‘istos volu- biles sotulares nuper inter curiales usitatos, Anglice vocatos slyppars sive patans.° In 1497 the canons were forbidden to exchange opprobrious or scandalous charges or to draw knives upon one another."' ‘There are no means of deciding how general such derelictions were, but compari- son with the visitations of 1478 and 1481 leaves a decided impression that the tone of the com- munity had altered for the worse in the interval. In the reign of Henry VII Edward Stanley, Lord Monteagle, held its stewardship with those of Furness and Cartmel, and the office passed to his son and successor.*? The pressure brought to bear upon the monasteries by the crown and its agents for some time before the Dissolution is illustrated by a letter in which ® Ibid. fol. 658. * Thid. fol. 1424. “ Tbid. fol. 121. ton ; ibid. fol. 143d. “ Thid. fol. 144. - Collect. Anglo-Premonstr. 263. MS. Ashmole, 1519, fol. 894, 121 al Tb Gl, aay ee * L. and P. Hen. VIII, iii, 3234. “ Tbid. fol. 84. “ Ibid. fol. 144. He was afterwards vicar of Mit- 156 RELIGIOUS HOUSES Abbot Poulton excuses himself to Cromwell from preferring his nominee Sir James Layburn to certain lands in the manor of Ashton on the ground that the heirs of the late occupants claimed to hold by tenant-right.® Doctors Legh and Layton made a serious charge against two of the canons,™ but this was not corroborated by the royal commissioners under the Act of Suppression, who visited the abbey at the end of May, 1536.5 They re- ported that the prior and twenty-one canons, all of them priests, were of honest conversation and desirous to continue in religion. ‘Two of them served chantries at Tunstall and Middleton, and two others acted as proctors for the abbey at its appropriate churches of Mitton and Garstang, but all four could be recalled to the monastery. No mention is made of the lay brothers (con- versi) who occur at an earlier period, unless they were the five ‘poor aged and impotent men’ whom the foundation required to be kept at the abbey. Ten other poor men were provided with bed and board daily for charity. The total cost was £22 7s. 4d.a year. There were two persons living in the house by purchase of corrodies ; one of these, bought in 1507 for ten marks, cost the abbey half that sum yearly. Its staff of servants numbered fifty-seven, of whom nineteen were officers of the household, ten waiting ser- vants, and eleven hinds of husbandry. The wages bill for a year was £46 16s. 8d. The income of the abbey as ascertained for the pur- poses of the tenth in 1535 °° was well under the limit of £200 fixed by the Act of February, 1536, which empowered the crown to dissolve the smaller monasteries. But the Commissioners raised the valuation to not far short of £ 300, and this, coupled with their report of the good state of the house, doubtless induced the king to use the discretion conferred upon him by the Act of Suppression and allow Cockersand to continue.” It was not until 29 January, 1539, that the house was surrendered by Abbot Poulton and his twenty-two canons.** Two months later the site, with the demesne lands and the rectory of Garstang, was leased for twenty-one years to John Burnell and Robert Gardiner at a rent of £73 6s. 84. John Kitchen of Hatfield, Hert- fordshire, farmer of the monastery from 1539, bought the site and demesne from the crown on 1 September, 1543, for £700.% By the mar- 3 Land P. Hen. VIII, v, 1416. & Tbid. x, 364. % Their full report is preserved in Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 5, No. 4, a ‘ brief certificate’ of it in No. 7. 56 Valor Eccl. v, 261. 37 [, and P. Hen. VIII, xi, 1417 (18). 58 Dep. Keeper’s Rep. viii, App. ii, 16. There had been an addition of one canon since 1536. 5° Original lease at Thurnham Hall. ® Pat. 35 Hen. VIII, pt. 13, m. 20. the whole, was acquired prior to 1272.% riage of his eldest daughter Anne to Robert Dalton of Thurnham Hall it passed to that family, in whose possession it still remains.®! The abbey was dedicated to St. Mary. As already stated its original endowment was largely augmented during the thirteenth century by numerous gifts of land and rents. A consider- able portion of these were in Amounderness, but extensive acquisitions were made in the other Lancashire hundreds, and in the adjoining counties of Cumberland, Westmorland, Chester, and York. The donations usually consisted of small parcels, but there were some important exceptions. In the early years of the abbey Adam de Dutton gave it a moiety of the vill of Warburton with other lands in Cheshire for the foundation of a cell in connexion with the church of St. Werburgh at Warburton.” Abbot Roger, before 1216, resigned to Geoffrey son of Adam all but eight oxgangs of land in War- burton, for confirmation in which latter he under- took to find a chaplain to minister for Adam’s soul. There seem still to have been canons there in the middle of the century, but in 1271 the abbey sold all its rights to the second Geoffrey de Dutton for the sum of eighty marks. Among its Westmorland grants was one of half the township of Sedgewick by Ralph de Beetham between 1190 and 1208. In Amounderness Gilbert son of Roger Fitz Reinfred granted the villof Medlar, one plough-land ; ® Adam de Lee before 1212 gave a moiety of the vill of Forton ; and the remaining moiety, with the lordship of Wil- liam de Lancaster III bestowed four oxgangs of land in Garstang on his deathbed in 1246. South of the Ribble Elias son of Roger de Hutton gave the whole township of Hutton, comprising three plough-lands in the parish of Penwortham, between 1201 and 1220, and about the middle of the century Westhoughton in Salford Hundred was conveyed to the abbey in several portions.® Sir Edmund de Nevill, kt., gave a third of the manor of Middleton in Lonsdale in 1337 to endow a chantry there, 61 Documents at Thurnham Hall. The crown sold other Cockersand estates, e.g. the manor of Hutton for £560 to Lawrence Rawstorne of Old Windsor ; Pat. 37 Hen. VIII, pt. 5, m. 8. & Ormerod, Hist. of Ches. i, 575. ® Ibid. Some parcels of land at Allerton and Knowsley which had been given by others to War- burton Priory were retained by Cockersand ; Cartul. 544, 559-61, 606-7. Cockersand may possibly have furnished the canons whom Thomas son of Gos- patric established about 1190 at Preston (Patrick) in Westmorland, for he was also a benefactor of the abbey (Chartul. 999), but if so the Preston house afterwards removed to Shap was quite independent. * Ibid. 1038. 8 Tbid. 167. % Tbid. 337 sqq. Ibid. 272, 280. 8 Chartul. 407. ® Ibid. 677-9, 688. 157 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE which was served by one of the canons.” These estates were managed by eleven bailiffs and the stewards of Hutton and Westhoughton, in addition to the abbey steward, a post occupied by Thomas Stanley, Lord Monteagle, a receiver and a court steward."! The rent-roll of the house in 1535 was estimated at £145 55. 114d. and the total annual value of its temporalities at £182 8s. 83d. From spiritualities a revenue of (£45 16s. 8d. accrued. The expenses were £70 11s. 4d. leaving a net income of £157 14s. o44.% But the commissioners of 1536 must have thought this estimate unduly low, for they raised it far higher than in the case of any other monastery they visited.“* They put the net income at £282 7s. 74d. The indebtedness of the house was £108 gs. 8d. Its bells and lead were worth £126 135. 4d. and its movable goods £217 5s. 14.’5 In common with the other English houses of the order Cockersand was subject to visitation by the abbot-general of Prémontré or his commissary, and until the beginning of the fourteenth century its abbots were required to attend the annual general chapter held at the mother house and to pay their share of any tax imposed for the benefit of the order in general and Prémontré in par- ticular.”® It was placed in the northern of the three circuits (circariae) into which the English ™ Add. MS. 32104, fol. 246; Duchy of Lanc, Great Coucher, i, fol. 63, No. 27. For the chantry in the abbey church and two beds in the poor infirmary which were established for the souls of members of the Beetham family between 1235 and 1249, see Chartul. 1013. Rather earlier land in Kellet was given ‘ad ospicium infirmorum sustentan- dum’ ; ibid. 906. "Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. ptfo. s, No. 2z. / "Valor Eccl. v, 261. In 1292 they had been assessed at only £24, and this was reduced after the Scottish ravages to £4; Pope Nich. Tax. 308. In the levy made for Prémontré in 1470 Cockersand paid £3 §5., practically the same rate as Croxton, and higher than any other house of the northern circuit save St. Agatha (£3 §5.), and Alnwick (£3 105.). Its contribution in 1487 was the highest in the northern circuit and identical with that of Croxton, Welbeck, Newhouse, and Barlings ; Coll. Angl-Premonstr. 1,77, 157. For a decision in 1292 that all the lands of the abbey except Pilling and 2 carucates in New- sham were geldable, see Plac. de Quo IM arranto (Rec. Com.), 379. In 1527 it had been roughly estimated at £200; Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Sury. ptfo. 5, No. PS. * Hutton manor, whose rental is stated at £20 in 1535, was farmed from the crown a few years later at £30; the clear value of Mitton rectory, put at £26 16s. 8d. in the Valor, was afterwards said to be £35, and Garstang rectory, which figures for £19 in 1535, was leased in 1539 at a rent of £40; Duchy of Lanc. Mins. Accts. ** Ibid. Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 5, No. 4. © Coll. Angle-Premonstr. Introd, abbeys were divided for purposes of visitation and taxation.” The Statute of Carlisle, however, in 1307 forbade the payment of tallages to foreign houses,’® and the English abbots demanded relief from the burden of annual attendance at Prémontré,”® and its abbot’s yearly visitations of their province. After a lengthy dispute, which was carried to Rome, Abbot Adam de Crecy in 1315 absolved the abbots from personal atten- dance at the general chapter, consented to reduce the burden of visitation and to limit the calls for contributions to necessary collections approved by their representatives at the chapter.*° Hence- forth the abbot of Prémontré seems to have executed his visitorial powers at longer intervals through a commissary who was one of the abbots themselves. In 1496 Bishop Redman, abbot of Shap, who was then the abbot’s visitor, informed the abbot of Cockersand that he intended to visit his monastery, arriving on 3 April if the tide served. He asked that someone should be sent to Lan- caster the day before to provide lodgings for him and safe conduct inter maris pericula to the abbey.*! The visitor of 1506 spent a night at Kendal at the expense of Cockersand, and his visitation lasted two days.® More frequent visitations were made by the local visitors in each circuit.8 The abbot was expected to attend the provincial chapters of the order, which were usually held in some town in the Midlands,*4 ABBOTS OF COCKERSAND Hugh (Garth) the Hermit,® said to have been Master of the Hospital before 1184 Henry," occurs as prior before and in 1190 Th[? omas],*’ occurs as ‘Abbas de Marisco’ between 1194 and 1199 Roger,® occurs as ‘ Abbas de Marisco,’ and in 1205~6 as ‘abbas de Kokersand ’ 7 Thid. ™ Stat. of the Realm, i, 150-1 3 Rot. Pari. i, 217. ” For royal licences to abbots of Cockersand to go to the chapter in 1290 and 1317 see Cal, of Pat. Se Fue pp. 381, 384, and Cal. Close, 1213-18; © Coll. Angl-Premonstr. The statute was not always enforced. Cockersand was rated to levies for Prémon- tré in 1470 and 1487 ; ibid. i, 77, 157. ® Ibid. 247. age * Thid. 193. 8 Ibid. * e.g. ibid. 126, 140, 148. & Chartul. x, xxi, 758. He is not actually called master in any contemporary document. © Tbid. xi, xxi, 2. ” Lancs. Pipe R. 339 3 Duchy of Lanc., class xxvi bdle. 30, No. 5. - : =e *° B.M. Harl. Chart. 52, i, 1 3 Hist. of Lance. Ch. (Chet. Soc.), 385. Lytham Chart. in Durham Cathe- dral treasury, 4a, 2ae, 4ae, Ebor. 4. 158 RELIGIOUS HOUSES Hereward,® occurs 1216 and May, 1235 Richard, occurs 1240 Henry,” occurs 1246 and April, 1261 Adam de (? le) Blake,” occurs July, 1269, and 1278 Thomas, 1288 Robert of Formby,” occurs 1289 and 10 Sep- tember, 1290 Roger, occurs 1300 Thomas,” occurs August, 1305, and 22 March, 1307 Roger,” occurs 1311 and 1331 William of Boston,** occurs 1334 and 10 Oc- tober, 1340. Robert of Carleton,” occurs July, 1347, died 20 March, 1354 Jordan of Bosedon,™ elected 4 May, 1354, and occurs 30 November, 1364 Richard,” occurs 21 November, 1382 Thomas, occurs 1386-7 and 1388-9 William Stainford,’ occurs 1393 Thomas of Burgh,’ occurs 1395 and 1403 Thomas Green,” elected 6 July, 1410, occurs 1436-7 occurs September, 1286 and ® Hist. of Lane. Ch. 49 3 Chartul. 169. *® Ibid. 520. A deed whose date lies between 1235 and 1249 mentions an abbot Roger; ibid. 1013. The editor refers it to the time of the early abbot of that name, but the names of the witnesses point to the date given above. Possibly he is an abbot hitherto unnoticed, but the abbreviated forms of Richard and Roger were often confused, and there may be an error in one or other of the above passages, most probably in the first, as the second is taken from the original deed. *! Furness Coucher (Chet. Soc.), 349 ; Chartul. 147. % Tbid. xxi, 150, 548 ; Coram Rege R. 6 Edw. I, 41, m.28. An Abbot William who held office semp. Hen. III appears in Pal. Plea R. No. 11, m. 39. % Cal. of Pat. 1281-92, p. 251; De Banco R. 73, mM. 7. * Assize R. 404, m. 3; Cal of Pat. 1281-92, p. 3843 Reg. Archiepis. Ebor. % Reg. Archiepis. Ebor. 8° Coram Rege R. 183, m. 26; Chartul. 784. %” Dodsworth MSS. (Bodl. Lib.), cxlix, fol. 147%. 5 Assize R. 1404, m. 19. °° Chartul. 384, 750; Cur. Reg. R. 8 Edw. III, m. 121; Lancs. and Ches. Antig. Notes, il, 4. ° Cal. of Pat. 1345-8, p. 3873 Ing. a.q.d. 35 Edw. III, No. 18. 100 Reg. Archiepis. Ebor.; CAartul. 386; Pal. of Lanc. Plea R. No. 11, m. 39. 11 Ing. p.m. 6 Ric. II, 112 s.v. Lanc. 10? Chartul.750,1147. He occurs in B.M. Add. MS. 32104, fol. 2614, dated 24 Jan. in the third year of John of Gaunt’s regality (i.e. 1380); but this must be an error of transcription unless Abbot Richard came between two called Thomas. 18 Screen in Mitton church ; C4artul. xxii. 14 J, P. Rylands, Local Gleanings Lancs. and Ches. ii, 225 ; Sloane MS. 4935, fol. 1313. 5 Reg. Archiepis. Ebor. ; Rylands, loc. cit. ; Lancs. Final Cone. iii, 127. Robert Egremont,! elected 1444, occurs 1474 William Lucas,’ died 1477 William Bowland,” elected 1477, died 1490 John Preston,’ elected 16 December, 1490, occurs 1500 James Skipton," elected 20 December, 1502 Henry Stayning,™ elected 7 October, 1505 John Croune,’ elected 11 May, 1509 George Billington,"* occurs 1520-1 and 27 September, 1522 John Bowland,™ occurs 22 January, 1524, and 20 M — Newsham Gilbert Ainsworth," elected 25 March, 1531 Robert Kendal!’ elected 16 October, 1531 Robert Poulton,’ elected 27 May, 1533, surrendered 29 January, 1538-9 The common seal of the abbey is pointed oval and represents three niches one above another ; in the upper one God the Father in the attitude of benediction, on each side a demi-angel swing- ing a censer; in the centre one the Virgin crowned with the Child on her left arm ; in the lower one the abbot in prayer.”° Legend :— -+ s’ BE MARIE ET AVGVSTI COVET D’ COK’sAD A seal of Abbot Henry (¢. 1242-50) is at- tached to a deed among the Trafford muniments printed in the charculary (p. 723). It is vesica- shaped (1f in. X1¢in.), much rubbed and worn, apparently bearing the right fore-arm and hand of a canon outstretched, holding a crozier. Le- gend in Gothic characters hardly discernible :— SIG . HENRICI . ABBATIS . DE . COKIRSAND ™ Reg. Archiepis. Ebor.; Chartul, 819; Pal. of Lanc. Writ of Assize, 14. Aug. 1451; Dodsworth MSS. 70, fol. 161 (if there were not two Roberts, one in 1444-51 and a second in 1474). 107 Coll. Angl-Premonstr. i, 96. 18 Thid. 97, 111. 1 Ibid. 112; MS. Ashmole (Bodl. Lib.), 1519, fol. 14.25. 1) Reg. Archiepis. Ebor.; Rylands, loc. cit.; cf Chet. Soc. Publ. (Old Ser.), lvii (2), 29. See above, . 156, Pi Reg. Archiepis. Ebor. MN? Tbid. 43 Rylands, op. cit. ii, 226; L. and P. Hen. VIII, ili (2), 2578. ™ Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 5, No. 4, m. 4; Whitaker, Hist. of Richmond, ii, 335. In 1527 he had been abbot for four years; Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 5, No. 15. 15 Thid. No. 4, m. 4. NS Reg. Archiepis. Ebor. N7 Thid. NS Thid.; Dep. Keeper's Rep. viii, App. ii, 16. Either Poulton or his predecessor appointed a procu- rator for Garstang on 7 May, 1533; Rentals and Surv. loc. cit. 19 BLM. Cat. of Seals, i, 514. 159 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE 13. PRIORY OF HORNBY This small house of regular canons was estab- lished in the second half of the twelfth century by the Montbegons of Hornby. ‘The canons, it seems probable, were brought from the Pre- monstratensian house at Croxton in Leicester- shire, of which the priory was certainly after- wards, and perhaps from the outset, a dependent cell. Croxton Abbey had been founded shortly before 1159 by William, earl of Warenne and count of Boulogne and Mortain, lord of the honour of Lancaster. Roger de Montbegon III (1172 ?-1226) ‘gave to the canons of Hornebi in alms 100 acres of land in Hornebi,’ 1” and he doubtless was the founder of the priory, though some have attributed its creation to his father Adam or his grandfather Roger II.” The third Roger de Montbegon also granted to the priory the advowson of Melling church ” and presumably that of Tunstall. The former had belonged to the Norman abbey of Sées as part of the endowment of its cell at Lancaster, but was transferred to Roger before 1210 in consideration of a yearly pension of 2s. from the church to Lancaster Priory and his renunciation of all claim upon the chapel of Gressingham, hitherto dependent upon Melling.’* Roger dying without issue, his lands passed to his kins- man Henry de Monewden, who on 14 September, 1227, alienated the Lonsdale estates, including Hornby Castle and the advowsons of the priory and of Melling, to Hubert de Burgh and his wife Margaret. '** The prior’s failure to chal- lenge the inclusion of the Melling advowson involved him nearly twenty years later (1246) in litigation with Hubert’s widow over the right of presentation to the living.’ Before the pro- ceedings had gone very far Geoffrey, abbot of Croxton, intervened on the ground that the priory was a cell of his abbey and that he could remove the prior at his will, which the prior admitted to be the case. A compromise was ultimately arranged by which the Countess Margaret acknowledged Croxton’s right to the advowson, but was allowed to present her clerk pro hac vice. A licence for the appropriation of the church was obtained by the abbey from Edward II on 20 May, 1310.8 Tunstall church was appropriated and a vicarage ordained before 1236."" 1° Testa de Nevill, ii, 832 (Inquest of 1212). ™ Lancs. Ing. (Rec. Soc.), 1, 82. 8 Lancs. Final Conc. (Rec. Soc.), i, 95. "3 Hist. of Lanc. Ch. (Chet. Soc.’, 20. date see post, p. 168. 4 Cal. of Chart. R. i, 60. Ona plea of warranty the charter was reinforced by a final concord on 3 Nov. 1229; Lancs. Final Conc. 1, 56. % Thid. i, 94. 8 Cal. of Pat. 1307-13, p. 229. 7 Hist, of Lane. Ch. 164. For the Henry de Monewden's disposal of the advowson of the priory, and the absence of any mention of its subordination to Croxton before 1235,'* have inspired a suggestion that it was originally independent and that Hubert de Burgh, who received a grant of the manor of Croxton in 1224,)” first made it a dependent cell of the Leicestershire abbey. But this is only con- jecture, and if the priory contained no more than three canons, including the prior—its later complement—it is scarcely likely to have been independent. From the middle of the thirteenth century, at all events,the dependent status of the priory is sufficiently clear. In 1292 the abbot of Croxton sued for lands in Wrayton ‘ut jus hospitalis sui $. Wilfridi de Hornby,’%° and a letter is extant from Abbot Thomas ‘ad obe- dientiarios suos de Hornby’ requiring better obedience to the prior appointed by him,’ For above sixteen years prior to 1526 the then abbot of Croxton is recorded to have occupied not only the rectory but the vicarage of Tun- stall, and in 1527 the vicars both of Melling and Tunstall were canons of Croxton.“? In the Valor Ecclesiasticus of 1535 the possessions of the priory were assessed with those of the abbey. It is true that the prior of Hornby was some- times present at the provincial chapter of the abbots of the order,'? and that the priory was separately surrendered to Legh and Layton on 23 February, 1536,' by the prior William Halliday, whose morals they had called in question,’** and the two canons, John Fletcher and Robert Derby. But this was evidently cancelled and anew prior appointed, for the surrender of Croxton Abbey, made on the 8 Sep- tember, 1538, was signed by John Consyll,, "8 Lancs. Final Cone. i, 67: Abbot Ralph quit- claims land in Tatham. In January, 1227, an oxgang of land in Wennington was quitclaimed to the prior of Hornby ; ibid. i, 151. % Lancs. Ing. i, 103. Richard de Croxton was master of Hornby in or about 12273 Cockersand Chartul. (Chet. Soc.), got. Assize R. Lanc. 20 Edw. I. rot. 12. Pope Nich. Tax. (309) of the same year speaks of a ‘custos domus de Hornby.’ 8! Collectanea Anglo-Premonstratensia (Camden Soc.), ii, 148. The editor’s date seems too early. They must obey him as they would their claustral prior if they were in the convent. ™ Duchy of Lancs. Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 5, No. 15. eg. In 1476 and 1479; Collectanca Angh- Premonstratensia (Camden Soc.), i, 140-8. Hornby was not, however, reckoned as one of their thirty-one English houses (ibid. 224), nor does it seem to have been subject to visitation by the abbot of Pré- montré ; ibid. 193. ™ Dep. Keeper's Rep. viii. App. ii, 23. 1. and P. Hen. VIII. x, 364. ™ Cf. Leland, Collectanea, i, 723 L. and P. Hen. VIII, ix, 816. 160 RELIGIOUS HOUSES prior, and John Fletcher and Thomas Edwin- stowe, canons of Hornby.” The site was granted in 1544 to Thomas Stanley, second Lord Monteagle, whose father had acquired Hornby Castle and its lands.}88 The priory was dedicated to St. Wilfrid.” In 1292 its temporalities (bona) were taxed for tithe at £8 13s. 4d., reduced to {2 after the Scottish raids.“ Its gross income in 1535 amounted to £94 75. 84d., of which £28 8s. 44d. was derived from its temporalities and £66 6s. 8d. from spiritualities.4! The fixed charges, £18 75. 4d. in all, included a fee of £2 to the chief seneschal, Lord Monteagle, one of £1 65. 8d. to Marmaduke Tunstall, seneschal of its lands in Lancashire, 135. 4d. to the court steward, Thomas Croft, and {4 for alms to thirteen poor people ‘by the foundation of Roger de Montbegon.”!#? Priors oR Warpens oF Horney Richard of Croxton, occurs 1227 N ( ),"4 occurs 1230 Robert, died 1246 Robert of Gaddesby,“*appointed 1379 Thomas Kellet “” (Kelyt), occurs 1475 Thomas Wyther,™® occurs 1482 Ellis Sherwood,™* occurs 1484 and 1490 Edmund Green," occurs 1497 and 1501 William Halliday," occurs 1535, surrendered 1536 John Consyll,'? surrendered 1538 The seal attached to the surrender of 1536 has been (doubtfully) supposed to be the common seal of the priory. Unfortunately it is much broken and none of the legend re- mains. FRIARIES 14. THE HOUSE OF DOMINICAN FRIARS, LANCASTER The house of the Black Friars at Lancaster was founded about 1260 by Sir Hugh Harring- ton, kt.! In September, 1291, the archbishop of York instructed them to have three brothers preaching the Crusade on Holy Cross Day, one at Lancaster, another in Kendal, and a third in Lonsdale.? Master William of Lancaster in 1311 received licence to give a rood of land for 7 Dep. Keeper's Rep. viii, App. ii, 18 ; Foedera, xiv, 617. 88 Pat. 36 Hen. VIII. pt. 10. '® Lancs. Final Conc.i, 51. “° Pope Nich. Tax. 309. “| Val. Eccl. (Rec. Com.), iv, 150. The Com- missioners of 1527 reported the cell to be worth £26 13s. 4d; Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 5, No. 15. They refer no doubt to the temporalities. ™ Val. Eccl. iv, 151. MS Lancs. Final Conc. (Rec. Soc.), i, 51 ; Cockersand Chartul, gor. “4 Hist. of Lanc. Ch. (Chet. Soc.), 154. The date seems clear from comparison with similar documents at pp. 164, 362. “5 Lancs. Final Conc. i, 95 n. He was killed by his horse violently dashing him against a cross. “8 BLM. Peck MSS. ii, 36. 47 Bodl. Lib. Ashmole MS. 1519, fol. 5 (list of confratres of Croxton). “8 Ibid. fol. 21. This list is referred to 1482 by Father Gasquet (Col. Angl.-Prem. No. 338), but may belong to 1478. ™ Ibid. fol. 424 (probably the same as Helias or Ellis Hathersage [Hatersatage], prior of Hornby, mentioned at fol. 1134); Collectanea Anglo-Premonstra- tensia (Camden Soc.), Nos. 339, 345. Identified by Father Gasquet with Elias Attercliffe, elected abbot of Croxton in 1491 (ibid. ii, 158). He acted as assessor to Bishop Redman, visitor of the order. the enlargement of their site, and a few years later they took out a pardon for the acquisition without licence of a further two acres.? In 1371 William of Northburgh, one of the brethren, was licensed as penitentiary in the wapentakes of Blackburn and Leyland.* Brother Richard Pekard, recluse of this house, received a licence in 1390 to hear confessions.® The house was probably surrendered in 1539 ° and the crown on 18 June, 1540, sold it with the friaries of Preston and Warrington to Thomas Holcroft, esquire of the body to the king, for £126 10s.’ * Ashmole MS. 1519, fol. 136, 1534. Elected abbot of Halesowen, 4 July, 1505 ; Coll Angh.-Pre- monstr. No. 447. 1! Valor Eccl. iv, 151; L. and P. Hen. VIII. x, p- 141. See above. Dep. Keeper’s Rep. viii, App. ii, 18. ‘The royal licence to acquire a site is dated 27 May, 1260; Pat. 44 Hen. III, m. 9. A prior of the house is mentioned in 1269 ; Dugdale, Mon. On the division of the English province of the order into four ‘visitations,’ Canterbury, London, Oxford, and York, it was assigned to the last-named ; Worc. Cath. Lib. MS. 93, fly-leaf. * Let. from Northern Reg. (Rolls Ser.), 95. ® Cal. of Pat. 1307-13, p. 387. * Lich. Epis. Reg. Stretton, fol. 26. ° Ibid. Scrope, fol. 126d. ° In Feb. 1539 one of Cromwell’s agents mentions this as one of twenty or more friaries still standing in the north, most of which he hoped to see suppressed before Easter; L. and P. Hen. VIII, xiv (1), 348, 413. A royal commissioner was on his way to Lancaster on 10 March ; ibid. 494. ” Thid. xv, 831, g. 43. The site was alienated in 2-3 Philip and Mary to Thomas Carus of Halton and his son Thomas ; Dugdale, Mon. vi, 1486. 2 161 21 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE There was a chantry in the chapel of the friary founded (so the Chantry Commissioners reported in 1547) by the ancestors of Sir Thomas Lawrence of Ashton near Lancaster. Robert Makerell, the last priest of the chantry, continued to celebrate masses ‘at his pleasure’ in other places after the dissolution of the friary.® 15. THE HOUSE OF FRANCISCAN FRIARS, PRESTON Edmund, earl of Lancaster, younger son of Henry III, has from the fourteenth century been considered the founder of the house of Grey Friars at Preston.? Leland, however, remarks that, though he was ‘the Original and great Builder of this house,’ the site was given by a member of the local family of Preston, an Irish representative of which became Lord Gorman- ston in 1390. This is supported by evidence that the Prestons at a somewhat later date held the land adjoining the friary.’ From an entry in the Close Rolls, hitherto overlooked, it would appear that the Franciscans had settled at Preston before Earl Edmund’s connexion with the county began. On 25 October, 1260, Henry II granted to the Friars Minor of Preston five oaks in Sydwood, Lancaster, for building? Presumably the site had already been obtained from one of the Prestons. Sub- sequent gifts by Edmund, who received the honour of Lancaster in 1267, towards the erection of the house doubtless earned for him the credit of being its founder. In September, 1291, the archbishop of York gave instructions that one of the friars should preach the Crusade at Preston itself, and a second at some other populous place in the neighbourhood.!® Pope John XXII in 1330 on the petition of Henry, earl of Lancaster, forbad the authorities of the order to remove the house from the Wor- cester ‘Custodia’ of the English Franciscan province, in which Henry’s father had had it included.!* The subsequent history of the house is a scanty record of small bequests for masses ® until ® Lancs. Chant. (Chet. Soc.), 225. The clear annual value of the chantry in 1535 was £3 185.; Valor Eccl. (Rec. Com.), v, 263. ° Cal. Pap. Letters, ii, 345. * Leland, Itin. iv, 22; G. E. C. Complete Peerage, iv, §5. Viscount Gormanston is the present represen- tative of this family. 1 Fishwick, Hist. of the Par. of Preston, 198. ® Close, 44 Hen. III, pt. 1, m. 13 information from Mr. A. G. Little. 8 Let. from Northern Reg. (Rolls Ser.), 96. “ Bullarium Franciscanum, v, No. 882; Cal. Pap. Letters, il, 345. © Fishwick, loc. cit.; T. C. Smith, Rec. of the Par. Ch, of Preston, 244. the time of the last warden, Thomas T odgill, whose dispute with the lessee of the hospital of St. Mary Magdalene over the ‘Widowfield’ is narrated elsewhere.!® He was accused in the court of the Duchy of having made away with goods placed in his care during the nonage of one Elizabeth a Powell; but he denied the charge and the verdict has been lost.7 The house was prob- ably surrendered in 1539,'8 and the crown sold it with the friaries of Lancaster and Warrington to Thomas Holcroft, esquire of the body to the king, on 18 June, 1540, for £126 105. WARDENS OF THE FRIARY James,” occurs 1480 Philip,”! occurs 1509-10 Thomas Todgill,” occurs 1528, surrendered 1539? 16. THE HOUSE OF AUSTIN FRIARS, WARRINGTON The date of the settlement of the hermit friars of the order of St. Augustine at Warrington is not known, but it was before 1308. In 1329 some of the brethren were ordained by Bishop Langton.” An old hospital is said to have been taken over by the friars. William le Boteler gave them a meadow in 1332. In the latter part of the century several of the brethren were appointed penitentiaries or had licence to hear confessions in one or more deaneries of South Lancashire; in one case throughout the arch- deaconry of Chester.** A large number of Warrington friars took holy orders.” ® See post, p. 164. ” Fishwick, op. cit. 199. * On 23 Feb. 1539, Richard, bishop of Dover, informs Cromwell that he is about to proceed to the north to suppress some twenty friaries which are still standing there ; L. and P. Hen. VIII, xiv (1), 348, 413, 494. ® Tbid. xv, 831 (43). *” Whitaker, Hist. of Richmondshire, ii, 428. * Harl. MS. 2112, fol. 1154; Smith, op. cit. 244. * Smith, 239. In 1544 Todgill, then about fifty years old, was chaplain of Gray’s Inn, London. Eight years later (16 July, 1552) he became rector of Holy Trinity, Chester, on the presentation of the Earl of Derby. He died before 1 Feb. 1565 ; Ormerod, Hist. of Ches. (ed. Helsby), i, 331. * Lich. Epis. Reg. Langton, fol. 157, 1634. Beamont (Ann. of the Lords of Warrington (Chet. Soc.), 73) conjectures that they were introduced about 1259 by William le Boteler, seventh baron of Warrington. * Beamont, op. cit. 168, 189. * Lich. Epis. Reg. Stretton, fol. 15, 20, 23, 264; ibid. Scrope, fol. 1274, 129. * Lich. Epis. Reg. 162 RELIGIOUS HOUSES In 1362 William de Raby, an apostate friar of the house, was seeking to be reconciled to his order.” Chantries were founded in their church by Sir Thomas Dutton, kt., in 1379 and by Sir John Bold, kt., in 1422. In 1504 Gilbert Southworth of Croft bequeathed his body to be buryed in the cemetare of the churche of Jhesus belongyng to the bredren of Seinte Austen.” The house was probably surrendered in 1539,°° and the crown on 18 June, 1540, sold it with the friaries of Preston and Lancaster to Thomas Holcroft, esquire of the body to the king, for £126 105,31 Priors oF WARRINGTON Henry, occurs 1334 John of Crouseley,*? occurs 1368 William Eltonhead,* occurs 1379 Geoffrey Banaster,® §.T.P., appointed 1404 Nicholas Spynk,** occurs 24 June, 1422 Stephen Leet,®” occurs 1432 — Slawright,®” occurs 1520 HOSPITALS 17. HOSPITAL OF ST. MARY MAGDALEN, PRESTON The precise date of the foundation of this leper hospital does not appear. It is first mentioned in letters of protection granted by Henry II after 1177.1 Its position does not seem to be known exactly, but is supposed to have been near the present church of St. Walburge.? The patronage of the hospital always belonged to the lords of the honour of Lancaster,™ and it possessed a free chapel, i. e. exempt from the jurisdiction of the ordinary. This was the only free chapel in the county. The hospital consisted of a warden and leper brethren and sisters, but the number of the inmates and the rule by which they lived are unknown.? From the fourteenth century at latest the wardens seem to have been often, if not always, pluralists and non-residents. It is first mentioned in the charter which he granted be- tween those dates to Lancaster Priory.”* In the fourteenth century it sustained a chaplain and nine poor persons, of whom three were to be lepers,” but it is always referred to in early documents as the hospitale leprosorum of Lancaster. John’s grant included free pasture for their animals in his forest of Lonsdale, and the right of taking fuel and building timber therein with- out payment. Deprived of these privileges dur- ing the civil troubles which followed, they secured orders for their enforcement from Henry III in 1220, 1225,% and 1229. From Pope Celes- tine III (1191-8) they claimed to have obtained exemption from payment of tithes on lands in their own cultivation. This led to disputes with the priory of Lancaster, which owned the rectorial tithes of the parish. The first recorded ended in a compromise about 1245.°1. In 1317 there was further litigation. The prior complained that the master of the hospital withheld tithes at Skerton and Lancaster to the amount of { 5, and the oblations of the hospital chapel, worth £1. On the question of tithe the master pleaded the bull of Pope Celestine, to which the prior re- torted that the benefits of the bull were exclu- sively intended for lepers,** and that in any case it only covered land newly brought into cultivation, whereas that in dispute had been cultivated from time immemorial. He alleged seisin of both tithes and oblations since the date of the bull. Judge- ment was given against the hospitalon both heads. On the forfeiture of Thomas of Lancaster the advowson of the hospital was taken into the hands of the crown, and one William de Dalton obtaining a grant of the wardenship ejected several of the lepers and poor inmates, and sub- let the wardenship to William de Skipton and Alan de Thornton, who diverted much of its revenue to their own uses.** A protest was made and the king ordered an inquiry. The jury reported (5 October, 1323) that the custom had been for the brethren to elect one of the * Ing. a.q.d. 17 Edw. II (1323), No. 72. * Farrer, Lancs. Pipe R. 298. 7 See note 25. The lepers were separately lodged in a building known as the ‘Spitell house’ ; Lancs. Pleadings (Rec. Soc.), 1, 211. * Rot. Claus. (Rec. Com.), 4144; Farrer, Lancs. Ing. i, 88. Cal. Pat. 1216-25, p. 525. % Cal. Close, 1227-31, pp. 182, 195. 51 Roper, Hist. of Lanc. Ch. (Chet. Soc.), 305. 32 Who were a minority in the hospital. 3 Hist. of Lanc. Ch. 487. Ing. a.g.d. 17 Edw. II, No. 72. lepers as master and present him to the seneschal of Lancaster, who instituted him.?®> Three years later, however, the crown appointed a warden.* On 1 November, 1356, the mastership being vacant, Henry duke of Lancaster gave the hos- pital to the nuns of Seton in Cumberland to relieve their poverty.*” His generosity is said to have been inspired by his servant, Sir Robert Law- rence, kt., of Ashton, near Lancaster, a kinsman of the prioress.°8 The grant was conditional on the consent of the burgesses of Lancaster and on the nuns finding at the priorya chantry of one chaplain to replace that at the hospital and agree- ing to continue its alms and dues at Lancaster.*® How long this last condition continued to be fulfilled is not recorded, but an inquiry held at the instance of the burgesses in 1531 showed that no alms had been done for sixty years, and that the lazar house had been pulled down and the church and other buildings allowed to fall into ruin. The prioress, though summoned, did not appear to answer the allegations of the townsmen.*” In the Taxatio of Pope Nicholas the posses- sions of the hospital after allowing for necessary expenses were assessed at 135. 44.41 The tem- poralities comprised one plough-land in Skerton, with a manor and mill in Lancaster. Accord- ing to the jurors of 1531 they had been worth about £6 135. 4d. a year ;** they were assessed in 1535 at £6.44 The daily portion of the brethren according to the inquisition of 1323 reveals the poverty of the house ; it consisted of a loaf weighing 1 lb. 12 0z. with pottage on Sunday, Monday and Friday. Masters oR WarDENS OF THE HosPITAL Nicholas,** occurs 1224-5 William Dalton, occurs 1323 Richard de Cesaye,® appointed 23 February, 1326 Robert de Arden,* occurs 1334 Ibid. *%Seebelow. * Dugdale, Mon. iv, 227. 8 Lancs. Pleadings (Rec. Soc.), i, 212. 8° The charter as printed in Dugdale requires the burgesses to continue their alms, but the translation in the pleadings takes it as an obligation on the nuns. © Lancs. Pleadings, i, 211-14. " Pope Nich. Tax. 309. The incomein 1323 was £6 6s. 8d. ; Ing. a.q.d. 17 Edw. II, No. 72. “Ibid. ; Lancs. Inquests, 1, 294. 8 Lancs. Pleadings, i, 212. ‘This income was in- creased by the alms and offerings given by strangers. * Valor Eccl. (Rec. Com.), v, 265. “ Ing. a.q.d. 17 Edw. I, No. 72. © Lancs. Final Conc. i, 46. ‘7 Inq. a.q.d. 17 Edw. II, No. 72. © Col. Pat. 1324-7, p. 245. Cesaye, described as a chaplain, received a grant of the wardenship for life from the crown, to whom the patronage had reverted on the forfeiture of Thomas of Lancaster. Confirma- tion is wanted of the statement made in 1531 that the appointment of a warden had to be confirmed by the burgesses. * Coram Rege R. 297, m. 11, 165 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE 19. GARDINER’S HOSPITAL, LAN- CASTER The small hospital or almshouse at Lancaster known as Gardiner’s Hospital was established in 1485 by the executors of John Gardiner of Bailrigg in accordance with the provisions of his will made in 1472 and proved eleven years later. The headship of the hospital, for which Gardiner seems to have erected a building in his life-time, was combined with the incumbency of a chantry in the adjacent parish church. Out of the issues of the manor of Bailrigg, which in 1547 amounted to £11 6s. 10d., the chantry priest was required to pay Id. a day to each of four poor people in the almshouse and 2d. a week to a serving-maid, retaining the residue for his own maintenance. The nomination of the priest or chaplain after the first vacancy was vested in the mayor and twelve burgesses of Lancaster.” In the first year of Edward VI the chantry was dissolved, but the hospital survived and is still in existence with an income brought up by some small legacies to £15 a year.®) Cuantry Priests OF THE HosPITAL Nicholas Green, appointed by Gardiner’s feoftees, 1485 Edward Baines,®* incumbent in 1547 20. LATHOM ALMSHOUSE This was a foundation, similar to the last, for a chaplain and eight bedesmen, founded by the second Earl of Derby in 1500. It also survived the Reformation, or was soon refounded, and exists to the present time.™ 20a. THE HOSPITAL OF ST. SAVIOUR, STIDD UNDER LONGRIDGE The hospital of St. Saviour at Stidd under Longridge in the township of Dutton and parish of Ribchester can be traced back to the reign of John, about which time Richard de Singleton gave four acres in Dilworth to the master and brethren.”® It was afterwards granted to the Knights Hos- pitallers and became attached to their preceptory at Newland near Wakefield. Shortly after- wards, or early in the fourteenth century, it seems to have ceased to be a hospital, though its chapel remained in use.* COLLEGES 21. THE COLLEGE OF UPHOLLAND In 1310 Sir Robert de Holland obtained a licence in mortmain to endow a college of thir- teen chaplains, one of whom bore the title of dean, in the chapel of St. Mary and Thomas the Martyr on his manor of Upholland near Wigan.’ The college took the place of a chantry for two priests, projected three years earlier but perhaps not carried out. “This was to have been endowed with two messuages and two plough-lands in Holland and a third in Orrell.2 The grant to the college was limited to one messuage and one plough-land in Holland, but there was added the advowson of Childwall church, which the founder seems to have acquired from Thomas Grelley, the last baron of Manchester of his name. The first dean was William le Gode, who died in the following year, and was succeeded by Richard de Sandbach. On g January, 1313, William de Snayth and six other chaplains were 5° Lancs. Chant. (Chet. Soc.), 221-2. 5! Baines, Hist. of Lancs. (ed. Croston), v, 475. 5? Lancs. Chant. 222. 8 Ibid. 221. The Robert Mackerall, ‘ Chantry Priest of Lancaster Hospital,’ mentioned in the footnote ibid. p. 223, as in receipt of a pension in 1553 can no doubt be identified with the priest of the same name who had a chantry in the Franciscan Friary until 1539; ibid. 225. It he is not incor- rectly described above we must assume that he was appointed to Gardiner’s chantry under Mary. 4 See V.C.H. Lancs. ili, 257. instituted to prebends on the presentation of the founder. The college may not until then have attained its full complement, but the institution of six priests not very long afterwards renders another explanation possible.® The situation was lonely, the prebends cannot have been of much value, and vacancies were probably frequent. Harmony, we are told, seldom prevailed in the college and ultimately the canons deserted it.® After an interval the endowments were trans- ferred in 1319 to a new priory of Benedictine monks.’ Among them was the rectory of Whit- wick near Ashby de la Zouch in Leicestershire, which Pope John XXII had appropriated to the college on the very eve of its dissolution, on the petition of Sir Robert de Holland and at the re- quest of Thomas, earl of Lancaster and Leicester, patron of the church. Childwall, of which at first it had only held the advowson,® seems to have been appropriated to the college somewhat earlier. * Dugdale, Mon. vi, 686. * For details and list of masters see the account of Stidd in Ribchester. ' Cal. of Pat. 1307-13, p. 233. * Lancs. Inguests (Rec. Soc.), i, 322. ° Lich. Epis. Reg. Langton, fol. 594. * Thid. fol. 325. * Ibid. fol. 61. ® Dugdale, Mon. iv, 411. ” Cal. of Pat. 1317-21, p. 353. See ante, p. 111. *Cal. of Pap. Letters, ii, 188 ; cf. ii, 215. °A rector was presented by William le Gode and the presbyters of the college in March, 1311 ; Lich. Epis. Reg. Langton, fol. 59. 166 RELIGIOUS HOUSES 22. THE COLLEGE OF MANCHESTER The parish church of Manchester was incor- porated in 1421 at the instance of Thomas la Warre, its rector and last lord of the manor of his name, who endowed the college with certain lands and the advowson of the church. The royal licence was given on 22 May in that year.?° The college was to consist of nine chaplains : a master or warden, and eight fellows with other ministers‘! who were to celebrate for the health- ful state of the king, Bishop Langley (head of the founder’s feoffees) and La Warre while they lived and for their souls after death, as well as for the souls of the parishioners and of all the faith- ful departed. About the time of the outbreak of the Pil- ALIEN 23. THE PRIORY OF LANCASTER The priory of Lancaster was founded by Roger of Poitou, in the reign of William Rufus, as a cell of the Benedictine Abbey of St. Martin at Sées in Normandy. Sées formed part of the inheritance of his mother, the notorious Countess Mabel, and its abbey, refounded in 1060 by his father, received liberal endowments in England from the house of Montgomery. The chartulary of Sées recites three charters of Roger granting Lancaster church and other portions of his English possessions to the abbey ; two of these are ascribed to 1094, the third is undated. All three differ in some important respects. That without a date was the definitive charter of foundation, for it alone appears in the register of the priory.?, The others may have been granted by Roger while in Normandy in 1094,° but the names of its witnesses show that 10S, Hibbert-Ware, Hist. of the foundations of Man- chester, iv, 145. Further details will be found in the account of the church. NTbid. 163. From the founder’s letter present- ing the first warden, we learn that the ‘other minis- ters’ were from the first four clerks and six choristers (ibid. 173). In 1546 two of the priest fellows served the parochial cure, the rest ‘kept the choir ;’ Lancs. Chantries, 8. "1. and P. Hen. VIII, xi, 635. 8 Lancs. Chantries, 29. ' They are numbered in the chartulary 258, 260, and 266. ‘These numbers do not agree with those given in the transcript in the Archives of the Depart- ment of the Orne at Alencon used by Mr. Round ; Cal. of Doc. France, 236--9. It should be noted, too, that No. 665 of the calendar is only a truncated fragment of No. 260 of the chartulary. For the history of Sées see Neustria Pia, 5773; Orderic Vitalis, Hist. Eccl. (Soc. de Hist. de France), ii, 46--7. grimage of Grace a correspondent of Lord Darcy wrote that ‘This week past, Manchester College should have been pulled down and there would have been a rising, but the Commissioners recoiled,”"?_ This must surely have been a false alarm, for the commissioners had no power to deal with the colleges. The college was, however, dissolved in 1547, but refounded by Queen Mary. ‘The ancient common seal of the college, an impression of which is appended to the foundation deed of St. George’s Gild in the collegiate church, represented the Assumption of the Virgin ; at the base the Grelley and La Warre shields, Legend : SIGILLVM : COMMVNE MARIE : DE : COLLEGIL : : MAMCESTR : 33 BEATE ; HOUSE this was drawn up in the north of England, probably at Lancaster. It cannot be much later in date. The wide range of Roger’s endowments bespeaks the poverty of his northern lands. In- cluded among them were part of the township of Lancaster, the two adjoining manors (mansiones) of Aldcliffe and Newton, the vill of Poulton- le-Fylde, and the tithes of the parishes of Preston and Bolton-le-Sands and of nineteen townships, all with one exception within the bounds of the later county of Lancaster and comprising practi- cally the whole of Count Roger’s demesne lands in that district. A tenth of his hunting, pannage, and fishing was added, together with every third cast of the seine belonging to the church of Lancaster. The church itself was granted; also the churches of Bolton-le-Sands, Heysham, Melling, Poulton, Preston, Kirkham, Croston, Childwall, and a moiety of Eccleston, and three in the Midlands, Cotgrave, Cropwell (both in Notting- 7 B.M. Harl. MS. 3764, fol. 12; printed by Farrer (Lancs. Pipe R. 289) and (with the rest of the register) by W. O. Roper in Materials for the Hist. of the Church of Lancaster (Chet. Soc.), 8. The documents connected with the priory in Add. MS. 32107, Nos. 818-86 and Exch. Aug. Off. Misc. Bks. vols. 33--40 include some which are not in the register. 3 He unsuccessfully defended Argentan near Sées for King William against Duke Robert ; Angl.-Sax. Chron. sub anno ; Hen. Huntingdon, Hist. 4ug/. (Rolls Ser.), 217. Some of the witnesses of the 1094 charters are English tenants of Roger (e.g. Godfrey the Sheriff and Albert Grelley), but others, Oliver de Tremblet, for instance, are not known to have been. “Newton is described in later documents as a hamlet in the township of Bulk; Hist. of Lanc. Ch. 495- 167 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE hamshire), and ‘ Wikelay.* In the case of Bolton, Heysham, Preston, and Poulton con- siderable areas of church land were conveyed with the advowsons. Most of these churches were gradually alienated before the fourteenth century. Those in the Midlands were soon lost, either by amicable arrangement or by crown resumption on Count Roger’s forfeiture in 1102. It has been sug- gested that with them Henry I resumed Preston, Childwall, and perhaps Poulton. This, how- ever, seems open to doubt. The circumstances under which another of its advowsons was lost to the priory in the reign of Stephen are fortunately known. Among Roger’s gifts were Kirkham church and the tithes of Walton-on-the-Hill. But in a charter issued in 1093 or shortly after- wards his sheriff Godfrey, with his consent, conveyed the churches of Walton and Kirkham to the abbey of St. Peter at Shrewsbury, the chief English foundation of the count’s father, Roger of Montgomery.” The only probable explanation of the double grant is that between the date of this charter and that of Count Roger’s definitive foundation of the priory he had taken into his own hands again some estates held of him by Godfrey when the Shrewsbury charter was drawn up. Nevertheless the latter was con- firmed by Archbishop Thomas of York and by Henry 1.8 Litigation between the two houses inevitably followed and the dispute being sub- mitted to the arbitration of Bernard, bishop of St. Davids, the Lancashire monks had to resign Kirkham church and the Walton tithes to the abbot of Shrewsbury, who in return gave them a plough-land at Bispham and the tithe of the adjoining township of Layton with Warbreck.® A charter issued by David king of Scots as lord of the honour of Lancaster, which protects Shrewsbury’s rights in the church of Kirkham, is extant and probably followed the composition arranged by Bernard.’? It seems not unlikely that these events took place in 1141 during the short-lived triumph of the Empress Maud, of whom Bishop Bernard was an ardent partisan.! Fear lest the decision might be invalidated on political grounds may have dictated the further reference of the dispute by Shrewsbury Abbey to Archbishop William Fitzherbert of York, who in a synod, apparently held in 1143, gave judge- ment in its favour.!® There were other out- standing questions between Sées and Shrewsbury, and ina general settlement effected four years later the former, while confirming the resignation * Mr. Farrer suggests that this is Wakerley, North- ants, but guaere. § Lancs. Pipe R. 292-4. "Tbid. 269. 5 Ibid. 272, 280. ® Ibid. 276. ” Tbid. 275. “Tait, Mediaeval Manchester and Beginnings of Lancashire, 167. * Thid. 168 ; Lancs. Pipe R. 280. of Kirkham, restored the plough-land at Bispham and the tithes of Layton and Warbreck, receiv- ing in return the chapel of Bispham and certain disputed property in Shropshire.’? Roger’s gifts to the Norman abbey were confirmed by Pope Innocent II on 3 May, 1139,"* by Ranulf Gernons, earl of Chester, probably in 1149,'* and by John, count of Mortain when lord of the honour of Lancaster, between 1189 and 1193.’® During this period also John granted to the priory the privileges of having all suits touching its lands tried before himself or his chief justiciar, and of taking their tithes from his demesne lands whether they were in his own hands or not.” Meanwhile the advowson of Preston had passed away from the priory. In 1196 Theo- bald Walter claimed the advowsons of Preston and Poulton, seemingly on the strength of the grant he had received two years before of the lord- ship of Amounderness. The matter was settled in the king’s court; Theobald quitclaimed his rights in the advowson of Poulton with Bispham chapel, and the abbot and convent of Sées did the same as regards the advowson of Preston, but secured an annual pension of 10 marks from that church."* This was probably as much as they could have derived from it in any case so long as it remained unappropriated. A little later the advowson of Melling church was transferred to Roger de Montbegon of Hornby,!® who resigned all claim upon its chapel at Gressingham, which Pope Celestine III had appropriated to the priory.” 'S Lanes. Pipe R. 282-3. ™ Hist. of Lanc. Ch. 105. * Lancs, Pipe R. 296. For the date see p. 187. 6 Thid. 298. 7 Thid. 116 ; cf. Hist. of Lanc. Ch, 16-17. ‘* Final Conc. (Rec. Soc. Lancs. and Ches.), i, 6. Mr. Farrer infers from these proceedings that the ad- vowson of Preston and probably that of Poulton had been taken from Sées by Henry I on the forfeiture of Roger of Poitou; Lancs. Pipe R. 293-4. But if the crown had been in possession for nearly a century Theobald would hardly have had to bring a claim against the abbey, much less make the concessions he did. He obtained the advowson of Kirkham in the same way from Shrewsbury Abbey, which had certainly not been disseised of it ; Final Conc. i, 2. His claim in all three cases may have been based on a contention that Roger’s forfeiture had invalidated the titles. Nor was Sées disseised of the ei of Poulton in 1102 as Mr. Farrer (loc. cit.) asserts. Its omission from the Testa de Nevill has parallels, and the priory of Lan- caster was chief lord of the vi// in the thirteenth century ; Hist. of Lanc. Ch. 483. * While Henry de Bracqueville was abbot (1185- 1210) of Sées (Dugdale, Mon. vi, 99° ; Neustria Pia, 582). A dispute in the previous century between Prior Nicholas and a rector of Melling had been settled by Hugh Pudsey, bishop of Durham (1153- 95); the prior granted the church and Gressingham chapel to the rector fora pension of 20s, (Round, Cal. of Doc. France, 239). ” Hist. of Lan:. Ch. 20, 117. 168 RELIGIOUS HOUSES Gressingham thenceforward became an isolated chapelry of Lancaster. It was perhaps in 1232 that the advowson of Childwall church passed to the Grelleys, in whose barony of Manchester the manor had long been included. Thomas Grelley in that year obtained an assize of darrein presentment against the prior, but this may have been a collusive suit.2!_ The annexation of the priory’s church of Bolton-le- Sands to the archdeaconry of Richmond in 1246 was part of an arrangement advantageous to the house.” Of the thirteen advowsons granted by Roger of Poitou five only, Lancaster, Heysham, Poulton, Croston, and Eccleston, were now re- tained ; but two of these churches, Lancaster and Poulton, were appropriated to their own uses. The church of Lancaster had been from the first so appropriated, and the priory held it integre or pleno jure, that is, without obligation to havea perpetual vicar ordained in it with a fixed por- tion of its revenues, inasmuch as the monks and their chaplains ‘served in the church and parish day and night and laboured perpetually in the cure of souls.’ *? Its chapels at Caton, Gressing- ham, and Stalmine were held in appropriation by grant confirmed by Pope Celestine III (1191-8). Celestine also confirmed an appropriation of a moiety of the church of Poulton and of its chapel at Bispham.” ‘The other moiety was secured in 1246 as part of the compensation awarded to them for their surrender of the advowson of Bolton-le-Sands to John le Romeyn (Romanus), archdeacon of Richmond.”* It was not to fall in, however, until the death or cession of its rector, Alexander de Stanford, when a vicarage of 20 marks was to be appointed for the whole church. They bought out Stanford in 1250,” but for some reason the vicar’s portion was not fixed until 1275.78 *| Cal. of Pat. 1225-32, p. 512. The transference has indeed been ascribed to Henry 1; Lancs. Pipe R. 293. But this is at variance with the above entry and with one or two further pieces of evidence. To- wards the end of the twelfth century papal delegates settled a dispute between the monks and the rector of Childwall, whom they ordered to pay a pension of 20s. to the priory as long as he held the benefice ; Lane. Ch. 119 ; cf. 114, 121. 7 See below. ® Hist. of Lanc. Ch. 123,139. The definite recog- nition of this privilege formed part of the settlement of outstanding questions between the priory and John le Romeyn by papal delegates in 1246. “Ibid. 117. Stalmine and Gressingham were iso- lated chapelries cut out of the parishes of Poulton and Melling. Cemeteries were consecrated in all three in 1230, the lay lords in each case undertaking not to claim the advowson ; ibid. 153, 164-5, 362. * Ibid. 117. 6 Ibid. 122. 7” Papal delegates adjudicated his share to Sées, which was to pay him 20 marks a year for life at its Lincolnshire priory of Wenghale ; Exch. Aug. Off. Misc. Bks. vol. 40, No. 6. 8 Hist. of Lanc. Ch. 380. 2 169 In the cases of Heysham, Croston, and Ec- cleston the monks had to remain content with the advowson and an annual pension.”® Only a moiety of Eccleston church belonged to them until in the fifth decade of the thirteenth century Roger Gernet, lord of half the vill, and his under-tenant Warin de Walton resigned their rights in the advowson to Sées and the monks of Lancaster. The dependence of the priory upon the abbey of Sées may have been closer at first than it was afterwards. After the loss of Normandy the crown asserted a control over the appointment and removal of priors by Sées. In 1209 the abbot proffered 200 marks and two palfreys to be allowed on any vacancy to present two of his monks to the king, for him to choose and admit one, who was not to be recalled without his con- sent.*! Qn the death of a prior in 1230 a local jury of inquest reported that the priors were appointed and removable by the abbot, subject to the assent of the king, and that during a vacancy the priory had always been taken into the hands of the crown, not of the archbishop of York or the archdeacon of Richmond.” But if the prior had no perpetuity the right of the crown to custody pending a new appointment could hardly be upheld, and the king ordered the sheriff to restore the priory to a representative of the abbot.*? A looser conception of its relation to the Norman house must have before long pre- vailed, for in 1267 the king restored the tem- poralities to a prior,* and in 1290 John le Rey not only received the lands from Edmund, earl of Lancaster, but was canonically instituted and installed by the archdeacon of Richmond on the presentation of the abbot of Sées.%° A prior so instituted could not usually be removed except upon grounds satisfactory to the diocesan. From the early years of the thirteenth century at latest the priory was conventual ; %* the prior and the five monks forming a society which could enter into legal engagements, though at that time deeds were mostly drawn and law proceedings conducted in the name of the abbot and convent *» From Heysham 6s. 8d. (Hist. of Lance. Ch. 124), from Croston 6 marks (ibid. 113), and 20s. from Eccleston (ibid. 446). 3° Ibid. 22, 28. A few years earlier John de la Mare renounced any claim in the advowson of Croston and of a moiety of the chapel of Eccleston ; ibid. 24. Eccleston may have been originally a chapel of Croston, but when the rector of Croston claimed rights over it in 1317 it was decided to be a parish church ; ibid. 441. 31 Lancs. Pipe R. 231. 39 Hist. of Lanc. Ch. 150. 3 Cal. of Close, 1217-31, p. 460. Hist. of Lanc. Ch. 4.74. % Ibid. 475-6. 36 Ibid. 309 ; expressly so-called in 1400 ; Foedera, viii, 105. Nichols (A/en Priories, i, iv, ed. 1789) is mistaken in assuming that conventual priories always chose their own priors. 22, A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE of Sées. Their usual style was ‘the Prior and monks of St. Mary of Lancaster,’ but ‘ the Prior and Convent’ occasionally occurs.*’ No con- vent seal, however, seems to have existed, the prior’s seal being used. Sometimes the prior stated that he was acting both in his own name and as proctor for Sées.* The income of the endowments was adminis- tered by the members of the priory subject toa fixed annual ‘apport’ or pension of 50 marks to the chief house.*® This was rather less than half their revenue as assessed for the tithe.“ The prior and monks were selected from the inmates of the parent monastery, and two priors of Lancaster became abbots of Sées.41. The history of the priory is little more than a record of disputes and litigation, which were not infrequently carried up to the pope. Some of these arising out of its advowsons and appropriations have already been mentioned. Its right to the tithes of demesne lands in Lancashire under the grants of the founder and Count John of Mortain had to be defended against the rectors of Walton and Sefton at the end of the twelfth century,* and against those of Preston and St. Michael’s-on- Wyre in the first quarter of the fourteenth century.# The priory was often involved in disputes with other religious houses which had interests within its sphere. A claim was put forward by the leper hospital at Lancaster to be exempt from payment of tithes for their lands in that parish in virtue of a bull of Pope Celestine III ; but in 1317 the prior obtained a decision that the papal privilege only covered land newly brought into cultivation, and established his rights to the offerings made in the hospital chapel.** A similar dispute with the abbot and convent of Furness in regard to the tithes of their grange of Beaumont near Lancaster had been settled a quarter of a century earlier.° There was much litigation, too, with Furness, to whom Stephen of Blois had transferred his fshery at Lancaster, as to the precise rights conferred upon the priory by its founder’s grant of the third throw of St. Mary’s seine. In 1314 their servants came to blows, the matter was brought before the royal ” Henry, abbot of Sées (1185-1210), so styles them ; Dugdale, Mon. Ang/. vi, 998. See also Hist. of Lance. Ch. 139. 8 Hist. cf Lanc. Ch. $9, 71. The consent of Sées is now and then mentioned ; ibid. 64. Fora case where both gave identical charters, see ibid. 309. Dugdale, Alen. vi, 998. £80. See below. " Dugdale, Mon. loc. cit. ; Assize R. 423, m. 2. * Hist. of Lanc. Ch. 66, 112. In 1342-4 a later rector of Walton contested its right to tithes in the woods of Lancashire; Add. MS. 32107, No. 823; Exch. Aug. Off. Misc. Bks. vol. 33, No. 32. ® Hist. of Lane. Ch. 448, 453. “ Thid. 305, 487. “In 1292 (ibid. 63-4) ; Lanes. Inp. 85. justices, and next year an agreement was arrived at by which the priory took every third throw in St. Mary’s Pot and every other throw else- where.® The foundation of the Premonstratensian house at Cockersand just over the southern limit of the parish of Lancaster, and its acquisition of lands both in that parish and in Poulton, led to disputes with the priory over the tithes and other parochial rights. Papal delegates in 1216 arranged a compromise which gave two-thirds of such tithes to the monks of Lancaster and the remaining third to the canons of Cocker- sand.47 Fresh quarrels were ended in 1256 by an agreement in which Cockersand undertook not to admit parishioners of the prior to burial or the sacraments without his consent, which however, he was not to refuse if leave was asked and dues paid. Parishioners serving in the Cockersand granges must not pay their offerings or tithes to the abbey, but the servants at the abbey itself were excepted from this prohibi- tion.® The gift of the lands of Staining, Hardhorn, and Newton in Poulton parish to the Cheshire abbey of Stanlaw produced similar complications, which were finally ended in 1298; the abbey, just removed to Whalley, was awarded the great tithes on payment of eighteen marks a year to the priory.* On one occasion at least the monks of the priory came into conflict with the town in and around which they held so much property. In 1318 the burgesses of Lancaster pulled down an inclosure which Prior Nigel had made in New- ton, in which hamlet they claimed common of pasture. Buta jury found that though their cattle had pastured on the land in question they had only done so on sufferance on their way to the forest of Quernmore, where King John had granted common rights to the bur- gesses.*! © Cal. of Pat. 1313-17, p. 307; Hist. of Lane. Ch. 489, 4933 Beck, Annales Furnesienses, 217, 249, 250. In 1352 the abbot’s men seized the priory nets and the prior recovered them by force ; Duchy of Lanc. Assize R., class xxv, 2, No. 3743 3, Nos. 35,36; 4, No. 163. In 1370 the king’s escheator took possession of the fishery, then valued at £5 a year, on the plea that the priory had first received it in 1315 and without royal licence, but this was disproved ; Coram Rege R. 442, m. 4. “ Add. MS. 20512; Hist. of Lanc. Ch. 49. Litigation over a carucate of land in Heysham ended (1214) in the priory demising it to the canons for an annual rent of one mark (Charter penes W. H. Dalton, esq. Thurnham Hall). “ Ibid. 52 ; Add. MS. 19818. © Hist. of Lanc. Ch. 61, 70, 75, 527. This was an increase of eight marks on the ferm fixed about 1250. “ Charter penes W. H. Dalton, esq. Thurnham Hall. ° Hist. of Lanc. Ch. 495. 170 RELIGIOUS HOUSES Twelve years later a quarrel broke out between the priory and Sir Adam Banaster, who sought to exclude its servants and tithe- collectors from his lands in the parish of Poulton. Prior Courait was forcibly carried off from Poulton and kept in durance at Thornton ; his servants were beaten, wounded, and imprisoned.” Early in 1331, however, Sir Adam and the prior came to an understanding. During the French wars the house was taken into the hands of the crown with the other alien priories. These little groups of Frenchmen could not be permitted to send over considerable sums of money and perhaps information to the king’s enemies. But at Lancaster as elsewhere the prior was often allowed to farm the priory from the crown.*4 Under Edward HI the prior of Lancaster paid 100 marks (£66 13s. 4d.) a year.’ This was double the amount of the pension paid by the priory to Sées when the two countries were at peace.°® In February, 1397, Richard II granted the custody of the house at the same rent to Cockersand Abbey, which seems to have had considerable difficulty in getting possession.” Henry IV, however, having his attention drawn to the disastrous effects upon this and other alien priories of the heavy rents exacted and the intrusion of external farmers, restored them in the first year of his reign to their priors ; merely stipulating that so long as the war with France continued they should pay to the crown the pensions they were wont to render to their chief houses abroad in time of peace.*® The king’s financial embarrassments led in a few years to the reversal of this considerate policy °° and Lancaster Priory was again farmed out at arent of £100, being an increase of fifty per cent. on that paid before 1400. Henry V in granting its custody to Prior Louvel and Sir Richard Hoghton (21 October, 1413) put on another £10. Next year Parliament gave the crown permanent possession of the alien priories, and Henry ? Hist. of Lanc. Ch. 468. 53 Ibid. 471. 4 From Oct. 1324, to March, 1325, the priory had been in the king’s hands and not farmed out ; Duchy of Lanc. Mins. Accts. bdle. 1125, No. 21. The prior was paid 35. a week, each of the five monks and the two parochial chaplains who ministered to the parishioners 18¢. a week. Each monk received a clothes and shoe allowance of ros. for the term of the Nativity. Half a quarter of peas and barley were distributed weekly among ten poor people ‘of ancient alms.” ° Cal. Close, 1337-9, p- 335 3 Cal. Pat. 1340-3, p- 388. The crown reserved the ecclesiastical patron- age of the priory ; Cal. Clase, 1343--6, pp- 435, 483- 5 See above. 57 Cal. Pat. 1399-1401, pp. 49, 71, 150. 8 Foedera, vill, LOL sqqe ® Wylie, Hist. of Hen. IV, iii, 142 sqq. ® Add, MS. 32107, No. 824. vested the rent from that of Lancaster in trustees as part of the endowment of the Bridgettine nunnery of Syon which he founded at Isleworth in that year. After the death of Prior Louvel, the farmer, the priory itself was to become the property of the nuns.*! Louvel died before September, 1428, but Henry Bowet, archdeacon of Richmond, put in a claim to its revenues and tithes ratione vacationis. It had been decided in the thirteenth century that the archdeacon had no such right. Bowet, how- ever, seems to have taken up the position that the gift of the priory to Syon amounted to a fresh appropriation of the churches of Lancaster and Poulton. Archbishop Kemp was appointed arbitrator and apparently decided in his favour, for the abbess and convent agreed to indemnify him and his successors by the heavy annual payment of £40 6s. 8d.%* In 1430 the arch- deacon ordained a perpetual vicarage in the church of Lancaster,® and in the following year the trustees appointed by Henry V conveyed the priory to Sion. On the accession of Edward IV it was thought prudent to secure a regrant.® The priory buildings had been assigned in 1430 to the use of the vicar of Lancaster, but the abbess and convent retained an_ honest chamber and stable as a lodging for their officers visiting Lancaster.” In 1462 they leased the whole priory, with the exception of the advowsons, for nine years to John Gardiner of Ellel, at a rent of £156 13s. 44.% The advowson of Eccleston had perhaps never been granted to them, and at any rate was parted with before 1464 to the Stanleys.® Sir Edward Stanley in 1488 claimed the advowson of Heysham as lord of the manor in spite of a legal 6 Rot. Parl. (Rec. Com.), iv, 243 ; Dugdale, Mon. vi, 997. The rule adopted for the house was the Augustinian as reformed by St. Bridget, a Swedish lady related to the royal house (d. 1373.) According to the usual practice the advowsons of the priory were not included in Louvel’s farm, and in 1418 Pope Martin V, at the king’s desire, sanctioned the appropriation of Croston church to Sion ; Foedera, ix, 617. For the advowsons of Eccleston and Heysham see below. 6 Madox, Formulare Anglicanum, 100. 83 See above, p. 169. 68a Madox, loc. cit. ; Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. R. 378. 6 Ibid. ; Notitia Cestriensis, 429-31. The vicarage was worth {80a year in 1527 (Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 5, No. 15.) 8 Madox, op. cit. 270. 8 Rot. Parl. v, 552. 8’ Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. R. 378. 8 Exch. Aug. Off. Misc. Bks. vol. 33, No. 20 ; Baines, Hist. of Lancs. (ed. Croston), v, 467. 69 Pal, of Lanc. Plea R. 26,m. 16. Thomas Stanley, kt., recovered the patronage against Abbess Elizabeth on the ground that he and his father had twice presented before she made her claim. 171 A HISTORY OF decision of 1479, and the verdict of a local jury wasin his favour”? but Syon appears in possession in 1527. After the dissolution of the abbey in 1540 the bulk of the priory estate was sold by the crown in 1557 to Robert Dalton of Bispham for £1,667.” The priory was dedicated to St. Mary. Its original endowment included, besides the churches and tithes already enumerated, the manors of Aldcliffe and Newton,” one third of the vill of Heysham,"* and the whole vill of Poulton-le-Fylde.” The most considerable later addition was the gift by Thomas of Capernwray, escheator of the county of Lan- caster about the middle of the thirteenth century, of all his land in Bolton and Gress- ingham.”® Conveyances of numerous small parcels of land, chiefly in the parishes of Lan- caster and Poulton, are recorded in the register of the priory. Its temporalities were taxed in 1292 at £4, re- duced after the Scottish raid to 305.77 In adocu- ment of 1367 its total assessment for the tithe is given as {80.8 This must be taken as net income, which will agree pretty well with the amount of rent exacted by the crown during the French wars, £66 135. 4d., rising by 1413 to £110.” The gross income in 1430, just before Syon obtained possession, amounted to £326 2s. 8d. No complete estimate of the expenditure in money is supplied. On the dissolution of Syon Abbey ‘the late priory of Lancaster’ was valued among its possessions at £216 13s. 8d." Priors oF LANCASTER John,® occurs ¢ 1141 Nicholas,® occurs between 1153 and 1192 7 Exch. Aug. Off. Misc. Bks. vol. 39, No. 130; Add. MS. 32108, No. 50, m. 7. ™ Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 5, No. 15. " Hist. of Lanc. Ch. 595. > Together 2 plough-lands ; Testa de Nevill, ii, fol. 834. ™ Lancs. Pipe R. 290; Hist. of Lanc. Ch. 478. > Ibid. 480, 483. See above, p. 168. © Hist. of Lanc. Ch. 156, 253; Confirmed by Earl Edmund in 1273 ; ibid. 256. 7 Pope Nich. Tax. 309. *® Dugdale, Mon. vi, 998. It is difficult, however, to reconcile this figure with the details given in Pope Nich. Tax. ” See above, p. 171. © Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. R. 378. The great tithes produced £153 135. 4¢., pensions from churches and monasteries {25 135. 4¢., small tithes £72 10s. gd. and temporalities £74 55. 3¢. In 1527 Sion was said to be drawing £100 a year from the rectory of Lancaster alone ; ibid. ptfo. 5, No. 15. Duchy of Lanc. Mins. Accts. No. 33, m. 26. Lancs. Pipe R. 276. § Round, Cal. Doc. France, 239. LANCASHIRE William,™ occurs between 1188 and 1192 and in 1204 John de Alench’,® occurs between 1207 and 1227, died 1230 (?) Geoffrey,® occurs 1241 Garner,” occurs 1250 William de Reio (Reo),® occurs 1253 and 1256 Ralph de Trun,® instituted 1266, occurs 1287 John ‘le Ray,’® instituted 1290, occurs 1299 Fulcher,” occurs 1305 and 1309 Nigel,” occurs 1315 and 1323 [William de Bohun,® occurs 1327] Ralph Courait,™ occurs 1329 and 1334 Emery de Argenteles,® occurs 1337-42 John de Coudray (de Condreto), occurs 1344-5 Peter Martin,” occurs 1352, res. 1366 ™ Hist. of Lanc. C4. (Chet. Soc.), 112 ; Lancs, Final Conc. (Rec. Soc.), i, 23, 151. ® Possibly Alengon 13 miles south of Sées; B.M. Add. MS. 33244, fol. 60; P.R.O. Anct. D. ili, B. 3905 (which gives the surname) ; Cad Chose, 1217-31, p. 460. There may, however, have been two priors called John at this period. See a charter falling between 1205 and 1225 witnessed by Johannes Redufus, prior of Lancaster ; Cockersand Chartul. 922. © Hist of Lanc. Ch. 32, 39, 306, 4303 Lancs. Final Conc. i, 82. He was probably the prior elected in 1230. See above, p. 169. * Exch. Aug. Off. Misc. Bks. vol. 40, No. 6; Hist. of Lance. Ch. 47 (the date 1259 on p. 4§ is an error for 1250). ® Probably Ri, a hamlet about 20 miles north-west of Sées ; Hist. of Lanc. Ch. 34, 104, 410, 489. © A village some 22 miles north of Sées ; Hist. of Lanc. Ch. 35, 474. Mr. Roper (ibid. 771) inserts a Geoffrey after Ralph, but the passages adduced evi- dently refer to a predecessor, probably the prior mentioned under 1241. ™<«Dictus Rex’; Hist. of Lanc. Ch. 85, 88, 475-6. He became abbot of Sées ; Assize R. 423, m. 2. "Ibid. ; Exch. Aug. Off. Misc. Bks. vol. No. 202. * Duchy of Lanc. Anct. D., L. 345 ; Hist. of Lanc. Ch. 477. * Only mentioned by Croston (Hist. of Lancs. v, 467), who gives no authority. “ Erroneously called Adam (Hist. of Lanc. Ch. 471) and Richard (Dugdale, Mon. vi, 997) ; Hist. of Lanc. Ch. 460; Cat. of Anct. D. ii, B. 2945. * Cal. of Close, 1337-9, p. 1623; Cal, of Pat. 1340-3, p. 388. * Possibly Coudray near Les Andelys; Exch. Aug. Off. Misc. Bks. vol. 32, No. 75 ; Cal. of Close, 1343-6, PP: 435,482, 636. He probably died in 1349; Engi. Hist. Rev. v, 525. ” Duchy of Lanc. Assize R., class xxv, 2, No. 374. Provided to the abbacy of Sées by Pope Urban V oe ; Dugdale, Mon. vi, 998; cf. Neustria Pia, 582. 33, 172 RELIGIOUS HOUSES William Rymbaut,® appointed c. 1366, died June or July, 1369 John Innocent,® admitted 23 September, 1369, occurs down to 1391, died before 6 September, 1396 John des Loges,’” died 1399 Giles Louvel,’” admitted 15 December, 1399 ; occurs down to 1414; died between 21 April, 1427, and 1428 % Spelt Raynbote in Fine R. 170, m. 27. On 25 Nov. 1366, Urban reserved the priorship for him when Abbot Peter’s installation at Sées should be complete. He had spent several years at Lancaster, and spoke and wrote English well; Dugdale, Mon. vi, 998. % Raines’ Lancs. MS. (Chetham Library), xxii, 308 ; Cal. of Pat. 1389-92, p. 490; ibid. 1399- 1401, p. 449; Fine R. 200, m. 29. 1 Raines’ Lancs. MSS. xxii, 395. The British Museum has a cast of the seal of a Prior William.” It is pointed oval ; the Vir- gin seated on a throne, with its sides terminating in animals’ heads, with crown ; in her left hand the Child. In the field on each side a wavy sprig of foliage. In base under an arch, the prior half-length in prayer; to the left behind him a cinquefoil rose. ‘The legend is imperfect. (s] FRis . . . . Lt [P]RIOR’ LANCASTR. . 1 Thid.; Foedera, viii, 105; Cal. of Pat. 1399-1401, Pp. 49, 71, 1503 Pal. of Lanc. Plea R. 2, m. 20 ; Rot. Parl. (Rec. Com.), iv, 243 ; Madox, Formulare Angli- canum, 270. 1 BLM. Cat. of Seals, i, 609. It is there assigned to the fourteenth century. But Harl. Chart. 52, 1, 1, from which it appears to be taken, is early thir- teenth century, and the prior of Lancaster who attests it is Prior William, who lived ¢, 1204. 173 POLITICAL HISTORY Part I—To THe Enp or Tue Reicn or Henry VIII ANCASHIRE is one of the youngest of the English counties. The district formed part of a remote march or borderland which was not definitively divided into shires until the twelfth century. Between the departure of the Romans and its conquest by the Northumbrians the history of this district is almost a blank. Attempts have been made to identify within its limits the sites of a number of the twelve victories attributed to the legendary King Arthur in the Historia Brittonum of Nennius, but ‘they are altogether too suspicious to merit a place in sober history.’ Certain it is, however, that down to the beginning of the seventh century this region, with the rest of the western side of the island from the Severn Sea to the Firth of Clyde, and part of the later West Riding (Loidis and Elmet) was still held by unconquered Britons, whose heightened sense of common blood and interest in the fierce conflict with the advancing English is seen in their assumption of the new name of Cymry, i.e. compatriots. How far they attained to common organization or action, and to what extent the primacy of the rulers of Gwynedd (North Wales) was recognized are questions we cannot answer, but there is ample evidence that the northern Cymry were divided among a number of tribal kingdoms, the largest of which, called by the English down to the tenth century the kingdom of the Strathclyde Welsh and afterwards Cumbria, extended from the Clyde to the (Cumberland) Derwent and Stainmoor. The existence of the small kingdom of Elmet renders it probable that west of it there were one or more such principalities between the Derwent and the Dee, including the present Lancashire, but their names have not been preserved.” Ethelfrith, the first king of united Northumbria, may have begun to conquer them before his great victory at Chester in 613 which severed the northern from the southern Cymry. But as even Elmet was first reduced by his successor Edwin (617—33)* it is probable that the subjugation of the districts west of it was in the main a consequence of the battle of Chester. The victories of Penda of Mercia and his Cymric allies over Edwin and 1 Engl. Hist. Rev. xix, 138. The River Duglas, on which four battles are said to have been fought, was identified as early as the fourteenth century with the Wigan Douglas; Higden, Po/ychronicon (Rolls Ser.), v, 328-9. Mr. A. Anscombe finds the ‘ flumen quod vocatur Bassas’ in the same neighbourhood, and locates the first battle, fought ‘juxta hostium fluminis quod dicitur Glein’ at the mouth of the Lune; Zeisschr. fur Celtische Philolgie, v (1904), 103. * 'Teyrnllwg is given as the traditional Welsh name of this region in the Iolo MSS. p. 86 (quoted by Rhys, Cesic Brit. 136), but better authority could be desired. 5 Nennius, Hist. Brittonum (ed. Mommsen), 206. 175 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Oswald* may have temporarily undone the work,’ but before 675 the English were firmly planted on the Ribble, and Ecgfrith (670-85) gave Cartmel ‘with all its Britons’ to St. Cuthbert.*® The thoroughness with which the Northumbrian Angles settled the conquered districts is attested by the almost complete disappearance of Celtic lace-names, except in the case of rivers. The first syllable of Manchester is of course Celtic.? Darwen (Derwent) may have borrowed the name of its stream at a later date, and Prees (in the Fylde) and Leck (in the north- eastern corner of the county) are perhaps doubtful instances of survival. Cartmel would be a clear case if we could be sure that the passage in the Historia de S. Cuthberto already quoted is giving the exact words of Ecgfrith’s grant.’ It is, however, more probably a Scandinavian name. It has been suggested that the ancient tenure by ‘cornage’ or cattle rent of which some traces are found in Lancashire after the Norman Conquest may have been of Celtic origin, but the question is still a very open one.’ The English settlements were naturally most numerous in Low Furness, the valley of the Lune and the low-lying districts comprised in the later hundreds of Amounderness, Leyland, and West Derby. From the gift of Cartmel no event is recorded in connexion with this district until the last years of the eighth century. On 3 April, 798, notes the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, there was a great battle at Whalley (aet Hwael- leage) ‘in Northymbralande’ in which Alric son of Heardberht, and many others were slain. From Symeon of Durham, who had a fuller northern chronicle before him, we learn that this was an episode in the strife of faction which was destroying the Northumbrian state. King Eardwulf, confronted by a confederacy headed by the murderers of his predecessor Ethelred, and perhaps encouraged by Mercia, met and overthrew his enemies at Billingahoth near Whalley.” Five years before the battle of Whalley the Northmen had made their first recorded descent upon the east coast of Northumbria. In 795 they reached Ireland, where by 832 they effected permanent settlements. York was captured, and the kingdom of Northumbria overthrown in 867, and nine years later Healfdene, we are told in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, divided North- * The identification of Maserfeld, the scene of Oswald’s defeat and death (642) with Winwick in Maker- field (cf. Hardwick, Anct. Battlefields in Lancs. 62-99) cannot be upheld. The battle is located at Oswestry in a Life of St. Oswald written about 1150; Sym. Dun. Ogera (Rolls Ser.), ii, 353. 5 Elmet is included in the Mercian list known as the Tribal Hidage, c. 660; Birch, Cart. Sax. i, 414. ® Hist. of the Ch. of York (Eddi), 1, 25-6 (Rolls Ser.) ; Sym. Dun. Hist. Cuthb. (Surtees Soc.), i, 141. The mention of the Britons of Cartmel may suggest that it was a conquest of Ecgfrith, but the passage in Eddi does not justify Green (Making of Eng/. 358) in ascribing the conquest of all the region north of the Ribble to that king. It is doubtful whether all the places mentioned by Eddi must be looked for in this quarter (see above, p. 3), and in any case they were the gifts (to Wilfrid) of more than one king. ” Engl. Hist. Rev. xv, 495. * The form of the statement rather suggests this, but the second syllable of the name looks like the old Norse me/r, ‘ sandbank.’ °V.C.H. Cumb. i, 318. A cornage rent is mentioned ¢o nomine at Little Heaton near Manchester in 1235 (Lancs. Final Conc. i, 66), and the rents paid as ‘cowmale’ at Heysham and Nether Kellet as late as 1441 (Duchy of Lanc. Mins. Accts. 100, No. 1790) doubtless fall under the same category. For male or mail-rent see Eng/. Hist. Rev. ii, 335 ; Lawrie, Anct. Scot. Chart. 10. 1° Chron. (ed. Plummer), sub anno, and ii, 66. 1 Sym. Dun. Hist. Regum (Rolls Ser.), ii, §9. There isa Billinge near Blackburn, and a Billington close to Whalley in which is Langho. Whitaker (Hist, of Whalley (1818), 34) takes Billingahoth, which he amends to Billinghoh, to be the long ridge between the two. His conjecture that the name of the Dux Wada who escaped from the rout is preserved in Wadhow and Waddington is very rash. 176 POLITICAL HISTORY umbria among his followers, who exchanged the sword for the plough. It would appear that this division was confined to Deira, the later Yorkshire. Of the fate of the western parts of the kingdom no historical record survives save that Healfdene in 875 harried the Picts and Strathclyde Welsh, on which occasion he probably destroyed Carlisle. That the Northmen settled in con- siderable numbers from the mouth of the Dee to the Solway is, however, - proved by the evidence of place and personal names. It seems on the whole probable that most if not all of these settlements were made by the western wing of the invaders, who came round the north coast of Scotland. South of the Ribble their position points strongly in this direction. They lie thickest on both sides of the Mersey estuary—in the Wirral peninsula and round (West) Derby,” extending northwards along the coast to the mouth of the Ribble and some distance inland.’ But east of a line drawn from Widnes to the latter river there are practically no Scandinavian place-names in South Lancashire. North of the Ribble this evidence of approach by sea and not by land fails us, for here Scandinavian names extend right across the county. An attempt has been made to demonstrate the western provenance of the settle- ments in Furness (and the Lake District) by a different line of proof which involves the double assumption that the Scandinavians who came down the west coast were necessarily Norwegians, and that the names of their new homes can be philologically distinguished from those settled by men of Danish blood, that ¢Awaite, for instance, which abounds in the Lake District, is a purely Norwegian sufhx, and dy exclusively Danish.“ But it is certain that at least from the middle of the eighth century Danes found their way into the Irish Sea, and dys are not unknown in Norway and in Furness itself, nor ¢hwaites in undoubtedly Danish districts. ‘The predominance of one or the other depends upon the nature of the country or the settlement rather than upon racial and dialectical differences. ‘The date of these Scandinavian settlements in what is now Lancashire can only be approximately fixed. Some if not all may have preceded the Danish conquest of Deira, for that event happened nearly seventy years after the first appearance of the Northmen in the Irish Sea, since when, as stated, they had already planted themselves in Ireland and the Isle of Man. In any case we seem justified in assuming that their settlements between Ribble and Mersey were made before the conquest of that district by Edward the Elder and Athelstan at the end of the first quarter of the tenth century. This assumption is strengthened by the fact that in 930 the land between the Ribble and the Cocker already bore the unmistakably Norse name of Amounderness.” There is authority, though it is not contemporary, for the presence of Northmen in the Lake ™ There is a Thingwall (Old Norse Thingvillr=field of assembly) on each side of the estuary. The dy suffix is fairly common. 8 Mr. Henry Harrison (Place Names of the Liverpool District, 7) makes out a list of twenty-five places in the hundred of West Derby which have Scandinavian names as against eighty-three bearing Anglo-Saxon appellations ; but some of the twenty-five are perhaps doubtful cases. M Anglezarke (An/afsargh) is a certain, Ince (in Makerfield), a possible exception. ® Robert Ferguson, Northmen in Cumb. and Westmid.; R. C. Ferguson, Hist. of Cumb. 151-3. For a map with conjectural restorations of the original forms of the names in part of this district see H. S. Cowper, Hawkshead. 6 War of the Gaedhil with the Gaill (Rolls Ser.) ; Green, Conquest of Engl. 65-7, 276. 1 Hist. of the Ch. of York (Rolls Ser.), iii, 1. Amounderness is ‘the promontory of Agmundr.’ The preservation of the Old Norse genitive flexion a (Agmundarnes) is, according to Mr. Stevenson, very rare, and suggests strong Scandinavian influence in the district. 2 177 23 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE District as early as 1000,” and it may not have been so recent as some modern historians have supposed." The amount of change brought about in the future Lancashire by this influx is not easy to estimate. Except on the western side of the hundred of West Derby and in High Furness, it was not intensive enough to alter seriously the Anglian nomenclature of the townships. The position of the Scandinavian place-names in the rest of the county sometimes affords ground for suspicion that the new-comers took up land hitherto unoccupied.” At any rate evidence is lacking of any such general partition as took place in Deira. On the other hand assessment in carucates and the practice of counting by twelves and sixes are features which, if Mr. Round’s arguments be correct, bespeak strong Scan- dinavian influence and reorganization." To which may be added the use of the term wapentake and the frequency as late as the thirteenth century of such Christian names as Orm, Gamel, and Swein. Until the end of the first quarter of the tenth century the lands beyond the Mersey remained severed from the Anglo-Saxon realm. In g20 or 923, however, Edward the Elder built a fort at Thelwall, on itssouthern bank, and sent a Mercian force to repair and garrison Manchester ‘in Northumbria.’ ” His object, no doubt, was to cut off the Danes of Deira from their kinsmen in Ireland, and Manchester for the present was only an outpost against the Scandinavians of Northumbria,” who in the following year recognized his supremacy.** Edward died in 925, and it was left for Athelstan to convert overlordship into direct rule. On the death of King Sihtric he took possession of Deira, and penetrated as far north as Dacre, near Ullswater. He bought Amounderness from ‘the pirates,’ which seems to imply that it was not part of the kingdom of Sihtric, and in 930 or 934 granted it to the church of York.* Probably the rest of what is now Lancashire submitted to him. It is possible that the battle of Brunanburgh in 937, in which Athelstan over- threw the great coalition of the Danes, Scots, and Cumbrians who sought to undo his work, was fought in the country south of the Ribble. The strongest argument in favour of this view is the discovery in 1840 near the ford over the Ribble at Cuerdale above Preston, of a remarkable hoard, containing 975 ounces of silver in ingots and over 7,000 coins, none later than g 30.” Upon the greater part of Athelstan’s acquisitions his successors preserved only a precarious hold ; on the other hand ‘the land between Ribble and *® Hen. of Hunt. Hist. Ang/. (Rolls Ser.), 170. * Green, op. cit. 383. * In the wapentake of Lonsdale south of the Sands, the townships which clearly bear Norse names are Ireby and Hornby, but there may bea few others. Anglian names predominate, especially on the coast. * Round, Feudal Eng/. 71, 86. For Lancashire carucates see V.C.H. Lancs. i, 270-1. ™ Angl.-Sax. Chron. sub anno 923. For the conflicting evidence as to the date see Plummer, Two Saxon Chron. ii, 116. ® If Symeon of Durham (ii, 93, 123) may be trusted, Sihtric of Deira invaded Cheshire in the same year and plundered Davenport, perhaps in retaliation. * Angl.-Sax. Chron. sub anno 924. The distinction here made between Danes and Norwegians may per- haps be taken as supporting the view that the settlers on the west coast were mainly of the Jatter race, and independent of or only loosely dependent upon the Danes of Deira. * Hist. of Ch. of York, ii, 1. For the date and the authenticity of the charter see above, p. 5. * Hardwick, Anct. Battlefields in Lancs. 164, sqq. but his etymologies are untenable ; Messrs. Hodgkin and Stevenson suggest Birrenswark in Dumfriesshire as the site, others find it in Cheshire or Westmorland. The composition of the confederacy, which included the Danes of Dublin, seems to make it at least certain that the battle took place on the west side of the Pennines ; see Plummer, op. cit. ii, 140. For an attempt to refer the Cuerdale find to the defeat of the Danes in g11, see above, V.C.H. Lancs. i, 258. But Athelweard places this battle at Wodnesfield, which Mr. W. H. Stevenson identifies with Wednesfield in Staffordshire. In any case a site so far north as the Ribble is extremely improbable at this date. ‘ 178 POLITICAL HISTORY Mersey ’ was severed from Northumbria and attached to Mercia. This is nowhere expressly recorded, but the Mercian magnate Wulfric Spot, the founder of Burton Abbey, in his will (dated 1002), bequeathed to his sons extensive lands ‘ betweox Ribbel and Maerse and in Wirhalum’ (Wirral) ; in Domesday Book the district is found surveyed in close association with — Cheshire ; and, unlike Northumbria, divided into hundreds and assessed in hides, while from other sources we know that it was now in the Mercian diocese of Lichfield.” It does not seem, however, to have been included in the Mercian earldom, the crown up to the Norman Conquest retaining it as royal domain ; it still bore traces of the old Northumbrian connexion.” The character of this district as a thinly-populated march in the hands of the crown is well marked in the details supplied in Domesday. Its six hundreds were great royal manors, each with its au/a,” large tracts of which had been granted out to the thegns, drengs, radmans and /iberi homines on a tenure including agricultural and hunting services, which after the Conquest came to be regarded in the greater part of the kingdom as badges of villeinage. The rents of these tenants and other revenue from the six hundredal manors amounted in 1066 to £145 2s. 2d." Who was responsible to the crown for the collection and payment of thissum? Had the district ‘between Ribble and Mersey’ a separate administration or was it placed under the control of the sheriff of Cheshire, as Rutland was looked after by the sheriff of Nottinghamshire ?* In the one case the shire-moot which the thegns of West Derby Hundred were bound to attend * would be a local assembly, in the other the shire-court of Cheshire. In support of the latter alternative it has been urged that the survey of the district is tacked on to that of Cheshire in Domesday, that their hide assessment may originally have been a joint one, that some thegns under the Confessor, like Wulfric Spot under Ethelred, The dialect of South Lancashire belongs to the Midland type ; Trans. Engl. Dialect. Soc. xix, 13. It is true that Midland features also occur in the dialect of Amounderness, but they may be the result of influence from the region between Ribble and Mersey. ‘The place-names of the latter district present more similarities to those of Cheshire (some names are found in both, e.g. Adlington, Chorley), than to those of Amounderness, though allowance must be made for the much stronger Scandinavian influence north of the Ribble. For Wulfric Spot’s will see Kemble, Cod. Dip/. No. 1298. It is just possible that some of the Mercian characteristics of South Lancashire may be older than the annexation in the tenth century. ‘The Northumbrian victory of Chester was followed (doubtless owing to Penda’s victories) by a Mercian settlement of Cheshire, and it is conceivable that the land between Ribble and Mersey was Mercian for a time in the seventh century. 6 For instance, the assessment in 480 carucates had seemingly been brought into line with that of hidated Mercia, and subjected to a huge reduction (to be explained no doubt by its royal ownership) by reckoning 6 carucates as 1 hide. The hundreds were sometimes called wapentakes. * This perhaps throws some light on the origin of the hundred system. For traces in the south of England of the early importance of villae regales as administrative centres see Chadwick, Studies on Anglo-Saxon Institutions, 241, sqq. * See V.C.H. Lancs.i, 276. The actual work was no doubt done by their men, as is expressly stated in the case of the reaping. ‘Their tenure may be compared with that of the thegns to whom Bishop Oswald of Worcester ‘loaned’ land between 962 and 992 (Maitland, Domesday Bk. and Beyond, 308), and that of the drengs of Durham and Northumberland recorded in the Bo/don Book and in the Testa de Nevill. 31 Dom. Bk. i, 270. * Ibid. i, 2934. 8 Tbid. i, 269d. % Maitland, op. cit. 458, where it is erroneously assumed that each carucate would pay the same geld as a Cheshire hide. The number of hides assigned to Cheshire in Domesday is about 540, including the 21 hides at which the hundred of Atiscros, now in Flintshire, was assessed. If this could be accepted as pointing toan original 520, the 80 hides of ‘between Ribble and Mersey,’ would make up a round 600; but the ‘County Hidage’ attributed by Dr. Liebermann to the eleventh century gives Cheshire 1,200 hides; Maitland, op. cit. 355. Assuming that Cheshire here includes South Lancashire, a reduction of So per cent. before 1066 would mean that 3 and not 6 carucates were originally reckoned to the Lancashire hide. Against the inclusion of ‘ between Ribble and Mersey’ is the fact that Cheshire itself (including lands now in Wales) contained twelve hundreds in 1086. Ly? A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE seem to have held land in both,’* and that even after this connexion, if it existed, had come to an end Whalley and Clitheroe are described in a charter of about 1122 as in Cheshire.* If these indications be regarded as misleading, it must be supposed that ‘between Ribble and Mersey’ before the Conquest possessed a sheriff and shire-moot, without being a recognized shire, as border districts after the coming of the Normans were sometimes entrusted to great lords who appointed their own sheriffs.” The portions of modern Lancashire lying north of the Ribble, with the southern halves of the later shires of Cumberland and Westmorland, and the present Yorkshire wapentake of Ewcross, remained down to the Conquest in the earldom of Northumbria and diocese of York. They are surveyed in Domesday Book as appendant to Yorkshire. Here, too, the vills were nearly all grouped round a few great head manors. But while those between Ribble and Mersey were all continuous areas, administrative divisions of a well-defined district, the Northumbrian manors were much interspersed and highly irregular in outline.’ The sixty-one vills which ‘lay in’ Preston, however, comprised the compact region of Amounderness. North of Amoun- derness the manorial boundaries did not in any way correspond to those of the later shires. Preston, Halton, Whittington, Beetham, and ‘ Hougun,’ con- taining three-fourths of the rateable area of the whole, were held in demesne by Tostig when earl of Northumbria (1055-65). Domesday Book reveals a wide difference in the recent fortunes of the lands separated by the Ribble. Between that river and the Mersey very little waste is noted, and its revenue had only decreased by £25 when the Conqueror granted it out. A comparatively large proportion of the English holders remained on the land. On the manors beyond the Ribble no value could be put ; three-fourths of the vills of Amounderness were ‘ waste,’ the rest scantily inhabited. This desolation has been attributed to the struggle between Harold and Tostig in 1066, but the district may have shared in William’s devastation of Northumbria three years later. The comparative immunity of ‘between Ribble and Mersey’ from the ravaging that befell Northumbria and Cheshire* suggests that, belonging neither to the earldom of Morcar nor to that of Edwin, it gave little trouble. This district, with some of the manors north of the Ribble, was given by the Conqueror not earlier than 1072 to Roger, third son of his cousin Roger of Montgomery.“ Roger, ‘the Poitevin’ (Pictavensis) as he came to be called before 1086 in virtue of his marriage to the sister of the count of * Tait, Mediaeval Manchester, 154. After the Conquest, William son of Nigel, constable of Chester, was enfeoffed on both sides of the lower Mersey ; see below, p. 183. : % Dugdale, Mon. Angi. v, 120. * The ‘prepositus’ mentioned under West Derby Hundred, who was a judicial officer (Dom. Bh. i 2694), may have been the ‘ King’s reeve’ of that hundred manor ; cf. Chadwick, op. cit. 228 sqq-)- : * Preston, Halton, Whittington, Beetham, Austwick, Bentham, Strickland, and ‘ Hougun.’ ‘ Hougun’ (which comprised Furness and the land between Duddon and Esk) and its vill ‘Hougenai’ have been erroneously connected with Walney (Wagheney) Island ; Mr. Farrer identifies the former with Millom 3 Lancs. and Ches. Antig. Soc. Trans. xvili, 97. ® See the map, ibid. © Dom. Bk. i, 3018. “ Lancs. and Ches. Antig. Soc. Trans. xviii, 111. The absence of valets T. R. E. as well as T. R. W seems to favour the first alternative, but is perhaps not decisive. . “ Cheshire suffered severely when William occupied Chester early in 1070. “ The superior limit of date seems fixed by his father’s investiture with th i was after Earl Edwin’s death in 1071. : aa a 180 POLITICAL HISTORY La Marche, held both banks of the Ribble, his fief including Amounderness as well as ‘between Ribble and Mersey.’ Both had been resumed by the crown in or before 1086, but besides many manors in Suffolk, Essex, Lin- colnshire, and Nottinghamshire he still held land in the West Riding, with the district of Bowland adjoining Amounderness on the east, the extensive manor of Beetham round the Kent estuary, and a smaller but fairly com- pact fief on the south-west side of the estuary of the Lune.“ For this and other reasons his loss of Amounderness and ‘between Ribble and Mersey’ may with probability be traced to some readjustment of his possessions rather than to forfeiture for complicity in his eldest brother’s rebellion five ears before.* So far, if we are not mistaken, Roger had not had in his possession more than a part of the lands now comprised in North Lancashire, and this part did not include Lancaster, which is entered as one of the vills of Halton, a manor apparently retained in demesne.** In any case, the survival of the pre- Conquest manors shows that the boundaries of the future county in this quarter were not yet drawn. They were incidentally fixed when William Rufus, early in his reign (before 1094) divided the whole of the ill-organized territory bounded on the south by Amounderness, on the east by Yorkshire, and on the north by the Scottish fief of Cumbria (Carlisle) between Roger and Ivo Taillebois, lord of Spalding in Lincolnshire.” Roger, who had won Rufus’ favour by a timely desertion of Duke Robert in 1088, not only re- covered ‘between Ribble and Mersey’ and Amounderness, but had his fief in the valley of the Lune extended to include the whole of what is now the hundred of Lonsdale south of the Sands. Its boundaries were drawn with little regard to physical features, and did not always respect existing parochial boundaries. On the east, where it marched with Ivo’s manor of Burton-in- Lonsdale, afterwards the Yorkshire wapentake of Ewcross, the frontier cut across the valleys of the eastern feeders of the Lune and divided the parish of Thornton between the two fiefs, and so ultimately between two counties.” Its northern limit, dividing it from Ivo’s Kendal (Kentdale) fief (now southern Westmorland), to which Roger resigned all the vills of his Beetham manor except Yealand, included territory (down to the River Keer) which geo- graphically belonged to Kentdale and long afterwards retained the name,* and it cut the parish of Burton-in-Kendal into two.” “ Dom. BR. i, 332. Mr. Farrer thinks that he had held all the Northumbrian manors enumerated above. ‘This entails the assumption that what is said of his former ownership at the end of the Amounderness entry (Dom. Bk. i, 3014) must be understood as applying to Halton and the other manors which follow, a rather strained hypothesis even if the compilers had not left a blank space after the Amounderness entry. The view taken in the text is not without its difficulties, but seems on the whole more probable. “ The form in which the termination of his tenure here and in Norfolk (Dom. Bk. ii, 293) is noted, and the entry of the northern manors which he retained on a separate folio (ibid. i, 332) at the end of the York- shire survey after the index of tenants-in-chiefs (fol. 2984) had been drawn up, suggests that this readjustment was not completed till the Domesday returns had been digested. Some of his Yorkshire manors had been previously held by other Norman lords. ‘6 But this is not Mr. Farrer’s view ; see note 44 above. He is of the opinion that Roger had already held Lancaster and built the castle. Hee certainly had a castle somewhere on his northern fief before 1086 (Dom. Bk. i, 332), but this may have been that recorded at Penwortham (ibid. i, 270), or one at Clitheroe. ” Lancs. Pipe R. 269, 289 ; Dugdale Mon. iii, 548-9, 553 3 Tait, Mediaeval Manchester, 159. Ireby, though in Lancashire, is in the parish of Thornton in Yorkshire. a: “Which is applied, for example, in the Cockersand Chart. (1052 sub anno 1262) to the district between the Keer and the northern boundary of the county. * Leaving the township of Dalton in Roger’s fief. 181 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE These changes united in Roger’s hands, with one slight exception,” the whole of the continuous territory which forms the great bulk of what we now call Lancashire. At Lancaster, on the view here taken, he now first fixed the seat of his power, and built the castle.” The isolated part of the county on the north side of Morecambe Bay, known as Furness and Cartmel, and now forming the hundred of Lonsdale north of the Sands, was also part of his grant, although Ivo’s fief included Kendal on one side and Copeland (the southern portion of the later Cumberland) on the other. There were geographical and strategical reasons for associating this detached district with Roger’s Lancaster fief. Before the days of railways the road across the Kent sands from Lancaster to Cartmel was much the nearest way from the south into the region between the Duddon and the Winster. This can hardly have failed to be taken into account in such an exhaustive partition of the territories round Morecambe Bay as Rufus effected, especially if, as seems not unlikely, this partition was dictated by military considerations. It is scarcely possible that it was totally unconnected with Rufus’ con- quest of the Scottish fief of Carlisle or Cumbria in 1092." The division of the great tract of crown demesne to the south of this territory between two leading Norman barons may either have paved the way for its subjugation or formed part of the settlement which followed its conquest. In the former case the castles of Kendal and Lancaster were probably built as outposts against the Scots, in the latter as a second and third line of defence in the rear of Rufus’ new castle at Carlisle.*© In either case it would be advisable that the holder of Lancaster Castle should also hold the northern end of the route across the sands, which, as we know, was afterwards used by invading Scottish armies. The status of the nascent Lancashire while in Roger’s hands has not always been understood. On the strength of the regalities he is known to have exercised within its limits, and of a statement of Orderic Vitalis’ that his father procured him a comitatus in England, some have supposed that Lancaster was a palatine earldom and Roger the first earl of Lancaster. But Roger was ‘Comes’ in right of his wife as early as 1091, and it was contrary to Norman practice to accumulate these titles. He is never called earl of Lancaster, and as all his successors in the fief during the twelfth century were earls or counts when they received it, the creation of a specific earldom of Lancaster was deferred until the reign of Henry III. Nevertheless a con- tinuous territory ruled by a ‘ Comes’ with powers which enabled him to give it a shire organization might excusably, though loosely, be described as a comitatus. Roger’s fief had not indeed the unity of an old shire. It com- prised districts of distinct history and character, and there was no adequate guarantee that it would not split up again into these component parts—as indeed it did for a time in the days of Stephen. Lancashire was still only in the making, and its emergence as a recognized county was further retarded by the fact that it was but part of a wider fief extending into counties as far south as Suffolk. * Little Bowland and Leagram were added later. See below, p. 184. 8 See below. There is no direct evidence of Roger’s tenure here earlier than an allusion in a charter of King John when count of Mortain and lord of Lancaster (Furness Coucher, 63, 419), but records for the history of the county in the eleventh century are so scanty that this need not cause surprise. * Angl.-Sax. Chron. sab anno 1092. ; 85 The border character of Roger’s castle seems marked by its advanced position and by the provision for its ward which he made in enfeoffing his military tenants. 58 Chron. of Lanercost, 246. ” Hist. Eccles. (ed. Le Prévost), ii, 422. 182 POLITICAL HISTORY In all but the strictly technical sense, however, it was a palatine county. The crown’s devolution of its authority was as complete here as in the neigh- bouring county of Chester; in one respect more complete, for while the bishop of Lichfield held his Cheshire lands directly of the crown and not of the earl, there was no tenant-in-chief in the Lancaster fief save Roger himself. He had his own sheriff, and no doubt his own shire court, with special juris- diction excluding that of the king. Had his fief been inherited by a long line of his descendants, its history would have been more closely parallel with the fortunes of Cheshire. As things turned out, it frequently escheated to the crown, and though several times granted out again, only once passed from father to son.” To Count Roger’s time belong not only the delimitation of the county and its organization as a private shire, but great changes in ownership and a new and fuller life. Roger founded and endowed the first religious house within its limits. He introduced Norman military tenure. Even before the date of Domesday Book he had enfeoffed some twelve knights with nearly half the land rateable to geld between Ribble and Mersey." A fresh distribution was made after his temporary dispossession, only one of these knights being known with certainty to have retained the holding he had before 1086. This was William son of Nigel, the constable of Hugh, earl of Chester ; his extensive fief in the hundreds of West Derby and Warrington, with its court at Widnes, formed part of his Cheshire honour of Halton.” The enfeoffment of a Cheshire baron by Roger, and the fact that by his tenure of Widnes and Halton he held both sides of Runcorn Gap, strongly suggest the possibility of some arrangement with the earl of Chester for the defence of the Mersey.® Roger’s revised arrangements proved more perma- nent than the old ones, but there is not enough evidence to decide exactly how many of the military fiefs which come into view later were of his creation. Excluding Widnes, they can hardly have exceeded six: Man- chester (Grelley), Tottington (Montbegon), Warrington (Vilers), Penwortham (Bussel), and Hornby. With the exception of Hornby and part of Pen- wortham, all these were cut out of ‘ between Ribble and Mersey.’ Roger’s enfeoffments were made partly out of the demesne, partly at the expense of English thegns and drengs, who became free tenants of Roger’s vassals. More than half the land held by thegns in the hundred of West Derby had been thus mediatized as early as 1086, and little more than a third of the land held by the drengs of Warrington a hundred and twenty years before was still in their hands. Nevertheless, a not inconsiderable proportion of the land of the county continued to be held by thegnage and drengage tenure.™ The labour services recorded in Domesday Book were generally commuted for additional rent,® but as late as the fourteenth century there were still drengs in * Godfrey the Sheriff appears as a tenant of Roger, ¢. 1093-4 ; Lancs. Pipe R. 269, 290. *° See below, p. 187. ® See above, p. 167. *! Dom. Bk. i, 2696-270; 2184 plough-lands out of 474. " Testa de Nevill (Rec. Com.), ii, fol. 718 ; Harland, Mamecestre, 135, 361. * This would account, perhaps, for William’s exemption from the redistribution of fiefs made by Roger under Rufus. “ In the twelfth century about 100 plough-lands, yielding some £33 annually ; Lancs. Pipe R. 37. * The drengage ‘customs’ of Bolton-le-Sands were commuted in the reign of John for an increment of 2 marks on the rent ; Lancs. Inguests, 95. 183 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Amounderness who reaped on the lord’s demesne and took care of his dogs and horses.™ Count Roger forfeited this with all his other English lands in 1102 by supporting his eldest brother, Robert of Belléme, in his rebellion against the new king, Henry I, and the whole mighty fief was taken into the hands of the crown. In accordance with Norman custom, however, it did not lose its individuality, continuing to be known as the ‘ Honour of Roger of Poitou,’ or the ‘ Honour of Lancaster,’ and was speedily regranted by Henry to his fatherless nephew, Stephen of Blois. The exact date of the grant is not known, but a roll of the landowners in Lindsey drawn up between 1115 and 1118, shows Stephen, now count of Mortain, in possession of Lincolnshire lands held in 1086 by Roger of Poitou." His first recorded act in the north-western part of the honour belongs to 1124, when he established monks of Savigny at Tulketh, near Preston, upon whom, three years later, he bestowed the greater part of Furness. The earliest evidence of his possession of ‘ Between Ribble and Mersey,’ is in the Pipe Roll of 1129-30.” There is no good reason, however, for doubting that the honour was given to him as a whole in the early years of the reign.” Several new feoffments were made between the Mersey and the Lakes by Henry I after the forfeiture of Roger of Poitou or by Count Stephen.” One of these deserves special mention, because it left a permanent impress upon hundred boundaries. In 1102 Robert de Lacy of Pontefract, to whom Roger had given Bowland, and in all probability the adjoining fief of Clitheroe, which included the whole hundred of Blackburn, received a grant of the eastern corner of Amounderness—Chippingdale, Dutton, and Aighton.” The gift led to the transference of this compact block of territory on the right bank of the Ribble to Blackburn hundred.” The accession of the amiable but irresolute Stephen to a disputed throne, undid for a time the work of Rufus and Henry I in the north-west, and the Three Lancs. Doc. (Chet. Soc.), 56; cf. Testa de Nevill (Rec. Com.), 404. The lands in Newton and Warrington hundreds which were still held in drengage in 1086, suffered further reductions, and what survived was in the thirteenth century held in thegnage. * The latter perhaps had a narrower application at first; see below, p. 186. °° Roll of Landowners in Lindsey (ed. Chester Waters), 20 qq. ® See above, p. 114. ® Lancs. Pipe R. 1. A charter ascribed by the editor (ibid. 427) to 1114-16 cannot be earlier than 1125, and may be ten years later ; cf. The Ancestor, No. 4, p. 156. "The alleged previous tenure of ‘Between Ribble and Mersey’ by Ranulf le Meschin, who was lord of Kendal, Ewcross, and Copeland (as son-in-law of Ivo Taillebois), and of Rufus’s conquest of Carlisle (by grant of Henry I) until 1120, when he became earl of Chester, rests only upon an assertion made in a charter of his son, Ranulf Gernons, when in possession of the district in the next reign ; Lancs. Pipe R. 319. As the latter had probably laid violent hands upon it (see below, p.186), he would have an interest in claiming to hold it by hereditary right, and it is significant that he wholly ignores Count Stephen’s tenure of it. It is possible that the earls of Chester thought they had rights there in virtue of its former connexion with Cheshire. The charter in which Clitheroe is described as ‘in Cheshire,’ belongs to this period (c. 1122) ; see above, p- 180. 7 Michael le Fleming’s lordship of Aldingham in Furness, which was excepted from the grant to Savigny. may have been one of the fiefs given by Henry I to new comers from Flanders. William Peverel, of Notting- ham, received Ashton and Great Marton near Preston, and Blackrod near Bolton, which after the escheat of his lands to the crown in 1153, formed part of the honour of Peverel ; Lancs. Pipe R. 266; but cf. V.C.H. Lancs. i, 293. The Butler fief of Weeton, in Amounderness, was probably created by Count Stephen. ™ Lancs. Pipe R. 382. ™ Ibid. 425 ; Lancs. Ing. i, 289. The parish of Ribchester (which included Dutton) was thereby divided between the two hundreds. Dutton and Chippingdale were left in the deanery of Amounderness. Little Bowland with Leagram was probably part of Chippingdale, but may possibly have formed part of Bowland proper, confirmed to Lacy about the same time. In the latter case it must have been separately annexed to Lancashire and Blackburn hundred. 184 POLITICAL HISTORY territories the union of which in the hands of Roger the Poitevin laid the basis of a new county of Lancaster, were again separated. Under cover of his niece’s claim to the English throne David of Scotland secured a strong hold upon the north of England. His first invasion in January, 1136, ended in Stephen’s retrocession of Carlisle and its district and a promise to consider the claims of David’s son Henry to the earldom of Northumbria in right of his mother, a daughter of Earl Waltheof.” It was nominally to Henry that Carlisle was given, no doubt because it was held to be one of the lands for which the young prince was required to do homage to Stephen at York, but his father took over the government.” When hostilities were resumed two years later William son of Duncan, David’s nephew, pushed southwards with a flying force as far as Upper Ribblesdale, ravaging the possessions of Furness Abbey in Craven and routing a small English force of four squadrons which made a stand near Clitheroe.” The Yorkshire barons repelled a further inroad at the Battle of the Standard, but in 1139 Stephen bought peace by investing Henry with the earldom of Northumbria.” It is to this grant, probably, that we ought to look for an explanation of the fact that not long afterwards the Scots king is found in possession of the territory between the Ribble and the district of Carlisle which had belonged to the earldom of Northumbria before the Conquest. The register of Shrewsbury Abbey contains two charters of David addressed to his officers of ‘the Honour of Lancaster,’ confirming Roger of Poitou’s Amounderness grants to the abbey.” That Stephen intended to include in his grant these western lands, which no Norman earl of Northumberland had held and much of which was his own private property, may well be doubted. David, however, may have laid hands upon them, interpreting the grant to suit himself or obtaining a new one from the Empress Maud. As for the date of his occupation there is some reason to believe that one of the two charters referred to above belongs to 1141, the year in which he joined the empress in the south ; the other may be earlier. With one exception these are the only recorded acts of David’s rule within the bounds of Lancashire. The exception in question is his appointment of Wimund, bishop of Man, to the governorship of a district which included Furness. Wimund, of whose extraordinary career William of Newburgh has left a graphic account," began life as a monk of Furness, Sym. Dun. Hist. Regum (cont. by John of Hexham) (Rolls Ser.), ii, 287 ; Chron. of Steph. &c. (Rolls Ser), ili, 145-6. Lawrie, Anct. Scot. Chart. 94,96. David himself would not do homage in view of the oath he had taken to the succession of the empress ; Céron. of Steph. &c. iv, 129. 7 Sym. Dun. op. cit. ii, 291. A later insertion in the MS. gives Friday, 10 June, as the date. Ramsay (Foundations of Engl. ii, 366) thinks that if this be correct the Scottish column cannot have been thrown off, as the chronicler represents, from David’s army before Norham, which yielded about 8 May, but must have come by the western route, by which at any rate it returned; Chron. Steph. &c. iii, 156. The raiders, largely Galloway Picts, with only six men-at-arms, were very proud of their victory over /oricati; ibid. Igo. For William Fitz Duncan see Lawrie, op. cit. 271. His ravaging Craven suggests that he had not yet married Alice de Romilly, the heiress of this district and of Copeland ; cf. Sym. Dun. ii, 156. ® Tbid. ii, 199, 300 3 CéAron. of Steph. &c. iii, 176. ® Lawrie, op. cit. 105-6; Lancs. Pipe R. 274-5. The ‘Honour of Lancaster’ is here used in a restricted sense. See below. For David’s rule in Copeland cf. Lawrie, 150. ° Tait, Mediaeval Manchester, 166-9. The former cannot be later than 1143. To the evidence adduced in the above work we may add that Jordan, David’s chancellor, who witnesses the charter, was replaced by Edward as early as 1144; Lawrie, op. cit. 136. ; 8! Chron. of Steph. Kc. i, 73. 2 185 24 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE extorted his nomination as bishop from the abbey, in whom the power of appointment was then vested, and afterwards, though of humble English birth, claimed to be the son of Angus, earl of Moray (slain in 1130), and ravaged Scotland in support of his pretensions, which David only bought off by entrusting to him the provincia already referred to. He ruled with such violence and insolence that the country people, with the connivance of the ‘nobiles,’ seized and blinded him.” The assumption that David rested his title to these lands on the pre- Conquest lordship of the earls of Northumbria is supported by the absence of any evidence that he held or claimed territory south of the Ribble. Such a claim might at first sight seem to be implied in his addressing charters to the justices, &c., of ‘the whole Honour of Lancaster.’ It 1s, however, doubtful whether the entire fief which Roger of Poitou had forfeited was as yet so described, and even if it were there is ample proof that the designation could be applied in a narrower sense to the part of the present county lying north of the Ribble, of which Roger’s castle at Lancaster was the natural centre. The southern half, though it also passed away from Stephen, had gone into other hands than David’s. Before May, 1147, ‘ Between Ribble and Mersey,’ is found in the possession of Ranulf Gernons, earl of Chester. It seems probable that this was one of the districts of royal demesne which the turbulent Ranulf seized upon without law or leave during the anarchy when he made himself for a time all powerful in the North Midlands.* A phrase in one of his charters suggests that he may have thought that he had some hereditary claim to a district which had old connexions with his own county. In 1149 an opportunity presented itself of reuniting in his own hands the nascent county of Lancaster. Ranulf, Henry of Anjou, and King David met at Carlisle to concert common action against Stephen, and the Scots king consented to cede the ‘ Honour of Lancaster’ to the earl in return for the abandonment of his claim to the land of Carlisle, of which his father Ranulf le Meschin had once been lord.” Ranulf, whose son was to marry a granddaughter of the king, did homage to David. These arrangements have been thought to betray ‘an idea on the part of the earl of throwing off his connexion with the English crown and establishing an independent position partly based on an alliance with Scotland.’ The earl went off to collect his forces, and David and Henry, moving south with an army, awaited his arrival at Lancaster before attacking Stephen, who was advancing in force towards Yorkshire. ‘They waited in vain, for Stephen seized the opportunity to outbid them by enormous territorial concessions to Ranulf, of which ** Chron. of Steph. &c. 1, 73. For fuller details and difficulties in the story see above, p. 116. The blinding of Wimund, who spent his last years at Byland Abbey, took place before 1152, when his successor in the see of Man was appointed 3 Chron. of Steph. &c. iv, 167. But cf. Fordun, Scotichronicon (ed. Skene), ii, 428. * The wider use had come in by 1164 (Lancs. Pipe R. 6), but a charter of Stephen some twenty years before that date distinguishes the ‘ Honor de Lancastre’ from the ‘terra de inter Ribliam et Mersam’ as well as from the ‘terra Rogeri Pictavis a Northampton usque in Scotiam’; ibid. 368. This restricted application of the name appears also in a passage of Brompton’s Chronicle (ed. Twysden in Decem Scriptores, fol. 956), perhaps based on a twelfth-century source : ‘ Lanchastreschire continet in se quinque modicas schiras, West- derbischire, Salfordschire, Leylandschire, Blackbournschire et territorium Lancastrie.? Perhaps at first the regular appellation of the whole fief was ‘ Honor Comitis Rogerij Pictaviensis’ ; Lancs. Pipe R. 370. i Ibid. 277 ; Tait, op. cit. 169. The date of the charter lies between June, 1141, and May, 1147. Gesta Stephani (Rolls Ser.), 118. * Lancs. Pipe R. 319. See above, p. 184. * Hen. of Hunt. Hist. Angi. (Rolls Ser.), 282 ; Sym. Dun. op. cit. (Rolls Ser.), ii, 323. * Ramsay, Foundations of Engl. ii, 438. The author is unaware that David was already in possession of the territory ceded. 186 POLITICAL HISTORY ‘Between Ribble and Mersey’ and the ‘Honour of Lancaster’ formed but a small part.” There is documentary evidence that the earl was actually in possession of Lancaster at one moment, but the date is unfortunately doubtful.” In any case David is hardly likely to have suffered a permanent occupation by the recreant. The Carlisle arrangement may, however, have been ratified when in the spring of 1153 the double-dyed traitor sold his support to Duke Henry in return for even more sweeping concessions, which probably included both halves of the future Lancashire.” In the compromise effected between Stephen and Henry in the autumn, whereby the latter was enabled to tear up his charter to Ranulf,” the whole was certainly reserved, with or without Scottish concurrence, for the king’s second son William, earl of Warenne and count of Boulogne, along with the rest of Roger of Poitou’s honour and all other estates held by Stephen before his accession.” William was still under age at his father’s death in October, 1154, and for a year the ‘honour of Lancaster’ remained in the hands of the crown." There is no actual evidence that the young earl (who had succeeded his father as count of Mortain) obtained possession of the lands of the honour lying north of the Ribble until Malcolm IV’s surrender of Cumberland and Northumberland to Henry in 1157, but it is improbable that the Scots retained their hold upon Lancaster during the troublous minority which followed King David’s death four years before.” Earl William died childless during the retreat from Toulouse in 1159, and the honour of Lancaster probably formed part of his widow’s dower until her remarriage in 1164 to the king’s illegitimate brother Hamelin. It was then resumed by the crown, and Henry II retained it in his own hands until the end of his reign. The administrative unity of that part of the honour which lay between the Mersey and the Duddon was not further interrupted. From 1168, if not earlier, it is regularly described as ‘the county of Lan- caster’; °° it paid fines to escape the Regard of the Forest and the Forest Eyre,” and was amerced for concealment of the pleas of the crown.” As early as 1168 its northern portion was already divided into wapentakes.” The county of Lancaster differed, however, from older shires in that it formed part of an extensive and widely scattered honour, and consequently was not ® Lancs. Pipe R. 367-8. Stephen’s charter is only known in a transcript without date or list of witnesses, but this seems the only likely occasion when it could have been granted. See Round in Engi. Hist. Rev. x, go, and Tait, op. cit. 170. Mr. Farrer’s date is in any case much too early. %° Lancs. Pipe R. 296 (a confirmation, given at Lancaster, of Roger of Poitou’s gifts to the priory). The editor refers it to Ranulf’s journey southwards from the meeting at Carlisle in 1149, but as it is dated 27 July (without note of year) and the meeting was in May this seems improbable. "Tbid. 370. The grant comprised inter alia ‘totum honorem comitis Rogeri Pictaviensis ubicunque aliquid haberetur’ (Dugdale and Ormerod read ‘habet’). The final words have been regarded (Tait, op. cit. 173) as excluding what David held (or claimed), but this is not clear. * This has hitherto been overlooked. ‘The earl did not die until 16 Dec. of this year; Dugdale, Baronage, i, 40. % Rymer, Foedera, i, 13. David’s death on 24 May doubtless facilitated these dispositions. % Lancs. Pipe R. 285. This is the first clear instance of the wider use of the term. The honour does not appear in the Pipe Roll of 1155-6, the first of the reign which survives. % William’s confirmation of an agreement between Furness Abbey and Michael le Fleming, dated at Lancaster, no doubt belongs to 1158, when he visited Carlisle with Henry; ibid. 307. Cf Tait, op. cit. 175-6. % Lancs. Pipe R. 13. 7 Ibid. 16, 38, 45, 55, 60, 63. e.g. ibid. 63. * Lonsdale wapentake is mentioned in that year; ibid. 12. ‘The first mention in the Pipe Rolls of Furness wapentake, now Lonsdale north of the Sands, is under 1184; ibid. 55. The latter was sometimes called the wapentake of Dalton ; Furness Coucher, 84. 187 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE recognized as a fiscal unit at the exchequer. It is the ‘honour’ and not the ‘county’ which from 1164 appears in the Pipe Rolls '® charged with a fixed farm of £200 a year, representing a rough estimate of demesne income, farms of wapentakes, rent of thegnlands, &c., after making allowance for expenses and the sheriff's profit." But from the outset two-thirds of this income and nearly all the casual profits (which were separately accounted for) accrued from the county, and this ratio tended to increase with the disproportionate amount of subinfeudation in the other parts of the honour as the century advanced.’ The farm of the honour and the casual profits were accounted for and the administration of the county conducted by a separate sheriff, except for a short period from 1166, when these duties were entrusted to the sheriff of Northumberland. From 1164 to 1166 Geoffrey de Valognes, who may have acted in the same capacity for the earl of Warenne, was sheriff of Lancaster."° During the next three and a half years William de Vesci, sheriff of Northumberland, half brother of Richard Fitz Eustace, constable of Chester and lord of Widnes, rendered the accounts of the honour.’ On Vesci’s removal from office, with the other baronial sheriffs, at Easter, 1170, Roger de Herleberga was appointed sheriff of Lancaster. In the critical year 1173 he gave way to a better known servant of the crown, Ranulf de Glanville. A Scottish invasion in concert with the feudal rebels in France and England was imminent ; their king had not abandoned hope of recovering all that David had held in England, includ- ing Lancaster,’ and the earl of Chester was one of the leaders of the revolt. It was important, therefore, to have Lancaster Castle and the county which it guarded in strong hands, and though Glanville was not yet famous his ability had doubtless been recognized. He fully justified the confidence placed in him, suppressed the rising of Hamon de Masci, baron of Dunham (Massey), and in July, 1174, at the head probably of the forces of his county, took a leading part in the defeat and capture of the Scottish king at Alnwick. The worst danger over, he resigned his sheriffdom to Ralph Fitz Bernard. Neither had any leisure to render accounts during the years 1173 and 1174, and indeed when peace came Glanville, in spite of an allowance of £45 for expenditure upon the siege of Leicester and the struggle with Hamon de Masci, was unable to pay any part of his farm to the treasury.” A considerable sum was charged to him for a year or two, but in view of the difficulty of collecting revenue in the war time and the heavy expenses incurred by him, Henry allowed the whole amount to be wiped off.’ '* The accounts of escheated honours were usually appended to those of the shires in which their capita lay. But Lancaster being in none of the older counties the clerks of the exchequer tacked it on to Yorkshire, whose sheriff had collected its Danegeld in 1162 (Lancs. Pipe R. 4), or more generally to Northumberland, with which it was united for some years under a common sheriff ; see below. Exigencies of space sometimes com- pelled a departure from this arrangement, as in 1165-6, when its accounts were appended to those of Bucking- eae Meg in 1181-2, when it was made a separate entry ‘quia non erat ei locus in Northumberland’ ; mt The absence during the years 1164-8 of allowances for grants made out of the demesne seems to show that the farm had been newly fixed in the former year. The gross revenue was probably nearly double the amount of the farm ; ibid. 268. ‘? Tbid, 264 et seq. The demesne lands of the honour when Henry took it over were assessed at nearly 120 hides or carucates (ibid. 4-5), of which at least three-fifths lay in the county. a Ibid. 6-9. ‘ Ibid. 10-13. Cf, Hoveden, Céron. (Rolls Ser.), iii, 243. % Lancs. Pipe R. 26; Ormerod, Hist. of Ches.i, 533. 1or Lancs. Pipe R. 25-7. Ibid. 34. 188 POLITICAL HISTORY The attitude of the county of Lancaster to the rising is not directly recorded ; the outlawry of Gilbert son of Waltheof, the master serjeant of West Derby wapentake, which was only remitted on payment of the heavy fine of £400, seems, however, to point to his participation, and Hamon de Masci had some land in the county.’® But any wide complicity would have left more traces upon the Pipe Rolls. Apart from the periodical visitations of the itinerant justices, the only outstanding events in the history of the county during the remainder of the reign are the grant in 1179 of a charter to Preston, which was perhaps the result of a royal visit,"° and the gift some years later of the valuable district of Cartmel to the famous William the Marshal, who had been the trusted adviser of the king’s eldest son." It was under Henry II, though the exact date is unknown, that a body of loyal Welshmen, dispossessed by Owen Gwynedd’s conquests in Flintshire, migrated to Lancashire with Robert Banaster, whose castle at Prestatyn had been destroyed in 1167, and founded more than one local family.’ Banaster was no doubt promised compensation here but does not seem to have obtained possession of Makerfield until after Henry’s death. Although the county of Lancaster was now a recognized administrative area it does not appear under that name in the list of districts included in the northern circuit of the justices as rearranged in 1179. ‘Inter Rible et Meresee’ and ‘ Lonecastre’ are still distinguished as in Stephen’s day."* It is doubtful whether this must be regarded as a mere official clinging to ancient nomenclature or as implying that the justices held separate assizes for the two districts, once distinct but now united in a single county. In any case the two regions retained a certain individuality, and long afterwards the name ‘Between Ribble and Mersey’ was still in use.“* The entire honour of Lan- caster was included in the huge appanage with which Richard, in 1189, shortly after his accession, too trustfully invested his brother John, count of Mortain. Here, as in the other territories granted, among which were the counties of Derby and Nottingham, the whole of the regalities were transferred and for nearly five years the honour disappears from the Pipe Rolls."* Over a large part of England John enjoyed all the powers which the palatine earl of Chester and the bishop of Durham had long exercised in more restricted areas. In some of the districts comprised in his fief the castles were retained by the crown, but Lancaster Castle was handed over to him, and this, with the importance of Lancashire as the door to his Irish posses- sions, perhaps explains the special favour he seems to have shown to his men 09 Lancs. Pipe R. 31, 64. _ 10 The burgesses received the liberties of Newcastle-under-Lyme ; ibid. 412. For presumptive evidence that Henry hunted in the forest of Lancaster during the winter 1178-9 see ibid. 40. 1 As the sheriff in 1187-8 claimed deduction of the rent of Cartmel for a year and nine months (ibid. 66), Mr. Farrer ascribes the grant to 1185 or 1186, but as Marshal only returned from a long campaign in the Holy Land in the autumn of 1187 (Dict. Nat. Biog.) the grant may have been made in that or the following year with a lien upon past revenue. : 12 @.9, the Welshes (Le Waleys) of Aughton, Litherland, and Welch Whittle and the Hultons of Hulton represented ¢. 1200 by Yorwerth son of Bleddyn ; Lancs. Ing. i, 20, 65. _In 1229 the ‘ Banaster Welsh- men’ resisted a tallage of 20 marks, claiming to have always paid voluntary aids in lieu of tallage. “Twelve of them were summoned to Westminster to show warrant ; Cal. of Close, 1227-31, p. 159. They are said to have been still called ‘les Westroys’ under Edw. I. ; Waalley Coucher, 113. 43 Hoveden, Chron. (Rolls Ser.), ii, 191. From 1202, when the extant records of their proceed- ings begin, the justices seem to have held a single session for the county, generally at Lancaster but sometimes at Preston or Wigan. ™ See below, p. 194. M8 Norgate, Fobn Lackland, 25-7. 189 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE in the county. The burgesses of Lancaster received a grant of the liberties of Bristol,"* and his father’s charter to Preston was confirmed and extended ; "7 the knights, thegns, and freeholders dwelling within the extensive forest of Lancaster were empowered to assart, sell, and give away their woods, and the precarious exemption from the Regard which they had purchased from time to time was made permanent ;"* considerable areas of demesne land were granted by charter to his local followers."* A large number of leading freeholders of the county, including the heads of the Montbegon, Boteler, Gernet, Redman, Lathom, and Molyneux families, and Jordan dean of Manchester, consequently supported their traitor lord in February, 1194, against the brother whose release from his foreign prison upset all John’s plans.¥° On his behalf they made an expedition to Kendal, the bare fact of which is alone recorded." The great military tenants in the county seem, however, with the exception of William le Boteler baron of Warrington, Roger de Montbegon baron of Hornby, and Theobald Walter, lord of Amounderness, to have held aloof. One indeed, Robert Grelley of Man- chester, was a minor and married to a niece of John’s old enemy William de Longchamp, the former chancellor and justiciar ;'” while the most important of them all, Roger de Lacy, constable of Chester, who, in addition to his Cheshire lands and Widnes fief, had just inherited the honours of Clitheroe and Pontefract from his cousin Robert de Lacy, was at bitter feud with the count. Three years before he had hanged the castellans of Tickhill and Nottingham, who betrayed those castles to John, and the latter had avenged them by depriving Roger of the lands he held of him and ravaging those he possessed elsewhere.’* But the collapse of the resistance to Richard here was due to John’s desertion by a trusted servant. On leaving England for Normandy he had placed Lancaster Castle in charge of Theobald Walter lord of Weeton in Amounderness, whose services in Ireland had been rewarded with an hereditary butlership and large grants of land, while in Lancashire he received from John, about 1192, a grant of all Amounderness, that is, of the whole of the demesne and other profitable rights there, pleas of the crown only excepted.* Shrinking from treason or yielding to fraternal influence Theobald surrendered the castle to his younger brother Hubert Walter archbishop of Canterbury.’* The honour was resumed by the crown and entrusted to Theobald Walter as sheriff. In further recognition of his loyalty he received a re-grant of Amounder- ness.’ Richard did not show himself implacable to John’s partisans. Archbishop Hubert used his influence in favour of clemency, and some forty "8 Lancs. Pipe R. 416. "7 Rot. Chart. (Rec. Com.), 264. N° Tbid. 25. The charter cost them £500, but the relief from the oppressive exercise of the forest law was cheap at the price; cf. Lancs. Pipe R. 419. N° Tbid. 115, 431 et seq.; Rot. Chart. 25. Among these grants was one of Preesall and Hackensall in Amounderness to Geoffrey his crossbowman (Arbalaster) on the annual service of two crossbows. For the grant of Amounderness itself to Theobald Walter see below. ™ Lancs. Pipe R. 77. 4 Thid. 78. ™ Tait, op. cit. 137. “8 Gesta Ricardi, 232, 234. His superior, the earl of Chester, took an active part against John. ™ Dict. Nat. Biog. viii, 77; V.C.H. Lancs. i, 352. Mr. Round’s statement (Dict. Nat. Biog. viii, 77) that he held Amounderness in 1166 is an error due to a later addition to the Black Book of the Ex Liber Rubeus (Rolls Ser.), 445. "5 Hoveden, CéAron. il, 237. * Being much employed elsewhere he executed this office after the first year by deputy. ™ Lancs. Pipe R. 434. chequer ; 190 POLITICAL HISTORY of the most prominent were allowed to redeem their lands and buy their pardon by payment of fines ranging from one mark to five hundred and amounting in the aggregate to nearly £700." A few, however, failed to recover their forfeited estates from the grasp of the sheriff until John ascended the throne.” The castles of Lancaster and West Derby were repaired‘ and Theobald received an allowance of half a year’s farm to replace the stock removed from the demesne during the crisis.“! William the Lion’s attempt to secure the friendly retrocession of the northern part of the county along with the other English territories which David had held, met, of course, with a polite refusal.” The grant of Navenby in Lincolnshire to Robert le Rous at Easter, 1194, completed the subinfeudation of the demesne (and ancient escheat) of the honour of Lancaster outside the county. Practically the whole of the regular revenue available for payment of the farm now came from the county, and the clerks of the exchequer began to use frequently ‘honour of Lancaster’ and ‘county of Lancaster ’ as interchangeable terms."* The county was now to all intents and purposes treated as a separate fiscal unit parallel with the older shires, and with the virtual disappearance of the distinction which had hitherto marked it off from them it may be regarded as taking its place among English counties of the normal type. On Richard’s death in April, 1199, the castles of Lancaster and West Derby were specially guarded for some time by order of the new king.™ John’s former supporters obtained—though not gratis—confirmation of his charters as count of Mortain,’* which in many cases had been disregarded after his downfall in 1194, and redress was given to those whose lands had been withheld by Theobald Walter, who was punished by the temporary forfeiture of Amounderness.' The king’s special relation to Lancashire and its strategical value as a starting point for Wales and Ireland procured it an embarrassing amount of his attention. He more than once visited Lancaster, whose castle he largely 138 Lancs. Pipe R. 77, 90, 99. Roger de Montbegon, from whom 500 marks (nearly half the total) was exacted, had been active in the defence of Nottingham Castle. Henry de Redman of Yealand paid 120 marks. 9 Ibid. 115-16. % Tbid. 97. 181 Ibid. g2. The money does not seem, however, to have been expended. At all events Theobald was compelled to refund it in the first year of John. Mr. Farrer suggests (ibid. 83) that this and the retention of certain forfeited estates were an attempt on his part to reimburse himself for the undertaking he had apparently given not to claim a deduction from his farm in respect of Amounderness. His suits to recover the advowsons of the churches of Preston, Kirkham, and Poulton, which were successful in the case of the first two, may have had the same motive ; Lancs. Final Conc. i, 2, 6. 132 Hoveden, Chron. (Rolls Ser.), iii, 243. It is implied that he claimed the whole county, but this is due to a confusion explained below. "3 Lancs. Pipe R. 72, 76, 104, 126, 163 ; but it was not until 1241 that ‘firma comitatus’ permanently replaced ‘firma Aonoris’ ; Tait, Med. Manchester, 179. The chroniclers speak of John receiving a grant of the county in 1189 (Wendover, Flores Hist. i, 371 ; Hoveden, Céron. ii, 6), though he clearly obtained the whole honour. In matters of tenure the distinction between the honour and the county was of course still care- fully observed ; knights’ fees held of the honour outside the county were distinguished as ‘extra comitatum’ or “extra Limam,’ the mountain boundary of the county on the east ; cf. Tait, op. cit. 12, 180, 193. For a complete list of the fees of the honour in 1199 see Lancs. Pipe R. 144; cf. Testa de Nevill (Rec. Com.), p. 403, for Penwortham. They numbered 74 and a fraction. 134 ¢ Ad custodiam patriae’; Lancs. Pipe R. 105. 185 Thid. 106 et seq. £200 and 10 ‘chascurs’ were exacted»for confirmation of his charter to the forest- tenants; ibid. 114. The new charter to Lancaster gave it the privileges of Northampton instead of those of Bristol ; Rot. Chart. 26. 136 Lancs. Pipe R. 211. It was regranted to him in 1202 (Rot. de. Lid. 25), but after his death in 1205 it was not allowed to descend to his heir ; Lancs. Ing. i, 115. IgI _— A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE rebuilt at a cost of over £500." On the estuary of the Mersey he founded (in 1207) the new borough of Liverpool.’ ‘ Bretesches’ and provisions were despatched by the sheriff to the army in Ireland,’ and for the Welsh campaigns of 1211 great quantities of stores were sent from Lancaster to Chester by way of Liverpool."° More than 600 men from Lancaster served on that occasion, and 200 more were called up in the following year, but the levy was dismissed without fighting.” To the expenses thus incurred (and others afterwards, less defensible) the county contributed directly by a special aid towards the rebuilding of Lancaster Castle,* and by its share in the incessant scutages and tallages of the reign (the former augmented by the new demand from military tenants and thegns alike of considerable sums ne transfretent), and indirectly by the raising of farms and a great variety of miscellaneous exactions. The financial management of the county no doubt required readjustment. The ancient farm had been almost wiped out by deductions for grants out of demesne, while the value of what remained had increased with the growth of wealth and population in the county during the last half century. Richard de Vernon, for whose appointment as sheriff (1200-4) the county proffered— why is not obvious—to pay 100 marks, undertook to increase his farm by that sum,’ and in 1204 the farming system was abandoned, the sheriff being now appointed as custos, and expected to account for the whole revenue coming into his hands. The fee farm rents of estates of ancient demesne were raised, in one case nearly fifty per cent., in addition to the sums exacted for confirmation of John’s grants thereof when count of Mortain.“* It may be doubted whether the increase was always proportionate to an actual rise in value. Estates held in serjeanty, thegnage, and drengage, which had been alienated without good warrant since 1154 were ordered in 1205 to be taken into the king’s hands.” Extortionate fines and amercements swelled the royal revenue. The assizes of 1202-3 yielded over £300, the abbot of Furness was mulcted 500 marks for forest offences,’ two successive barons of Newton had to pay 400 and 500 marks respectively to secure their inheritance,’ and Hugh Bussel, unable to pay a heavy fine inflicted for a - legal irregularity ten years old, was driven to relinquish the barony of Penwortham to Roger de Lacy, already lord of Clitheroe and Widnes." It is not surprising that all John’s great tenants in Lancashire took active part against him in 1215. John de Lacy (Roger’s son), Roger de Montbegon of Hornby, Robert Grelley of Manchester, William le Boteler of Warrington, 7 Dons. Pipe R. 234, 239. 4 Thid. 220, 2265. ™ Thid. 228, 234. 1 Ibid. 243. “Ibid. 242 ; Norgate, Fohn Lackland, 158. 15 knights, 60 esquires with 2 horses apiece, 466 foot- men and 96 carpenters, whose united wages amounted to £109 9s. ‘© Rot, Claus. i, 131 ; Wendover, Flor. Hist. iii, 239. Lincs. and Derby. both furnished 200, Notts. 300, Yorks. 730. M3 Lancs. Pipe R. 236. ™ Ibid. 144-5. ™ Thid. 126, 135. “6 Tbid. 119, 130, 137. Some of these rents may have been raised by Theobald Walter in the previous reign. “T Rot. Claus. i, 55. The great inquest of 1212, which was not limited to the honour of Lancaster, had a similar motive. It is printed in the Testa de Nevill (Rec. Com.), 401 sqq.; a translation of the Lancs, entries in Lancs. Ing. i, 2-114. ‘© Lancs. Pipe R. 162. © Afterwards reduced to 200 ; ibid. 204, 209. Thid. 180, 246, “Lancs, Pipe R. 152, 161. 192 POLITICAL HISTORY and the sheriff Gilbert Fitz Reinfred, baron of Kendal and lord of Warton and Nether Wyresdale, who presented no accounts in 1214." Lacy and Montbegon were among the twenty-five barons appointed to see Magna Carta executed. With the others they were subsequently excommunicated by Pope Innocent, and their estates were transferred by John to his own supporters. Gilbert Fitz Reinfrid’s son William of Lancaster, with two of his knights, fell into John’s hands at the capture of Rochester in November, 1215, and his father had to abjure the Great Charter, sur- render his castles, and proffer a fine of 12,000 marks to obtain their release and his own pardon.’ Most of the other Lancashire barons submitted to John while he was in the north early in 1216, but some at least did not recover their lands until the general pacification in the next reign.’ The king committed (30 January, 1216), the custody of the castle and county of Lancaster to his staunch supporter Ranulf de Blundeville, earl of Chester.“* For eight years the office of sheriff of Lancaster was vested in the powerful earl, who was also sheriff of Shropshire and Staffordshire, and but for his absence on crusade (1218-20) would probably have succeeded the earl of Pembroke as regent for the young Henry III. On his return he headed the opposition to Hubert de Burgh, who had taken the place that might have been his, but finding himself outmatched gave up (30 December, 1223) the royal castles in his possession. The custody of the castle and honour, with the sheriffdom of the county, were transferred to his brother-in-law, William de Ferrers, earl of Derby, in whose hands they remained until the end of 1227,” when Henry, now of age, put an end to this interim arrange- ment, and henceforth appointed sheriffs from the chief tenants of the county. ee Ferrers’ connexion with Lancashire was destined to be soon revived in a different form. In 1229 Ranulf of Chester became the owner of a great fief in the southern part of the county, for on 18 October in that year the king gave him the whole of the royal demesne between Ribble and Mersey—ice. in the three wapentakes of West Derby, Salford and Leyland, for that of Black- burn belonged entirely to the Lacys—with the profits of the said wapentakes and feudal superiority over all tenants in them, at the nominal annual rent of a mewed goshawk or 4os.° The practical effect of the grant was to place Ranulf in three out of the four wapentakes of ‘ Between Ribble and Mersey ’ in the same position as that occupied by his grandfather, Ranulf Gernons, in 15? Apparently he was superseded for a time. In April, 1214, Reginald of Cornhill was custos of Lancs. and Surrey (Rot. Claus. i, 1426), but Gilbert afterwards rendered an account for this year ; Lancs. Pipe R. 249. During the crisis the castles of Lancaster and West Derby were placed in a complete state of defence at a cost of nearly £250; the former was supplied with 10,000 crossbow quarrels; 140 footmen, 10 horsemen, and the crossbowmen received £153; ibid. 250. 188 Lancs. Pipe R. 252, 258. Over £6,000 was still owing in 1246; Pipe R. Henry de Redman of Yealand was also among the defenders of Rochester ; Lancs. Pipe R. 259. 14 Thid. For the successive dispositions of Grelley’s estates see Tait, Mediaeval Manchester, 138. 185 Rot, Pat. 1644. The rest of the honour was added by 13 Apr. ; ibid. 1764. %6 Doyle, Official Baronage ; Dict. Nat. Biog. v, 289. As sheriff of Lancaster he farmed the county, taking all revenue from demesne after payment of the ancient farm of {200 and the increment on certain manors imposed under John, amounting to {14 a year. 187 Thid. ; Baines, Hist. of Lancs. (ed. Croston), i, 47. 188 Ferrers was ‘custos’ not ‘firmarius’ of the county, receiving a fixed salary of £100 a year; Pipe R. 10 Hen. III. His successor Adam de Yealand was only paid £40 ; ibid. 12 Hen. III. 18 Lancs. Final Conc. i, 112. The sheriff was consequently excused {80 a year and his salary was reduced by one half; Pipe R. 14 Hen. IIL. 2 193 25 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE the whole district nearly a century before." This aggrandizement of the already overpowerful earl, the impolicy of which would have been more glaring had he not been childless, was probably the sequel toa violent quarrel between the king and Hubert de Burgh. Coming down to Portsmouth to start on his Poitevin campaign Henry found the preparations incomplete and laid all the blame upon Hubert.’” We may perhaps conclude that in his anxiety to avert the collapse of the expedition Henry paid the heavy price the earl demanded for his further support. The demesne lands transferred to him comprised ter a/ia the manors of Salford and West Derby and the borough of Liverpool.’” Soon afterwards he purchased for 200 marks the Lancashire fief of Roger de Marsey (or Mattersey), of Mattersey in Nottinghamshire, which included Bolton, Chorley, Radcliffe, Urmston, Westleigh, and other manors.'® In the division of Ranulf’s vast estates among his sisters after his death in October, 1232, his fief between Ribble and Mersey fell to William de Ferrers, earl of Derby, in right of his wife Agnes, the third sister. The three wapentakes were seised into the king’s hands in or before 1242 owing to some misdemeanours of Ferrers’ bailiffs, but he redeemed them in that year by a fine of £100." His son William, who succeeded him in 1247, obtained in 1251 confirmation of the privilege enjoyed by Ranulf de Blundeville of appointing his own officers for the conservation of the peace in the three wapentakes, to be paid by the inhabitants. He died in 1254, and the custody of his lands during the minority of Robert, his son and heir, was committed to the king’s eldest son Edward, who had just been invested with the earldom of Chester, annexed to the crown in 1246 after the death of Ranulf de Blundeville’s nephew, John le Scot.” In the barons’ wars Robert de Ferrers was so violently anti-royalist that Simon de Montfort had to sacrifice him to Henry’s hostility, and on 23 April, 1265, his lands between Ribble and Mersey were taken into the king’s hands."® A year later he was captured by the royal forces at Chesterfield, and his estates were granted to the king’s younger son Edmund, who had just attained his majority. After the pacification Ferrers pledged himself to pay Edward the enormous sum of {50,000 in redemption of his estates, but '® See above, p. 186. It is possible, however, that Ranulf Gernons did not recognize the County Court at Lancaster, then in the hands of the king of Scots, while Blundeville’s grant left its authority unimpaired. He collected the castle guard money from the fifteen knights’ fees in his fief; Pipe R. 14 Hen. III. It will be noted that the Domesday wapentakes of Makerfield and Warrington had by this time been merged in that of West Derby. The wapentake of Makerfield is mentioned as late as 1169 ; Lancs. Pipe R. 12. '! Matt. Paris, Chron. Maj. (Rolls Ser.), iii, 191. ' He granted a borough charter to Salford in or shortly after 1230 ; Tait, Mediaeval Manchester, 46, 109. He or one of the Ferrers earls built the castle at Liverpool, which replaced that at West Derby. "S Ormerod, Hist. of Ches. i, 36-7. ‘This purchase is here and elsewhere (e.g. Dict. Nat. Biog. v, 270) confused with the king’s grant of the three wapentakes. It is barely possible that it preceded that grant by a few months, for Sir William de Vernon, justiciar of Chester, who was a witness, was appointed early in 1229 but it seems more probable that it came a little later. , ™ G.E.C. Complete Peerage, ii, 225. His earldom of Lincoln passed to his constable John de Lacy, as son-in-law of his fourth sister, and still further increased the importance of the lords of Blackburnshire Widnes and Penwortham ; ibid. v. go. ; '® Baines, Hist. of Lancs. (ed. Croston), i, 47. ‘ Ibid. 48. 7 G.E.C. Complete Peerage, ii, 225. The accounts of Edward’s bailiffs between Ribble and Mersey from Mich. 1256 to Easter 1257, are printed in Lancs. Inguests, i, 205-10. 18> Close, 49 Hen. III. m. 6 @ ; Dict. Nav. Biog. xviii, 387. For another view of Montfort’s action cf, Engi. Hist. Rev. x, 21. 194 POLITICAL HISTORY failing to raise it never recovered the bulk of them. One of his Lancashire tenants, Thomas Grelley, baron of Manchester, had played a prominent part on the baronial side’‘in 1258. He was included not only among the twenty- four commissioners appointed under the provisions of Oxford to arrange for the raising of an aid, but among the twelve who ‘to spare expense to the community of the realm’ (which in practice meant the barons) were to represent them in the little council of twenty-seven which was to constitute the Parliament of the realm.’” Grelley was also appointed justice of the royal forests south of the Trent," but as he died in 1262, leaving an heir under age, his estates escaped forfeiture. The disturbed state of the country after that year is indicated by the absence of any accounts for Lancashire on the Pipe Rolls. The Ferrers’ fief between Ribble and Mersey was included in the grant of his estates on 12 July, 1266, to Edmund,'” to whom already in the previous year had been given Montfort’s earldom and honour of Leicester.’ About twelve months later the whole honour of Lancaster, with the county and castle, was conferred upon him.’* In the charter (30 June, 1267) he is not styled earl of Lancaster, but as he was summoned to Parlia- ment under that title from 1276 it is assumed that he obtained this dignity at the time of the grant by the girding of the sword.’* In the interval between the grants of the Ferrers and Lancaster honours the castles of Builth and Kenilworth had been conveyed to him and simulta- neously with Lancaster he received the honours of Newcastle-under-Lyme and Pickering, the manors of Scalby, Huntingdon, and Godmanchester, and in Wales, Grosmont, Skenfrith, Whitecastle and Monmouth ; but Lancaster was selected as the caput of his vast appanage, and he was thence- forth known as Edmund of Lancaster, the founder of the great house of that name.’” To find a precedent for the position of Edmund in regard to the county, we have to go back to the days when John count of Mortain was lord of Lancaster, though John enjoyed regalities which were withheld from his grandson. All the tenants of the crown there were required to do homage to the earl.” The entire ordinary revenue of the shire was enjoyed by Edmund, who appointed his own sheriff,’” and only accounted to the crown for certain debts due to the king, such, for instance, as amercements imposed ‘69 Besides Chartley he was allowed to retain (as a tenant of Edmund) a considerable part of his Lanca- shire estate, including Bolton, Chorley, and the wapentake of Leyland. ‘These passed after his death to his second son, William Ferrers of Groby, and his heirs ; Lancs. Ing. i, 268. 0 Tait, Mediaeval Manchester, 140. '1 Cal. Pat. (Rec. Com.), ii, 31. 1? Dugdale, Baronage, i, 778. It is doubtful whether this grant conveyed or was accompanied by the earldom of Derby (or Ferrers). His son Thomas styled himself Earl Ferrers on one of his seals (Complete Peerage, v, 6), but his grandson Henry was specially created earl of Derby ; ibid. According to Trokelowe (Annales [Rolls Ser.], 70), Edmund used neither this title nor that of earl of Leicester. "3 Complete Peerage, v, 46. ™ Cal. Chart. (Rec. Com.), 94. No services were specified, but the omission was remedied in 1292, when it was decided that the honour should be held by the service of one knight’s fee ; Cal. Pat. 1281-92, 77: 5 G.E.C. Complete Peerage, v, 5. 6 Engl. Hist. Rev. x, 9 seq., 209 seq. ; a careful study of Edmund’s career by W. E. Rhodes. 77 Some sought to escape this on the ground that they had already done homage to the king; Ca/. Pat. 1281-92, p. 417. 78 Roger de Lancaster, to whom Henry in 1266 had committed the custody of the county for 100 marks yearly, was indemnified ; Eng/. Hist. Rev. x, 33. The sheriffs into whose counties the honour of Lancaster extended were forbidden (1268) to interfere in anything that concerned it ; ibid. 195 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE by the royal justices of assize."” Even these he was sometimes allowed to take ; the whole profits of the last ster of Henry III’s reign were granted to him by royal writ." Edward I bestowed upon him the privilege of having pleas of the forest held in his lands, the justices being appointed by the crown on his request, but the fines and amercements going to the earl." He also authorized his brother to exercise the royal right of purveyance within his territories, and on recovering by an inquiry guo warranto the right to wreck of the sea at Lytham and Cartmel from the priors of Durham and Cartmel, and that of holding the sheriffs tourn in Furness from the abbot of that house, he made them over to Edmund.'” Edmund had so many interests and employments elsewhere that he rarely set foot in the county from which he took his title. His first recorded visit occurred during one of the Welsh campaigns, with which Lancashire, owing to its proximity to the scene of the war, was brought into specially close connexion.’ In July, 1276, the king ordered the sheriff to make pro- clamation that no markets should be held in the county while he was in those parts going to Wales ; wares and victuals were to be brought to the king and his army." Four months later the earl of Warwick was appointed captain in Cheshire and Lancashire ‘against Llewellyn son of Gruffydd and his accomplices.’ '*° Edward’s Scottish wars likewise imposed exceptional burdens upon Lancashire in common with the other northern counties. In November, 1297, it was required to furnish 3,000 footmen to serve against the invading Scots at the king’s wages under Robert de Clifford, captain of the March against Scotland.’ A levy of 1,000 foot was made in the county in the following June." Six months later the sphere of Clifford’s captaincy was extended to include ster a/a Lancashire.“ All persons having lands and liberties in these districts were to assemble at Carlisle in eight days. Clifford was succeeded in this post on 25 September, 1300, by John de St. John. In 1299 and again in this year another 2,000 men had been called up from the county."” On 22 June, 1301, Richard de Hoghton the sheriff, and Robert de Holland were ordered to take 600 foot to Carlisle by Wednesday after the octave of St. John the Baptist. In addition to this personal service, for which pay was promised, the county bore its full share of the heavy taxation entailed by Edward’s wars, ° Pipe R. 12 Edw. I, m. 26. This is the first roll since the grant in which Lancaster appears, and it is concerned solely with such debts and with the belated accounts of sheriffs prior to 1267. The remission in 1277 (Cal. Pat. 1272-81, p. 208) of all debts due on the castle, town, and county of Lancaster ‘late of Rotert de Belehem’ is puzzling. Robert de Ferrers must be meant, but the corruption of his name is not easy to explain. ™ Pipe R. 12 Edw. I. The amount was £863. 'S! Engl. Hist. Rev. x, 37 3 Cal. Pat. 1281-92, pp. 263-4. '? Engl, Hist, Rev. x, 38. ‘S He was at Liverpool on 21 July, 1283 (Coucher Book of Whalley, 507) and at Lancaster on 29 Sept. (Engl. Hist. Rev. x, 225). ' Cal. Close, 1272-9, p. 426. ™ Cal. Pat. 1272-81, p. 171 (16 Nov.). 188 Thid. 1297-1301, pp. 313, 315. The only northern counties providing more were Cumberland (5,000), Cheshire, Yorkshire (4,000 each). In the Midlands the levy was lighter. Shropshire and Stafford- shire had to furnish 3,000 between them. 1 Thid. 351; ™ Ibid. 387. ‘Ibid. 537. Ralph son of William occupied it in 1316; ibid. 1313-17, p. 389. From Coram Rege R. 254, m. 56, we learn that Hornby was in the March of Scotland, the usage of which as to ransom of prisoners obtained there. ® Cal. Pat. 1297-1301, pp. 512, 530; Bain, Cal. of Doc. Scot. ii, 177. '! Cal. Pat. 1297-1301, p. 598. 196 POLITICAL HISTORY and its right to Parliamentary representation was duly recognized. It had no doubt been represented in the various assemblies to which knights of the shire had been summoned during the thirteenth century, but the ‘ Model Parlia- ment’ of 1295 is the first in which the names of its members are recorded. To that famous assembly Lancashire sent no fewer than ten representatives, two for the county (Matthew de Redman and John de Ewyas), and two each from the four boroughs, Lancaster, Preston, Wigan, and Liverpool.'* But except in 1307 the two last were not again represented until the sixteenth century, while Preston and Lancaster did not regularly send members, and ceased to send them altogether after 1331 and 1337 respectively.” The representatives were elected in the County Court. It was one of the charges against William le Gentil that as sheriff he sent to the Parliament of October, 1320, Gilbert de Haydock and Thomas de Thornton, without election and ‘ out of his own head.’ Four of the chief tenants in the shire were summoned to Parliament as peers. Two of these, however, were great magnates outside the county, Henry de Lacy earl of Lincoln and Salisbury (who removed Stanlaw Abbey to Whalley) in Yorkshire, Cheshire and elsewhere, and Theobald Butler (Walter) of Weeton (whose nephew became earl of Ormond in 1328) in Ireland.’* William le Boteler baron of Warrington,”* and Thomas Grelley baron of Manchester,'” received writs of summons from 1295 and 1308 respectively, but Boteler’s descendants were not summoned, and Grelley was the last of his line. Edmund of Lancaster died more than ten years (5 June, 1296) before his brother the king. His great heritage passed (save the Welsh estates) to his elder son Thomas, who, unlike his father, chose to call himself earl of Leicester and Ferrers (Derby) as well as of Lancaster. Thomas’ marriage to Alice, heiress of Henry de Lacy, brought him on her father’s death in 1311 two more earldoms and vast estates in various counties.’ His demesne lands in Lancashire received a large accession by the acquisition of the Lacy fiefs of Clitheroe (Blackburnshire), Widnes, and Penwortham.’ Earl Edmund had always remained a trusted and faithful servant of his abler brother. Thomas of Lancaster was of a different temper and lived under a less fortunate star. He aspired to an influence in the kingdom pro- portionate to his birth and territorial position, but his cousin Edward II pre- ferred to give his confidence to a Gaveston and a Despenser, and Thomas allowed his resentment to hurry him into violence which he had not the ability to carry to a successful issue. He did indeed remove Gaveston from his path in 1312,” but with circumstances of treachery which alienated some 1? Returns of Members of Parl. (1878), p. §. Wigan received a borough charter from John Mansell, rector and lord of the manor in 1246, confirmed by Henry IIT in the same year ; Hist. of Ch. of Wigan (Chet. Soc.), 9. 8 Returns of Members of Pari. ‘The sheriffs in their returns state poverty as the reason why there were no boroughs which could send representatives. '* Tbid. 60; Assize R. 425, m. 14. It was further alleged that Haydock and Thornton were paid double what was lawful for their expenses ; ibid. 18 G.E.C. Complete Peerage, ii, 95. 86 Thid. i, 381. 17 Ibid. iv, 93. Here the date of his death is confused with that of his brother-in-law ; cf. Tait, Mediaeval Manchester, 145. He granted a charter to his burgesses of Manchester in 1301 ; ibid. 62. 88 Among them Bolingbroke, afterwards the birthplace of Henry IV. 199 Three Lancs. Doc. (Chet. Soc. [Old Ser.], Ixxiv), i. 700 Some fifty Lancashire men received pardons in Oct. 1313, for various acts committed in connexion with the capture and death of Gaveston ; Ca/. Pat. 1313-17, p. 21. 197 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE of his own party, and were never forgiven by the king, though his isolation and the Scottish wars compelled him for a time to submit to Lancaster’s domination.*" Shortly after Thomas’ appointment in August, 1315, as commander-in- chief against the Scots, whom Bannockburn made aggressive, he was con- fronted by a revolt in his own county of Lancaster. Bitter party feuds and lawless violence were the inevitable results of their earl’s conflict with the king, and one of our authorities represents the rising of Sir Adam Banaster as directed against Lancaster’s ‘ principal Coun- sellor,’ Robert de Holland. The head of a comparatively obscure family which had been seated at Upholland near Wigan for over a century,” the earl’s favour enabled Holland to make a great match,™ and in 1314 he was summoned to Parliament as a peer. The Hollands were a numerous clan in south-west Lancashire; their importance greatly increased with the rise of their chief, and probably they presumed upon it. Banaster was a military tenant of the earl at Shevington, Charnock Richard and Welch Whittle in the wapentake of Leyland, and had been attached to his household. On 8 October, 1315, he met his brother-in- law, Sir Henry de Lea of Charnock, Lea and Ravensmeols, Sir William Brad- shaw of Blackrod and others at Wyndgates in Westhoughton, close to Blackrod, where they entered into a sworn confederacy to live and die together.% A party detached to bring in Adam de Radcliffe from Radcliffe slew Sir Henry de Bury. The confederates reassembled in force at Charnock on 22 October, and moved slowly southwards, gathering adherents willing and unwilling, by Wigan, to Knowsley, which they reached on the 24th. Next day they made an unsuccessful attack upon Liverpool Castle, and on the 26th betook themselves to Warrington, where they stayed several days. Bradshaw plundered the houses of Holland’s brother Sir William at Haydock, and Sir John de Langton at Newton, while Sir Henry de Lea and Sir Thomas Banaster crossed the Mersey and stormed Halton Castle. A force which had been sent northwards took Clitheroe Castle. In both cases arms collected there for the Scottish war were carried off. The confederates exhibited letters patent with the king’s seal, and said they had the king’s commission to do what they had done. On the 31st they proceeded to Manchester, where next day they showed to the people a standard bearing the king’s arms taken from the church, claiming that Edward had sent it to them. The news that the sheriff Sir Edward de Nevill was gathering forces against them beyond the Ribble drew them north. Wigan was reached on 2 November, and *: The best account of Lancaster’s career is in Dict. Nat. Biog. lvi, 148 et seq. *? Chron. cf Edw. 1 and Edw. 1] (Ro‘ls Ser), i, 279. Another chronicler attributes it to fear of punish- ment for a murder he had committed ; ibid. ii, 214. See also Leland, Collectanea, i, 249, 274-5. Banaster was connected by marriage with Holland. He married Joan third daughter of his sister Margaret de Holland by her second husband John de Blackburn of Wiswall; Lancs. Final Conc. ii, 81.0; Whalley Coucher, 1085 ; Sir Henry de Lea married the second daughter. j ** The statement in Packington’s Chronicle (Leland, op. cit. ii, 464) that Lancaster took him ‘oute of his Botery and preferrid him to the yerely lyving of 2 M (2000) Markes’ exaggerates the small beginnings of the great house of Holland. ** With Maud, daughter and coheir of Alan Lord Zouche of Ashby, who brought him considerable property in the Midlands, including Brackley in Northamptonshire. Lancaster’s own gifts included (after Banaster’s revolt) the manor of West Derby, Torrisholme and Nether Kellet and the custody of the forest of Lancashire ; Caf Pat. 1317-21, p. 431. ™$ Lancs. Ing. i, 150, 269 ; Cal. Pat. 1313-17, p. 421. ** Coram Rege R. 254, Rex m. 52. 198 POLITICAL HISTORY Preston on the 4th. With banners flying they routed a small force sent by the earl under Sir Adam de Huddleston, Sir Walter le Vavasour and Sir Richard le Waleys, Vavasour being mortally wounded; but the sheriff coming up later in the day an engagement was fought between Preston and Deep- dale which ended in their complete defeat after less than an hour’s fighting.” Sir Thomas Banaster was taken, and Adam Banaster and Henry de Lea, after hiding for a week in woods and moors, were betrayed to Sir William de Holland at Charnock, by Henry de Eufurlong, perhaps one of Banaster’s tenants, in whose house he had taken refuge, led out to Leyland moor and beheaded (11 November) by Robert son of Jordan le Prestsone of Manchester.” Bradshaw managed to escape from the county. Their adherents were treated with great severity. Some were beheaded.*” Goods to the value of £5,000 are said to have been taken from them in the wapentake of Leyland alone.’ The fines exacted ranged as high as 200 marks.” The distrust with which Edward and Earl Thomas regarded each other invited attack by the Scots, and was largely responsible for the terrible ravaging to which the northern counties were subjected in the years which followed Bannockburn. It was two years before these raids reached Lanca- shire. At Midsummer, 1316, when England was suffering from a pestilence and famine unparalleled within living memory,’” a Scottish force under a leader whose name has not been preserved penetrated as far south as Rich- mond, and then struck across country into Furness, burning and plundering.” This raid only touched the northern fringes of the county, but six years later it did not escape so lightly."* Two Scottish columns invaded the West March. Bruce himself led a force through Copeland and over Duddon Sands into Furness. The abbot redeemed his fief from a second harrying, and entertained Bruce at the abbey, but his followers were hard to restrain, and some places were burnt. Crossing Leven Sands into Cartmel, where nothing but the priory was spared, and the cattle and movable property were carried off, the raiders traversed the sands of the Kent to Lancaster, where they burnt town and castle, leaving only the religious houses. Here they were joined by the second column under the earl of Moray and Lord James Douglas, which had probably been ravaging Lunesdale,* and pushing southward burnt Preston. Fugitives laden with goods fled before them over the Ribble, some of whom found the inhabitants there hardly more merciful than their pursuers. A small body of Scots apparently crossed the river and advanced five miles beyond it, but the retreat was ordered, and on 24 July the army re-entered Scotland.” In October their victims were 7 Coram Rege R. 254, Rex m. 51,52. Their forces were officially estimated at 800 men, horse and foot (Cal. Pat. 1313-17, p. 421), but as the sheriff is said to have had only some 300 (Coram Rege R. 254, Rex m. 51), perhaps there is some exaggeration here. 8 Tbid. m. 52 ; Leland, op. cit. i, 249. * Coram Rege R. 254 Rex m. 51. 0 Ibid. "I Ibid. Rex m. 61. 77 In the north of England wheat fetched 40s. a quarter ; Chron. de Lanercost (Maitland Club), 233. 73 Thid. ™4 Trokelowe, 4#. (Rolls Ser.), 102, speaks of a Scottish raid almost as far as Lancaster in 1318, but it is nowhere else mentioned, and as chronology is not his strong point he may have postdated that of 1316. 15 Hornby Castle was plundered and Quernmore Forest destroyed ; Assize R. 425, m. 13. 316 Chron. de Lanercost, 246 ; on § Aug. the burgesses of Lancaster complained to the king that his officers would not allow them to take wood in Quernmore Forest to repair their burgages. Fugitives from Cumber- land and North Lancashire were robbed at Lostock Bridge near Croston (8 July) and at Anderton by Horwich ; Coram Rege R. 254, m. 42 ; Rex 52d. 199 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE called away from their desolated homes to repel a fresh Scottish invasion of Yorkshire." A precise estimate of the havoc wrought by the Scots in a land already scourged by hunger, plague, and military levies 1s fortunately available. Owing to these accumulated misfortunes the clergy of the harried districts were utterly unable to pay tenths on the valuation of their incomes made in 1292 by order of Pope Nicholas IV, and a huge reduction of assessment was effected."* In this ‘New Taxation’ the twenty-four parishes of North Lancashire were relieved of two-thirds of the total valuation of 1292."° The reduction partly took the form of an exemption of glebe, small tithes, and offerings, partly of allowances for ‘ lands wasted by the Scots’ which could no longer pay tithe. From a document in which these deductions are enumerated in detail for each benefice we learn that the amount allowed under the latter head was £375 or three-fifths of the whole reduction.** Not a single parish north of the Ribble had escaped, though those of Furness, Cartmel, and eastern Amounderness, in the direct track of Bruce’s army, seem to have suffered more severely than the rest. In the case of Ribchester parish it is exceptionally noted that there were ten ploughs less, which meant an annual loss to the vicar of £5 6s. 8d. Monastic property required equal indulgence. The greatest sufferer was Furness Abbey ; its temporalities, valued in 1292 at #176 a year, were assessed at only 20 marks in 1317.™ From this blow North Lancashire took long to recover. Nearly twenty years after Bruce’s inroad only six of its benefices showed a slight improve- ment in value.*” The southern half of the county escaped Scottish fire and sword, but war, misgovernment, and civil strife fostered grave disorders and materially checked its prosperity. Lancaster’s fall in 1322 was the signal for a renewal of the disturbances which had accompanied Banaster’s rising. While the earl was flying northwards in March through Yorkshire from Burton-on-Trent and Tutbury before the now thoroughly roused king some of his followers retreated into Lancashire, where they were pursued for five days (11-15 March) by the Cheshire levies under Sir Oliver de Ingham.** Complaints were after- wards made that they did not distinguish too nicely between friend and foe.” " Cal. Pat. 1321-4, p. 208. All men between 16 and 60 were to be arrayed. ‘The county had sent 3,000 men to Carlisle in the previous spring ; ibid. 97. ™° It has hitherto been assumed that this ‘ Nova Taxatio’ was assessed in 1318 for the whole region affected. But if this were so we should have to conclude that North Lancashire was ravaged as far as the Ribble in 1316 as well as in 1322. For this there is no evidence, and as a matter of fact the re-assessment can be proved to have been going on from 1317 (e.g. at Furness (Coucher, 637) which was raided in 1316) for some time ; Caf. Pat. 1313-17, p. 649 ; 1317-21, p. 1603; Cal. Close, 1333-7, p. 726; Letters from Northern Registers (Rolls Ser.), 279, 316, 352. The error seems traceable to the introduction to Pope Nich. Tax. (Rec. Com.) where a document referring to the Diocese of Carlisle (p. 331), is treated as general. The heading of p. 327 is itself decisive. 7? See above, p. 24. Some vicarages were exempted altogether. ™® Nenarum Inguisitio (Rec. Com.), 35 sqq- *! Pope Nich. Tax. (Rec. Com.), 307. ™ Nonarum Inguisitio (made in 1341). *° Sir Richard de Holland took a force to Runcorn intending to cross into Cheshire and engage Ingham there, but he found all the boats removed to the Cheshire side ; Coram Rege R. 254, m. 59. Ingham seems to have entered the county at Warrington. Sir Hamon de Masci of Dunham and Sir William de Baguley were with his force; ibid. m. 24d. ** Alice widow of Adam de Prestwich demanded redress in the next Parliament against these Cheshire ‘ meffesours,’ who had abstracted £200 worth of her chattels from Prestwich and Alkrington. She could get no remedy at common law for ‘Cheshiremen care nothing for outlawry or process outside Cheshire’; Rot. Parl. i, 407, 438. In Salford Hundred, especially round Manchester, they are said to have taken goods to the value of 2,000 marks; Coram Rege R. 254, m. 63. 200 POLITICAL HISTORY After the defeat and capture of Lancaster at Boroughbridge, where some Lancashire men fought on his side (16 March),”* and his execution at Ponte- fract the county with all his other possessions was seised into the king’s hand as a forfeited estate, and was not restored to his heir until after Edward’s death. The same fate befell the estates of a number of his Lancashire partisans, among them Robert de Holland, though he apparently deserted the earl at the last moment and submitted to the king.”* He was imprisoned at Dover and perhaps afterwards at Berkhampstead.*” Robert de Clitheroe, an old servant of the crown, and since 1303 rector of Wigan and ex-officio lord of that town, was arraigned in 1323 for sending his son and another man-at-arms, with four footmen, to Lancaster’s army and for preaching in his church the justice of the earl’s cause. He denied the greater part of the accusation, but only got off on payment of a fine of £200." In the next reign, when he could afford to be franker, he explained that by the tenure of his land he furnished the earl of Lancaster with a man-at-arms whenever he arrayed his people ‘pur oster le venyme qui feust pres du Roy’ and caused prayers to be said in his church for the earl and the other earls that God would give them grace as pillars of the land to maintain the crown and peace of the land ;** an illustration of the too favourable light in which Thomas of Lateaster’s motives and aims were regarded by many Englishmen who were weary of Edward’s misgovernment. With the earl dead and Lord Holland in prison those whom they had crushed seven years before could now again raise their heads. Banaster’s old associate, Sir William Bradshaw, formed a confederacy with Thomas Banaster and others against the Hollands, who united their forces under Sir Richard de Holland. They attacked one another wherever they met, besieged one another’s houses, overawed courts of law, and kept a great part of the county practically in a state of war for more than a year.™ The infection of disorder became general. The forests and parks which had reverted to the crown by the forfeiture of Lancaster and Holland were freely hunted in and destroyed with the connivance of the keepers, goods taken from the king’s enemies were concealed, and a band of raiders from Craven and Airedale, headed by Nicholas de Mauleverer, carried off several hundred pounds worth of crown property from Ightenhill, Pendle, and Trawden. The sheriff and other officials, if they are not maligned, were guilty of many oppressions and extortions. Collectors of taxes, it is alleged, raised something for themselves from each township. Coroners left bodies unburied if the heavy fees they demanded were not paid.™ Early in 1323 a startling development in the north called the king’s attention to the anarchy in Lancashire. This was the discovery that Andrew 5 Coram Rege R. 254, m 26 Chron. of Edw. I and Edo, a (Rolls Ser.), ii, 267 ; Ca/. Pat. 1327-30, p. 455; Leland, Collectanea, ii, 453. His steward in Lancashire sent him 500 men to Ashbourne ; ; Coram Rege R. 254, m. 59¢. His presence with this force at Ravensdale, a few miles north of Tutbury, is attested ; ibid. m. 61-2. For the king’s urgent summons to him on 4 March see Ca/. Close, 1318-23, p. §25. Edward’s bad faith to him and others who submitted seems clearly established ; Leland, op. cit. i, 274. The Chron. de Lanercost (247) alone makes him fall into the victor’s hands at Boroughbridge. 227 Leland, op. cit. 1, 274 3 Chrow. Edw. 1 and Edw. II, i, 343. 228 Hist, of the Ch. and Manor of Wigan (Chet. Soc.), 42. 9 Rot. Parl. ii, 406. *80 Full details are given in Coram Rege R, 254, m. §24., 60 et passim ; Cal. Pat. 1321-4, p. 374 3 Rot. Parl. ii, 380. The names of the confederates are given in Assize R. 425, m. 24 sqq. 731 [bid. passim. 2 201 26 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE de Harcla, the warden of the West Marches (whose victory at Boroughbridge had been rewarded with the earldom of Carlisle), despairing of the defence of the kingdom in Edward’s hands, had made a secret treaty with Bruce.™ Harcla bought support for his new policy in Lancashire, which was within his sphere of command. His brother-in-law, Sir Robert de Leybourne, sheriff of the county in 1322, was afterwards arraigned on a charge of induc- ing Sir William de Clifton and others to swear to maintain the warden’s undertaking, which ‘ would be to the King’s honour,’ and John de Harring- ton is said to have acted as his agent in Furness, securing for him the support of Sir Edmund de Nevill, Sir Baldwin de Gynes, and many others.” On 21 February, 1323, Edward ordered the levies of several adjoining shires to be ready to enter Lancashire in a few days, while Oliver de Ingham was to enter the county with the Cheshire men at once.™ Four days later Harcla was arrested at Carlisle and hanged as a traitor. John Darcy, sheriff of Lancashire, had already been commanded to arrest all confederates of the Scots in that county. To avert the possibility of another such crisis Edward concluded a thirteen years’ truce with Scotland and spent the whole summer and autumn in Yorkshire and Lancashire, ‘ punishing disturbers of the peace, especially leaders of the county who oppressed the common people and ordering the law of the land to be observed.’#* He entered Lancashire on 2 October from Skipton, whence he despatched orders for the arrest of Bradshaw and Holland,**’ and ordered a judicial inquiry into the disorders of the county from the beginning of the reign to be held at Wigan in his presence.** Ten days were passed in the hundred of Blackburn until the court at Wigan began its labours, when he removed to Upholland (Robert de Holland’s forfeited manor) close by. From 23 October he moved about between Liverpool, Ince, and Holland with a brief visit (1—3 November) to Halton across the Mersey.” Leaving the county on 6 November he reached Nottingham two days later. The reversal of Thomas of Lancaster’s attainder by Parliament on 7 March, 1327, restored his titles, with the county and most of his other estates, to his younger brother Henry, who had taken an active part in the deposition of Edward.*° His Lancashire demesne lands were, however, seriously diminished by the grant, which the then all-powerful Queen Isabella had a month earlier secured for her life, of the honour of Clitheroe and lord- ships of Penwortham, Rochdale, and Tottington.*' Lancaster was not in a ** Bain, Cal. of Doc. Scot. iii, 148 ; Dict. Nat. Biog. xxiv, 318. *8 Coram Rege R. 254, m. 45 d. Cal. Pat. 1321-4, p. 247. The explanation offered was that the Scots were about to invade it. * Thid. p. 245. *6 Hen. de Blaneforde, Céron. (Rolls Ser.), 139. By his orders William de Herle and Geoffrey de Scrope held an inquiry at Preston in August into recent disorders in Lancashire ; Assize R. 425. *! Cal. Pat. 1321-4, p. 343. ** The proceedings of the court as recorded in Coram Rege R. 254 (supplemented by Assize R. 425) furnish most detailed information on the state of the county in this period. ‘The justices dealt inter alia with murders and homicides, confederacies to disturb the peace, exactions from towns to leave them unplundered favours shown by those who arrayed men for the king’s wars in passing over the strong and choosing the weak, conspiracies to make false indictments and procure false acquittals, and maintenance by officers of great lords of causes not concerning their lords ; ibid. m. 40d. ™ Collect. Arch. (Brit. Arch. Assoc.), i, 140. ” G.E.C. Complete Peerage, v, 6 ; Dict. Nat. Biog. xxvi, 100. *" Cal. Pat. 1327—30, p. 69. She also had the castle and borough of Pontefract and the district of Bow- land which had belonged to Thomas. Her Lancashire estates, with Bowland, were reckoned to be worth £400 a year. She surrendered them to Henry’s son on 1 December, 1348, after the death of Alice countess of Lincoln ; Ducliy of Lanc. Misc. Bks. xi, fol. 11. ; Zou POLITICAL HISTORY position to object, but when in December Robert de Holland obtained an order for the restoration of his estates in accordance with a Parliamentary decision in favour of those who had been ‘of the quarrel’ of Earl Thomas, Henry disputed the right of the man who had deserted his brother to benefit by this decision.%* Lancaster may not have been personally responsible for the murder of Holland in October, 1328, but it was certainly the work of his partizans, who sent the unhappy man’s head to the earl, then in revolt against Isabella and Mortimer, and it was one of the things which created a temporary coolness between Lancaster and the earl Marshal. Holland’s estates passed to his eldest son, then under age. Holland’s murder is but one instance of the general lawlessness which the internecine strife of the late reign left in its train. As early as 1328 steps were taken to restore order. The statute of Winchester of 1285 was reinforced by the statute of Northampton ; and keepers of the peace were appointed in every county. But it was not until Edward III had got rid of Mortimer (1330) that the work of grappling with anarchy could be fairly begun. The state of Lancashire was no better, probably worse, than that of the kingdom at large. In 1333 orders were issued for the pursuit and arrest of John de Radcliffe and many other Lancashire men who, to escape trial for the death of Sir William Bradshaw, had wandered into divers parts of the realm, committing breaches of the peace and terrorizing the people. The disturbed state of the county is clearly reflected in the large num- ber of local cases which came before the King’s Bench which sat at Wigan in June, 1334, while the king was at Newcastle-on-Tyne.** Robert Foucher, the sheriff, was presented for extortion and for sending his own clerks and relatives to Parliament and putting a share of the wages paid to them by the county in his own pocket. But he was acquitted on most of the charges, including the last. For several years from 1338 commissioners of oyer and terminer con- stantly sat in the county to inquire touching felonies and trespasses against the peace and oppression by officials.*7 They found their task no easy one. In 1339 they received orders to suspend their labours for a time, as many in the county were much aggrieved by the commission and had withdrawn to Scotland to join the king’s enemies.** ‘This recalcitrance, unfortunately, too often took the more violent form of armed confederacies to prevent the king’s officers from executing his commands, terrorize litigants and witnesses, and break up the sessions of the justices. 4? Rot. Parl, ii, 18. ?3 Leland, Collect. i, 275, where the murder is said to have been committed in a wood near Henley, not far from Windsor, on 1§ Oct., which suggests that Holland was on his way to the Parliament, that met at Salisbury the following day, and which Lancaster had refused to attend. The story of the Monk of Malmes- bury (Chron. Edw. I and Edw. 11,1, 342) that he was escaping to London from Berkhampstead Castle, and was caught and beheaded by Sir G. Wyther and his men near Harrow, sounds less probable. ™4 On whose death (1373) they were carried by marriage to the Lovels of Titchmarsh and Minster Lovel ; Complete Peerage, iv, 236. The greater fortunes of the family were founded by his younger brother Thomas, who married (c. 1348) the daughter and heiress of Edmund earl of Kent, fifth son of Edw. I; ibid. 351. i Cal Pat. 1330-4, pp. 178, 573. Bradshaw was slain at Newton in Makerfield on 16 Aug. in this year ; Coram Rege R, 297, Rex m. 24. *6 Coram Rege R, 297. 47 Cal, Pat. 1330-47, passim. Under the latter head the master of the Forestry of Pendle and the steward of Penwortham were convicted of wrongfully exacting puture from the abbot of Whalley and the prior of Pen- wortham ; ibid. 1330-4, pp. 204, 213. *8 Cal. Close, 1339-41, Pp. 94. ? 203 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE These lawless doings not infrequently ended in bloodshed. Perhaps the worst case happened at the beginning of Lent, 1345, when Adam de Croft and a large following, with banners flying, came to Liverpool while the jus- tices were sitting there, and in their presence on Monday, 14 February, slew Adam de Lever, Geoffrey son of Sir Henry de Trafford, knt., and twenty-five others, carried off their armour, and prevented the justices from redressing the grievances of complainants.** Fresh commissions were appointed to inquire into the parlous state of the county, but matters had scarcely improved two years later, when John, son of Robert de Dalton, knt., and many knights and others chiefly from Lancashire, carried off Margery, widow of Nicholas de la Beche, by night from the manor of Beaumes, near Reading, within the verge of the court of the duke of Clarence, keeper of the Realm in the king’s absence abroad, and slew her uncle.*® In the same year Lancaster Fair was invaded by armed men, who wounded some, took the goods of others by force, and imprisoned others until they extorted ransoms from them.*! About the same time £2,000 in money and goods to the value of £3,000 were stolen from Queen Isabella’s treasury at Whalley, charters were carried off, and her houses in Bowland Chase burnt.** Of course, such acts of violence were not in- frequent at any time during the middle ages; but they were abnormally numerous in these years. ‘The too common practice of granting crown par- dons to felons on condition that they served in the royal armies did not tend to improve matters. The difficulties in the way of enforcing order were increased by the action of the sheriff, who, presuming on the earl’s immunities, put obstacles in the way of appeals to the king’s courts, and the delivery of his writs.*® With the county thus disturbed, and in parts in an impoverished con- dition, trouble was experienced in raising Edward’s war taxes. In 1342 little or nothing had been collected of the wool subsidy imposed the year before. The collectors arrested the bailiffs of the hundreds for refusing to execute their orders, and were themselves summoned to Westminster to account for the deficiency.** It appears that a demand had been made for three times the number of sacks (256) at first apportioned to the county.” On representations that it had not wool enough to meet the said apportion- ment, and was greatly depressed by the frequent invasions of the Scots” and other misfortunes, the larger demand was withdrawn and permission was given to pay money in lieu of the rest at the rate of g marks a sack,” though the crown had already sold them to York merchants at 12 marks.” Little or no recovery can have been possible before the great calamity of the Black Death fell upon the unhappy county. Making every allowance *° Cal. Pat. 1343-5, p. 499 3 Close, 1346-9, pp. 48, 79 ; Coram Rege R, 344, m. 8 ; 345,M. 25 347, m. 34.3; 409, Mm. I5. * Gal. Pat. 1345-7, PP» 379, 384, 436, $43. See above, pp. 112, 150. *! Ibid. 1345-7, p. 382. *? Thid. 49, cf. 393. a Sis Close, parka BE A eS oe a ee 470, 492. is may be compared with the proportions o estmorland (156), C shi (1157), and Norfolk (e206), See Rot. Park a, tet. AS ne caro ren * Lancashire inter alia furnished for service against the Scots 400 archers and 100 hobelers in Oct. 1332 (Foedera iv, §34), 500 archers and 200 hobelers in Feb. 1333 (Cal. Chase, 1333-7, pp. 87, 95) and 25 men-at- arms and 120 archers in Jan. 1340 (Ror. Parl. ii, 110), the last ‘at the expense of the county to Carlisle, then at the King’s wages ;” 125 archers accompanied the earl of Derby to Gascony in 1345 (Q.R. Memo, R. 20 Edw, III, m. 1§ 2), receiving 3¢. a day (L.T.R. Memo. R. 111, m. 207 2.). *" Cal. Cisse, 1341-3, p. 399- *8 Ibid. 257. 204 POLITICAL HISTORY for panic-stricken exaggeration in the rough contemporary estimate of 13,180 deaths between 8 September, 1349, and 11 January, 1350, in the ten parishes of the deanery of Amounderness,”” there can be no doubt that the mortality was very heavy, and here as elsewhere affected social and economic as well as religious conditions.” A year after this visitation Lancashire was erected into a county palatine, and became to a large extent an imperium ia imperto. ‘The crown had already by a series of grants divested itself in favour of the earls of Lancaster of a number of jura rega/ia of a more or less profitable nature. Earl Edmund was empowered to exercise the minor jurisdiction described in the old Anglo-Saxon phrase as ‘ sac and soc, infangenthef and outfangenthef ’ and obtained immunity from a number of ancient taxes, tolls, and services due to the king." These franchises were common enough, but Edward III in the early years of his reign conferred upon his cousin Earl Henry rights which the crown was much more chary in granting away; the return of all royal writs, all pleas of withernam (de vetito namio), and all the fines and amerce- ments imposed upon his men and tenants in the king’s courts.” A subsequent charter (7 May, 1342) confirmed and extended these liberties. The right to execute the summonses of the exchequer and to make all attachments arising out of pleas of the crown completed the transference of what may be called judicial administrative work from the king’s officials to the earl’s. Also he was henceforth to take not only the fines and amerce- ments incurred by his men and tenants, but their chattels when they committed offences for which they ought to lose them, together with all forfeited issues, and forfeitures which would otherwise have gone to the crown. To these lucrative rights was added exemption from pavage, passage, and a number of other tolls throughout the kingdom.” The enjoyment of these jura regalia was not, however, confined to the county of Lancaster ; they were granted for the whole of the lands held by the earls. Their position in the county only differed from that they occupied in their other estates in so far as they were themselves hereditary sheriffs of Lancashire, while elsewhere they merely excluded the sheriffs in matters covered by their charters.*** Though the ordinary revenue of the county went, with insignificant exceptions, into the earl’s coffers, and most *° Engl. Hist. Rev. v,524.8qq. See above, p. 29. In 1351 William de Liverpool was charged with having caused a third part of the men at the vill of Everton, after their death, to be carried to his house at the time of the plague, in respect of whom he did not fully answer to the lord; Assize R. 445 m. 1. 3 Yet there seems to have been no scarcity of agricultural labour here after the pestilence. In the Statute of Labourers the men of Lancashire, Staffordshire, Derbyshire, Craven, and the Marches of Wales and Scotland, whose custom it was to go to other counties in August for the harvest, were specially exempted from the restrictions on the freedom of movement of labour; Rot. Parl. ii, 234. This outflow was due to the limited area under tillage in these districts. | Engl. Hist. Rev. x, 37. 72 W. J. Hardy, Cart. of Duchy of Lanc. 1. On the strength of these liberties Robert de Radcliffe, Earl Henry’s deputy as sheriff in 1341, attempted without success to exclude the king’s escheator from the county ; Cal. Close, 1341-3, p. 275. 68 -W. J. Hardy, Chart. of Duchy of Lanc, 2. ‘These franchises were granted to Earl Henry and the heirs of his body, but in 1349 his son, whose heirs were young unmarried daughters, surrendered the grant-in-tail, which was described as having been made ‘to the very great damage and excessive disinherison of the King,’ and accepted a new grant for life; ibid. 4. The earl was sheriff of Lancashire de féodo, and appointed a deputy who was strictly called sud- vicecomes or under-sheriff, but is often described, even on the Rolls of the Exchequer, as sheriff simply. Objection was taken in 1340 to a writ in which he was so styled, but was not sustained because as acting sheriff he took the sheriff’s oath in the Exchequer; Year Book, 14-15 Edw. III (Rolls Ser.), Ixv, 90, 98. 205 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE of its administrative work was conducted by officers of his appointment, he lacked the higher regalities possessed by the bishop of Durham or the earl of Chester—regalities once enjoyed by his own predecessors, the old lords of Lancaster. Lancashire was still under the jurisdiction of the king’s courts, his justices still went on assize there, though the earl took the fines and amercements they inflicted, and no cause could be begun by its inhabitants without a writ from the royal chancery.** Its liability to contribute to royal taxation was unquestioned, for unlike Durham and Cheshire it sent representatives to Parliament.*” None of the practical reasons which dictated the creation of palatinates in the eleventh century could now be adduced for severing this direct rela- tion with the crown and calling into existence (or reviving) another county palatine. The Scottish invasions of the late reign had not been repeated, and had a palatinate been needed as a bulwark against Scotland Cumberland would have served the purpose better. No more adequate motive for the conversion of Lancashire into a county palatine can be discovered than a desire to do honour to one who was not only the greatest collateral member of the royal house but a distinguished soldier. Henry ‘of Grosmont,’ who became fourth earl of Lancaster on the death of his father in 1345, was at that very moment winning laurels as commander of the English forces in Gascony.” Six years later Edward III decided to recognize his cousin’s eminent services by conferring upon him the new title of duke, as yet borne only by his own eldest son the duke of Cornwall. Wishing to accompany this titular promotion by some corresponding accession of power, and probably not considering it desirable further to deplete the crown estates by grants of land Edward gave him the rights of a palatine earl in the county of Lancaster, a piece of generosity which cost him little in a pecuniary sense, as the bulk of the ordinary crown revenue from the shire was already drawn by the duke. The obvious objections to such a rending of the unity of the kingdom, which the memory of Thomas of Lancaster could hardly fail to suggest, may have been thought to be met sufficiently by making the grant to Henry for his life only," and withholding even from him some of the privileges attaching to the older palatine counties. By the charter of 6 March, L351, ‘there was granted to him a chancery in which writs should be issued by his own chancellor, justices of his own to try all pleas, whether pleas of the crown or not, touching the common law and all other liberties and Jura regalia pertaining to a palatine earl ‘as fully and freely as the earl of Chester is known to have them in the county of Chester’; with certain exceptions which were carefully enumerated.” In the county palatine of Lancaster the crown retained the right of Parliamentary and clerical taxation, the royal prerogative of pardon and the * In 1342 the sheriff was rebuked for trying to prevent appeals to the king and neglecting to deliver his writs ; Cal. Cisse, 1341-3, pp. 401, 470, $51. *° For the devices by which Parliamentary taxation was extended to Durham sec Lapsley, Co. Pal. of Dur. 298. *" Dict. Nat. Big. xxvi, 102 ; G.E.C. Complete Peerage, v, 6. See p. 204 n. 256. ** In any case the reasons which had prompted the revision of the charter of 1342 (see above, p. 205) were equally operative against a grant-in-tail of a county palatine. In the ducal dignity itself, to which the palatinate was an appendage, he only received a life estate ; Courthope, Hist. Peerage, 1xii). °° W. J. Hardy, Cart. of Duchy of Lanc. 9. 206 POLITICAL HISTORY right of correcting any defaults of justice on the part of the duke’s court or officers. It was further stipulated—practically as a corollary of the first reservation—that the duke should continue to send to all Parliaments and Councils two knights to represent the shire, and two burgesses from each borough, and should appoint proper persons to collect the taxes granted by those bodies.?” The title of earl of Lancaster having for the present been merged in the higher dignity of duke of Lancaster the district from which the former was derived was now commonly described not as the county but as the duchy of Lancaster.” Royal mandates, such as those for the election of members of Parliament, and the collection of subsidies, which would hitherto have been sent ‘to the sheriff of the county of Lancaster,’ were now addressed ‘to the Duke of Lancaster or his lieutenant (or chancellor) in the Duchy.’’” The divisions of the county are spoken of as ‘the six wapentakes of the Duchy.’*” The old name, however, was too firmly rooted to be entirely ousted, especially as palatine jurisdiction in accordance with the Cheshire precedent was granted to Henry as earl of a county though administered by him under the higher title of duke ; ** occasionally Lancashire is described simultaneously as a duchy and a county.” The county and the duchy of Lancaster being identical areas, the sphere of the chancellor and other officers of the duchy was in Duke Henry’s time, and afterwards under John of Gaunt, limited to Lancashire. In his other lands the duke retained the older titles of earl of Leicester, Derby, &c., and no change took place in their administration. It was not until a duke of Lancaster ascended the throne in the person of Henry IV that the term ‘duchy of Lancaster’ was extended to include the. whole complex of his private estates. The reasons which dictated this change of nomenclature will be considered in their proper place.’ On Duke Henry’s death of the plague on 13 March, 1361, his dukedom became extinct, and his palatine rights lapsed in accordance with the terms of the grant made ten years before. Lancashire ceased to be a duchy, and was once more governed as an ordinary county—subject only to the modifica- tions entailed by the original grant to Earl Edmund. Edmund’s rights, including the hereditary sheriffdom, descended to the king’s fourth son John of Gaunt, earl of Richmond,” who had married Duke Henry’s elder daughter Blanche and now succeeded jure uxoris to a moiety of her father’s vast estates, 70 WJ. Hardy, Chart. Duchy of Lanc. 10. The charter does not say that the duke shall ‘ choose’ the representatives as asserted by Mr. Armitage-Smith (John of Gaunt, 208), who otherwise gives the best account of the Lancaster regalities. 71 Cf, the provision on the creation of the duchy of Cornwall in 1337 that ‘the county of Cornwall should remain for ever as a duchy to the eldest sons of the kings of England’ ; Rot. Parl. iv, 140. 72 Tbid. iii, 400, 404. Under Duke John the sheriff sometimes reported to the duke that in his ‘full duchy’ (i.e. county court) he had caused knights of the shire to be elected ; Chan. Misc. bdle. i, file 3. 73 Misc. R. Chan. 29. 74 In the next century we occasionally hear of ‘ the duchy palatine,’ but this was rare. 8 Thomas de Thelwall was chancellor (of John of Gaunt in 1377) ‘within the Duchy and County of Lancaster’ ; Dep. Keeper's Rep. xxxii, App. 1 ; cf. Armitage-Smith, op. cit. 219. 76 See below, p. 211. *7 His father had also given him (in 1360) the castle and honour of Hertford ; Dep. Keeper’s Rep. xxxi, App. 32. In 1372 he surrendered the earldom and honour of Richmond, at Edward’s desire, and received instead the castle of Pevensey, the castles and honours of Tickhill and Knaresborough, the castle and manor of High Peak, and other manors, &c., from Nottingham to Sussex ; Hardy, Céart. of Duchy of Lanc. 26 ; Armitage-Smith, op. cit. 203. 207 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE with the earldoms of Lancaster, Lincoln, and Derby. The other moiety, with the earldom of Leicester, came into John’s hands on the death a year later of the younger daughter Maud.*” Six months after the reunion of Duke Henry’s heritage the ducal title was revived (13 November, 1362), in favour of his son-in-law, but without a grant of palatine rights in the county.*” For the present John had to be content with the lesser yura regalia which Henry enjoyed in all his lands before 1351.” It was not until, fifteen years later, he was practically ruler of England that he secured palatine jurisdiction in Lancashire. In January, 1377, he packed a Parliament in which was undone the work of the ‘ Good Parliament’ that had come into such bitter conflict with him a few months before. It was with the assent of the prelates and nobles there assembled that the king, now in his dotage, ‘considering the strenuous probity and eminent wisdom’ of his son, made Lancashire once more a county palatine. The grant ran in exactly the same terms as that made to the first duke, contained the same reservations, and like it was limited to the grantee’s life.*" From the day on which it was made, 28 February, 1377, John of Gaunt reckoned the years of his ‘regality’ by which his Lancashire charters are dated. Some doubt arising as to the exact extent of the jwra regalia covered by the general words of the grant, he obtained, in the second year of Richard II, a supplementary charter in which his right to have his own exchequer in the county, with barons and other ministers necessary thereto, and to appoint his justices in eyre for pleas of the forest, and other justices for all manner of pleas touching the assize of the forest within the county (except where the crown was a party) received express recognition. The continued existence of the palatinate remained dependent on the duke’s life until 1390, when Richard, who had just emancipated himself from the control of the Lords Appellant and needed the support of his eldest uncle, acceded to his request that the palatine jurisdiction, like the ducal dignity, should be entailed upon his heirs male.%* Some of the mischievous effects of the creation of such a ‘state within the state” had already made themselves felt. Edward III’s wars seem to have mitigated the lawlessness so rampant in the county at the beginning of his reign by drawing away the more disorderly elements, and this relief might be set off against the heavy taxation and drain of men which they entailed. The Black Death, too, must have helped to silence strife. In Duke Henry’s time, at all events, the special commissions into felonies and trespasses were discontinued on the complaint of the inhabitants that (ster a/ia) they impeded them in their business, and the enforcement of the law was left to the ** G.E.C. Complete Peerage, v, 8; §S. Armitage-Smith, Fohn of Gaunt (an elaborate and valuable monograph). ” Rot. Parl. ii, 279; Hardy, Chart. Duchy of Lanc. 17. It was now ordered that all pleas and sessions of justices in the county should be held at Lancaster and not elsewhere; Cal. Pat. 1381-5, p. 336. The justices had not infrequently sat at Preston and Wigan. * These were first granted to him in the limited extent in which they were possessed by Henry before 1342, in Blanche’s moiety on 13 Nov. 1361 (Hardy, op. cit. 12), and in Maud’s on 12 May, 1362 ; ibid. 14. Two years later Henry’s surrender in 1349 of the fuller liberties granted in fee tail in 1 342 was declared to have been ultra cires, and these franchises were confirmed (14 July, 1364), to John and Blanche and the heirs of their bodies ; ibid. 19. On 4 June, 1377, they were extended to the lands he received in exchange for the earldom of Richmond (ibid. 35). “1 Ibid. 32. 8 Thid. 62. “Ibid. 67. Six years later the franchises enjoyed by him in all his lands and fees received some additions, including the assize of bread, wine and ale ; ibid. gz. 208 { \ POLITICAL HISTORY ordinary tribunals.™* But as the terror of the plague receded and the Peace of Bretigni and the rapid loss of territory which followed the resumption of the war brought back to England a crowd of fighting men, who, if not criminals to start with ** had learnt no respect for law and order on the fields of France, the old complaints of lawlessness reappear. This demoralization was not limited to any part of the kingdom, and the weakened central government of Edward III’s old age and Richard II’s minority was ill-fitted to cope with it, but the exempt jurisdictions of the palatine counties of Chester and Lancaster gave special scope to disturbers of the peace. Petitions to the Gloucester Parliament of October, 1378, reveal an extra- ordinary state of anarchy on their borders. Armed bands invaded the adjoining shires, killed or held to ransom their inhabitants, carried off their daughters to those franchises, exacting a third of their property as dower, and sending them back when it was spent, and descended upon fairs and markets to the terror and impoverishment of the commons and the loss of their lords.** Commissions were promised, with power to imprison the offenders without indictment and keep them there without bail till the coming of the justices, but six years afterwards things seem to have been little better. The Cheshire men had a bad pre-eminence and did not spare their fellow offenders, for in 1384 the commons of Lancashire joined with those of other counties in a demand that such ill-doers should forfeit their Cheshire lands as well as those they held elsewhere, the privileges of the palatinate notwithstanding.*” The king’s evasive reply illustrates the obstacles which such franchises opposed to the effective enforcement of the law. Among the incidents which throw light upon the internal state of the county during the last years of Edward and the early years of Richard, are the murder of a coroner** and of a justice of the peace,” and the conviction of Henry de Chadderton, bailiff of West Derby wapentake, of extortion, maintenance, perversion of justice, accepting bribes to remove archers from the roll and substituting unfit persons, collecting corn by colour of his office, and exacting 20s. too much towards the expenses of the knights of the shire on the occasion of each Parliament for twenty years back.*” The Poll Tax returns of 1377 afford data for a rough estimate of the population of Lancashire at this date. The number of persons over fourteen years of age in the county was returned as 23,880. According to this estimate it had the same population as Shropshire or London, and rather more than a fourth of that of Norfolk, the most populous shire. Four years later, when a new poll tax was levied upon all persons over fifteen years of age, the number returned for Lancashire was only 8,371. Nearly all the figures in 1381 show a drop so great as to admit of no other explanation than widespread collusion or evasion, which, as might be expected, was greater in Lancashire than in any other county except Cornwall.” In the ensuing 4 Baines, Hist. of Lancs. (ed. Croston), i, 145-6. 7° Numerous pardons were granted to homicides and other felons who were going abroad on the king’s service. 3 Rot. Parl. iii, 42-3. *87 Ibid. 201. 788 Coram Rege R. 463, m. 28 d@.; Cal. Pat. 1377-81, p. 313. *8 Thid. 1385-8, p. 73. 7 Coram Rege R. 454, m. 13 (1374). 71K. Powell, The Rising in East Anglia in 1381, 122. Mr. Powell suggests that a large portion took to the woods and wastes to escape the tax collectors. The connivance of the collectors, however, in the falsifica- tion of the returns seems established ; Oman, The Great Revolt of 1381, pp. 27, 183. 2 209 27 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Peasants’ Revolt it apparently took no part, though the rising extended into Yorkshire and Cheshire.” Three years later the county, after a lapse of sixty years, experienced a Scottish raid. John of Gaunt’s invasion of Scotland in April, 1384, provoked a counter-inroad, which is said to have been pressed as far as Lancashire, though details are wanting.** For four years from the end of 1385, the duke, relinquishing the entire defence of the northern march to the earl of Northumberland, was absent in Spain. His departure was the signal for a bitter struggle between Richard and the Lords Appellant, headed by his youngest uncle, Thomas, duke of Gloucester. In 1387 the king appealed to arms, sending his favourite, Robert de Vere, earl of Oxford, into the north with orders to Thomas Molyneux of Cuerdale, constable of Chester, the sheriff of Chester, Ralph Vernon, Ralph de Radcliffe, and all the other magnates of the two counties, to raise their forces and put them under Oxford’s command. Molyneux in his zeal is said to have cast partisans of the Appellants into prison, with instructions that their only food should be black bread and water on alternate days until he returned. North Wales con- tributed its quota, and Oxford moved on London with some four or five thousand men. He was met and routed with ease on December 20 by the Appellants, at Radcot Bridge in Oxfordshire, on the Upper Thames. A mere handful were slain, but they included Molyneux ; some 800 men, however, were drowned. The victors, it is said, stripped to the skin those who fell into their hands, and sent them thus ignominiously back to their own country.* Its share in this episode can only have aggravated the disorders which, as we have seen, had for some years been prevalent in Lancashire. After eighteen months of humiliated submission to the Appellants, Richard, in May, 1389, resumed the reins of government, and recalled his uncle John from Spain to be his chief adviser. Lancaster’s influence over the king was resented by Richard’s old opponents, who took advantage of the unpopularity of his efforts to bring about peace with France to foment a northern rising against him in 1393. It was mainly a Cheshire movement, but there were disturbances in Yorkshire, and Lancashire was to some extent affected.” In 1394 Sir Thomas Talbot, perhaps of Bashall in the Hodder Valley, near Clitheroe, was declared a traitor for having conspired with others in Lancashire and Cheshire, where he had lands, to kill Lancaster and his brother Gloucester.” But it was only in Cheshire that he raised armed bands, and the fact that Lancaster, when he came north to suppress the move- ment, led the forces of his duchy into Cheshire, suggests that it had no strong hold in Lancashire. John of Gaunt died on 3 February, 1399, and the king, contrary to the promise given when his son Henry, duke of Hereford, was banished a few TA. Réville, Soukcement des Travailleurs PL Angleerie en 1381, cvi; Trevel an, England in the IW ychfe, 244, from Chester Indictment R. 8, m. 57. In the writ printed in Foed fee ened ‘Lancashire’ is clearly an error. In the autumn of this year the county was threatened with a ‘dearth of com ; Caf Pat. 1381-3, p. 61. *8 Close, 8 Ric. II, m. 32. ; Walsingham, Hise. Angi. ii, 112 ™ Malverne in Po.yeAronicon (Rolls Ser.), ix, 111 sqq.; Knighton, Chron. (Rolls Ser.), li, 250-4. : ; *° dun. Ric. II (Rolls Ser.), 159-62, 166 ; Malverne, Op. cit. ix, 239-40, 265, 281; Armitage-Smith John of Gaunt, 351. 2 " * Rot. Peri. iil, 316. In the Parliament of Jan. 1397, Lancaster demanded justice on Talbot escaped from the Tower 3 ibid. 338 ; Cal Pat. 1391-6, p. 560. Gloucester had eae chief justice oo since 1388 (Ormerod, i, 63), and there was a rumour that the county was to lose its ancient privileges. H was also associated with Lancaster in the negotiations with France. : sali : 210 POLITICAL HISTORY months before, seized into his hands the duchy and all the other possessions of the late duke.”’ The recovery of his heritage served Henry as a pretext for the invasion which placed him on the throne in September, 1399. Henry was careful not to incorporate the duchy of Lancaster and the other estates inherited from his father with the old crown lands. He provided that they should be kept distinct and separately administered, just as if he had not become king, and should descend to his heirs specified in the charters conferring the lands and rights. His motive in retaining them as private possessions of his house is obvious. The future of the succession to a crown upon which he had no hereditary right was uncertain. He did not venture in the first place to do more than secure Parliamentary recognition of his eldest son as heir apparent. Should circumstances oblige him to yield to the superior hereditary claims of the earls of March, his paternal heritage might be saved for his family. As he could not himself be styled duke of Lancaster, Henry arranged, with the consent of Parliament, that the title should be borne by Prince Henry. The estates, however, remained in his own hand. This settlement gave a new and wider meaning to the term, ‘ duchy of Lancaster.’ The old Lancastrian earldoms had been merged in the single title ‘duke of Lancaster,’ and the duchy of Lancaster, hitherto identical with the county palatine, henceforth comprised the whole complex of estates scattered over England and Wales, which John of Gaunt had held.*” Of this wider duchy of Lancaster the county palatine was for the future only a parcel—a subordinate regality. The duchy and the county now had each its own seal and its own chancellor.’ The central administration of the duchy was vested in the chancellor and council of the duchy, and it *7 On 1 March he gave the custody of the castle and honour of Lancaster, the castles and lordships of Liverpool and Clitheroe, the manor of Blackburnshire, the castle of Halton, &c., to his nephew, Thomas Holland, duke of Surrey ; Fine R. 202, m. 11. For imprisonment of a Lancashire contemner of the king in the Tower, see Rot. Parl. ili, 445. *8 Hardy, Charters, 137-40 (14 Oct. 1399). The only point in which the status of the tenants was changed, was in the enforcement of the crown prerogative of marriage outside the county palatine where it was already enjoyed. Chief Justice Gascoigne decided in 1405, that in matters relating to the duchy of Lancaster, the king could be sued like any common person ; Wylie, Hen. IV, ii, 187. Cf. Blackstone, Commentaries, i, 118. Sixty years later, after a long civil war, such a pacific arrange- ment was impossible, but at an earlier date might have been conceivable. It should be noted that even if the house of Lancaster had kept the crown, the duchy might have ceased to be held by the king. The first act of settlement of 1406, for instance, would have limited the succession to the crown to heirs male, while the Lancaster estates could descend to females ; Rot. Parl. iii, 574. 8 Tbid. 428 (10 Nov. 1399). According to the peerage writers he was the last duke of Lancaster. The notion that the crown as owner of the estates of the duchy is thereby ‘Duke of Lancaster,’ is regarded by them as a popular error. It is at any rate an ancient error, and one that has received some Official recognition. In 1515, e.g. Henry VIII made a grant ‘as Duke of Lancaster’; L. and P. Hen. VIII, ii, §5. °°! Cal. Pat. 1399-1401, pp. 434, 507, 527. Yet the term was still sometimes used in its old narrower application. ‘Thus John de Springthorp was in 1410 appointed by Henry IV, chancellor ‘ infra Ducatum suum Palatinum Lancastriae’ ; Towneley MS. CC. p. 129, No. 436. Henry V annexed to the duchy in 1414 the estates of the earldom of Hereford derived from his mother ; Hardy, op. cit. 151. 5°? Hen. VI attests the existence of the two chancellors under his predecessors when abolishing (in 1460) the third chancellor and other officials who had been created for the duchy lands committed to feoffees for certain purposes ; Hardy, C#art.258. Despite this the same person is sometimes described as chancellor of the county and of the duchy. Thus in 1442 Walter Shirington appears as ‘ chancellor of our county palatine of Lancaster’ (Add. MS. 32108, No. 1657), and in 1443 as ‘chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster’ ; Proc. Privy Council, v, 238. Is it the explanation of this apparent contradiction that the two offices were occa- sionally (or always) united in one hand? For the great seal of the county palatine in 1399 see Dep. Keeper’s Rep. xl, App. 527 ; for that of the duchy in 1404 (sig. Henrici regis Angliae . . . de ducatu Lancastriae), see M. Bateson, Rec. of Leicester, ii, xxix (with facsimile). 211 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE seems probable that the court afterwards known as the court of the Duchy Chamber of Lancaster was established at Westminster by Henry IV for the jurisdiction in all matters of equity relating to lands held of the king in right of the duchy and empowered to receive appeals from the Chancery Court of the county palatine.” An attempt was made in Henry’s first Parliament to grapple with local disorder in the north-west, not only by a stringent general law against the indiscriminate giving of liveries, but by special legislation. Richard’s great bodyguard of Cheshire archers had made that ‘den of thieves’ even more dangerous to its neighbours than before, and it was, therefore, enacted that Cheshire men committing acts of violence in other counties should forfeit their lands in Cheshire as well as any they might hold outside it. The difficulties Henry experienced in maintaining his throne were not, indeed, very favourable to the success of these measures. Henry Percy passed through Lancashire in July, 1403, on his way to the battle of Shrewsbury *° and found at least one supporter there. Geoffrey Bold, of Whittleswick, joined him, for which he afterwards forfeited that manor.** Another con- nexion between Lancashire and the battle was created by the king’s gift of the church of St. Michael-on-Wyre to the Collegiate Church founded on the site of his victory.*” Local anarchy was still sufficiently prevalent in 1410 for a petition to be presented to Henry asking for the appointment of commissions of oyer and terminer to deal with rioters in Lancashire and other northern counties.*” In the same Parliament complaints were made of damage done on the coasts of Cheshire, Lancashire and Cumberland by French, Scots and Welsh rebels, and a request was made for a local squadron under a deputy of the admiral of England. ‘The answer given was that a remedy should be included in the ordinance for the safe-guard of the sea.*” A considerable contingent from Lancashire accompanied Henry V in 1415 on the campaign which ended at Agincourt. John Lord Harcourt, banneret, took out two knights, twenty-seven men-at-arms, and ninety archers ;*"° seven knights, James de Harrington, Richard de Kighley, Ralph de Staveley, Nicholas de Longford, William Botiller, John Southworth and Richard de Radcliffe, and two esquires, John Stanley and Robert Laurence, each served with fifty archers.*" A temporary Act passed in 1419 and renewed in subsequent Parliaments throws a curious light upon the abuses which the privileges of the palatinate made possible. In consequence of false indictments against loyal persons brought in that county and alleging treasons or felonies in places not in he county, every Justice was ordered to inquire by a local jury of twelve, each $3 The i eae : F . Chas Rec Soe Bu rest mane of te Ghy dosent of the centhcetay ceeds ne Rot. Parl. iii, 440. . a Traison et Mort de Richart Deux (Engl. Hist. Soc.), App. 284. Chan. Misc. Bdle. i. file 1 ; Fine R. 240 m. 5. 8 Rot. Parl. iti, 624 ; Towneley MS. CC. p. 134, No. 3 % Rot. Parl. 639. 5‘ : eas “ Army Accounts (Exch. Q.R.), Bdle. 47, No. 33. The amount due to him was nearly £600 Ibid. Bdle. 46, No. 35 ; Bdle. 44, No. 29. The nine received £113 158. apiece, and the archers were paid 6d. a day. Of the fifty archers under Kighley’s command six died at the siege of Harfle were invalided home before its capture, six were left in garrison there, seven were taken priso ie uy before Agincourt, and only nineteen fought in the battle. None of these last were killed pom ae ae 212 *” See above, p. 35. POLITICAL HISTORY having a free tenement there of the clear yearly value of £5, whether there was such a place, and if there were not the indictment was to be quashed. Indicters who prevented their victims from appearing by fear of being beaten, maimed or killed, were to be punished by imprisonment, fine and ransom.*” In 1421 it was further enacted that those put in exigent or outlawed in the county palatine should not forfeit any of their property outside the county.” Evidence of continued lawlessness in the county and on its borders during this reign and the next is only too abundant, though here too false charges seem to have been frequent. One or two examples of this lawlessness may be given. In March, 1415, Sir John Byron of Clayton, with an armed band of twenty-eight men, carried off his mother, dame Joan, from Colwick, in Nottinghamshire, to Lancashire, and made her enter into an obligation of £1000 before the Mayor of Wigan not to alienate any lands descended to ners” Six years later Parliament was obliged to take extraordinary measures against a band of wild youths from Westmorland seeking the life of Sir John Lancaster ; they had taken refuge in the woods and mountains between that county and Lancashire, and could not be reached by either sheriff. In 1432 a petition was presented by William Scott of Hamerton in Bowland, alleging that Henry Bradley of Slaidburn, and Ellis Bradley of Ribchester, lurked in the hills out of the reach of sheriffs and frequently beset his house by night to kill him so that he could not live there. He asked that they should be summoned under heavy penalties before the King’s Bench.* The failure of the Lancastrian government to suppress local disorder was sufficiently evident before the outbreak of the Wars of the Roses. In that struggle the county of course ranked as a royalist district, but the dynasty did not obtain such a solid and unwavering support from its leading magnates as its close connexion with the house on the throne might have promised. The last two centuries had seen many changes among the great families of the county. Of its old Norman barons only the Butlers of Warrington survived obscurely in the male line. In South Lancashire the Banasters of Newton had been succeeded by the Langtons, the Grelleys of Manchester by the la Warres and the Wests, whose chief interests were outside the county. The more recent importance of the Hollands had passed away when an heiress carried their lands into the house of Lovel of Oxfordshire and Northampton- shire. In this part of the county now the two most prominent families were those of Molyneux and Stanley, who had only quite lately come to the front. 512 Rot, Parl. iv, 120, 127, 147 3 V, 28. 318 Thid. iv, 147. This was renewed from Parliament to Parliament until 1453, when it was made perpetual ; but two years after it was repealed by the Yorkist Parliament of July, 1455, on the plea that it encouraged ‘ foreign men which for the most parte hathe noo thyng within the same Contee’ to commit ‘orrible offences’ therein ; ibid. v, 53, 268. It was re-enacted by Henry VII in 1491, the adnullation of 1455 being attributed to ‘ suggestion unresonable and sinistre labours of persons not best disposed, for theyre owne singular avauntage and to the grate prejudice and grugge, singular hurte and jeopardie of all your true Leiges oute of the said shire.’ It was again repealed, however, in the same year. 84 Karly Chan. Proc. Bdle, 6, No. 294. 318 Rot. Parl. iv, 163. The special process devised to enforce the Act against giving liveries was extended to the county palatine by a statute of 1429 ; ibid. 348. 316 Thid. 416. In January, 1437, Isabella, widow of John Butler, of Bewsey, petitioned the king for justice on William Poole, of Wirral, gentleman, who in the previous July carried her off from Bewsey ‘ naked except her kertyll and smoke,’ into the wilds of Wales. She had been recovered by a special commission under the great seal, but Poole was still at large ; ibid. 497. 213 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE The Molyneux family, though seated at Sefton since the time of Henry I, held a comparatively humble place among the great tenants of the county until Sir Richard Molyneux distinguished himself in Henry V’s French wars and his brother Adam rose to be bishop of Chichester and Keeper of the Privy Seal.” Sir Richard’s son and namesake was a favourite of Henry VI, who bestowed upon him in 1446 the chief official positions in West Derby wapentake, including the constableship of Liverpool Castle.’ This accentu- ated the already existing rivalry between his family and the Stanleys, who had only been settled in Lancashire for sixty years.‘ The fortunes of this great house were founded by Sir John Stanley, a younger son of the Stanleys of Storeton in Wirral. Sir John, who was lord lieutenant of Ireland under Richard II and Henry IV, and received a grant of the Isle of Man from the latter king, acquired Knowsley, Lathom, and other lands in south-west Lan- cashire by his marriage (before 1385) with the heiress of Sir Thomas Lathom. His grandson Thomas also governed Ireland, became lord chamberlain to Henry VI and was created a peer in 1456.%' In North Lancashire the leading position was held by the Harringtons, originally a Cumberland family. They had succeeded the Le Flemingsin the barony of Aldingham in the thir- teenth century, and quite recently a younger branch had become possessed of the honour of Hornby, formerly a Montbegon fief, and since held by the Nevills. The only daughter of the last Lord Harrington of Aldingham in the male line married the son of Lord Bonville of Devonshire, an ardent Yorkist, and their son, who became Lord Harrington in 1458, took to wife a sister of the earl of Warwick, the kingmaker.*” In the Civil War, therefore, both the Harring- ton families frankly sided against the crown. Thomas Stanley, who succeeded his father in 1459 as second Baron Stanley, was also a brother-in-law of Warwick, but from the first adopted that trimming policy which ultimately secured him the earldom of Derby. At the battle of Blore Heath in August, 1459, he and his younger brother William executed the same manceuvre which afterwards proved so successful at Bosworth Field. Thomas Stanley kept the 2,000 men he had raised at the queen’s call a few miles away from the scene of the battle, while William fought openly on the Yorkist side.** Sir Richard Molyneux of Sefton, who was almost inevitably in the opposite camp, though some of his family were Yorkists, was slain along with other Lancashire men. William Stanley was attainted in the October Parliament of this year, but his elder brother's conduct, though the Commons impeached him as a traitor, was overlooked by the queen. In December, 1460, the young Lord Harrington, his father William Bonville, and Sir John Harrington of Hornby, were all slain fighting for the duke of York at Wakefield.** A few months later York’s son was on the throne, and the wily Lord Stanley chief justice of Chester. Early in 1464 the commons of Lancashire and Cheshire rose to the number of 10,000 in *" Dict, Nat. Bicg. xxxviii, 131. Tbid. 134. His father had also held them ; Duchy Reg. No. 17, fol. 75. "In July, 1425, there was great rumour of ‘routes’ between Sir Richard Molyneux and Thomas Stanle the younger at Liverpool. The sheriff received orders to take the posse comitatus against them ; Towneley Ms. CC. p. 219, No. S70. The Stanleys had built the Tower in Water Street, a bowshot from the castle , © Dice. Nat. Big. liv, 76. "0 Ibid. , 8 G.E.C. Comp.ete Peerage, iv, 169. 8 Dict. Nat. Bizz. liv, 76. ** Rot. Parl. v, 348, 369. *” Ramsey, Lancaster and York, ii, 238. en tose 214 POLITICAL HISTORY support of the duke of Somerset’s rebellion, but they were soon ‘ downe agen’ and one or two ‘ hedyd’ at Chester.”* Six years later, in March, 1470, the duke of Clarence and the earl of Warwick, fleeing before Edward IV, came to Manchester in hopes of support from Lord Stanley, but ‘ther they hadde litill favor’ and left the county hurriedly.*’ On the restoration of Henry VI Stanley no longer hesitated, and in March, 1471, he was besieging Hornby Castle on behalf of the Lancas- trian government.** Yet the next turn of the political wheel found him in high favour with Edward IV. His first resistance to the duke of Gloucester’s ambition in 1483 procured him a short imprisonment, but Gloucester’s fears that Stanley’s son would raise Lancashire and Cheshire against him were not realized, and the father made his peace with the usurper.** He warily avoided committing himself in Buckingham’s revolt, in which his second wife Margaret Beaufort, countess of Richmond, was deeply engaged, and even at Bosworth, though he had a secret interview with his stepson the earl of Richmond, he kept his Lancashire troops out of the battle, leaving his brother to decide the day for Henry. His abstention, however, counted for much and was suitably rewarded. The manors of Bury, Pilkington, and Cheetham, forfeited by Sir Thomas Pilkington, and the lands of other Lancashire families who had taken the losing side, swelled his possessions, and on 27 October, 1485, he was created earl of Derby.** He became godfather of Prince Arthur, and in July, 1495, the king and queen paid him a visit of nearly a month’s duration at Knowsley and Lathom.*! The marriage (before 1489) of his fifth son Edward to Anne Harrington, heiress of Hornby, extended the Stanley influence into North Lancashire. Meanwhile dynastic changes had compelled a revision of the relations of the Lancaster estates to the crown. In 1461 they were declared in Parlia- ment to be forfeited to Edward IV by the treason of Henry VI. The claims of the heirs of the original grantees being thus barred, the duchy, with all its privileges, including those of a county palatine in Lancashire, was entailed upon Edward and his heirs being kings of England, to be held under the name of ‘Duchy of Lancaster,’ separate from all other inheritances. The possibility left open by the settlement of 1399 of this mighty fief passing again into the hand of a subject was thereby definitely excluded. Henry VII in the first Parliament of his reign had it vested in himself and ‘his heirs for evermore . . . separate from the corone of England and possessione of the same.’ ** Although the wording seems open to the construction that the crown and the duchy might pass into different hands, the Act of 1485 has 335 Paston Letters, ii, 152 (before 1 March). 57 Tbid. ii, 396. Edward could not follow them into Lancashire ‘for lakke of vitayll’ ; Rot. Pard. vi, 233. During his subsequent exile Roger Lever is alleged to have entered Lancaster Castle with an armed force and carried off the record of a judicial decision against his claim to the wardship of the manor of Great Lever ; ibid. 34, p. 181. 533 Feed. (Orig. ed.), xi, 699. The cannon called The Mile Ende was sent from Bristol for the siege. 39 Dict. Nat. Biog. liv, 77. 3° The title was taken from the county, though he had no lands there, not from the hundred of (West) Derby in which the bulk of his estates lay. 31 Excerpta Hist. 104. He may have been one of the Lancashire men whom the earl of Oxford, when expecting a royal visit in 1489, proposed to convince that ‘ther be gentylmen (in Essex) of as grete sobestaunce that thei be able to bye alle Lankeschere’ ; Paston Letters, iii, 353. 332 G.E.C. Complete Peerage, v, 347 ; Leland, Jtin. viii, 109. °33 Hardy, Chart. of Duchy of Lanc. 282 ; Rot. Parl. v, 478. *™ Ibid. vi, 272. 215 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE always been held to have had the same effect as that of 1461, annexing the duchy to the crown as a separate inheritance. It was on the Furness coast that the earl of Lincoln and Lambert Simnel landed with their Irish and German forces on 4 June, 1487, and here they were joined by a number of Yorkists, including Sir Thomas Broughton and James and Thomas Harrington.** Thence they made their way eastward into Yorkshire. In the royal army which defeated them at Stoke near Newark a large Lancashire contingent was present under the command of Lord Strange, eldest son of the earl of Derby.” Lord Lovel, who disappeared so myste- riously after the battle in which he fought against the king, was a considerable landowner in the county.** Lancashire benefited by the cessation under the first Tudor king of the constant hostilities with Scotland which laid so heavy a burden upon the northern counties. But in 1513 Henry VIII’s invasion of France provoked a counter-invasion of Northumberland by the Scots, and Lancashire troops fought at Flodden. The 500 Lancashire men who, with double the number from Cheshire and some Yorkshire men, formed the extreme right wing of the English army under Lord Edward Howard, did not indeed distinguish them- selves. This wing ‘never abode stroke but fled.’** If we may believe the contemporary chronicler Hall, however, it was hopelessly outnumbered. Here fell Robert Lawrence of Ashton-by-Lancaster and Sir John Booth of Barton, ‘ the only man of eminence slain on the English side.’ *' Brian Tun- stall of Thurland and Richard Bold of Bold were also in this part of the field. Hall mentions 1,000 Lancashire men under Sir Marmaduke Constable, but does not indicate their place in the battle.** Some men from the county were no doubt included among the retainers of James Stanley, bishop of Ely, who under his illegitimate son, Sir John Stanley, formed part of Surrey’s division. But it was the doings of the extreme left wing, which like the right was drawn from Cheshire and Lancashire, and had as commander Sir Edward Stanley, fifth son of the earl of Derby, that compensated for the failure of their countrymen on the other wing. The official dispatch merely says that the earls of Lennox and Argyll with their puissances joined battle with Stanley and were put to flight ; but according to Hall, Stanley led his men up the hill unperceived by the Scots and drove their right before him down to the scene of the main fight. His services were rewarded by the order of the Garter and a peerage. He took the title of Lord Monteagle.™ *® Courthope, Hist. Peerage, 278. °% Rot. Parl. vi, 3973 Leland, Collect. iv, 210-15 ; Busch, Engl. under the Tudors, 36, 326. “7 After the battle Sir Humphrey Stanley was made a banneret and Henry Bold and others knights. ** He held the old Holland estates. See above, p. 203. °° State Papers Hen. VIII, iv, 1 (the official despatch). * E. Hall, Chron. (ed. 1801), 562. He reckons the opposing force at 10,000 or more. 3 Land P. Hen. III, i, 4462. *? Sir Henry Kighley, Sir Thomas Gerard of Brynn, and Sir William Molyneux of i as fighting in this division ; Cet. Soc. Publ. (Old Bee eae 17-18. v vee ne “ Hall, op. cit. 563. It is possible that Hall was misled by exaggerations in the Stanley interest, but he does not support the wilder assertions of the popular ballads (Flodden Field (ed. Weber), 37, 50) that Surrey jealously rejected the demand of the army that Stanley should lead the van and that Sir Edward slew James IV with his own hand. It should be noted that the Cheshire ballad printed by the Chetham Society (loc. cit.), which was written shortly after the battle, says nothing of Stanley’s charge. The writer, however, was more inrerated in Sir John Stanley. He greatly exaggerates the numbers. “4 A title said to be allusive to the #i// he captured at Flodden and the eagle-foot crest of his house ; Dugdale, Baronage, ii, 255. ‘ 216 POLITICAL HISTORY The death of Thomas, second earl of Derby, in 1521, and of Mont- eagle in 1523, leaving in each case a son under age, temporarily deprived the county of the leadership which the Stanleys had successfully asserted. ‘The earl of Surrey, who was collecting a force against the Scots in October of the latter Jean, informed the king that he proposed to lead the Lancashire men himself, ‘ considering there is some little displeasure amongis them and no man among them by whom they wol be ruled.’ ** Quarrels between the retainers of local magnates chiefly accounted for the riotous assemblies in Lancashire and other northern counties which attracted the attention of the government in 1535, and were made subject of special inquiry. Sir Marmaduke Tunstall of Thurland and his followers fell out with the servants of (the second) Lord Monteagle, and both sides appeared in arms. Tunstall nearly came to blows with a Mr. Morley over a disputed stag. His cook ‘ sore bete and struck’ a burgess of Lancaster.” ‘And thus,’ continues the report, ‘Tunstall and his servants over-rynnyth all the Countre.’ In South Lancashire Monteagle was forcibly prevented by Adam Hulton of Hulton from holding his court as steward of the abbot of Cockersand’s lands at Westhoughton.“* Monteagle and Tunstall had to give securities for the peace, but were left to reduce the county to order.*” In the autumn of the following year the commons of North Lancashire and the neighbourhood of Whalley rose in sympathy with Aske and his followers in Yorkshire. Their grievances were partly religious, partly secular.*° On the top of the dissolution of the smaller monasteries, which excited fears that the parish churches too would soon be despoiled, there came a demand for a new subsidy. ‘Thecommon people say openly that surely they will pay no more money for they have it not.’*" Many joined in the movement in the hope of getting relief from feudal burdens.*” Repeal of certain unpopular statutes was demanded.** The loyal attitude of the young earl of Derby and his promptitude in raising a force of nearly 3,000 men ** prevented the extension of the rising to the southern parts of the county, where indeed discontent was less keen. The rebels had had hopes of Derby, and it was insinuated that his elation at receiving a royal commission extending over Lancashire, Cheshire, North Wales, and Staffordshire lost them his support.*° Derby disbanded his little army on hearing of the accord taken by the duke of Norfolk with the Yorkshire insurgents at Doncaster on 27 October. They were sent home without their wages, and a week or two later some of them set upon the earl 48 Land P. Hen. VILL, iii, 3482. 36 Thid. viii, 984, 1008. 47 Thid. 1029. 48 Thid. 1108. 48 Thid. 1030, 1046 (July). %° For a full account of the Pilgrimage of Grace in Lancashire and its religious causes see above, PP- 39, 43- For letters from Aske to Lancashire gentlemen urging them to raise the commons there sce L. and P. Hen. VIII, xi, 804 ; xii, 785. *! Thid. xi, 678. 82 Thid. 454,464,507. ‘The commons demanded confirmation of the concession now made by the lords that land in the northern counties, including Furness, should be held by tenant right, and that the ‘ gressom’ (ingressum) payable at each change of tenancy should be limited to two years’ rent ; they also asked for the enforcement of the Statute of Inclosures; ibid. 1246. %3 Statutes of Handguns and Crossbows, of Uses, of Constructive Treasons, and that empowering the king to declare the succession by will. Reform of Parliamentary elections and an early Parliament to be held in the north were also requested, 34 Ibid. 1251. His cousin Lord Monteagle headed a Stanley contingent of 616. 885 Thid. 807 ; Derb. Corresp. (Chet. Soc. New Ser. xix). Edward Stanley third earl of Derby was great- grandson of the first earl, who died in 1504. 2 " e197 28 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE and ‘took such as he had.’** During the subsequent negotiations between the royal officers and the commons, Derby was instructed to be ready to raise the forces of Lancashire and Cheshire at a moment’s notice and his activity excited suspicions of the king’s good faith. Aske complained that there was such mustering in Lancashire that the commons adjoining could not be kept in order ‘ for fear of being overrun.’ **” After the final outbreak, which barely touched Lancashire, the earl of Sussex was associated with Derby in the work of punishing the guilty and restoring order in the county.“* A number of offenders (including the abbot of Whalley) were hanged at Lancaster, Whalley, and Manchester,” and on 21 March, 1537, Sussex wrote that he ‘expected to leave the people as obedient, faithful, and dreadful subjects as any in the realm.’ He incidentally expressed his opinion that there was not a ‘* skacer’ county both for horse meat and man’s meat in England.*” Some things came out in the course of the general inquiry into the insurrection which suggested that the hopes which the rebels had cherished of support from the earl of Derby might not have been without some justification in his views on certain points, but his conduct throughout had been so correct that no notice could be taken of these suspicions. That he was popularly supposed not to be over sympathetic with the subsequent developments of royal policy seems to be attested by the false report set about in the autumn of 1538 that he had been sent to the Tower. The quiet which fell upon the county during the remaining years of the reign was broken only by musterings for the wars. When the earl of Hertford invaded Scotland in 1544 Lancashire furnished 3,000 archers and billmen out of a total of 12,300 provided in combination with Cheshire, Derbyshire, Yorkshire, and Nottinghamshire.” Parr I]—From rue Reicn or Henry VIII Though Lancashire took no considerable part in the great rising of 1536 it had to suffer its share of the penalties awarded to the rebellious north. For the better preservation of order in these distant parts of the kingdom two consti- tutional changes were then introduced which very closely affected the subse- quent history of this county as well as that of the north generally, and proved very far-reaching in their effect. These were the revival of the ‘Council of the North’ of Edward IV and the appointment of lords-lieutenant to administer the political and military government of the counties. The revival of the ‘Council of the North’ was a stroke of masterful policy rendered necessary perhaps by extraordinary events. By it there was now placed upon the proud and stubborn neck of the northerners a yoke which at the end of a hundred years became so insufferable that, as will be seen, they threw it off with violence, breaking in pieces not merely the yoke itself, but the government that had kept it there so long. a - ie P. Hen. VIII, xi, 1097. *7 Ibid. 1134-5, 1227. “S Ibid. xi, 302. 5 Thid. 632. * Ibid. 695. *! hid, xiii (2), 632. *@ Ibid. xix (2), App. 8. Cheshire 2,000, Yorkshire 6,000, Derbyshire 800, Nottinghamshire 500. The four northernmost counties supplied together 7,473. 218 POLITICAL HISTORY In its beginning the council does not appear to have been injurious to Lancashire, which had not much part or lot in its deliberations. There seem to have been no Lancashire members, and there were no sessions held in the county.’ This was in some respects an advantage, and in others a disadvan- tage, since any causes affecting the county had to be pleaded at York, Hull, Newcastle, or Durham, wherever the council happened to be sitting.’ A northern lieutenancy comprising several counties grouped together (as in the ancient Norman shrievalty) had been actually instituted earlier in the reign of Henry VIII, but after the unrest and disaffection which culmi- nated in the Pilgrimage of Grace it assumed greater power and importance. The office, which was at first closely associated with the presidency of the Northern Council, was held by the duke of Norfolk, by the earl of Shrewsbury, and lastly by the earl of Derby, in whose family it has remained, with one or two exceptions, down to the present time. It is not exactly clear when the lieutenancy of Lancashire became separated from the general lieutenancy of the north, but it was probably from the time when it was taken over by the earl of Derby, who as a great county magnate had almost paramount power in the palatinates of Cheshire and Lancashire.® Politically regarded the institution of the lieutenancy of the county is important, as it marks the beginning of a period of strong centralization. The lord lieutenant was an extraordinary officer sent by the monarch, a /atere so to speak, to rule the county on behalf of the crown. As the sovereign’s direct representative he took precedence of, and partially superseded, that ancient provincial governor, the sheriff, whose authority had hitherto been supreme in all matters of law and order affecting the county. . It is necessary to insist upon the extraordinary character of the two political expedients to which the Tudors resorted, because these powerful presidencies came to have a predominating influence on the history of the north and of the palatinate of Lancashire in particular. Gradually departing from the raison d’étre of their inception, which was to administer justice and to preserve law and order, they ended in becoming the local instruments of the king’s tyranny, and so defeated the purpose for which they were originated, and by their strongly partisan and persecuting character became definite sources of oppression. From the very first the law of political expediency and of subserviency to the crown was, as might be expected from a crown officer, pursued by the lieutenancy. It was not merely that, on account of the firmness and caution of the earl of Derby, the county was kept out of the northern rebellion, but it was equally due to the earl’s recognition of the necessity of bending to the strong current of the times that the lieutenancy met the requirements of the advanced Edwardian reformers, just as the earl afterwards accommodated his policy to the orders of the Marian bigotry. This pliant acquiescence, though it saved trouble at the time, prepared the way for later disasters. By giving each party its head alternately, both grew strong enough to wrestle with 1 Quoted Lancs. Lieutenancy (Chet. Soc. xlix, 1), pt. i, Introd. p. xviii. ? Burnet, Hist. of the Reformation, pt. ii, bk. i, No. 56. 3 The earl had a commission from Hen. VIII to raise forces and suppress insurrections on the border of the county, but this was at the very time when the earl of Shrewsbury held the northern lieutenancy ; vide Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. vi, App. X, 445. 219 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE their opponent in the following century. Had Mary succeeded her father the Reformation in Lancashire might have been stamped out altogether, and the remainder of Church property might possibly have been saved from the wreck. But the succession of a minor under the guardianship of a fanatically Protestant council, headed by the enthusiastic Somerset, nourished and fostered those seeds of reformation which in Lancashire had fallen upon fertile ground, and during the interval of the rule of Edward VI its assiduous cultivators succeeded in bringing to a mature growth the Lancashire Puritan party, which later became a great political force in the county. The lord-lieutenant was probably more congenially and suitably engaged in the military duties of his office than in destroying monasteries or persecuting Protestants, and we therefore turn to his work of assembling in 1553 the first recorded military muster of the county forces under the Lancashire lieutenancy.* Each hundred furnished its special quota as follows :— Derby hundred . : . 430 men Amounderness hundred . 300 men Salford ,,. ; Bi BGO. 155 Blackburn ie «$00. 55 Leyland ,,. ’ IO! 55 Lonsdale 5 ° BIS OF nay Their leaders were to be the earl himself and the chief gentlemen of the county. Sir Richard Molyneux, Sir Thomas Gerard, Sir Piers Legh, Sir John Holcroft, Sir John Atherton, Sir William Norris, and some other esquires and gentlemen, were for West Derby. For Salford were Sir Edmund Trafford, Sir William Radcliffe, Sir Robert Langley, Sir Thomas Holt, Sir Robert Worsley, and some others, esquires. In Leyland hundred Sir Thomas Hesketh and other gentlemen ; and in Amounderness Sir Thomas Hesketh and Sir Richard Hoghton and other gentry. In Blackburn hundred Sir Richard Shireburne, Sir Thomas Langton, Sir Thomas Talbot, Sir John Southworth, John Towneley, and other esquires and gentlemen. In Lonsdale hundred the Lord Monteagle, Sir Marmaduke Tunstall, and some other gentlemen. In 1556 a levy of 200 archers was made on the county to serve the queen against the Scotch, under the leadership of Sir Robert Worsley and Edward Tildesley, esquire. Next year we find a dispatch of the earl of Derby in his capacity of lord-lieutenant addressed to the earl of Shrewsbury, Lord President of the Council of the North, giving details as to the captains of the forces he was sending ‘against the Scottish doings.’ These were as follows :— Soldiers Sir Richard Molyneux, or his son and heir. . . . é ; 200 Sir Thomas Gerard. . ‘ : ‘ 3 4 ; : : 200 Sir ‘Chomas Talbot . : : ‘ . ‘ : ‘ ‘ ‘ 200 Sir Richard Hoghton, not able to go in person, but will send a substitute . 100 Sir Thomas Hesketh Sir Thomas Langton In able to serve, but will furnish an able captain . 100 Sir William Norris Sir William Radcliffe or his son and heir, and Sir John Atherton with him 100 Francis Tunstall and others ‘ : , ‘ ; : : i 100 Sir John Holcroft and his son and heir; Richard Assheton of Middleton : and others ‘ F : i : é - 100 The earl of Derby supplied the rest of the quota for Lancashire, which totalled about 2,000 men.® * Lancs. Lieutenancy (Chet. Soc. xlix, 1), pt. i, 2, et seq. * These details are copied from the earl’s dispatch as quoted ; ibid. pp. 16-17. 220 POLITICAL HISTORY These names of Lancashire knights and gentlemen are interesting and important owing to the very prominent part borne by many of them or their descendants in the next and following reigns. Again in 1556—7° a commis- sion of array was issued to the sheriff and justices of the county for a muster of its armed forces. Next year the queen died. The accession of the Princess Elizabeth in 1558 was doubtless a great relief to the handful of Protestants in Lancashire, one or two of whom were in prison for religion. The queen’s policy, however, being a middle one between the Edwardian iconoclasm and the Marian bigotry, did not promise much satisfaction to the Puritans any more than to the Roman Catholics of the county. She was intolerant of extremists. Her position was rather that of her royal father, and by the Acts of Supremacy and Uniformity passed in 1559 she assumed the right of deciding the doctrine and worship which were to be taught and used in public. Those who objected to the assumption were regarded as ‘disobedient subjects’ or even ‘traitors, and punishable accordingly. The Acts were strenuously resisted by many in Lancashire ;7 but the queen seems to have set her heart and mind upon the spiritual and political conquest of the county, for the more ‘ contumacious’ the people the greater were the efforts put forth by the queen and her council. The loyalty of Lancashire was indeed of importance owing to its nearness to Scotland, where in 1561 the young widowed queen of France, then queen of Scots, had taken up herstate. Her zealous adherence to Roman Catholicism, her asserted claim to the English throne, made her a dangerous rival on the northern border, and a possible combination with the zealous Roman Catholics of Lancashire was far from being impracticable. By way of assuring herself and her council of its military strength the queen ordered the lord-lieutenant to summon a muster of the troops of the county. The array of January, 1560, showed 3,992 ‘harnessed and un- harnessed men’ in it. These probably were those whom the earl mentioned in a letter to Sir William Cecil as being ordered to Newcastle for 1 February’ to assist at the siege of Berwick. Owing to the tumult of events happening over the border, where in 1565 the Scottish queen had married the young earl of Darnley and acquiesced in his murder two years later, Elizabeth and her council, headed by Cecil, afterwards Lord Burghley, felt that greater attention should be given to the forcible conversion of Lancashire from its religious leanings. The county indeed swarmed with Roman Catholics, some of them having sworn not to come to the Anglican communion and rejoicing in the report of a projected Spanish invasion.” Upon such nothing short of an organized government campaign of prosecution was likely to take affect. Accordingly in 1567 the queen wrote to Dr. Downham, bishop of Chester, urging him to be more zealous in the suppression of recusancy and in the encouragement of episcopacy," and pointing out how the earl of Derby had already proved ® Pat. 3 & 4 Phil. and Mary (1556-7), m. 11 4. "Pat. 1 Eliz. m. 32d. 8 Lancs. Lieutenancy, pt. i, 21, No. 6 (reprinted from the Shuttleworth MSS.). ® Cal. 8.P. Dom. 1547-80, p. 149. © Letter from Rich. Hurleston to the earl of Pembroke concerning the king of Spain’s preparations for invading England ; ibid. 303. 4 Strype, Annals of the Reformation, i, 544-5. 221 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE his zealous loyalty by the arrest of suspected persons. In compliance with the queen’s request the bishop made a tour of his diocese, which extended over all Lancashire, and on 1 November, 1568, wrote a report to Cecil as to the doings of the ecclesiastical commissioners, and mentioned certain prominent recusants, who were examined before them.” In February, 1569, the queen wrote to her ecclesiastical commissioners in the north, and in particular to the earl of Derby, the bishop of Chester, and the sheriff of Lancaster, directing them to attach such persons as under pretence of religion drew sundry gentlemen and other persons from their ‘duty and allegiance.’ In another letter to Edward Holland, the sheriff of Lancashire, the queen commanded him to apprehend certain ministers '* who were obviously Roman Catholics preaching their so-called ‘disloyal’ doctrines. One of these was that afterwards notorious political schemer Cardinal Allen,“ who, warned of his danger in remaining in Lancashire, went over to Flanders in the same year. As a further measure of precaution against idle discontent the whole mob of vagrant persons who had no honest means of livelihood were herded up and swept out of the county. Strype tells us that no less than 13,000 ‘masterless’ men were sent back to their own counties as the result of this general order." The anxiety of the queen and her ministers was amply justified in that second great ‘ Rebellion of the North,’ which broke out in November, 1569, on behalf of Mary queen of Scots and of the restoration of the Roman Catholic religion. Again, thanks to the stout loyalty and extensive power of the earl of Derby, Lancashire was kept from taking any part in this insurrection, though the rebel earls of Northumberland and Westmorland sent letters to ask his help and countenance.” On 20 November, 1569, the queen had appointed Lord Derby her lord-lieutenant™® in the county palatine of Lancaster. Now, therefore, came the earl’s chance for proving his staunch loyalty. He had already written to the queen giving her information of the intended rising, and assuring her that Lancashire should not participate in it. He next forwarded the letters of the rebel earls, and before the queen could have received them a missive reached him from Eliz- abeth commanding him to raise the whole forces of Lancashire and Cheshire and to proceed against the rebels. They were easily dispersed, and the county forces returned home. But from this time onwards the queen and her council kept the county closely in hand both as to the persecution of recusants and the preparation of available troops for cases of similar political and military emergency.” It was probably these costly musters that obliged the government to have recourse to taxation, so that in 1569-70 ‘the ancient Tenth and " See Lancs. Lieutenancy, pt. i, 46, note 89; also note 28, quoting letter of Bishop Downham to the Secretary of State. '* Cal. 8.P. Dom. 1547-80, p. 305. “ Thid. 307. ® See Lancs. Lieutenancy, pt. i, 25, note (continued from note 2, ps 23). * Strype, Annals of the Reformation, i, 572. ’ Published in Burghley’s State Papers, i, 5 64. ** Baines, Hist. of Lancs. (ed. Harland), i, 169. ° Cal. S.P. Dom. 1566-79, p. 159. * See Harl. MS. 309, fol. 104 for the earl of Derby’s adjustment of the respective divisions of force assigned to the justices of the peace in the palatinate, Sept. 1570. 222 POLITICAL HISTORY Fifteenth chargeable within the county of Lancaster’ was revived and levied in the net sum of £305 35. 8a.™ The ‘seventies’ were anxious times for England. The pope’s hostile proclamation by a bull releasing Elizabeth’s subjects from their allegiance, followed by the great massacre of Protestants in France in 1572 and the hatching and exposure of the Ridolfi plot for marrying the queen of Scots to the duke of Norfolk, necessarily alarmed the queen and her advisers, and made them feel how necessary it was to prosecute the campaign against the recusants and to provide an armed force within the country to resist any sudden rising on their part. In 1572 the old earl of Derby died, and was succeeded in his title and estates by his son Henry, the queen’s favourite.” On him, apparently, the queen conferred the lieutenancy of both palatinates in succession to his father, and one of the new earl’s first duties was to superintend the general muster of 1574, by which was obtained a list of the serviceable men that could be furnished by the county. The various extant documents which certify to the Lancashire returns * vary a little in detail ; but it will suffice to quote the verdict of the editor of the Lancashire Lieutenancy, who puts the total number of men mustered in Lancashire in this commission as between five and six thousand, of whom though all were ‘able’ only about one-half, or rather less, were armed.” The distribution was as follows :— Archers Billmen Soldiers Honprep Tora. Furnished | Unfurnished | Furnished | Unfurnished! Furnished | Unfurnished Derby. . . . . 140 140 429 390 569 530 1,099 Leyland . . . . 59 40 200 go 259 130 389 Blackburn. . . . . 126 20 251 402 377 422 799 Lonsdale . . . |. 112 76 344 267 456 343 799 Amounderness . . . 108 120 152 459 260 579 839 Salford. . . . . 60 72 294 309 354 381 735 County. . . . 605 468 1,670 1,917 2,275 2,385 4,660 Compared with the musters of the other counties Lancashire came out favourably ; but in respect of the proportion of soldiers to the aggregate population it ranked second in England, being exceeded only by Middlesex.” The importance of keeping a county of such military capacity on the side of the crown was fully appreciated by Elizabeth, though not sufficiently ” Harl. MS. 1926, art. 5, fol. 22. Quoted Lancs. Lieutenancy, pt. i, 24, No. 8. * Burghley, State Papers, ii, 184. Also Thos. Challoner writing in 1576 says he was ‘with Elizabeth © Queene well lik’t and of her subjects in great favour.’ * Harl. MSS. Cod. 1926, art. 3, fol. s-19¢; and Harl. MS. 1926, art. 4, fol. 20, for the general levy of arms, armour, and horses in Lancs. ; and for the certificate and summary of the same muster. Quoted Lancs. Lieutenancy, pt. i, 34-61, No. 10, 11. ™ The editor of the Lancs. Lieutenancy has (i, 61) a lengthy note as to the various discrepancies in the table of returns, as shown by the detailed numbers quoted in the text of the Harl. MS. and those given in the above table, in which he remarks that the totals given in the text (as distinguished from the table) are 2,375 furnished and 2,495 unfurnished. Add to these, he says, the 600 pioneers and it gives for the total number of men mustered in Lancashire under this certificate 5,470. Add again the 1,230 men given in the first-quoted Harl. MS. as furnished ‘ by the Statute,’ and the total is 6,700 men for Lancashire. *% Cf Baines, Hist. of Lancs. (ed. Harland), i, 171. 223 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE by her unfortunate successor, the second Stuart, whose final and completest overthrow, as will presently be seen, was largely effected by the resistance of this very county. In addition to this general muster of the county's armed strength, special levies were raised in it to serve in Ireland. Fifty archers had been levied from Lancashire to serve in that county in 1567 ;** and now again in 1574 the earl and other commissioners were required to raise, furnish with arms, clothing, and money, a composite force of archers, billmen, and calivers, making a total of roo men. Next year a levy of thirty labourers and soldiers was taken for service in Ireland by the queen’s command.” While taking good order for the military efficiency of the county, the queen and her advisers lost no time in pressing on the campaign against the recusants. In a letter of 1570 the bishop of Carlisle had remarked that ‘in Lancashire the people fall from religion, revolt to Popery, and refuse to come to Church.’ * In 1576, in reply to a letter received from the council urging strong measures against such, the bishop of Chester, Dr. Downham, wrote a letter which is an indictment of the Roman Catholic members of the population, who would not attend the Church service, or pursue the ‘ godly exercises of Religion allowed and set forth by the Laws of this Realm.’ He incloses a list of the principal offending recusants, classed as ‘ obstinate’ or ‘conformable.'” The matter was sufficiently serious to engage the attention of the queen and her council, and to be referred to a new ecclesiastical commission acting in concert with the president and Council of the North, which acted as the Northern Star Chamber. In June, 1580, the lords of the council wrote to Henry earl of Huntingdon, lord president of the North, signifying that many gentlemen and others in Lancashire being fallen away to ‘the Popish religion,’ the queen had thought fit to send down an ecclesiastical commission into the diocese of Chester (which at that time included Lancashire in its scope) directed to the archbishop of York, the earl of Derby, the bishop of Chester and others, to proceed against the said parties. As the defection referred to was thought to be < principally begun by sundry principal gentlemen of that county ’ (Lancashire), ‘by whom the ‘meaner sort of people are led and seduced, so it is thought meeter that in the execution of the commission you begin first with the best of the said Recusants.’* The first measures of the High Commission Court were the levying of greater penalties upon non-attendance at church, and the imprisoning of recusants. If the persons fined did not appear in court to answer the summons against them the sheriff was empowered to effect a distringas on their goods and lands. In July this year Lord Burghley himself wrote to the bishop of Chester ‘ touching the ill state of Lancashire on the Lords of the High Commission’s first repair thither’ ; and that at the bishop’s request he had procured the queen’s letter of thanks to Henry earl of Derby for his great pains in endeavouring to reform the same.” A letter of 26 July § Shuttleworth MSS. ; Harl. MS. 1926, art. 9, fol. 284, quoted Lanes. Lieutenancy, pt. i, 22, No. 7. * Shuttleworth MSS. quoted Lancs. Lieutenancy, pt. i, 66, No. 14, 1575. ** Quoted ibid. i, 31, note. ” Harl. MSS. Cod. 286, fol. 28. Quoted Lanes. Lieutenancy, pt. i, 67, No. 14*.—1576. *° Peck, Desiderata Curiosa, i, 85; Lib. iii, No. xi, June 1580, *' Ibid. i, Lib. iii, No. xii, 3 July, 1580; No. xiv, 15 July. * Thid. 23 July, 1580, No. xvi. 234 POLITICAL HISTORY thanks the bishop for his great exertions, and hopes to see ‘those countries under your charge speedily purged of that dangerous infection of Popery.’ The discovery of real or fictitious plots against the queen decided the council upon the severest measures against a religion which exalted allegiance to the pope above that due to the sovereign. Campion was thought to be in hiding in Lancashire. A letter of Sir Francis Walsingham, dated 31 July, 1580, refers to the queen’s decision ‘ to proceed roundly with the recusants.”™ Campion was arrested and executed in 1581, and in that year Sir John Southworth, and others who were arrested by the inquisition of 1576, were more strictly kept, and the whole machinery, lay and clerical, of the county, was put in motion for the prosecution of the religious campaign.” The commissioners were to require ‘ the sheriffs and Justices of the Peace adjoin- ing to their houses to cause the precepts to be duly served and executed upon their peril.’ * That the task of prosecuting recusancy in a county where Roman Catholicism had such a deep hold was not an easy one appears from the letter of the council to the high sheriff of Lancashire and to the justices, reproaching them that although the queen had signified her pleasure for a general conformity in matters of religion—no properly political disloyalty being alleged—and for all recusants to be proceeded against at the quarter sessions, yet nothing had been done in Lancashire ; and requiring a list of all faulty persons and absent justices. In January, 1582, the lords of the council wrote to the earl of Derby and the bishop of Chester, regretting to hear that ‘there is such a number of Recusants in Lancashire,’ and referring to the ‘slackness and partiality used by some of the Justices.’ The question soon arose as to how the heavy expenses of the prisoners for religion were to be defrayed. The commissioners decided that a charge of 8d. a week should be laid on every parish to defray the cost.” This collection was to be assessed and taken by the justices of the peace, and paid to the keeper of the Fleet Prison, Manchester. Some difficulty arose about the collection of money in the parishes, but in December, 1583, the council sent orders it was to be continued, and those who opposed it were to be sent up to London. The earl of Derby was very zealous in the cause of the crown, and the queen caused the council to thank him for his forwardness in the matter.” His son Ferdinando, Lord Strange, writing to the bishop of Chester, refers to Lancashire as ‘this so unbridled and bad an handful of England.’ While all this prosecution of recusants was going forward, the queen and council were by no means indifferent to the military provision for the county. In March, 1580, the queen’s commission for a general muster was sent to the palatinate, under the management of the earl of Huntingdon as lord president of the Northern Council, the earl of Derby as lord-lieutenant, the sheriff, Edmund Trafford, esq., and many others, knights, esquires, and gentlemen of the county.“ At the same time was sent an order for a ® Peck, Desiderata Curiosa, i, Lib. iii, No. xviii, 31 July, 1580. % Thid. No. xxxiv. 35 Ibid. No. xxxv, 4 July, 1581. % Ibid. No. xlili. 14 Dec. 1581. 7 Thid. No. lili, 30 June, 1582. 88 Tbid. Lib. iv, No. vi. 3° Ibid. No. xxvi, Dec. 1583. * Ibid. No. xxvii. " Shuttleworth MSS. quoted Lancs. Lieutenancy, pt. 2, p. 104, No. 27.—1580. 2 225 29 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE detachment of trained men to be shipped from Chester to Ireland.* In 1583 instructions were sent to the county commissioners concerning the mustering of horsemen and the breeding of horses.* Next year another levy of men was taken for Ireland ; while as a more effectual means of anticipating any rebellious efforts, the recusants were now required to find either horsemen or money for the Irish expedition, a requisition which would sufficiently cripple their power of finding any for their own purposes. The danger to the queen’s person from the adherents of Mary Stuart in general, and from Roman Catholic fanatics in particular, was believed to be so great, that in 1584 a loyal association of English gentlemen was formed by the earl of Leicester and with the sanction of Parliament, to protect their sovereign from assassination.* Not to be lacking in zeal for their queen, the Protestant gentlemen of Lancashire got up a similar declaration. The list was of course headed by the earl of Derby and his son Ferdinando, Lord Strange, and comprised the names of eighty other Lancashire landowners.” Many of the loyal Roman Catholic gentry also subscribed their names. The declaration was, in fact, a public test of loyalty, and those who refused to sign would certainly have been arrested as traitors. The absence of names such as those of Sir John Southworth and others, may be accounted for by the fact that they were not merely in prison, but had been taken to London some time before. In May, 1585, Philip of Spain declared war against England by imprisoning all the crews of English ships in Spanish harbours and detaining the vessels. Drake sailed later in the year to avenge this injury, and it would appear that from about this time the king of Spain was planning a descent upon the English coasts. This was apparently to have come about in connexion with the Babington conspiracy to assassinate Elizabeth and to put Mary on the throne.* In August, 1586, the conspirators, who included several Lancashire men, were arrested, and a special commission was appointed to examine Mary’s share in the plot. Meanwhile Philip’s designs of invasion seem to have been more particularly confirmed to the English ministry by the evidence of a Liverpool merchant, one Humphrey Brooke, and a circum- stantial account is furnished by him of the number and strength of the Spanish fleet which he had seen off the Biscayan coast, and which was believed to be approaching the English Channel.” The danger was undoubtedly very great, and urgent measures of defence were imperative. In October, 1587, orders were sent to Sir Richard Shireburne, one of the deputy lieutenants for the county, and to the justices, that the trained bands were to be mustered at Lancaster, Preston, Whalley, Manchester, Ormskirk, and Chorley, the horsemen at Preston and Wigan, and the arms of the county were to be collected at the places of muster by “ Shuttleworth MSS. quoted Lancs. Lieutenancy, pt. 2, p. 111, No. 28.—1 580. “ Harl. MSS. Cod. 1926, art. 28, fol. 382. Quoted ibid. pt. 2, p. 130. “ Shuttleworth MS. ; Harl. MS. 1926, art. 51, fol. 65. Quoted ibid. pt. 2, p- 132. “Ibid. Also Harl. MS. 1926, art. 52, fol. 67, in which the year is wanting. Quoted Lancs. Litu- tenancy, pt. 2, p. 139. ; ““ Hansard, Parl. Hist. i, 823. “ The full list of names is attached to the copy of the declaration preserved in the Harl. Collect Harl. MS. 2219, fol. 19. Quoted Lancs. Lieutenancy, pt. 2, pp. 152-8. © State Trials, i, 123. “Vide Harl. MSS. Cod. 286, fol. 88. ‘Tidings of the Spanish fleet.? Quoted in Lancs. Lieutenanc pt. 2, pp. 176-9. a * Shuttleworth MSS. quoted Lancs. Lieutenancy, pt. 2, p. 180, et seq. 226 POLITICAL HISTORY the justices of the peace. In April, 1588, an abstract of the returns made by the deputy lieutenants certifies that Lancashire could furnish 1,170 trained men, 700 calivers, 300 corslets, 80 bows, 20 bills, and 20 lances. Another certificate adds 265 light horse.” Probably by way of bringing the palatinate more closely under the eye of the council, the queen, in June, 1587, appointed her secretary, Sir Francis Walsingham, to the vacant chancellorship of the duchy.” Other steps thought necessary for the order of the county were also taken. On the suggestion of the rector of Wigan, the Rev. Edward Fleetwood, those justices who were deemed favourable to the cause of recusancy were removed and others who were more reliable were put in their places.* No less than six hundred recusants were consequently presented at the summer assizes at Lancaster in this year. In the summer of 1588 the danger of foreign invasion upon the west was so much increased that points on the Lancashire coast and heights inland were guarded by warning beacons,” and, in particular, attention was given to the possibility of an armed landing near the Peel of Foudrey,® in the northern part of the county of Lancaster. These pre- cautionary measures were the direct outcome of a spirited public letter written in June that year by the queen to all lords-lieutenant and so to Lord Derby, in his capacity of lord-lieutenant of Lancashire, referring to the alarm of present invasion, and requiring every man to arm in defence of ‘Country, Liberty, wife, children, lands, life, and that which is especially to be regarded, for the preservation of the true sincere Religion of Christ.’ * The earl was to signify to the Privy Council what additional armed strength could be provided upon this ‘ instant extraordinary occasion.’ Everyone knows what happened to the great Spanish Armada, and the rejoicings that took place all over England at the news of its dispersal and destruction. In September, 1588, the earl of Derby, who had been in Flanders and at court in the previous months, wrote from Lathom House to Sir John Byron, his deputy lieutenant, and the Salford justices to give order for a public service of prayer and thanksgiving for their great deliverance.” A similar order was doubtless issued in each of the six hundreds of Lancashire. In the ‘nineties’ another Spanish attempt, a landing in Ireland, was feared, and in the spring of 1593 the queen wrote to the lord-lieutenant for the putting in readiness of 138 soldiers for service in Ireland. Once or twice already men had been asked for, and subsidies demanded for their fitting out, and yet no further use of the men had been made. The earl acknow- ledges in a letter to the Salford justices that by reason of the taxation for soldiers for Ireland levied during the past eight years, he understands ‘a general grief and Mislike conceived in that notwithstanding two several Assessments have been made and collected throughout the Shire, for the furnishing of 200 soldiers’ for Ireland, ‘and no employment made at all of 5 Harl. MS. 1926, art. 77, fol. 85, quoted Lancs. Lieutenancy, pt. 2, p. 201, note 27. 51 $.P. Dom. Eliz. ccii, 47 ; also Lancs. Lieutenancy, pt. ii, p. 180, note 2. 8 See letter of Rev. Ed. Fleetwood, dated 7 Sept. 1587. Cotton MSS. Titus, B. ii. & Baines, Hist. of Lancs. (ed. Harland), i, 184. . % Harl. MS. 1926, art. 59, fol. 72 ; also Shuttleworth MSS. ; also Harl. MS. 1926, art. 42, fol. 584. 5 Tansd. MSS. Cod. 56, art. 51. * Harl. MS. 1926, art. 54, fol. 684. Quoted in full Lancs. Lieutenancy, pt. ii, p. 203-5. 58 Sranley Papers, ii, 26 Sept. 1588. 6° Harl. MS, art. 108, fol. 113; ibid. art. 109, fol. 114; ibid. art. 107, fol. 1128. 227 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE them; yet her Majesty now requiring but the furnishing of 138 soldiers a new taxation is made and demanded.” This fear of Spanish invasion, how- ever, passed over, as is signified by the later order of this same year for the discharge of the ‘ Beacon Watches.’ * The Tudor period was now drawing to a close, and in 1603 the great Queen Elizabeth, who had outlived nearly all her famous ministers, passed away. With her also passed that era of strong but wise and temperate policy which had been applied to the government of the wild and undaunted North. Much has been so far written of the Elizabethan campaign against the Roman Catholics, which was in Lancashire the chief political agitation in the last half of the sixteenth century. Before leaving that century it will be well to insist upon another campaign which the queen also prosecuted in Lancashire, though with less necessity for stern measures of suppression ; this was what might be termed the minor war against the Puritans. The queen disliked the Puritan independence of thought and their objection to prelatical authority which, she rightly argued, boded no good-will to monarchical authority. But since the events of the time caused even the Puritans to side firmly with the throne against Romanist conspiracies, their tenets did not clash with or threaten the safety of the government, and, moreover, many of the queen’s advisers, including Lord Burghley, were of strong Puritan leanings. One of her chaplains, Dean Nowell of St. Paul’s, a noted Lanca- shire divine, preached strongly both in London and Lancashire in favour of Puritan doctrines. Some excesses, however, of the more extreme professors of the party called for vigorous political suppression. In 1593 the authors of several seditious pamphlets were hanged, and with these also Penry, one of the authors of the Martin Mar-Prelate tracts, some of which had been printed and published in Manchester® by a wandering press seized and destroyed there in 1588." Nore and more, however, in Lancashire, due perhaps to the vigorous preaching of Dean Nowell and the following he had in his part of the country, Puritan doctrine found favour among the Protestant gentry. Possibly no more significant sign of the tendency of the times could be found than in the protest issued and signed by a number of Lancashire gentlemen against the enormities practised on the Sabbath and against the general desecration of the hours appointed for divine service, and for the abridging of the number of ale-houses in the county. This petition was signed by the well-known names of ‘Jo. Byron, Ric. Shirborn, Edm. Trafforde, Nicholas Banester, James Asshton, Ric. Brereton, Ric. Assheton, Bryan Parker, Thos. Talbotte, John Bradshawe, Edm. Hopwood, Alex. Rigbie, W. Wrightington, Edm. Fleetwoode.’ * Towards the close of Elizabeth’s reign the Puritans had grown even stronger and firmer in their convictions than before, and looked with great expectations to the young King of Scotland as to one who, coming from a realm where his chief counsellors had been of the strictest Presbyterian order, © Harl. MS. 1926, art. 112, fol. 117. Quoted in Lancs, Lieutenancy, ii, p. 233, note. §! Ibid. art. 119, fol. 125. * Timperley, Hist. of Printing, 400 et seq. * State Trials. Quoted Lancs. Lieutenancy, pt. ii, 223, note. “ Harl. MS. 1926, art. 69, fol. 80. Quoted Lancs. Lieutenancy, pt. ii, 217 et seq. 228 POLITICAL HISTORY might be counted on to favour their religious convictions. Never, however, were any people more mistaken than those who anticipated that King James would smile upon the Puritan party ; and it was the bitter disappointment of these Puritan expectations which ultimately brought about the alienation of the Lancashire Puritans from the House of Stuart. The Stuarts were as lacking in political sagacity as the Tudors were conspicuous for that very quality. Doubtless James I received the adulatory address presented to him on his accession by the Lancashire gentry in the same spirit of overweening confidence which proved the ruin of his son. It would appear that though the majority of them were strong Protestants, many of the gentlemen who now testified their loyalty to the king’s person were either ‘conformed recusants’ or the sons and heirs of recusants.® But the Gunpowder Treason of November, 1605, gave a great blow to the king’s tolerance of Roman Catholics, and though they had no concern in it a list of Lancashire recusants was, after the discovery of the plot, forwarded at once to the Privy Council. Legislation was enforced to secure the attendance of ‘conformed recusants’ at church, and once a year at sacrament,” and in 1612 the Lancashire recusants were deprived of their arms. As for the Puritans, their hopes, though raised at first, were subsequently dashed by the king’s public denouncement of them and their doctrines. Returning through Lancashire from his visit to Scotland, in 1617, the king stayed, as is well known, at Hoghton Tower, where he was most royally entertained for three days by Sir Richard Hoghton, assisted by the neigh- bouring gentry. While there he received a petition praying for the removal of the restrictions imposed by the late queen’s commissioners for the strict keeping of the Sabbath. The king not merely granted it, but subsequently issued a proclamation ® in which he observed That in his progress through Lancashire he found it necessary to rebuke some Puritans and precise people and took order that the said unlawful carriage should not be used by any of them hereafter, in the prohibiting and unlawfully punishing of his good people for using their lawful recreations and honest exercises upon Sundays after service. In this ‘ Book of Sports’ as the proclamation was called, the king remarked that he had found two kinds of people in Lancashire—Papists and Puritans. With regard to the latter he observed that he had given orders to the bishop of the diocese to deal with all Puritans and Precisians in the county, and constrain them either to conform or to leave the country. As by this ordinance no one was permitted to indulge in Sunday sports who had not previously attended divine service according to the rites of the Church of England, it followed that all recusants were excluded from the benefit of the concession, and those who were included against their will had to see the sanctity of the Sabbath violated before their eyes. Thus the king outraged the feelings of the better class and more sober portion of the Protestant population in order to pander to the tastes of the rabble, and without affording any pleasure to the Roman Catholics, who were expressly excluded from participating in the Sunday revels * Lancs. Lieutenancy, pt. ii, 250, note. * Cal. 8.P. Dom. 1603-10, p. 264. * Stat. of the Realm, 3 Jas. I, cap. 4 (1605). * 24 May, 1618. ® «Book of Sports.’ 229 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE they would otherwise have enjoyed. The edict was a definite insult to Lancashire Puritanism, and alienated from the king’s side all serious-minded men. Such was the heritage of factious trouble King James bequeathed to Lancashire and of which his son Charles was to reap the unhappy conse- quences. Charles I succeeded his father in March, 1625. He at once put the loyalty and goodwill of the county to trial by demands both for men and money. After raising a body of 300 men, who were embarked at Hull on foreign service,” William, earl of Derby, as lord-lieutenant, was required to raise a loan in the county for the crown. In October he wrote to the council that the state of the gentry was much impaired, but that he hoped to raise a loan far exceeding any former loan of this kind. ‘Thereupon the deputy lieutenants were instructed to forward lists of the most able men of good personal estate and of rich tradesmen. Every knight was taxed twenty marks and every esquire £10. Probably for purposes of getting money by fines a ready ear was lent to informers against the recusants. Sir Thomas Gerard among others was accused of treasonable speeches,” and Sir William Norris of having some years before sent over money and arms to the late king’s enemies abroad.” The recusants were further accused of having held meetings in Wharmer Forest.” In 1626 the earl of Derby and his deputy lieutenants were much occu- pied in making military musters and in reviewing the trained bands, for whose calling together, however, they complain they have no power of levying money.’* Next year men were again summoned for foreign service,” and the loan commissioners forwarded £4,418 19s. 11d. from the county with the pleasing report that ‘no man denied.’ The income from the recusants must have been considerable, as many of them compounded by a yearly payment for their fines; thus Sir Cuthbert Clifton of Lytham is mentioned as compounding in £100 per annum, and Sir William Norris of Speke in £60 per annum.” With the famous Went- worth (afterwards Lord Strafford), now made president of the Council of the North, which still, as in Elizabeth’s time, acted as the Northern Star Chamber, this Council and the equally detested High Commission Court gave little rest to either recusants or Puritans. In 1629 the earl of Derby forwarded the Muster Rolls of the county to the king in council.” Finding other sources of income insufficient and having dissolved Parlia- ment without receiving any supplies, the king had recourse to extraordinary measures for raising money. The Forest Laws, particularly obnoxious in the north, where so much land might come under the title of forest,” were revived, and the areas of the royal parks and forests were defined anew. Irritating laws were also passed against the sale of venison and game and fowl, and the punishment of such offences was relegated to justices of assize.™ 70 31 May, 14 June, 1625. Cal. S.P. Dom. 1625-6, pp. 31, 36 44. 1 Ibid. p. 161. "Tid. p. 304. Ibid. p. 161. ™ Ibid Pe ie haa ie P : ne baa 326, 387, 431. oe . Pp. 250. Ibid. 1629-31, p. 428 ; cf also 1663-4, p. 348. The total amount raised in Lancashire by the compositions was about £2,500 a year. ® Ibid. 1629-31, p. 108. ® See below, p. 262. * Cal. S.P. Dom. 1635-6, p. 247. * Tbid. 230 POLITICAL HISTORY The great work required from the sheriffs was the assessment of the king’s arbitrary loans and taxes, particularly of that known as ship money, first imposed on the county in 1635 during the shrievalty of Humphrey Chetham.” Lancashire being a maritime county bore the tax very patiently at first, and to give a semblance of reality to the demand the earl of Derby was appointed vice-admiral of the Lancashire and Cheshire coasts.” The tax, which amounted to the sum of £3,500, was levied on every hundred and on every corporate town," and appears to have been willingly paid if we may judge from a letter sent to the sheriff of Lancashire ‘taking notice of his forwardness and of the people’s good affection.’ ** In June, 1636, Mr. Farington, a prominent gentleman of the Stanley household,* was pricked as sheriff for Lancashire, and the sum of assessment was now raised to £4,000, Both under William Farington’s shrievalty and that of Richard Shuttleworth, who succeeded him in the office next year, this sum appears to have been raised without any great difficulty. In December of this year the earl of Derby forwarded to the council his son Lord Strange’s certificate of the services of the deputy lieutenants in mustering the trained forces of the county. The deputies calculated that the total number of men of all arms under review was 7,468." In 1638 a levy of 600 men was raised for the king’s service,®* and the usual demand of ship money was made by the sheriff Roger Kirkby. For the first time recorded, the county appears to have resented the tax. It was only collected with difficulty. The corporation of Wigan ‘ was all behind,’ we read, the inhabi- tants having denied the payment.” Several other townships were also behind, and in some cases their goods were distrained for the payment. Still the sheriff hoped to make the account good by next term.” ‘The trouble reached a climax in Lancashire in 1640 under the shrievalty of Robert Holt, who wrote to the council that in reply to the assessments required of the hundreds by their head constables, only the constable of one hundred, and that the least in the county, brought an assessment, the rest excusing themselves upon some pretext or other. The sheriff goes on to say that ‘the county in general is very averse to the payment of this money, and that it will be great trouble and much difficulty to levy the same.’* Again in May he writes to the council that by reason that the country in general ‘bends itself against the tax’ he has not been able to collect the whole £4,000 assessed on the county. ‘With much ado, however, in several parts of three hundreds I have levied so much as amounts to £1,319 3s. which I have returned to the Treasurer of the Navy according to your instructions. Two of our largest hundreds, Amounderness and Lonsdale, altogether stand out and will neither assess nor pay.’ This evidence is important as helping to contravene the notion afterwards circulated, namely that it was only the Puritan hundreds of Salford and Blackburn that resisted the royal will. In the matter of oppo- sition to the king’s arbitrary taxation it will thus be seen that the Preston and Lancaster hundreds, as they might be called, actually led the way. The king was now in open strife with the Puritan party in Parliament, and more and more the differences between them began to assume a strongly ® Cal, S.P. Dom. 1635, p- 579. “Ibid. p. 55. ™ Ibid. 1635-6, p. 290. ® Ibid. 1635, p. 580. % See Stanley Papers (Chet. Soc. Ixvi), pt. iii, vol. i, p. lvi. *? Cal. §.P. Dom. 1636-7, p. 240. 8 Ibid. 1638-9, p. 387. *§ Ibid. p. 104. %° Thid. *! Thid. 1639-40, p. 449. 231 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE religious character. As Elizabeth logically conjectured, Puritanism implied a tendency to resist authority, particularly where that authority was pre- sumptuous enough to require unreasoning obedience. The king, who was a strong High Churchman, occupied the Elizabethan position midway between Roman Catholics and Puritans. His wife was a Roman Catholic, but, though this fact may have mitigated his resentment against the recusants, it was unable to turn him from his own Church. Still, the queen’s influence may have indirectly affected the protection afforded in 1639 to the Lancashire recusants from the unjust imposition of fines, which they complained were exacted by the under sheriff and other agents of Sir Edward Stanley, then sheriff of Lancashire.” In August, 1640, a summons came to the earl of Derby as lord-leu- tenant, to raise all the horse and foot he was able to find and to bring them ‘in person’ to join the king, who is leading his army against the rebel Scotch. The country generally was by this time in a state of ferment, and Lancashire equally so with the rest of the counties. The continual mustering of armed men by the lieutenancy upon the plea of reported attacks from the king’s enemies by land and sea, the pressing of Lancashire soldiers for the Scotch war,” the constant prosecutions of recusants and Puritans by the High Commission Court and the northern Star Chamber, the illegal demands of ship money, and, almost more than anything, the high-handed behaviour of the king’s great county officers, had irritated some sections in nearly all classes against the crown. So disturbed was the county, so full of wandering soldiers and idle persons that a convoy had to be demanded for the escort of the king’s revenue in the county.” On 3 November, 1640, the famous Long Parliament met in London. The Lancashire members * were as follows :— For the shire, Roger Kirby, esq., and Ralph Assheton, esq. (of Middleton) For Lancaster, Sir John Harrison, knt., and Thomas Fanshaw, esq. For Preston, Richard Shuttleworth, esq. (of Gawthorpe Hall), and Thomas Standish, esq. For Newton, William Ashhurst, esq., Sir Roger Palmer, knt. For Wigan, Orlando Bridgeman, esq., and Alex. Rigby, esq. (of Preston). For oe Ralph Assheton, esq. (of Whalley) son of Sir Ralph Assheton of Downham all, For Liverpool, John Moore, esq., and Sir Richard Wyn, knt. and bart. Owing to some confusion from similarity of names it may be helpful to intimate that the above-mentioned Asshetons were all for the Parliament, Ralph of Whalley being one of those who had purchased the abbey there, and the shire member of that name being the Colonel Assheton who was subsequently commander-in-chief of the Parliamentary forces in the county. One or two Rigbys were found in the later struggle on either side, but the member for Preston was the Colonel Rigby who commanded for the Parlia- ment, and must not be confounded with the royalist Alexander Rigby of Burgh, who was dismissed from his office of justice of the peace in 1641 by order of the Long Parliament. Richard Shuttleworth was the ex-sheriff, and a strong Parliamentarian. He took, as will be seen, a very prominent part in the county’s support of the Parliament.* The fate of the county, and as “ va A ie Commissioners for ca A : : ee : ss é haa S.P. Dom. 1639-40, p. 141. * Civil War Tracts for Lancs. (Chet. Soc. 2), 1. * For account of Richard Shuttleworth see Lancs. Liewtenancy, pt. ii, Pp. 272~3, note 15. 232 POLITICAL HISTORY it eventually proved, even of England, hung upon the attitude of these Lancashire members. The most outspoken of them were strongly opposed to the unlimited exercise of the king’s arbitrary power. The Asshetons, Richard Shuttleworth, William Ashhurst, Sir John Moore, were of this party; the rest sided with the king. The long pent up indignation at the king’s high-handed and unlawful exercise of the royal authority found immediate expression in the Parliament’s impeachment of Strafford in May, 1641. The popular rage against the courts of Star Chamber and of High Commission which had, particularly in Lancashire, been such sources of oppression, also broke forth, and _ these tyrannical tribunals were now by Act of Parliament abolished.” Thus ended, rather more than a century after its revival, the authority of the great ‘Council of the North,’ and with it the subserviency of Lancashire to its arbitrary and persecuting judgements. The strong Puritan bias of the Parliament was manifested still further by the bill for the abolition of Episcopacy (the Root and Branch Bill) that was on 27 May read in the Commons. This was indeed ‘the hour’ of those whom King James had so rashly insulted in his proclamation more than twenty years before ; when he seemed to imagine he could banish Puritans from Lancashire by the mere expression of his royal will and pleasure. In addition to these general grievances those Lancashire members of strong Protestant leanings were indignant at the arbitrary acts of Lord Strange, who had, they alleged, tampered with the election of the knights of the shire. In this irritated mood they hastened to emphasize their acceptance of a new lord-lieutenant appointed by Parliament, in the person of Lord Wharton. Their petition to the House of Commons thanked that assembly for purging the fountains of Government and establishing his Majesty’s Royal throne upon the old and sure foundation of impartial justice, national laws and subjects’ love . . . For expunging out of the Church innovations, and confining Churchmen to their proper functions ; and the future hopes of a National Synod of able Divines to compose the Civil War of the Church, and settle the differences both of doctrine and discipline . . . For settling the . . . hopes of a lasting possession of these high and invaluable benefits by disposing of the Militia and that of the Kingdom under command of persons of honour and unquestionable fidelity, of which members your petitioners do acknowledge the Noble Lord the L. Wharton appointed by Parliament Lord Lieutenant of this County. . . . For giving Life by Execution to the Laws against recusants and security of life to the Protestants by their disarming, for vindication of the Privileges of Parliament (. . . the best guard of His Majesty’s Royal person, Crown, and dignity) . . . That the Petition concerning the breach of privileges at the Election of Knights for this County. . . . as also the other grievances of the County . . . may receive examination and redress: and that such as shall be found to have been instruments of bringing in an arbitrary and insolent Government may make reparation for the oppressions they have done to their country and henceforth may be excluded from the exercise of that authority which . . . they would again abuse if they had the like occasion. And your Petitioners will ever be ready with their lives and estates to defend His Majesty’s Royal Person, the persons and privileges of the members of this House, the Protestant Religion, and Laws of this Kingdom. . . .® This petition has been quoted at some length because its importance as a statement of the questions then at issue between the Lancastrian Puritans and the crown, cannot be over-estimated. From the ultra-Royalist point of 7 Stat. of the Realm, 16 Chas. I, cap. xi (Parl. R. 16 Chas. p. 2, No. 7), also ibid. cap. x (Stat. of Realm, v, p. 110-2). %8 This petition was presented and read to the House, and ordered to be entered on the Journals of the House of Commons ; vide Com. Fourn. ii, 476. 2 233 30 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE view it constituted direct treason by the adoption of the Parliamentary nominee for the lieutenancy in opposition to the king’s officer, Lord Strange, already appointed. On the other hand, by the expression of loyalty to the king’s person in contra-distinction to the condemnation of the actions of his advisers, therein contained, it left to the petitioners a loophole of lawful escape from such a charge. The Parliament took the Lancashire petition so seriously that they at once acceded to the request of the petitioners to put the county militia ‘in a posture of defence,’ by sending back the four Puritan members (Assheton, Shuttleworth, Rigby, and Moore), to act as a commission to embody the militia. With these were associated other persons of quality chosen by the lord-lieutenant to serve as deputies, amongst whom were Sir Ralph Assheton (of Whalley), Ralph Assheton of Middleton, esq., Sir George Booth, Sir Thos. Stanley, Sir Will. Brereton of Honford, John Bradshaw, esq., Thos. Birch, esq., Thos. Standish, esq., and Mr. Nicholas Starkie of Huntroyde, with a few others. Some of these were likewise appointed as justices of the peace, and known Royalists such as Sir Gilbert Hoghton, Robert Holt, Alex. Rigby of Burgh, Edm. Assheton, Sir Alex. Radcliffe, Wm. Farington, Orlando Bridgeman, Roger Kirkby, and others were dismissed from that commission.'% But bold as the Puritan members might feel in London with the opinion of Parliament behind them, it was no light task to return and execute their commission in a county swarming with Roman Catholics and adherents of the earl of Derby and of Lord Strange. Possibly it was a sense of their danger and isolation that prompted them to make a final appeal to the king, by their petition of 2 May, 1642, to him at Hull. Nothing could have been more moderate or affectionate than this petition which proceeded to state that We .. . your Majesty’s most loyal subjects out of the zeal to God’s true Religion, your Majesty’s honour and safety and the Peace and welfare of our dominions, . . . do in all humility present and prostrate ourselves and supplications at your Royal fect, beseeching your Majesty to return to your great Council . . . and we with the rest of your faithfull subjects shall continually praise and pray for your prosperous and happy Reign over us.!! A second petition following this first was on the last day of May pre- sented to the king at York, subscribed to by 64 knights and esquires, ie divines, 740 gentlemen, and above 7,000 freeholders, members of the true Protestant religion in the county palatine of Lancaster. This petition enu- merated the gracious acts of the king in consenting to the reform of grievances, and praving him to be pleased to agree to the Parliament’s legislation, beseech- ing the king for direction as to where they were to turn for authority, he being absent from the Parliament ‘ whereof your majesty is the head.’! “The king’s answer was prompt and extremely gracious, but committed him to nothing more than general observations, and apparently gave no satisfaction to those who received it.!% To put the Royalist party in Lancashire in the wrong Parliament had already issued an order prohibiting the bringing together of armed forces, even ® See Civil War Tracts, 2, note 1. '” Com. Fourn. 24. Oct. 1641. Quoted Civi i'ar Tracts, 6. Quoted ibid, 8-11. "Ibid. p. 11 (6 June, 1642). 234 POLITICAL HISTORY by the king’s own warrant.. It was not likely the Royalists would suffer this tamely ; accordingly, Lord Strange, coming from York armed with the king’s Commission of Array and accompanied by the king’s sheriff, Sir John Girling- ton, and Lord Molyneux, moved from Lancaster, where he secured the magazine to Preston, where the sheriff summoned a meeting and read the Commission of Array. The sheriff then raised a shout among his followers that those who were for the king should follow him and his party.’ Mr. Alexander Rigby, the member for Wigan, being present, together with a few others of the Lancashire Parliamentary Committee, raised a counter cry of ‘For the King and Parliament,’ and this remained afterwards the noble watchword of the Parliamentary party in the county, to the no small irritation of the Royalist leaders.’ Fearing Lord Strange’s designs, Mr. Rigby hastened to warn Mr. Asshe- ton at Manchester to secure the magazine there for the Parliament.'* ‘That of Liverpool’” had already been seized by Lord Strange’s orders for the king. But for their close communication with the Parliament the Lieutenancy would have been hard put to it to sustain their part. By 3 July, however, they had raised 7,000 militia in Manchester,’ and when Lord Strange came to the town next day and demanded the magazine they felt themselves strong enough to refuse him. A slight skirmish ensued which was spoken of as the begin- ning of ‘ Civil War, being the first stroke that hath been struck and the first bullet that hath been shot.’ '” On the 15th of this month Lord Strange again attempted to seize the magazine; and a party of the townsmen favouring or fearing him invited him to a banquet in the town. He came in an overweeningly arrogant manner, accompanied by Lord Molyneux and other gentlemen, and with a troop of his own horse, between whom and the militia, directed by Colonel Birch, Captain Holcroft, and Sir Thomas Stanley, a skirmish ensued. Lord Strange took 2,000 men from the town, and assembled other thousands by his Commission of Array at Bury, Wigan, and Knutsford, and by the end of July, 1641, was said to have gathered a force of about twenty thousand men from each place to his muster. At this point a strong blow for the king might have effected great things and might have secured the county. That it was not so secured was the fault of the king’s own advisers, who, possibly jealous of the power of Lord Strange, urged Charles to disclaim these musters as tending to over- exalt the power of the king’s lieutenant and to threaten his own. No more suicidal policy could possibly have been adopted, but Charles, with his customary ill-fortune and vacillation, took the advice of his council, allowed the musters to be dispersed, divested Lord Strange of his lieutenancy of Chester and North Wales, and even proposed to divide with another his lieutenancy of Lancashire. The loyalty of few men could have stood such 1" Civil War Tracts, 13-14, and Rigby’s Letter to the Speaker of the House of Commons quoted ibid. 25-30. ee is See earl of Newcastle’s protest to Manchester, ibid. 144. ‘I cannot but wonder while you fight against the King and his authority, you should so boldly offer to profess yourselves for King and Parliament,’ &c. Manchester replied : ‘The honour of the King in all Regal Rights and Prerogatives and Privileges of Parlia- ment, and the true and native liberties and privileges of the Subject by Law established,’ &c. 1 Tbid. 16, June, 1642. 107 Thid. and 111. 8 Thid. No. vii, p. 20. 9 Tbid. No. viii, p. 26. Doubt has been cast upon the truth of this report. 10 Seacombe, Memoirs of the House of Stanley, 76. 235 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE a test, but that of Lord Strange never faltered. He endured the rebuke and the indignity, and in addition had to incur the danger of a Parliamentary impeachment for high treason."" The king’s standard was to be raised elsewhere, and it only remained for him to obey his royal master and fight wheresoever it pleased the king to assign him a post. His first duty was to be the taking of Manchester ;” and accordingly the earl with about four thousand troops laid siege to it. Owing perhaps to the check which had been so unwisely placed upon the zeal of the king’s loyal lieutenant in Lancashire, the siege of Manchester was not prosecuted with any extraordinary vigour. The earl seemed, indeed, anxious to spare the place, and not to resort to extreme measures. Even yet it is possible some compromise might have been effected, but for a stroke of royal policy which outraged the feelings of even the more moderate Parliamentarians in Lancashire. This was the king’s acceptance of the aid of the recusant party in Lancashire, who had petitioned him for the restoration of their arms.'® To the Puritan leaders in Lancashire such an act following the reports of Irish massacres seemed little better than an insult, and effectually barred any further advances from them to their misguided sovereign, who, it appeared was ready to clutch at any straw to preserve his authority. Their resistance was thenceforth stiffened to a marvellous degree, waverers were convinced of the necessity of the struggle, and they decided to apply to Parliament for assistance. It will have been gathered from these statements that the war was in Lancashire a war of religion. This was here its characteristic feature. The Roman Catholics, whose religion was proscribed as treason, who had seen ten of their priests executed at Lancaster on this charge, and who had suffered fine, confiscation, and imprisonment as rebellious subjects, were only too glad to have an opportunity of proving their loyalty to the king. They were in fact his main support in Lancashire and Sir Thomas Tyldesley is conspicuous among them. The Protestants," on the other hand, who were probably in a minority in the whole county, took advantage of the opportunity to cripple their religious opponents, and succeeded. ‘Recusancy’ was as serious an offence in the eyes of the Parliamentary Committees as ‘delinquency,’ and in the histories of the various townships will be found abundant evidence of the rigour with which it was treated. The Parliament, being convinced from the first of the importance of the resistance in Lancashire, at once voted men and money, and arranged for the raising of 1,000 dragoons to be sent to Lancashire under the command of Sir John Seaton" to strengthen the local forces. Meanwhile, on 29 Sep- tember, Lord Strange receiving news of his father’s death and of his accession to the earldom ™* found his own affairs a pressing reason for abandoning the siege,""® a decision to which he was perhaps induced by the defection of many of his followers and by the expressed unwillingness of the Cheshire Array to fight against Manchester.” "! Civil War Tracts, No. xiii, 35, 16 Sept. 1642. Lid: ive ; "* Thid. No. xiv, 38, 27 Sept. 1642. The earl of Derby with those over whom he had influence formed the conspicuous exception to the rule "™ Civil War Tracts, No. xv, 41, 29 Sept. 1642. ; "S Ibid. 54. His summons to this town to surrender was signed ‘I. Derby.’ "6 Thid. 55, 1 Oct. 1642. "T Tbid. 159. 236 POLITICAL HISTORY The thanks of Parliament were immediately (6 October) voted to the townsmen of Manchester for their defence ; and Lord Derby was summoned by the king to bring up his Lancashire regiments to his aid. They took part in the fight of Edge Hill, but the earl himself was ordered back to Lancashire without his forces to raise fresh levies and to defend the county as best he could. During November the earl sallying from Lathom attacked Blackburn and Leigh,"* but in both cases unsuccessfully. In December a meeting of Royalists was called at Preston to arrange for the financing of the campaign. A rate was imposed on the county, and Lord Derby was styled ‘Lord General of Lancashire.’"” Thus ended the first year of the war in Lancashire, with definite preparations on both sides for its continuance. The Parliament had sent down cannon to Colonel Assheton in Lanca- shire, and early in 1643 Sir John Seaton, who had been hurried up from London, had some successes in the northern part of the county whither he had marched accompanied by some of the stout garrison of Manchester. In February, 1643, he stormed and took Preston,” and Colonel Birch, another Parliamentary commander, temporarily occupied Lancaster Castle.” The earl at once hastened thither, set fire to a portion of it,’” and retook Preston.”* Flushed with this partial success Lord Derby hurried forward to Manchester, with a real and fixed determination, as he said, to take it or leave his bones before it. Here again, however, the king thwarted his enthusiastic Lancashire general by ordering the withdrawal of Lord Molyneux and his regiment to serve him in person. In vain Lord Derby besought him to stay even for a few days to accomplish the reduction of the city, and was thus again reluctantly obliged to give up the attempt and retire to the Royalist head quarters at Wigan.’* Continually thwarted in his designs the earl after attacking Bolton without success,’ and after being repulsed by Colonel Assheton at Whalley,” retreated to his house at Lathom, and thence in May, 1643, proceeded to York to join the queen.” In his absence Liverpool surrendered to Colonel Assheton. The earl of Derby, being both disheartened by the jealousy with which his operations had been regarded and discredited by their ill-success, was superseded in his command in the county by the earl of Newcastle, who took over the Lancashire campaign, and who imperiously, from his camp at Bradford, summoned Manchester to surrender. The town’s reply was dignified and significant.”* ‘They based their refusal as before on their endeavour to preserve the honour of the king in all legal rights and preroga- tives, together with the privileges of the subject by law established. Nor, by such a defence, did they esteem they had put themselves ‘out of his Majesty’s protection.’ This answer was sent on 7 July, 1643, and at the same time the precaution was taken to guard the passes into Yorkshire which might be attempted by the Royalist army. Newcastle’s campaign against Manchester went no further than a few skirmishes in the passes, after which he gave up the attempt, as Lord Derby had done before him. Meanwhile in the North Colonel Rigby had defeated Colonel Tyldesley and others in "8 Civil War Tracts, No. xv, 123, 65. 09 Thid. 67, 68. 9 Ibid. 72, 127, 224, 9 Feb. 1643. 1 Thid. 84, 130. 1 Ibid. 85-8, 131. 3 Thid. 85, 132. 14 Seacombe, op. cit. 84. % Civil War Tracts, 133. 48 Ibid. 96, 135. 47 Ibid. 99, 160, 280. 8 Thid. 144, quoted supra, note 105. 237 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Furness,"* and had taken Thurland Castle, bravely defended by Sir John Girlington.’° In December of this year Lord Byron defeated the Parlia- mentary troops near Middlewich in Cheshire, but Fairfax, moving quickly from Manchester with Assheton’s, Holland’s, and Booth’s regiments, joined with Sir William Brereton and defeated Byron near Nantwich on 25 January, 1644." And now commenced one of the most famous events of the war in Lancashire—the long and unsuccessful siege of Lathom House, where the brave countess of Derby held out in the absence of her husband from 27 February until 27 May, when Colonel Rigby, hearing that Prince Rupert ™? was advancing to the garrison’s relief, raised the siege and retired to Bolton. In his brilliant fashion Prince Rupert stormed Bolton and Liverpool, and for a short time threatened the county in general. The Parliament were keenly alive to the danger, as appears from their delibera- tions at the time. On 1 June, 1644, among the proceedings at the Committee of Both Kingdoms, it was debated what might be done ‘to prevent the spoil of Lancashire where Prince (Rupert) now is near Man- chester, having taken Stockport and Bolton and given a sore blow to Colonel Rigby, who is come to Bradford.’ Again, on 3 June it was moved that the earl of Manchester and Lord Fairfax be informed of Prince Rupert’s entry into the county and prevailing there and that considering the passes and the multitude of Papists and disaffected persons in that county he will so increase his forces as it shall be irrecoverable, and therefore [they] desire such a considerable strength may be sent thither as may ruin the Prince’s army.™ This urgent advice had weighed with the Parliamentary commanders. The prince was met and defeated at Marston Moor on 2 July, and thus the danger menacing the palatinate was averted. Subsequently the great Royalist leader, Sir Thomas Tyldesley, was captured near Montgomery on 17 September,”* and in this month the Parliamentary forces returned to the siege of Lathom House, which only capitulated to the Parliament in the December of the following year, 1645."* In May, 1645, the king was said to be marching upon Cheshire and Lancashire, and the Parliament ‘apprehending nothing he can have in design of so much danger to the public affairs as his entrance into Lancashire, where probably he may much increase his army,’ warned the Lancashire Committee to guard the passes of the county.’ Things, however, turned out differently. As is well known early in 1646 the king, after his heavy defeat at Naseby (in June, 1645), delivered himself up to the Scotch army, and in January, 1647, was resigned by them to the Parliament. But though the king was a prisoner and the actual warfare against him was thereby ended, all danger of rising on his behalf was far from being removed, particularly in Lancashire, where much marching and counter- marching of Parliamentary troops was still carried on. In 1648 there was a '” Civil War Tracts, No. xxxvii, 148-9, 150, 151. 8 Tbid. ™ Ibid. 1 1 - 154, 229. ™ Ibid. 182; al 2. S.P. . . Te et also Cal. S.P. Dom. 1644, p. 174. ™ Cal. $.P. Dom. 1644, p. 191. '* Civil War Tracts, 206 ; also Cal. S.P. Dom. 1644, P- 537. "9 Dec. 1645 ; Cal. S.P. Dom. 1645-7, p. 255. '” Ibid. 1644-5, p. 482. 238 POLITICAL HISTORY fear of a raid from the Royalist Scotch army, and Colonel Assheton marched into Westmorland to be ready for it. The Scots, in fact, penetrated as far as Preston, where they were joined by Sir Marmaduke Langdale and a force of English Royalists, and overthrown on 17 August by the vigorous onslaught of Cromwell himself, who, pursuing the defeated Scots south- ward, overtook and killed or captured most of them at Winwick and Warrington.'” In August the Lancashire Committee and deputy lieutenants were advised to look to the defences of Liverpool, of which the garrison was weak, since it would be ‘a public disaster’ if it should be taken by the enemy. The Lancashire Committee were apparently growing weary of the burden of the war, and wished to disband their forces. In 1645 the men and officers had grumbled of want of pay,“ and the county was in a wretched state of destitution from the prolongation of the struggle. To smooth their ruffled feelings the Parliament wrote referring to the Lancashire forces which ‘ served with so much distinction under Colonel Assheton,’ urging them to join Cromwell in the pursuit of the Scots, and promising to undertake that ‘this shall not be your burden singly.’ In conclusion the London Com- mittee added that ‘In recognition of your great forwardness both in this and the former war the Houses yesterday passed an ordinance for £3,000 to be paid to you.’ In November the order for the disband- ing of the Lancashire forces was issued, and £4,000 appointed to be paid to them.’ On the other hand some of the regiments were not disposed to be easily dealt with, and to find them employment, or get them out of the way, it was suggested they should be sent on to Ireland to support General Monk." In 1649 many roving disbanded soldiers troubled the country, and it was necessary to provide three troops to keep order in the county.* ‘Riots and contempts,’ and ‘the seditious preaching of ministers’ are spoken of in 1650 as greatly prevailing in Lancashire. The Council of State, writing to the Lancashire justices of assize, remark that In no place have their boldness come to that height . . . as in your county, a place that through all the heat of the war and in the greatest power of the enemy did and suffered so much for their own liberty and for the cause maintained by Parliament against that tyranny under which the labours of these seducers is to make them willingly return.™® In this year a new militia was enrolled consisting at first of two regiments of foot and three of horse.” The county was now governed by a major- general in place of the former lord-lieutenant. After the execution of the king in 1649, the Royalist leaders had at once transferred their allegiance to his son Charles, with whom Lord Derby communicated, with the result that Charles attempted to try his fortune in the kingdom. The young king’s passage from Scotland through Lancashire is related in the Mercury of that day under the date 21 August, 1651. In a letter 138 Cal, 8.P. Dom. 1648-9, p. 203. %8 Carlyle, Cromwell’s Letiers, No. 63-6. 1 Cal. S.P. Dom. 1648-9, p. 237+ Tbid. 1644-5, p. 568. - Pe ie pp- 263, 264. oe a ae ‘a id. 298. id, Pe 44. M8 Cal. S.P. Dom. 1650, p. 78. “7 Ibid. pp. 17-72, passim. 239 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE without address or signature we read that ‘upon Tuesday (12th) the Scots’ king came to Lancaster.’ That night he lodged at Ashton Hall, three miles from Lancaster, . . . upon Wednesday (13th) he lodged at Myerscough, Sir Thomas Tyldesley’s house, and from thence marched through Preston... . The last night (15th) their king lodged at Brynn, six miles from Warrington, being Sir William Gerard’s house, who is a subtle jesuited Papist. This dissembling Scot trusts none so well in Lancashire for his hosts as the Papists, which discovers his gross hypocrisy in taking the Covenant. . . . "Tis reported their king blames Major Ashhurst for bringing him into Lancashire, since he finds no more access of forces. Ido not hear that any considerable person doth openly own him since his march into England." In Cheshire the earl of Derby met the young king, and brought him all he had been able to muster, a miserable remnant of 60 horse and 250 foot. Returning to Lancashire he collected a force of 1,500 men, but being on 25 August attacked near Wigan by Colonel Lilburne, his force was utterly routed, and he himself being wounded was obliged to fly towards Bolton.” Sir Thomas Tyldesley was among the Royalists slain in this encounter. The great defeat at Worcester which followed completed the king’s discomfiture and the earl’s ruin. After securing the king’s safety the earl sought his own, but being already wounded and meeting a Parliamentary commander, one Captain Edge, a Lancashire man, the earl surrendered to him under promise of quarter. A court martial held at Chester con- demned him for treason—as had been decided beforehand—and this being ratified by the Parliament, he was executed publicly at Bolton. His end was as noble as his life had been loyal.’ The earl’s condemnation after quarter given, probably, like the late king’s execution, shocked the more moderate among the Lancashire Parliamentarians as it outraged the feelings of all Royalists. The county was no less trouble- some to manage after the earl’s death. Consequently the militia commission was very carefully kept up, and in 1655 it included the high sheriff, Colonel Gilbert Ireland, Sir Richard Hoghton, and twenty-one others. They received particular instructions to inquire into conspiracies, to disarm Papists who were ‘hostile to the present government,’ to keep the arms of the militia ready for use, to imprison mutineers, and to fine those who did not appear with horses and arms in support of the government upon any rebellion.’ In July, 1656, Colonel Tobias Bridges replaced Major-General Worsley deceased, as military governor of the county.’ From these military precautions it will be seen what a heavy curb was necessary to keep down the restive Royalist spirit in the palatinate. In August, 1659, however, it broke out in the insurrection of Sir George Booth, and Charles II was proclaimed king at Warrington. In the words of a contemporary, ‘The old Cavaliers with some discontented Presbyterians inclining to kingship, contrived a general insurrection . . . on behalf of Charles Stuart.’** The ‘treachery’ of two troops of Lancashire horse 148 Mercurius Politicus, No. 63, 21 Aug. 1651, p. 1004. Quoted Civil War Tracts, 287-8. nt Cf. various accounts of this given in Civil War Tracts, lii, 296-300. ' See Civil War Tracts, xvi, 311 ; lvi, 320-3. | Cal. $.P. Dom. 1655, p. 77. ™ Thid. 16 ; ; - 1656-7, p. 28. '8 Thid. 1659-60, p- 87. In Manchester a delightful rumour that ‘The es are up!’ was made an excuse for arming by the Presbyterian Royalists; Newcome, Autobiog. (Chet. Soc.), 109. 240 POLITICAL HISTORY helped their numbers. The rising, though promptly suppressed by Lambert, indicated the general reaction that had come about, and the spread of the desire for the king’s return, which was accordingly achieved in May, 1660.™ Among other loyal addresses was that of the Lancashire gentry.“ And now came the turn of the High Church party and even the Papists to triumph over the Presbyterians, who were made sensible of the reverse of Fortune’s wheel. Many ministers in Lancashire submitted and testified their abhor- rence of the late king’s murder, and their loyalty to the restored monarch.’ The obstinate remainder were to be dealt with later by subsequent severe legislation. Charles, earl of Derby, was made lord-lieutenant of the county,’ and the militia was put in the hands of Royalists again, and the sole power of ordering and disposing of it was by Act of Parliament, now solely vested in the crown.’* It was scarcely to be expected that all would go perfectly smoothly in a county so recently filled and ruled by those hostile to the restored monarch, and various plots and risings were alleged to have been discovered.’* A significant entry occurs in September, 1666, notifying that the Lancashire gentry are fallen in pieces, the Roman Catholics ‘ stomaching’ that some of their houses should have been searched for arms; and ‘ both parties’ have addressed the king and council. Something in the nature of disaffection was certainly abroad, and in February of the following year it was revealed as a plot of the old Cromwellian soldiers to support Cromwell’s son Richard." Owing to the vigilance of the lieutenancy this came to nothing, nor was Lancashire at any time a favourable ground for successful conspiracy, the sturdy, fearless character of the inhabitants lending itself rather to overt hostility than to secret feud. In 1672 the Declaration of Indulgence was an attempt on the part of the crown to bribe the Presbyterians to tolerate the Roman Catholics. It appears to have been gratefully received in Lancashire, judging from the number of ministers and congregations who applied for the renewal of licences to preach and worship in the Presbyterian chapels and meeting- houses of Lancashire.“* This measure of toleration was designed to prepare the public mind for the succession of the duke of York, who, as is well known, was a Roman Catholic. The accession of James II early in 1685 was doubtless received with very mixed feelings in Lancashire, where the population was so strongly divided into opposite and hostile religious camps. Loyal addresses were, however, paid to him,’ and upon the insurrection of Monmouth in the early part of June of that year, volunteers from Lancashire offered to serve against the duke, and a loyal address was presented from Manchester to the 4 Cal. S.P. Dom. 1659-60, pp. 393-4, 428. #5 Tbid. 1660-1, p. 4. 6 Thid. 422. 7 Thid. 1661-2, p. 519. For the particular details of the lieutenancy and minute military orders of the earl of Derby and his deputies, see the Bradshaigh MS. (in the possession of Mr. W. Farrer) containing copies of letters (1662-76) from Chas. II, Lord Arlington, the duke of Albemarle, the earl of Derby, the duke of Buckingham, and many other great men of the day. Exigencies of space preclude more than a reference to its multifarious details. 188 Svat. of the Realm, v, chap. vi, 308. 9 Cal. S.P. Dom. 1663-4, p. 287 ; 1665-6, p. 107. 1 Ibid. 1666-7, p. 128. Thid. 495, 584. 18 Particular lists of these are given in the Ca/. §.P. Dom. 1671-2, pp. 272, 422, &c. 183 Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. xiv, App. iv, No. 591. 2 241 31 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE king." From the first James showed very clearly that he intended to restore the Roman Catholic religion in England, and in 1687 gave an earnest of his intentions by removing William, the ninth earl of Derby (grand- son of the great Cavalier earl) from the lord-lieutenancy of Lancashire and appointing Lord Molyneux, ‘a Popish Recusant Convict,’ to that great office. Lord Molyneux made twelve deputy-lieutenants, gentlemen of his own religion, with the exceptions of Lord Brandon (also styled Lord Gerard of Brandon), Mr. Spencer, Mr. Girlington, Mr. Banaster, and Mr. Warren, who had the late king’s approbation.’® In September, 1688, upon the reported landing of the prince of Orange, the earl of Derby offered his services to the king, who, perhaps touched by gratitude, or fearing the earl’s great influence in the county, graciously accepted them and bid him hasten back to Lancashire, whither his com- mission should immediately follow him.’ The earl’s bearing towards the king was dutiful but outspoken. He taxed his majesty with the manner in which he had aggrieved his Protestant subjects in the county, particu- larly in the illegal return of members for Wigan, Liverpool, and Preston.’ On 5 November the prince of Orange landed at Dartmouth, and on the 8th arrived Lord Derby’s commission of lieutenancy. On the gth he was sworn and the militia commissions were made out. But here was an issue King James had not contemplated. It appears from the evidence that the earl of Derby had re-accepted his commission from the king merely to serve and further privately the interests of the prince of Orange should he arrive. He and Lord Delamere * had indeed arranged to raise the forces of the county for the prince. But whether Lord Derby was jealous of the influence of one whom he may have regarded as an upstart peer, or whether he was somewhat touched by a feeling of regret at betraying his king, can- not now be determined. At least he did not move as quickly as Lord Dela- mere impetuously demanded, and so lost the thanks of both masters. On 27 November the earl commissioned Protestant deputies, and besides raising the militia of Chester had four good and great regiments of foot and five troops of horse, all which in convenient time did declare for His Highness the prince of Orange.’* Yet notwithstanding these efforts of the earl, Lord Delamere wrote a harsh and insulting letter to him, remarking that ‘ Your Lordship must not think that you can be esteemed by the Prince or those with him as a man that has given any assistance to the cause, and I believe the nation will have the same opinion of you.” In December Lord Delamere was made lord-lieutenant of Cheshire in place of Lord Derby, and this touching the earl in his family honour, the Stanleys having held the lieutenancy there for above two hundred years, he resigned that of Lancashire early in the following year ; and in June, 16869, the office was given to Lord Brandon, son of the earl of Macclesfield.” ™ Hist, ASS. Com. Rep. xiv, App. iv, No. 597. For copious details as to the internal administration of the county from 1660-85, see ‘Orders &c. from the Privy Council to the Magistrates of Lancashire 1660-85” (in the possession of Mr. W. Farrer). Exigencies of space preclude the use of the mass of detail there available. 18 Thid. No. 611. 8 Ibid. No. 6344, 635. " Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. iv, App. iv, No. 635. ‘© The second of that barony and son to the Sir George Booth, afterwards first Lord Del fought for Chas. II just before the Restoration. : bic e cc ® Hist. MSS. Com. loc. cit. No. 642, 1. 7 Thid. No. 6 ™ Tbid. May, 1689, No. 659. ? i 0. 642, 16 Dec. 1688. 242 POLITICAL HISTORY It appears that at this time there were a number of regiments in Lanca- shire which had no connexion with the militia, but were in the nature of private companies raised by gentlemen of the county. No less than seven- teen captains are mentioned as commanding these companies. The disturbed condition of the country may be inferred when such a condition of compara- - tive lawlessness could be allowed.!” In spite of the peaceful entry of William of Orange, the Roman Catholics of Lancashire were not to be disposed of so easily. They were in continual correspondence with the exiled king and great fears of invasion from Ireland were entertained by the new government. The lord-lieutenant thought it necessary to secure the Roman Catholics, raise the militia and even to arm the Protestants against such a possibility.* Among those chiefly suspected were the eldest son of Lord Molyneux, Mr. Standish of Standish, and Mr. Towneley of Towneley (the younger). The lord-lieu- tenant was instructed to issue warrants and commit these to prison for high treason.’ In April, 1690, the earl of Shrewsbury wrote to the justices for Lancashire that a great number of Irish Roman Catholics, many of them soldiers in King James’s army, were privately entertained by their co- religionists'* in the county. There was, however, no actual disturbance. The opposition was confined to plotting, and culminated in the so-called ‘ Lancashire Plot’ of 1693-4, in which the chief persons implicated were Lord Molyneux, Sir William ‘Gerard, Sir Rowland Stanley, Sir Thomas Clifton; Bartholomew Walmesley, William Dicconson, Philip Langton, esquires, and Mr. William Blundell, gentleman.’ Except Sir R. Stanley, they were all Lancashire men. The plot was discovered to the government by one Dodsworth, who was subsequently murdered for his revelations.” ‘The several conspirators were arrested and tried for high treason at Manchester, on 20 October, 1694. No reliable evidence could be obtained against them and they were acquitted, though with severe censure. ‘This acquittal could not fail to be a triumph for the Jacobite cause in Lancashire, which was already strongly supported by the old Roman Catholics and those Protestant families who had fought for King Charles in the Civil War. King William’s subsequent legislation necessarily alienated the Roman Catholics still more from him, for it added to the already crushing penalties of their religious profession, and it offended the High Church party, who, for some time past, had been styled Tories, just as the Presbyterians (possibly from their Scotch origin) were termed Whigs. In Lancashire, therefore, the Roman Catholics and the small High Church party were now drawn together by one strong, common, political interest, the restoration of the Stuart succession. On the other hand, the Presbyterians were Whigs almost ™ Hist. MSS. Com. loc. cit. May 1689, No. 659. ‘The names of the captains were, Right, Bootle, Hooper, Browne, Andrews, Hulme, Crompton, Sharples, Rigby, Willoughby, Clayton, Astley, Dorneinge, Cross, Lever, Egerton and Birch. 1 Cal. $.P. Dom. 1689-90, p. 150. 1 Thid. 520. 5 hid. 567. "8 Facobite Trials at Manchester, 1694 (Chet. Soc. xxviii), 48. For other details as to evidence concerning this plot, see 4 True Hist. of the Several Designs and Conspiracies against His Mayestie’s Sacred Person and Government, from 1688-1697 (Lond. 1698), also The Hist. of the Late Conspiracy (Lond. 1696). 17 §.P. Dom. King Will.’s Chest, 15, No. 44. 243 ———— A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE to a man, and with these went those Churchmen who had _ repudiated James II and welcomed William of Orange, and who, by reason of their toleration of Presbyterians among them, were now designated the Low Church party. ; Those high Tories who were not openly avowed Jacobites, were, by their acceptance of King William, placed in a very false position. They felt that they were violating their old Cavalier doctrine of the ‘divine right.’ They took refuge, however, in a middle course, either by refusing to take the oath of supremacy, whence they were styled non-jurors, or by taking the oath to William as to the king de facto, while secretly reserving their allegiance to King James as their king de jure." Strange to relate, considering the history of the town in the Civil War, nowhere did this High Tory faction assert itself more noisily than in Manchester. The preaching of High Church doctrine at the Collegiate church served to keep alive enthusiasm for the Jacobite cause there. The cause was also very warmly espoused by numbers of younger sons of the Roman Catholic and Tory gentry, who were apprenticed to trade in that town.” Queen Anne’s toleration of Presby- terians and her known Low Church leanings alienated the extreme High Tories from her, and made them join hands with the Roman Catholics in the common object of restoring the Stuart succession.’ This coalition resulted in the wild and ill-considered rising of the ‘ Fifteen’ in Lancashire. The preaching of the famous Dr. Sacheverell in 1710 had wrought the High Church Tories generally to a pitch of extraordinary excitement. After the queen’s death, party feeling in Manchester ran so high that it broke out in the form of so-called Sacheverell mobs, who in 1715, the second year of George’s reign, attacked Presbyterian meeting-houses, and were supposed to be encouraged by ‘Jacobite’ magistrates and justices." Troops were sent to disperse and punish the mob, but the Jacobite cause was distinctly encouraged by this uproar. The joint Jacobite party of Roman Catholics and High Church Tories went so far even as to send word by Lord Widdrington (a connexion of the Towneleys of Towneley) to the Scotch Jacobites, then in arms for the Pretender, that on the appearance of a Scotch force in Lancashire, there would be ‘a general insurrection of at least twenty thousand men.’ ” The invitation was accepted, and the earl of Mar appointed Mr. Forster and the earl of Derwentwater to lead the expedition.” They came b Kirkby Lonsdale towards Lancaster, where Lord Widdrington’s brother, who had come up from Manchester, assured them that the Lancashire gentlemen would join them with all their interest. James III, he said, had been proclaimed at Manchester, where a troop of fifty armed men, besides volun- teers, were already raised."* On 7 November, 1715, the Scotch army havin entered Lancaster,’ the prince was proclaimed there as James III, and they were joined by Mr. Tyldesley, of Myerscough Lodge, and other gentlemen US Facobite Trial, 102-3. “8 Lancs. Memorials of the Rebellion, 1715 (Chet. Soc. v), pt. 1, chap. iv, 27. Ibid. Inquiry into the State of Parties in Lancs. preceding the Rebellion, Vv, 47. *! hid. Lancs. during the Rebellion of 1715, pt. 1, iii (h). Ibid. pt. 1, chap. vi (c.), 27. ‘8 Tbid. pt. 2, chap. iii, 62. Ibid. pt. 3, p. 85. ‘The March of the Insurgent Force... from Penrith . .. to Preston in Lancashire.’ © Thid. 89. 244 POLITICAL HISTORY with their servants."*© But all these were Roman Catholics, and the High- landers grew impatient because the promised High Churchmen did not appear. They reached Preston where more Roman Catholics joined them, also Mr. Richard Towneley, Mr. Shuttleworth, Sir Francis Anderton, Ralph Standish of Standish, Gabriel Hesketh, and Richard Chorley of Chorley. The plans of the invaders were to seize Warrington Bridge and march on Manchester, leaving Liverpool behind them at their mercy, because Liverpool was notably for the Whig interest,” just as Manchester was supposed to be for the Jacobites. But their foolish and inactive delay at Preston™ gave time for the government troops to surround them there, General Carpenter on the north, and General Wills moving from Chester with six regiments of horse and three of foot, on the side of Wigan. The investment was com- plete, and the fight at Preston which followed altogether routed the Scottish forces.* Forster, Derwentwater, and other leaders were made prisoners, and many of the rank and file also were taken. Thus disastrously ended the rash Jacobite expedition to Lancashire of 1715. Among the Lancashire prisoners sent to London were Sir Francis Anderton, Ralph Standish, Richard Towneley, Mr. Tyldesley, Richard Dalton, and Mr. Butler of Rawcliffe. Of those gentlemen tried at Liverpool were Richard Shuttleworth and Richard Chorley, both of whom were executed at Preston, one 28 January, the other g February, 1716.%° Mr. Standish, Sir Francis Anderton, John Dalton, Mr. Tyldesley, and Mr. Towneley were pardoned. Forster luckily escaped from prison, but Lord Derwentwater suffered the extreme penalty of the law against treason. Among the visitors to the unfortunate prisoners in Newgate was a certain Dr. Deacon, a young man whose personality proved in Lancashire the chief link be- tween the attempt of the “15 and that of the °45 which followed.™ This fervent non-juror visited Paul and Hall in their extremity, and is alleged to have drawn up the famous declaration signed by them which was handed to the sheriff at the time of their execution and which ‘is unequalled for the loyal adherence, founded upon non-juring principles,’ which it expresses towards James III."¥ Dr. Deacon was most probably the author of this declaration and he subsequently removed to Manchester where he became ‘ Bishop’ of a non-juring church. More stringency in compelling the taking of the oath of supremacy and of allegiance to the king upon the throne was now observed, and Parliament ordained by statute, that all ‘Non-jurors and Papists” should transmit par- ticulars of their estates to commissioners appointed for this purpose. With that clemency towards the rebels for which the Hanoverian sovereigns were remarkable, no actual sequestration of estates was undertaken, but the regis- tration of them served as a measure of warning to act as a deterrent against future delinquencies and to afford information to magistrates should occasion again arise for exercising vigilance. The occasion was not far distant. On the landing of the young Prince Charles Edward on 2 August, 1745, in the Hebrides, the intrigues of the 18 Dances. Memorials of the Rebellion, 1715 (Chet. Soc. v), pt. 3, pp. 89, 99. 187 Lancs. during the Rebellion of 1715, pt. 1, il, 4 5 also pt. 3, p. 98. 8 Thid. 105. 189 Tbid. 110, 111. 19 Tbid. pt. 5, chap. x, 192. 11 Tbid. pt. vi, chap. i. 1? Thid. pt. vi, 229-30. 8 Stat. at Large, vol. v, 1 Geo. I (1715), cap. 50, 55. 245 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE High Tories and Jacobites of Manchester, headed as already stated by clergy of the Collegiate church,’ and of Jacobite Lancashire generally, began again. At Manchester several young men of the town enlisted with Mr. Francis Towneley (a nephew of Mr. Towneley of Towneley) as captains in a force known as the Manchester Regiment, of which Mr. Francis Towneley was subsequently appointed colonel. This band of volunteers joined the Prince and offered him their services when he entered Manchester on 29 November, 1745, and they accompanied him, though with gradually sinking hearts, on his further march towards Derby. At Manchester James III was again proclaimed and illuminationsin honour of the prince were ordered and con- trived, though it is difficult to see how they could have been refused in a town occupied by an army of about 5,000 Highlanders. On the prince’s return in ten days’ time many of the Manchester men deserted ; the rest went on and were left to garrison Carlisle, where they were shortly invested and compelled to surrender by the duke of Cumberland. The officers of the so-called Manchester Regiment were sent to London for trialand a number of them were executed. The heads of some were sent to Manchester and placed on view there. Much subsequent pamphlet agitation followed upon the loss of reputa- tion the town was said to have suffered by reason of participation in this Jacobite rising. A series of letters was published in the Chester Courant of that day,”* vindicating the town from what was considered the ‘malicious tho’ bafHled attempt of a schismatical Cabal to distress and defame it.” The writer denies the reports of Jacobite mobs worshipping, or wishing to remove the heads of those who had been executed for their share in the rebellion . or concerning the ‘vast increase of Papists and Non-Jurors.’ He ascribes these reports to the rage and calumny of ‘ wrong-headed Whigs and furious fanatics.’ The writer goes on to show that ‘ King George has as many hearty friends and as many stedfast enemies in Manchester as in any other town in Britain." Again he repeats that the town is ‘well affected to his Majesty,’ though ‘it does not square with the party views of some folk to have this opinion prevail.’ In one account published of the prince’s entry into Manchester it is noted ‘ how he was convinced that the inhabitants almost unwisely showed they abhorred him,’ and for its honour the writer pleads with his readers to remember how loyally it behaved when his Majesty’s forces arrived in pursuit of the rebels.'8 The sum total of evidence appears to favour the hypothesis that the town was actually exploited by a Jacobite faction, and was repre- sented to the prince as enthusiastic for his cause, whereas, if not openly hostile, it was certainly supremely indifferent. The doctrines of the Whig and Presbyterian party were in ascendancy in the Lancashire towns, whose population was increasing at an enormous rate, and the people at large felt they had a stake in the maintenance of the Protestant succession. The accession of King George III in 1760 and his coronation in Sep- tember, 1761, was for these reasons enthusiastically celebrated at Manchester.’ ™ The town, not being a borough, had no organization, so that the fellows and chaplains of the church had a greater prominence and influence than they would have had ina corporate town. © 1746 ; republished as Manchester Vindicated (Chester 1749). '% Op. cit. p. iv. "7 Thid. p. 36. ‘8 Ibid. p. 73 i ; ¢ - P- 73, quoting The Chester Courant, 10 Dec. 1746. ; 198 See The Celebration of the Coronation of King Geo. II and his Queen at Manchester, 22 Sept oe privately printed 1841. : : ’ 246 POLITICAL HISTORY The latter half of the eighteenth century was greatly occupied with new projects of industrial enterprise in Lancashire, and this took the immediate attention of the masses from politics and directed it to industry. But the increase of population brought its dangers in the scarcity and high prices of food, and many ‘ Bread and Provision’ riots occurred in a county where the populace were of such an independent character as not to be oppressed with impunity. ‘Towards the close of the century the war with Napoleon created a distraction and the danger of foreign invasion drew the nation together. Meanwhile a safety valve was created for the safe escape of the military spirit peculiar to this county in the formation of volunteer corps. Those of Manchester, raised in 1777, afterwards became the 72nd regiment of 1,082 men and served with glory in the siege of Gibraltar, returning to the town amidst a public display of enthusiasm in 1783, when their colours were deposited in the Chetham College. Next in honourable mention were the body of volunteers known as the Manchester Military Association, formed in 1782, but afterwards disbanded.” Mention must also be made of the Manchester and Salford Light Horse, raised in 1798, and amounting to six troops under the command of Colonel Ford. These volunteers were only to be called out in case of foreign invasion.™* Nor must the gallant Eccles Volunteers of 1797, who later formed a part of the Manchester and Salford Royal Volunteers, be omitted ;** or the Loyal Bolton Volunteers of 1794, disbanded in 1802.°% In 1803 the Ashton-under-Lyne Volunteers were formed to resist the threatened French invasion, and in 1804 all over the county rose a small army of local corps, banded together for this loyal and patriotic purpose. The following ** were the volunteer companies and regiments raised in 1804 :— Name Commanded by Description, Numbers, &c. Loyal Ashton Volunteers . Sir W. Gerard . . . . . Cavalry, 1 troop Bolton 33 . J Pilkington Se ee ey & ‘5 to Liverpool i . Ed. Faukner, esq. . . . ‘4 2 troops es . . Lieut.-Col. Bolton . . . . Infantry, 10 companies » Custom House Capt. Arthur Onslow I company Volunteers The Knowsley Pe . Capt. Wright a Is 35 St. Helens 5 . Jas. Fraser, esq. . 2 . . 5 8 companies Manchester Riflemen . . . Lieut.-Col. Hanson. . . . 5 6 5 Pikemen, 2 ss Infantry, 1 company Preston Volunteers . . . W.Ashton . . . . . . Cavalry, 1 troop Liverpool 5 . . « Major Brancher. . . . . Artillery, 4 companies af Rifle Volunteers . Capt.O. Donoghue. . . . 55 Infantry. . . . Lieut.-Col. Williams . . . Infantry, 10 ,, Manchester Volunteers . . Lieut.-Col. J. Cross es Croxteth a . . Earl of Sefton hh Prescot iy . . Major Ashcroft. . . . . s Bo igs Whiston 3 ta 3 y ‘ $3 1 company Manchester 5 . . Col. Ackers . 5 12 companies ¥5 a . . J. L. Philips . is . See below, p. 300 et seq. 20 Local Gleanings Lancs. and Ches.i, 85, par. 187. * Tbid. 76-7, par. 165. #03 bid. i, June, 1875, p. 22, par. 52. ™ Ibid. 76-7, par. 436. 305 Ibid. 255-6, par. 445. 8 Ibid. 252-3, par. 438. me Tbid, 247 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Description, Numbers, &c. Name Commanded by Manchester Volunteers Shakespeare Phillips, esq. Cavalry, 3 troops Lancaster 3 John Bradshaw, e-q. Infantry, 6 companies Ulverston 35 T. Sunderland, esq. re 4 x Liverpool 55 Lieut.-Col. Earle 5 O. 45 Warrington _ Lieut.-Col. Lyon 3 B55 Wigan Rifles a ss <8 — - I company Newton ,, by it Fat Lieut.-Col. Claughton . 5 5 companies Trafford House Volunteers Lieut.-Col. Cooke i A 35 Winwick 5 E. Hornby, esq. : a I company Bolton le Moors ___,, Lieut.-Col. Fletcher 3 10 companies Preston sg Lieut.-Col. Grimshaw . 55 4 ra Preston Riflemen ge ey 5 eo ‘ I company Bury Rifle Volunteers (attached to Col. Hanson’s) 3 I ‘iy Capt. Yates Radcliffe 5 J. Bealey, esq. 55 I o Ashton 55 Capt. Peel 5 2 companies (near Warrington) Wigan Volunteers . Earl of Balcarres ee 8 F Bold io Capt. Kidd : 5 I company Hale $5 J. Blackburn, esq. iy I iy Preston 6 Lieut.-Col. Watson . i 5 companies Manchester ,, Lieut.-Col. Silvester 9 12 4, »” » ” ” 9: Hulme 6 Major J. Pooley . 5 3 +5 Pendleton __ ,, . . . . J.D. Ashworth . Ps I company Ashton-under-Lyne Volunteers 53 ‘i : % 6 companies Medlock Vale Rifles a I company Oldham Volunteers J. Lees, esq. . As 5 companies Heaton Norris Volunteers Capt. Dale me I company Heaton House = Earl! of Wilton 3 I 5 Swinton % Stanley Bullock, esq. si I a Preston Rifle 5 J. Ainsworth, esq. Pa I 33 Burton - Total Cavalry, 8 troops, 586 men Infantry, 176 companies, 13,710 ,, Artillery, 5 a5 560 ,, Of the above the Royal Manchester and Salford Volunteers formed a regiment of ten companies in all, 1,000 strong, which stayed a month at Preston in 1804, and were reviewed by the duke of Gloucester in that year at Manchester. From the fact that so many volunteers could be found to defend their hearths and homes against possible invasion it must not be argued that at the opening of the nineteenth century the people of Lancashire were possessed by an aggressively military spirit. Far from it. They were peace-loving almost to a man; but though, like most Englishmen, their sobriety of temper never provoked a quarrel, the Lancastrians were always ready to abide the utmost consequences of any that was forced upon them. This spirit was indeed in the course of the next hundred years to be put to the test repeatedly. The nineteenth century was, in a sense, the most crucial period through which the county has had to pass; and darkly as it opened, its close beheld Lancashire triumphant. It witnessed the long and difficult battle for political liberty, a fight in which the indomitable spirit of the Lancashire people may be said to have led the van. 248 POLITICAL HISTORY Reference has already been briefly made to the Bread Riots? which from time to time occurred in Manchester, particularly in the years 1762 and 1795, when the scarcity of corn almost brought a famine upon the county. Another crisis occurred in 1812, and the people, animated by the general theories then prevalent in France concerning the Rights of Man, began to look to political representation as the radical cure for all their social and economic miseries.*” The distress following the peace brought matters to a crisis. Many political associations of workmen had begun to be formed, and two subjects were continually being agitated: the repeal of the Corn Laws and the reform of parliamentary representation. A meeting to discuss reform and advocating universal suffrage and annual parliaments was called in St. Peter’s Field, Manchester, as early as October, 1816. The multitude came together peacefully and dispersed quietly. Next year the simple-minded workmen determined to march to London, thinking to lay their complaints, not before a parliament which had previously rejected their petition, but before the regent himself. From their preparations for sleeping on the road they were styled the ‘Blanketeers.’, The government regarded this proceeding with alarm, and some of the petitioners were arrested and the remainder dispersed. Nothing daunted, the friends of reform made yet another effort, and decided to have a mass meeting in Manchester or near it, and invited the well-known Radical, Mr. Hunt of London, to address the people. On 19 August, 1819, workmen and artisans came from Middleton, Royton, Oldham, Ashton, Stockport, and a radius of fifty miles round Man- chester to listen to the orator, who had just begun to address the assembly, said to number some 80,000, when by the order of the lord-lieutenant to the magistrates a detachment of yeomanry rode up with drawn swords, arrested Mr. Hunt and others near him, and rode down the unfortunate people who stood about the platform. This was afterwards known as the famous, or rather infamous, ‘ Massacre of Peterloo.’ *” For a time the ‘peace’ which is made from a desolation followed. The king died, and the coronation of his successor, George IV, was splendidly celebrated at Manchester. In 1823 the Manchester Reformers sent up a very dignified petition to the House of Commons asking for adult suffrage and for vote by ballot.”° Meantime from time to time efforts were being made by enlightened Whigs in Parliament to obtain reform. The leader of these efforts was Lord John Russell, but his proposals were, in 1819, rejected, and again in Ciao: But ‘ Liberty’ was in the air. Other bodies were now making an effort for relief, particularly the Roman Catholics, who still laboured under the severe disabilities imposed at a time when, as has been shown, their toleration ‘appeared to threaten the state. Strange as it may appear, it was the Tories (who, by tradition at least, ought to have favoured them) who, in the country at all events, most strenuously opposed their emancipation. Here again the influence of that great Whig statesman, Lord John Russell, was *? Baines, Hist. of Lancs. (ed. Harland), i, 335. 8 See below, pp. 309-12, for an account of the suffering of the manufacturing population at this period. 9 See the account given in The Hist. of the Reform Bill, 1832, by the Rev. W. N. Molesworth, 22-5 ; also by Petitioners of Manchester to the House of Commons (Fourn. Ixxvili, 249). 0 Com. Fourn. \xxviii, 249. 2 249 32 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE exerted towards a measure of justice and of relief, which was finally obtained in 1829. hee change had gradually come over party politics. The closing years of George IV and the opening years of William IV witnessed the rise of our modern political parties. At the opening of the nineteenth century the old names of Whig and Tory still remained, but the principles of those who bore the names had not so much changed as become exchanged, the Tory party, formerly High Church, having become almost as evangelical as the Presbyterians themselves, and being animated by exactly the same bigoted hatred of the Roman Catholics as was formerly the peculiar characteristic of the Whigs! The Whigs on the other hand, who had formerly been their greatest persecutors, led the demand for emancipation, and advancing still further from their former oligarchical seclusion, they also headed the popular demand for the extension of the franchise. Some of the more old-fashioned Whigs, who disapproved of these new-fangled theories, sought refuge in the Tory ranks, and became known as ‘ Peelites.’ All political creeds being thus thrown into the melting-pot, out of the crucible came forth the modern political parties which, since the opening of the nineteenth century, have been styled Liberal and Conservative, an extreme section of the Liberals being styled Radicals, and another section Socialists. These last-mentioned sections were becoming more especially prominent in Lancashire. The accession of William IV in 1830 was hailed with joy by the Lancashire Reformers, as the king was supposed to favour the extension of the Parliamentary franchise. As this was a proposal closely affecting Lancashire it will be helpful to notice briefly the state of the representation at this time. There were, as is well known, two knights elected for the shire. Cromwell summoned three to the Parliament of 1653, but two was the usual number. The so-called royal boroughs that were from old time entitled to send members to Parliament were Lancaster, Preston, Liverpool, and Wigan, two members each, but Queen Elizabeth, in the first year of her reign, added to them the boroughs of Newton and Clitheroe. Meanwhile some of these towns, such as Newton, Clitheroe, and Lancaster, had decayed both in population and in commercial importance, while other places such as Manchester, Bolton, Blackburn, Rochdale, and other manufacturing centres, had sprung into populous and industrial eminence, and yet had no parlia- mentary representation. Manchester had indeed been rewarded by Cromwell for its parliamentary zeal by being summoned to send a member to the Parliament of 1654. They returned the Major-General Worsley already referred to as the military governor of the county.™! But, as might have been expected, Charles II did not renew the privilege, and though the town yearly increased in industrial and county importance it was even in the year 1830 totally without representation for its vast wealth and population. In the spring of 1830, just before the late king’s death, Lord John Russell had been defeated in a proposal to enfranchise the three great industrial centres, Manchester, Birmingham, and Leeds.”* The matter, however, was not allowed to drop. In the end of the year Earl Grey took office. Petitions were sent to Parliament during 1830-1 from all parts of England, and many from Lancashire. Preston petitioned in 1830; a peti- 7" See above, p.240. ? Molesworth, Hist. of the Reform Bill of 1832, p. 53. 250 POLITICAL HISTORY tion of a town’s meeting in Manchester praying for reform had 10,000 signatures ; Accrington, Wigan, and Oldham petitioned for election by ballot. These were only a few out of the numbers that were sent to the House of Commons early in the following year."* The distress was universal?" and all looked to a measure of Parliamentary reform to relieve it. When the House met in 1830, Lord John Russell introduced a Reform Bill and made his famous speech in which he boldly asserted that the House of Commons did not represent the nation. He pointed out that at Liverpool, where there was a large constituency, and where he would be told there was a fine example of a popular election, he would see every voter receiving a number of guineas in his box as the price of his corruption. He further pointed out that such was the unjust state of things that ‘a ruined mound’ or ‘an uninhabited park,’ or ‘ three niches in a stone wall,’ sent representatives to Parliament, whilst opulent towns full of enterprise and industry (such as Manchester, Blackburn, and other places), sent no representatives.” Among other speakers for the Bill were Mr. Hunt, the Radical, then member for Preston. For him the measure, though he supported it, did not go far enough. ‘All that has been said in this House,’ he scornfully remarked, had been said twenty years ago by the weavers of Lancashire . . . The suffrage is not widely enough extended if the rabble, as they are called, are not to have votes. Am I to be told that the people who have fought the battle of their country, the lower orders whom I call the useful classes of society, are to be called upon to pay taxes on every article of human subsistence, and afterwards denied the choosing of representatives ? As a very moderate but far from enthusiastic reformer Lord Palmerston spoke for the Bill, and Sir Robert Peel against it. He was answered by the Lord Stanley of that day, who, to the honour of the house of Derby, warmly espoused the motion, though subsequently as earl of Derby, he lost his enthusiasm for the cause. Notwithstanding these appeals the motion was lost. Parliament was dissolved, and a second Bill was introduced by the ministry only to be thrown out in the Lords. Earl Grey thereupon very properly refused to accept office again or to introduce the third Bill unless the king would promise to exercise his prerogative of creating new peers if necessary. The king reluctantly promised, but the threat sufficed, and the third Reform Bill of December, 1831, resulted. In March, 1832, it passed the Commons, and was carried in the Lords by a majority of eighty-four. The Bill was at least a step in advance, and a necessary link between the old system and the new. The new boroughs now enfranchised were Manchester, Bolton, Blackburn, Oldham, each returning two members to Parliament, also Ashton-under-Lyne, Bury, Rochdale, Salford, and Warrington, each entitled to return one member. The borough of Newton was disfranchised, and Clitheroe was given one member only. Instead of two knights the county was to return four, two for north, and two for south, Lancashire respectively. The working classes of Lancashire, feeling themselves duped by their middle class neighbours, who had used their common agitation merely to entranchise themselves, threw themselves yet more heartily into the demo- "8 Molesworth, Hist. of the Reform Bill of 1832, p. 86 ; see also Com. Journ. \xxxvi, pt. i, p. 310, 10 Feb. ; 26 Feb. 1831. 4 For details of the social and economic distress in Lancashire at this period see below, pp. 309-10. ™5 Hansard, quoted Molesworth, op. cit. pp. 104-5. 251 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE cratic movement for popular representation. Immediately after the young ueen’s accession in 1837, the Radical party in the House moved the exten- sion of the franchise to the working classes, in their amendment to the address. Working men’s political unions spread throughout Lancashire, and all over the country, and the London association drafted their demands in special terms, Universal Manhood Suffrage, Annual Parliaments, Vote by Ballot, No Property Qualifications, the Payment of Members and Equal Voting Districts, and this, in 1838, became known as ‘The People’s Charter.’** The language of the mob orators was at times dangerously incitive. Mr. Richardson, speaking at Manchester, said that The people of Lancashire had begun to think seriously upon the matter . . . and had learned that the people had a right to petition, that failing that they had a right to remon- strate, and that failing that they had a right to arm in defence of their liberties. ‘The people of Lancashire,’ he went on, had last session laid on the table of Parliament a petition bearing a quarter of a million signatures, and praying for the repeal of the Poor Law Amendment Act. How was that petition treated? Why, it was carried away . . . and never heard of more. ‘The people of Lancashire had thereupon determined to petition no more, but would remonstrate, some had said they would not remonstrate but would arm, the people began to arm, the people were armed, but the national petition came in most opportunely. . . . If that petition should fail he did not pretend to say what would be the consequence. Rifles would be loaded. . . . Everything would be done openly by the people of Lancashire ; and it would be done constitutionally and legally.?!” The distress was acute in Lancashire, and the situation was indeed critical. In 1842 a great strike of workers was adopted, and the ‘hands’ marched in multitudes from one place to another, turning out the workers and stopping the factories. On 15 August, at a Stockport meeting, it was resolved to make the charter the basis of the strike. For fifty miles round Manchester the workers were out. At Preston, however, the Riot Act was read and the soldiers fired on the mob, who thereupon dispersed. But the populations of Burnley, Bacup, Colne, and Blackburn were all in a very excited state. The shopkeepers of Burnley called a meeting to petition for the People’s Charter. For several years the movement was led in Lancashire by one Fergus O’Connor, but he advocated peaceful measures and broke with the ‘ physical force’ party, and this split gradually weakened the unity and cohesion of the movement, which, as regards Lancashire, came to a head in May, 1848, when at a Chartist meeting for Lancashire and Yorkshire a reso- lution was formed to raise a national guard.” Military training and drilling went on in parts of the county adjacent to Yorkshire, and a meeting was arranged to be held at Manchester, which a party of Oldham Chartists, armed with pikes, started to join. Hearing, however, that the military were in readiness to receive them, they returned home, and thus passed over the most crucial period of the Chartist agitation in Lancashire.™* For one or two years more meetings at Stockport, Rochdale, Oldham, Ashton, Bolton, and other places were held to discuss the charter,?” but nothing more came of it Meanwhile, O‘Connor’s mind became unhinged, and in 1852 the Northern Star, the paper he had owned and edited as the organ of the party, was 216 ; ; Gammage, Hist. of the Chartist Movement, 3-5. 7 Gammage, op. cit. 52. ms Tid: 33 25 79 Thid. 333. *” Ibid. 369. 252 POLITICAL HISTORY bought in by his publisher, and the further advocacy of the charter was openly abandoned." In the midst of all this seething Chartist and Radical agitation a tem- porary lull occurred, afforded by the visit of the queen and Prince Albert to Liverpool and Manchester in 1851. Of the queen’s own impressions we read in her diary, where she observed that at the latter place she was sur- rounded by a very intelligent but painfully unhealthy-looking population, men as well as women, who kept the best of order during the procession of that day, better we read than had ever been kept a similar occasions in London, Glasgow, Dublin, Edinburgh or any other city we have visited. The queen goes on to remark that the order and behaviour of the people, who were not placed behind any barriers, was the most complete we have seen in our many progresses through capitals and cities . . . for there was never a running crowd. Nobody moved and therefore everybody saw well and there was no squeezing. If Queen Victoria was agreeably pleased with the Lancashire people, it is equally true that the people were delighted with their queen. She won all hearts. The poorest among them perhaps felt that, however hostile or harsh the Parliament or the laws might be, they had a friend in their sovereign, one who would see them righted and who would never betray or desert them. It is quite possible the queen’s appearance amongst them did much to lighten the gloom that pressed upon the working classes of Lancashire at this period. They abandoned their Radical attitude for the time, at all events, and the queen, in her delightfully sly, humorous way, refers to the honour done her by the mayor and other city officials, who, though they had hitherto been too Radical to wear any robes of office, were, on the occasion of her visit, most beautifully dressed !_ The Lancashire people never rested till the queen came again, which she did in 1857, when the crowds at Manchester were greater than ever, and the enthusiasm beyond belief. ‘Nothing but kind and friendly faces,’ says the queen in her diary recording her impressions of the visit. In 1859 the Volunteer movement, which had died away with the re- moval of danger from Napoleon I, sprang into life again at Lord Palmerston’s suggestion of danger from France.” Rifle Corps were again formed all over Lancashire, and formed the nucleus of the volunteer force as we know it to-day. In 1861 terrible disasters befell both the queen and Lancashire. In the last month of that year the Prince Consort died, and the American War brought upon Lancashire the cotton famine.”* The political sympathies of the Lancashire working men were, however, all with the North,”* which they believed to be the cause of freedom, and such was their fine independent spirit that they would not have accepted deliverance at the price of a victory for the slave-owners. The voice of men of this calibre was needed in the counsels of Parliament, and the local distress and the growth of population in these great Lancashire (and other northern) towns made the question of granting an extension of the Parliamentary franchise very urgent. From the close of the ‘fifties’ and throughout the ‘sixties’ agitation for representation 1 Gammage, op. cit. 381. ? Justin McCarthy, Hist. of Our Own Times, iii, 229-30. * For details of this see below, p. 319. 4 Tustin McCarthy, Hist. of Our Own Times, iii, chap. xliv. 253 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE went on in and out of Parliament. The three great orators of the period, Mr. Cobden, Mr. Bright, and Mr. Gladstone (whose father was a Liverpool merchant), were all either by birth, business, or political belief closely in touch with Lancashire, and all warmly advocated a measure of reform. In 1859 Mr. Disraeli, as leader of the Commons in Lord Derby’s minis- try, had introduced what Mr. Bright, one of the most prominent advocates for the extension of the franchise, stigmatized as the ‘ Fancy Franchises’ Bill. Lord John Russell moving and carrying as an amendment a further extension than the government measure promised,”* the government appealed to the country ; in May anew Parliament was summoned, in which the minis- try were again defeated, and in June Lord Palmerston was again in office. He was known to be adverse to any scheme of reform, yet to conciliate the Manchester Radicals the Prime Minister offered a seat in the Cabinet, as President of the Board of Trade, to Mr. Cobden, who had just been returned member for Rochdale. Knowing that Lord Palmerston’s principles were at variance with his own, Mr. Cobden felt obliged to refuse it.”* Another concession to the Liberals was the introduction of a reform measure by Lord John Russell, which was warmly supported by Mr. Cobden, Mr. Bright, and the Manchester and Radical party generally.””? But Lord Palmerston’s cold feeling on the subject proved fatal, and the Bill was withdrawn. No further attempts at reform were made in Lord Palmerston’s lifetime, but when, in 1865, Lord John Russell (since 1861 Earl Russell) became Premier, with Mr. Gladstone as leader of the Commons, reform became a measure of practical politics. Such a measure was become a vital necessity to Lanca- shire. Interest in the question ebbed and flowed. In a debate of May, 1864, Mr. Gladstone had,in a speech upon the Franchise, declared that the ‘ burden of proof rested upon those who would exclude forty-nine fiftieths of the work- ing classes from the Franchise,’ and again, ‘it is for them to show the un- worthiness, the incapacity, and the misconduct of the working class.’”* In 1865 Mr. Cobden, that gallant fighter for popular liberties, died, leaving Mr. Bright and Mr. Gladstone as the joint inheritors of his mantle. For- tunately for Lancashire, Mr. Gladstone now represented the southern division of the shire.” Notwithstanding their joint efforts, the popular Franchise Bill introduced by Mr. Gladstone was defeated by the Tory opposition, and the resignation of the ministry followed. The popular interest in this Bill had been evinced by meetings all over the north and particularly in Lancashire. In Manchester, Liverpool, and Rochdale large demonstrations occurred in support of it.% The Conservative Party now took office with Lord Derby as Prime Minister and Mr. Disraeli again as leader of the Commons. The popular mind being fixed upon the subject of franchise extension and reform, the Conservatives saw that their only course was to bring in a Bill, which, should it fail to pass, would not bring any discredit on themselves, but would throw the onus of defeat upon the Liberal Opposition. The Opposition, seeing through these tactics, determined to support the Government Bill, but so to amend it that it should result in the very measure they themselves had been = Justin McCarthy, Hist. of Our Own Times, iii, chap. xl. ™6 Ibid. 220, 221. st Ibid. 255-6. ™ Ibid. 396-7. Ibid. 417. ™ H. Cox, The Reform Bills of 1866 and 1879, 42-3, 231. 254 POLITICAL HISTORY unable to pass. Mr. Gladstone was the leader of this enterprise. The Bill was presented by Mr. Disraeli in March, 1867, and it was on the eighteenth analysed by Mr. Gladstone in a searching and critical manner.*! When it came up for second reading Mr. Bright ‘expressed a more uncompromising hostility to the Bill than Mr. Gladstone had done.” He remarked of it that it was a measure which from the working class point of view had in it ‘nothing generous, nothing statesmanlike.’ In an eloquent speech he con- demned the Bill both as bearing upon its face marks of deception and disappointment and because I will be no party to any measure which shall so cheat the great body of my countrymen of the possession of that power in this House on which they have set their hearts and which as I believe by the constitution of this country they may most justly claim.” On a defection of some Liberals Mr. Gladstone threatened to resign his place as leader of the Opposition, and this had the effect of causing many public meetings throughout the country and in Lancashire, where special votes of confidence in Mr. Gladstone were passed.** There were meetings at Man- chester, Liverpool, Ashton, Newton, and other places. On 11 May a great deputation from the North of England waited on Mr. Gladstone to assure him of their support and of their confidence in his work for the cause of amending the Bill. Among these were seventeen members of Parliament, including Mr. Bright and Mr. George Wilson of Manchester, the ‘venerable champion of Free Trade.’ After a stormy passage the Bill finally was amended by the Liberals into the form in which in August, 1867, it passed the Lords and received the royal assent under the title of Representation of the People Act. This Bill gave the household suffrage as we know it to-day, to men who had been in residence in any borough for one year and who had paid the ordinary poor rate for that year, and also to male lodgers in any house where the rent of such unfurnished lodgings was of the value of £10 and upwards. The county vote was lowered to owners of estate of the clear yearly value of £5, or to occupiers of lands and tenements of the rateable value of £12 on which the poor rate had been paid. In respect of ‘ Distribution of Seats,’ boroughs of less population than 10,000 in 1861 were to return only one member each. Lancaster, which had returned two members, was disfranchised, but Burnley and Stalybridge, hitherto unrepresented, each received a member. Manchester and Liverpool were assigned three members each in place of two. Salford received an additional member and the county was for voting purposes subdivided into four divisions, North and North-East Lancashire, South-East and South-West Lancashire, each division being represented by two members, making a total of eight members for the shire. In 1832 Lord Derby’s eldest son, the Rt. Hon. E. G. Smith-Stanley (Lord Stanley by courtesy) was the Liberal member for North Lancashire and Mr. J. Wilson Patten was the Conservative representative of the same division. In 1837, however, as Lord Stanley the former joined Mr. J. Wilson Patten as a Conservative representative and represented this part of the shire till 1844. In 1847 one Liberal member was returned and again Mr. Wilson Patten for the Conservatives. The latter retained the seat till 1878, when he retired 71 H. Cox, The Reform Bills of 1866 and 1867, 124-33. 239 Hansard, vol. 186, col. 642. 3 Cox, Hist. of the Reform Bills, 173-4. ™ Thid. 199. 255 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE as Lord Winmarleigh. Meanwhile, in 1857, Lord Spencer Compton Cavendish (afterwards marquis of Hartington, now duke of Devonshire), represented the Liberal interest in the county till 1865, when, by a process of reaction after the passing of the Reform Bill, the county representation again became wholly Conservative. North-East Lancashire, created a division in 1868, also returned Conservative representatives at this election, rejecting the Liberal candidates, Sir Ughtred Kay-Shuttleworth (now Lord Shuttle- worth) and Mr. Fenton, and returning Mr. Holt and Mr. Chamberlain Starkie. South Lancashire had up to the year 1847 been Conservatively inclined, rejecting Viscount Molyneux and Mr. Wood in 1835, in favour of Lord F. Egerton and the Hon. R. B. Wilbraham, until 1846, when Mr. W. Brown was returned as Liberal and Mr. Entwistle for the Conservatives. A contest of 1847 returned another Liberal, Mr. Alexander, and again in 1852 Mr. Brown and Mr. Cheetham. In 1859, however, the Hon. A. F. Egerton was returned and with him Mr. Legh for the Conservative interest, and when a third member was assigned to this division in 1861 Mr. Turner, Con- servative, defeated Mr. Cheetham, who again contested the division. In 1865 the Rt. Hon. W. E. Gladstone (as has been already mentioned) was returned as Liberal member for this division, with the Hon. A. F. Egerton and Mr. Turner as Conservatives, but on the Conservative middle class reaction of 1868, Mr. Gladstone, who had been so closely associated with the Reform Bill, was unseated, and Mr. Turner and Mr. R. A. Cross became the Conservative members for the new division of South-West Lancashire, while, in South-East Lancashire, the Hon. A. F. Egerton retained his seat, and another Conservative was also elected, Mr. J. S. Henry. In 1874 the Liberals were again rejected in this division, as they were in South-West Lancashire also, where they continued to be defeated, the Con- servatives continuously returning Mr. Cross (afterwards Sir R. A. Cross and Viscount Cross) and Colonel J. Ireland Blackburne. But in 1880 two Liberal members recaptured South-East Lancashire under the leadership of Mr. Leake and Mr. W. Agnew.** By this time the middle and upper classes, once so hostile to democracy, had become partially permeated with mildly Liberal and Progressive ideas, and in 1884, by mutual consent of both parties, another extension of the franchise was proposed. As before, the Bill was Mr. Glad- stone's, and it was introduced into the Commons in February, 1884. The great change proposed was the putting of the county population on the same level as the population of cities and towns. This extended the vote to the agricultural labourer just as the Bill of 1877 had included the town artizans. The household franchise of 1867 would . . . be untouched. The ten pounds clear yearly value franchise would be extended to land held without houses or buildings : while there would be created a new franchise which Mr. Gladstone proposed to call a Service Franchise, for persons who were inhabitants of a house but were neither occupiers nor tenants. . . . There would be therefore four kinds of borough franchise, the ten pound franchise, the lodger franchise, the household franchise of 1867, and the service franchise In the counties the franchise which reduced the ten pounds yearly value and the household lodger and service franchise of the boroughs would be established in the county con- stituencies. *§ For a table of shire representation see The Parliamentary Re tati = combe Pink and the Rev. A. Beavan, 1889. a ace a BA 256 POLITICAL HISTORY Such is Mr. Justin McCarthy’s description of the Bill.** After some negotia- tions with the peers and with the Opposition, Parliament met again in October, 1884, and a Redistribution Bill was promised which satisfied the peers, and decided them to accept the Franchise Bill which accordingly was carried in the last month of the year 1884. The Redistribution Bill was passed in March next year, and this left the Parliamentary representation of the county as we know it to-day. The early ‘eighties’ were important in another aspect, for they witnessed the military reorganization of the forces of the county. Several distinguished regiments had long been quartered in Lancashire, and by the Army Reorganization Order of July, 1881, seven of these fine regiments were definitely assigned to Lancashire, and placed on a territorial basis. To each was assigned a 3rd, or perhaps 4th, battalion of the old Royal Lancashire militia, which as a historic county force has been so often referred to in these pages. To these were also added volunteer battalions, which like the Militia were to bear the name of the regiment to which they were hence- forth attached. The committee responsible for these suggestions was very fittingly presided over by Colonel the Hon. F. A. Stanley, who in 1878-80 had represented North Lancashire and who, as the earl of Derby, is the present lord-lieutenant of the county. The rearrangement of the seven Lancashire Regiments in 1881 was as follows :—*” No. of Battalions No. of Militia} Title for Territorial Battalions Battalions 1 and 2 Line, 3 and 4 Militia No. of Reg. Name of Regiment Militia assigned 4th | King’s Own Royal . | 1st, 2nd | 1st Royal Lancashire | 41 and 2 | The Royal Lancaster Regi- 1 and 2 Batts. ment (The King’s Own) 8th | The King’s . . .| ist, 2nd | 2ndRoyal Lancashire — The Liverpool Regiment Rifles (The King’s) 2oth | East Devonshire. .| 1st, 2nd | 7th Royal Lancashire —_— East Lancashire Regiment (Rifles) (Fusiliers) znd Battalion (not yet formed) 30th | Cambridgeshire. . _— sth Royal Lancashire — West Lancashire Regiment §9th | 2nd Nottinghamshire 2nd Battalion (not yet formed) 40th | 2nd Somersetshire . — 4th Royal Lancashire — The South Lancashire 82nd | Prince of Wales’ : Light Infantry Regiment (Prince of Volunteers znd Battalion (not Wales’ Volunteers) yet formed) 47th | Lancashire . . . _— 3rd Royal Lancashire — The North Lancashire 81st | Loyal Lincoln Volun- Regiment teers 63rd | West Suffolk. . . — 6th Royal Lancashire — The Manchester Regiment g6th 286 Hist, of Our Own Times, from 1880 to the Diamond Jubilee, 168, et seq. 27 See Rep. of the Committee on the Formation of Territorial Regiments as prepared by Col. Stanley’s Committee, Feb. 1881, App. i, 12-3, et seq. ; see also App. ii, Parl. Rep. Army Organization, 1881-5. 2 257 33 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE The passing of the local Government Acts of 1888 ™ and 1894 ** were the most important political events of the last part of the century. The former, as is so well known, created the county councils, which now transact most of the county business. The latter defined the constitution of parish meetings, and parish councils, and their powers and duties, and appointed urban or rural district councils to take over the work of the urban sanitary authorities, whose chairman was ex officio a justice of the peace for the county.” The year 1894 is also especially memorable as the date of Queen Victoria’s fourth visit to Lancashire. This was an unwonted distinction for any county. The queen came on 21 May, 1894, to open the Manchester Ship Canal,*" and was received with the most outflowing enthusiasm by the vast assembled population of the Lancashire metropolis. Her Majesty’s Diamond Jubilee, which was celebrated in 1897, was nowhere observed with more genuine expressions of popular delight and affection than in all parts of Lancashire, and it may be here appropriately mentioned that the queen’s death in January, 1901, was here, as elsewhere in her dominions, felt to be the greatest calamity that could have befallen a nation who may justly be said to have adored her. Shortly after his accession King Edward signified his good will to Lancashire by graciously consenting to lay the foundations of the New Liverpool Cathedral, open the New Ship Canal Dock at Manchester, and unveil the Salford Memorial to the Lancashire heroes who had fallen in the great Boer War of 1899-1902. The king, who was the guest of Lord Derby at Knowsley, arrived in the county on 13 July, 1905, and received an immense ovation from the Lancashire people, to whose hearts he is especially recommended as a known lover of peace. His Majesty is reported to have spoken of his reception and entertainment at Manchester as ‘ magnificent.’ In 1906 the Unionist Government resigned office, and the Liberals were returned all over the country by an overwhelming majority, but nowhere more triumphantly so than in Lancashire, where out of fifty-eight seats the Liberals won forty-two, as against fifteen Unionist and Conservative members. Nothing, perhaps, contributed so much to this issue as the raising of the old controversy of Free Trade versus Protection. As might have been expected in Lancashire, where cheap food and cheap raw material are vital necessities both of life and industry, the only answer to be expected from the working man voter was the one they and their fathers before them had learnt from those great apostles of Free Trade and untaxed foodstuffs, Peel, Bright, and Cobden. This election especially demonstrated the enormous strides made by democracy during the last generation, seeing that out of forty-two Liberal members elected for the county, twelve were returned for Labour. Thus Lancashire alone supplies little less than one-third of all the Labour candidates ™ st & 52 Vic. cap. 41. 79 56 & 57 Vic. cap. 73. 9 Tbid. sec. 22, pt. il. Pal See see pp- is * The Labour members are returned for the Clitheroe Division of North-East Lancashire, for the Gorton and Westhoughton Divisions of South-East Lancashire, for the Ince and Newton Divigous of South-West Lancashire, for Barrow in Furness, for Blackburn, Bolton, North-East and South-West Manchester, Preston and St. Helens respectively. ; ; 258 POLITICAL HISTORY (forty-one in number) representing England. One striking incident of the last election was the unseating of the ex-Premier, the Rt. Hon. Arthur James Balfour, who for twenty years had with much distinction represented East Manchester. The seat was probably lost because of the supposed Protective leanings of the ex-Premier. It was won by Mr. T. G. Horridge, K.C. In this connexion it ought to be recorded that in the present year Manchester has been honoured with a visit from some of the Colonial Premiers assembled at the Imperial Conference of 1907. Uncompromising as Lancashire feels itself obliged to be on the question of Free Trade, the Mayor and Corporation of Manchester and the Under Secretary for the Colonies, the Rt. Hon. Winston Churchill, member of Parliament for North-West Manchester, cordially welcomed their distinguished guests and presented them and the rest of the Premiers with the Freedom of the City. Taking a wide and far-off survey of the political history of the county from Tudor times to the present day, it will be seen how, after the lapse of centuries, Lancashire is still true to her ancient creed of loyalty to a throne ‘founded upon the old and sure foundations of impartial justice, national laws, and subjects’ love’ ; as also to that ideal of popular and political liberty for which she battled so manfully throughout the seventeenth and two succeeding centuries. 259 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY ROM all that has been discovered of Roman occupation in Lancashire it is beyond doubt that there must have been a very considerable social and economic development during this period. Remains of glass, pottery, and metal work found on the sites of the Roman camps and garrison towns point to the introduction of these industries into Strathclyde. The natural aptitude and quick intelligence of the Celt would easily lend itself to the imitation of Roman wares, and the presence of large military camps would necessitate the employment of smiths, artificers, carpenters, and cloth-weavers. The building of forts and walls, though largely carried out by the legionaries themselves, must have entailed the working of quarries and the hire of such rude local transport as could be obtained, while the provisioning of the soldiery must have given employ- ment to a host of native merchants, sellers of fodder, corn, and wine. All these considerations justify us in regarding the Roman period of occupa- tion as characterized by civilization and economic progress, particularly at Mancunium and round those camps on the Ribble and Lune which were in direct communication with the southern and eastern garrisons of Chester, Aldborough, and York. Tacitus, indeed, tells us how these wild northern warriors were tamed and encouraged in the arts of peace, until they had adopted the fashions of the toga and the bath, and had become almost more Roman than their conquerors.’ The degree of British civilization attained under the Romans even in that part of Britain occupied by the Brigantes and afterwards known as Lancashire does not directly affect the later social and economic history of the county, as with the exception of the great military roads the whole superstructure raised by the Romans in Strathclyde, as elsewhere in Britain, was swept away by the invading Saxons, although a large Celtic element persisted in the population of East and North-east Lancashire. Until they were disturbed by the Danish inroads it is probable that the Saxons remained in an exclusive, self-sufficient tribal settlement on the lands between the Lune, Ribble, and Mersey, and that when the Northmen landed they were driven further into the interior, while the keen Danish traders established their merchant routes, going along the river banks or turning inland from them. Some general idea of the settlement of the Saxons in what we now call Lancashire may be gathered from the Domesday Survey, but this important 1 Tacitus, Agricola. 261 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE record and its contribution to the social and economic history of the county has already been dealt with in another article, and it is unnecessary to repeat here what has already been written in the first volume as to the conditions of Lancashire during the Norman period. From the Pipe Rolls’ we get glimpses of Lancashire as it may have appeared a hundred years after the Norman Conquest, by which time the honour had become practically coterminous with the present limits of the county, and included the Furness estate of Michael Le Fleming. Judging from the general aspect of the county as presented in the first ten rolls of the reign of Henry II (1161-75),° the main feature of the intervening century must have been that of slow but sure economic recovery, the result of an effective, and, as times went then, almost revolutionary struggle against the hitherto prevailing dominance of the ‘forest,’ a large part of the county being within the metes of the forest. Fines, farms, fees, and forests are still as in the Domesday records the main topics dealt with, but with a difference. Among the first entries is a payment of £66 18s. 4d., assessed on the whole county as a fine for various ‘negligences, purprestures and trespasses’ within the forest of Lancaster.* This assessment was followed next year, and for many years in succession, by a payment of 200 marks for a postponement of the forest regard in the county,* though in the interval betweeen the fifteenth and twenty-first year further fines were imposed to the extent of £93 135. 9d. for inclosures and assarts made within the prohibited area.* Fines continued to be imposed or payments for postponement of the regard continued to be made through- out the remainder of the reign.’ The crown, always alert to profit by fresh sources of revenue, found all over the county timber was being felled, clear- ings known as ‘assarts’ or ‘riddings’™ were being made, and the land thus reclaimed was being laid down in corn and pasture. The fact that the forest came up to the towns was dangerously tempting and greatly favoured the free pasturing of sheep, swine, and oxen in its desir- able glades and coverts. Many fines were for the erection of cattle sheds, huts for the herdsmen, or for hunting lodges. The larger landholders and the clergy were the chief offenders, though the fines of the latter were often excused by the king’s pious clemency.’ The comparative stability of Angevin rule had favoured the foundation of the greater number of Lanca- shire monasteries. The establishment of great religious houses, such as the * Farrer, Lancs. Pipe R. * Mag. Rot. Pip. 8 Hen. II (1161-2), R. 8, m. 12; ibid. R. 21, m. 2. * Mag. Rot. Pip. 15 Hen. II (1168-9), R. 15, m. 18¢. ‘The reader will scarcely need to be reminded that this sum, as of course all other sums mentioned in the rolls, would have to be multiplied by at least twenty to represent its modern equivalent. The rolls have been printed for Lancashire up to the end of King John’s reign ; Farrer, Lancs. Pipe R. ° Mag. Rot. Pip. 16 Hen. II, R. 16, m. 6d. : eet eo II pales Rs a m.2. ‘De Placitis Alani de Nevill.’ . ibid. 24 Hen. 1177-8), R. 24, m. 3¢. Among those fined pro foresta are Humphrey, cleri Albert Bussel’s brother-in-law, the archdeacon of Chester, a dean of Sr alc ene the sonia a Page the parson of North Meols, the dean of Kirkham, Elias son of Lessi, Geoffrey de Longton, Richard de Pierpont, Siward de Standish, Roger the Butler (of Warton in Amounderness), John son of Thurstan and Matthew son of William. 2 Locally described as ‘riddings,’ and in north-east Lancashire as ‘royds,’ the ‘rode land’ of the village community as distinct from the ‘oxgang land’ or ancient arable land of the early fiscal system of the county. oe Cf. Mag. Rot. Pip. 32 Hen. II (1185-6), R. 32, m. 10, 10d. ‘Harold of Lancaster’ is fined for making ‘ cowplaces’ in the forest. Ibid. 33 Hen. II (R. 33, m. 2), ‘Stephanus de Waleton r.c. de xls. pro * logia” facta in foresta.’ ® Farrer, Lancs. Pipe R. passim. 262 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY abbey of Furness, in the far wilds of Lancashire is of the highest import- ance because not merely were the monks the preservers of learning and dispensers of hospitality and shelter, but monasticism was one of the greatest economic forces of the Middle Ages.° As no less an authority than Pro- fessor Thorold Rogers avers, ‘modern agriculture had its first beginning under the shelter of conventual discipline." In a rude age, when the feudal baronage disdained even the management of their own estates and despised every exertion other than that of arms, the Mediaeval Church threw the whole weight of her cosmopolitan influence into the scale of manorial economy. In Lancashire as elsewhere the chief monastic occupation was agriculture. The monks were cultivators of grain, breeders of oxen, and in particular large farmers of sheep. In an entry for the sixth year of Richard I we find the abbot of Furness prosecuting a neighbouring baron, Gilbert son of Roger Fitz-Reinfred, for the recovery of ‘ 1000 sheep with the wool, and 88 lambs’ which the said Gilbert had carried off by force from the folds of the monastery.” Among the items of a grant by Warine Bussel to the abbot of Evesham of lands in Lancashire are mentioned ‘the half of his stock’ at a place called Martin, which consisted of four cows, four oxen, and sixty sheep. In these wild northern parts cattle appear to have been regarded as the most convenient and easily transferable form of wealth, just as cattle-lifting was the commonest form of robbery. In earlier times taxes were paid in cattle,"* and forfeitures were still apparently so claimed by the crown. Oxen were required not merely for ploughing and other agricultural works, but for transport service. ‘There were large cattle-breeding establishments on the demesne lands of the honour, and when King Richard resumed them after his brother’s rebellion he ordered the sheriff to see to their re-stocking.” There were many other large vaccaries throughout the county, particularly those of the honour of Clitheroe, and of the barony of Manchester, of which later. Enough has been said to show what a grievance the forest laws must have been in Norman and Angevin times to the landowners whose herds were pastured in the vicinity of the forest, and for whose trespass they were so heavily amerced. Success at length rewarded their alternate policy of trespass and of composition, when, somewhere between the years 1189 and 1194, John, count of Mortain, granted them a charter of liberties in return for the enormous sum of 500 pounds of silver. By this charter they were acquitted of any further regard of the forest, and might take, give, or improve ” Prof. Thorold Rogers, Agric. and Prices, i, 58. ‘Nor is it just to the monastic orders to ignore their great merit as industrial bodies . . . many parts of England once waste and uninhabitable owed their first settlement to monks who obtained grants of uncultivated land.’ " Tbid. 4 Mag. Rot. Pip. 6 Ric. I (1193-4), R. 40, m. 9 ; and Farrer, op. cit. 86. * Farrer, op. cit. quoted, 320. (Evesham Chart. Harl. MS. 3763, fol. 89.) ™ See Prof. Maitland, ‘Northumbrian Tenures,’ Eng/. Hist. Rev. v. May not this ‘cornage’ or ‘neat geld’ have survived as the ‘cow-male’ we find exacted as a custom on the demesne lands of Lancaster, at Skerton and Overton? See L.T.R. Enrolled Accts. Misc. Accts. and Receipts of John de Lancaster, 17 Edw. II (m. 72 d. first skin) ; also Rentals of Overton, m. 1, 17 Edw. II (1323-4). These rentals covering the years 1322-6, and frequently quoted in this article have been printed as regards the year 1323-4 in Lancs. Ing. (Rec. Soc. liv). Cf. Mag. Rot. Pip. 5 John (1202-3), R. 99, m. 18, et d. ‘Amerciamenta,’ &c. © Mag. Rot. Pip. 6 Ric. I (1193-4), R. 40, m. 9 ; also Farrer, Lancs. Pipe R. 95. A list of the vaccaries of Wyresdale and Bleasdale (temp. Edw. II) is given in L.T.R. Accts. and Receipts of the forest of Blackburn- shire, m. 72 @. (first skin). 263 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE their lands at will, or build houses where they pleased.'? After his accession to the crown John confirmed this charter in return for a fine of 200 pounds of silver. The capacity to pay such a sum as this in addition to the county farm and the especially heavy feudal aids of the period, may be taken as a proof of the beginning of economic expansion on the manorial holdings of Lancashire during the Angevin period. The increase of cultivated area implied by the number of ‘ assarts’ compounded for, as well as the numbers of cattle pasturing in the forest, suggests more labour on the land, more herds- men tending the stock, more mouths to feed and bodies to clothe, and more corn grown to afford food supplies. But land acreage and stock would only be increased in proportion to some definite demand for an additional supply ; therefore we are reasonably justified in supposing that a distinct and marked increase in population may be inferred from the payments offered by the county for its widely distributed trespasses upon forest lands at the close of the twelfth century. During the hundred years following the Conquest, the numbers of tiny manorial groupings had become so considerable that there was a general sprinkling of ‘ vills,’ or small manorial settlements, throughout the county." Besides the twenty-five demesne ‘ vills’ of the honour of Lancaster,” the roll for the fifteenth year of Henry II refers to the contribution from the ‘< vills’ of Lonsdale wapentake. Among these Lancaster, as the site of the castle and capital of the honour, had a distinguished pre-eminence. We know from a later entry that the king had houses there, by which may have been meant something similar to the king’s Houses of Westminster, either attached as part of the castle buildings, or a separate hostel in the town, set apart for the accommodation of the royal suite when the king was in residence. Possibly here were lodged the itinerant justices who visited the county in 1166.% A certain number of small freeholders, many of them holding by the petty serjeanty of works to be done at the castle,’ dwelt in and about the town, which was surrounded by fields and forest, and except for a small weekly market and regular cattle fairs was not, strictly speaking, commercial. Cloth would come there from the neighbouring town of Kendal, and wool would be offered for sale from the prior’s sheep-farms. But, generally speaking, the character of Lancaster in these early days would be rather that of a strong military bulwark against the northern raiders than that of a convenient market. In point of actual mercantile importance it was out- stripped by Preston, which was at this time the most prosperous townshi not merely of its own hundred of Amounderness, but perhaps of all Lancashire.” Preston owed its rapid advance to its happy situation at the junction of a Roman road and a navigable river, advantages of site which appealed strongly to the Danish spirit of commercial enterprise.¥ The Normans, like the P.R.O. Duchy of Lanc. Forest Proc. bdle. 1, No. 7, quoted by Farrer, op. cit. 418-19. See the article ‘ Forestry,’ below. Certain liberties of hunting were likewise accorded by this charter. 2 : ; : * Farrer, Lancs. Pipe R. Introd. p. xiv. The preceding statements as to fines paid for assarts, to an increase alike of population and cultivated area. '? Mag. Rot. Pip. 3 John (1200-1), R. 47, m. 20. * Ibid. 2 John (1199-1200), R. 46, m. 17. ‘Etin Reparatione Domo Regis d 2 ” Tbid. 13 Hen. II (R. 13, m. 10 2). ‘ Serra a arena ” The commercial importance of Manchester at this time cannot be determined. * Cunningham, Growth of Industry and Commerce. 264 &c., point SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY Danes, appreciated the convenience of a waterway, and Preston doubtless became a centre (sheltered by Lancaster Castle to the north) for undisturbed industry and traffic. In the aid for the marriage of the king’s daughter raised in 1168-9 by tallage of the demesne lands, when the towns of Lonsdale rendered £26 135. 4d., Preston and its dependencies were assessed at {10.™ Its advance was rapid, for in 1176 it was prosperous enough to be assessed at £16 tos. The men of Preston in 1179 obtained a charter granting their town free customs, which the king had already given to his burgesses of Newcastle-under-Lyme. For this charter, which they had to travel up to Winchester to receive, they paid 100 marks, and undertook to pay an increment of £6 to their annual farm of £9, making a total of £15 annually. The mercantile supremacy of Preston can be best realized from the fact that Lancaster did not attain to the dignity of a free borough till 1193, when John, then count of Mortain, granted his burgesses of Lancaster the same liberties as he had granted to his burgesses of Bristol, with release of suit to his mill, customary ploughing, and other servile customs. King John confirmed the Preston charter in his second year for a payment of 60 marks,” and also granted the town a fair of seven days in every year, in the month of August.** Almost parallel with these concessions to Lancaster and Preston was the founding of Liverpool, and its initiation as a free royal borough, when in his tenth year (1207) the king transplanted the main population of West Derby thither,” and issued a proclamation that all persons taking burgages there might have ‘in the town of Liverpool all the liberties and free customs enjoyed by any borough on the sea coast.’ In 1246 the celebrated John Mansel, parson of the church at Wigan, obtained borough rights for that town, with all the privileges appertaining to a hanse and merchant guild. Manchester, in the hands of the Grelley family, obtained none of these royal grants, though it received a baronial charter in 1301.” The importance of concessions such as were made to Lancaster and Preston and of the start given to Liverpool and Wigan, based as they were on the economic conditions of the more favoured English towns, can scarcely be over-estimated. They are the more important because they prove how at the beginning of the thirteenth century, though severely handicapped by remote- ness of geographical situation, Lancashire had taken a place with the rest of industrial England. Although no markets are expressly mentioned in the Pipe Rolls before Henry III,** we know that the larger towns served as distributing centres for the manors and vills that lay about their circumference. But if markets are not referred to we learn something about prices in the beginning of the thirteenth century, and are thus able to compare them with the standard of a hundred years later. In the year 1209-10 the sheriff had to pay 5s. a quarter for wheat, 4 Mag. Rot. Pip. 15 Hen. II (1168-9), R. 15, m. 18 d. * Ibid. 2 John (1199-1200), R. 46, m. 17. Nova Oblata. % Farrer, Lancs. Pipe R. 123. ” Tbid. 225. ® Pat. g John, m. 5. Cf. Ramsay Muir, Munic. Government in Liverpool. ° 30 Hen. III (1246), Plac. de Quo Warranto (Rec. Com.), 372. 7 ; 3° Mamecestre (Chet. Soc.), i, 181-2 ; Tait, Mediaeval Manchester, c. iil. The borough existed before the charter mentioned. : ; 8a The grant of a market to the little town of North Meols in 1219 was withdrawn in 1224 because it was inimical to the neighbouring markets. Fine R. 4 Hen. III, m. 8; Close R. (Rec. Com.), i, 608. 2 265 34 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE although he could get oats at 15, 2¢.° Next year a live cow fetched 45. 6d., and bacon-hogs 2s. each.” Again, in the interval between 1213 and 1215 the sheriff bought large quantities at the following prices :—-Wheat, at 35. 4d. the quarter; barley, at 1s. the quarter ; bacon-hogs, at 2s. 7d. each; live cows, at 4s. 7d. each ; wether muttons, at 1s. each ; salt, at 25. a stone; cowhides, at 10d. each ; sheephides, at 24d. each. Such small industries as flourished at this time would probably centre in or near the towns.* Apart from the spinning of flax and the weaving of a coarse woollen cloth, they were for the most part industries connected with the military and manorial requirements of that day. The building and repairing of castles gave considerable employment to masons and carpenters, as, for instance, at Lancaster and West Derby ;* and the king’s expeditions to Wales and Ireland raised a demand for engines and implements of war that were largely supplied from Lancashire. In 1170 Henry II required the manufacture and transport of two siege engines, at a cost of {14 115. for the two, for use in Ireland. In 1208 John also gave orders for the preparation of no less than seven siege engines, which were turned out at a cost of only £3 each, though it is not clear whether this included shipment.” Perhaps these were not towers, but great catapults. In the following year John again ordered a war equipment from Lancashire, consisting chiefly of provisions, but also including horse-shoes and nails. In 1210 the king ordered a pur- veyance for the Welsh expedition, including mattocks, axes and 2,000 fishing nets. The fortification of the castles also gave employment to armourers and bolt makers. In the sixteenth and seventeenth year the sheriff had expended £5 on 10,000 quarrels for crossbows for the castles of Lancashire and West Derby. Lancashire was not merely famous for its arrowsmiths, but for its archers. The Lancashire bowmen were noted for drawing their arrows to the head ; * and because of their skill both in making and in handling the bow Lancashire was a favourite recruiting ground. Its situation at a hinge or angle of England, from which men could be quickly marched over the Welsh or Scottish border, or shipped to Ireland, proved highly convenient to the mustering of troops, and the peculiarly high-spirited, daring and hardy nature of the Lancastrians made them admirable levies for the kind of rough warfare they were summoned to wage, in difficult country and against a wary, half-civilized enemy. The removal of several thousand rough fighting men, many of them felons or outlaws,” from the county could only be of advantage to its peace ; though the temporary loss of the carpenters and masons, who accompanied the army, may have been economically inconvenient. The long and comparatively peaceful reign of Henry III, followed by the firm and wise government of his son Edward, gave a great impetus to all " Mag. Rot. Pip. 12 John, R. 56, m. Ts * Ibid. 13 John, R. 57,m. 14. * Reference to them may be seen in the Salford borough charter in Tait, op. cit. * C£ Mag. Rot. Pip. 16 and 17 John (1213-15), R. 61, m. 5. * Ibid. * Ibid. 17 Hen. II (1170~1), R. 17, m. 3.2. * Ibid. 11 John (1208-9), R. 55, m. 9. ‘Et pro vij Breteschiis parandis ad portandum xj. li... .? The word may refer to the use of these engines for effecting a ‘breach’ in the enemy’s wall. * Annas of the Lords of Warrington (Chet. Soc.), pt. i, 386. Also cf. the Shropshi Baines, Hist. of Lancs, (ed. Harland), i, 255, note 1. ae aoe * See Pat. R. Edw. I, I, I, passim, for pardons granted to felons and murderers provided they would serve in the king’s wars, and stand their trial on their return if any one should implead them. 266 1 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY kinds of trade and agriculture. The towns throve after their fashion, and secured confirmations of their charters. The county greatly benefited by the disafforesting of lands within the metes of the forest. The result of this last enactment must have been to give a beneficial impetus to stock-raising, and from the records of the period we are able to gather a distinct impression of the way in which these great mediaeval manors were managed, and in some cases to discover the average head of cattle raised in the forest vaccaries. Where the lord kept the manor in his own hands instead of farming it out to a tenant, the working of the estate was left to a head bailiff, with clerks and assistant bailiffs under his supervision. The person in charge of vaccaries was styled the ‘ Instaurator,’ or stock-keeper. Sometimes, though the instaurator and constable were separate officers, the services of both were requisitioned in the management and buying of stock.“ It is probable that the actual rolls were kept and written by the baron’s chief clerk or chaplain, as few except the clergy could write in those times ; and the accounts were moreover kept in monkish Latin, with which it is very improbable the bailiff was acquainted. Nothing was too insignificant to be entered upon the roll, which records every detail of income or expenditure, from the amount of wild honey obtained during the year to the number of candles used in any particular cow-place or ‘ vaccary.’ * The office of manorial bailiff was indeed no sinecure in the thirteenth century, as a brief study of his responsibilities will prove. He had assistant bailiffs under his direction, but he was finally responsible for every farthing of income or expenditure belonging to the estate.* One of his first cares was the management of stock, the raising of sufficient plough oxen to work the manor, and their proper distribution among the various farms. He had also to provide sufficient swine and sheep, not merely for the lord’s household, but also for the feeding and clothing of the workers on the manor. There was the raising of grain, wheat, oats, barley, peas, and beans hemp and flax, as well as the mowing of hay meadows, and the pasturing of cows and oxen. He had to judge which lands were to be ploughed, and which were to lie fallow every third year according to the plan pursued by cultivation upon the three-field system.“ He had to arrange for the letting of certain pastures, or for the ‘agistment’ of other cattle upon the lord’s pastures; he had to collect the rents of all places that were let to farm, such as mills, forges, furnaces, dovecotes, fruit gardens, and common ovens. He had the receiving of the lord’s market tolls and weekly stallages as well as those of fair time. He had the payment of wages upon the estate ; the distribution of corn allowances, the over-looking of damage to fences or buildings, and the ordering and superintendence of repairs, the erection of new buildings, the Cal. of Close, 1227-31, pp. 100-1. In 1229 to the men of Liverpool Henry III granted the town for four years for a farm of {10 a year; Pat. Hen. III, m.9. In 1328, just a hundred years later, the king granted to the bailiff and men of Liverpool three years’ pavage ; Ca/. of Pat. 1327-30, p. 231. The king granted the men of Preston that by view of his forester they might have the dead and dry wood lying on the ground in the forest of Fulwood ; Cal. of Pat. 1225-32, p. 112. "Cf De Lacy Compotus (Chet. Soc. cxii), 126. “Cf. Prof. T. Rogers, Agric. and Prices, i, 64. ‘No source of income, however small, was neglected or unappropriated by the feudal superior.’ , “© Cf Mamecestre, ii (Extent of Manchester, 1322) ; the bailiff, pp. 374, 397. ‘And there is a certain bailiff, and serjeant of the lord, sworn to him to ride about and superintend his demesne and to pay the lord the rents of the outside tenants, and other things as fines (or amerciaments) and things of that kind.’ “ Cunningham, Growth of Indust. and Commerce. 267 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE sale and purchase of stock. He had the superintendence of the manorial stud farms, the up-keep of saddle or draught horses for the baron’s own use, and had to receive such colts, mares, or stallions as were put under his care, or to forward them as required to any given place. With the manor and its farms went, of course, the management of the manorial vaccaries scattered on the edge of the forest, and the payment of the cowkeepers and cheese makers. It would even seem that the management of the chase was under the bailiffs care, as he paid the parker and his assistants their wages, as well as those of the wolf-watchers, and had to provide for the strawing of fodder and the cutting of branches for the wild animals in the winter, for the making of dear leaps, for the taking, salting, and forwarding of the wild boar and venison, whithersoever the lord might require it to be sent.** In short the bailiffs responsibility appears to have been as absolute as his opportunities of personal aggrandisement must have been manifold. Of the royal manors belonging to the lord of Lancaster, we read little in the Pipe Rolls,“ except that in 1194, after John’s rebellion, those and others in the honour were understocked, and the sheriff, as we have seen, claimed payment for the purchase of*7 240 cows, 15 bulls, 80 brood mares, and 120 ewes wherewith to replenish them. Mr. Farrer tells us that in 1178 these twenty-five manors had 584 teams of oxen assigned to them,** which, at the estimate of eight oxen to a team,” meant a herd of 468 oxen kept for ploughing and draught purposes. This would give an average of nearly 19 oxen to a manor, supposing the manors to be all the same size, which they were not. In the records for another part of the county we learn further details of these cattle herds, for which Lancashire appears to have been famous in the Middle Ages and long after, for a writer in the eighteenth century (1749) tells us that even then the Lancashire cattle were remark- able for their great size, in point of which they were only rivalled by those of Somersetshire.” The vaccaries of the honour of Clitheroe belonged, in the end of the thirteenth century, to Henry de Lacy, earl of Lincoln, and from the Compotus Roll for the year 1295-6" we find a mixed herd of 2,330 cattle were at that time kept in the great forest of Blackburnshire. The herds were distributed as follows :— — Cows Bulls Steers Heifers Yearlings of oe Trawden Forest 197 5 26 33 64 82 Pendle Forest . 463 14 66 Si 137 171 Rossendale Forest . 435 14 69 51 141 170 For Accrington Vaccaries the details are not given. “* See the De Lacy Compotus of the Honor of Clitheroe (Chet. Soc. cxii), passim © Farrer, Lancs. Pipe R. passim. “’ See above, note 16, Mag. Rot. Pip. 6 Ric. (1193-4), R. 40, m. 9. * Farrer, Lancs. Pipe R. 37. “ Tbid. 94. * John Owen, Britannia Depicta (4th ed. Lond. 1749), 236. ' De Lacy Compotus (Chet. Soc. cxii), 138-40. Instaurators and cowkeepers of Blackburnshire render their account at Ightenhill, 27 Jan. 1297 ; from Sept. 1295 to Sept. 1296. 268 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY These respective herds were spread over a fairly wide tract of country in the forest places, styled ‘booths,’ a word which has locally survived to this day in many parts ot north-east Lancashire. Those of Trawden were apportioned to five cowkeepers, those of Pendle and of Rossendale to eleven respectively. The average stock kept at each ‘booth’ was apparently about 40 cows, one bull, five to six steers, six to seven heifers, 12 to 15 yearlings, and 15 to 16 calves of the year. The average number of calves reared was about two from every five cows, so that the increase was only at the rate of forty per cent., while sixty per cent. of the cows were, from the point of view of stock-raising, unprofitable. No doubt murrain, exposure, the ravages of wolves, which at this time infested the forest of Blackburnshire, the ignorance of the attendant herdsmen, and other detrimental causes resulted in a heavy mortality of young or new-born stock. No details are given for the herds of the demesne vaccaries of the honour of Lancaster in the forests of Wyresdale and Bleasdale. A hundred years before, as has already been mentioned, the sheriff looked after them for the king, who then held the honour. It is probable that they were now let to farm, as we know they were twenty-five years later. Other vaccaries of the county were those of the Manchester barony, in the forest of Horwich, but of these herds no details are given. A comparison of the rents of these ‘ cowplaces’ is possible, but owing to their varying area, apt to be misleading. However, we learn that in 1311 the twenty-seven places for cows in the forests of Blackburnshire, plus four places at Accrington, were let for a sum of £15 ros., at an average of ros. yearly per vaccary. In Horwich in 1322 eight ‘cowplaces’ brought in a rent of £19. Obviously these were larger or richer and could pasture more cattle. In the same year the vaccaries of the demesne forest lands of the honour of Lancaster, namely, Wyresdale and Bleasdale, were let to farm for a total rent of £21 115. The oxen raised at the vaccaries were bred primarily for draught and to work at the plough, but a large surplus was often on hand and was either transferred to the various farms.as required or sold at the nearest market. A great number were annually sold from the Accrington booths, where out of 317 oxen mentioned, 98 were kept for use, and 213 were sold. The milk from the vaccaries was churned into butter and salted for winter use or made into cheese. No less than 156 cheeses and 274 stones of butter are mentioned in the De Lacy Compotus Roll of 1295. Attached to the ‘cowplaces’ were stud farms, where a stock of draught and saddle horses were annually reared, wherewith to supply the earl’s or the king’s requirements for war, travel, or draught purposes. With these herds belonging to the demesne lands of the two honours it is interesting to compare the stock of a small monastic establishment at the beginning of the fourteenth century, only fifteen years after the De Lacy “The Widnes Vaccary is entered separately and had 46 cows, 2 bulls, and 35 yearlings, but only 12 calves of the year. Cf. ‘Higham Booth,’ ‘Crawshaw Booth,’ ‘Barley Booth’ in the Pendle Forest district. 58 Cf, Prof. T. Rogers, Agric. and Prices (ed. 1866), i, §3. ‘The losses of stock sustained by the mediaeval farmer were enormous.’ : “ Particulars of stock which might be maintained in Wyresdale and Bleasdale, 1249-97, are given in Lanes. Ing. and Extents (Rec. Soc. Lancs. and Ches. xlviii), 170, 221-2, 290. 5° Mamecestre (Chet. Soc.), il, 387-8. 269 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Compotus. An account of it is furnished by the compotus of Lytham Priory for the years 1310-11, and again for the years 1338 and 1345. In 1310 they had only 22 cows, two bulls, 14 calves and bullocks, 13 heifers, and nine stirks, a total of 83 head of all ages and sexes. The next year, though the respective numbers vary, the total head remains unchanged. In 1338, nearly a generation later, the total head has increased to rather more than double, being 175 animals of varying ages and sexes, while in 1345 the total amount had risen to a mixed herd of 218 animals. For this year also reference is, for the first time, made to vaccaries belonging to the monastery, where, it is stated, was a herd of 349 cattle of divers sexes and ages. Whether this included or was in addition to the 218 already specified is not made clear. The one feature which differentiates the priory stock from that of the honour of Clitheroe or of Lancaster is the keeping of sheep. In the forests of Blackburnshire it seems at this early period to have been unprofitable to pasture sheep owing to the constant attacks of wolves, against which even the cattle had to be continually guarded by a special watchman. The monasteries, headed by that of Furness, however, went in very extensively for sheep-farming, and it was from these localities that the Italian merchants collected their annual supplies for export. The monastery wool was, in fact, often pledged to these merchants for several years in advance in return for some loan, At the opening of the fourteenth century but a small flock of sheep was kept at Lytham. In 1310 it numbered only 107 head, composed of 32 rams and wethers, 42 ewes, and 33 lambs. Next year it had only increased by seven. Nearly a generation later it had risen to 210 head, and in 1341 to 284 animals. By the year 1345 the flock consisted of 403 sheep of varying ages and sexes. Analyzing these respective figures we find the average year’s increase to have been seven animals between 1310 and 1311; while in the next twenty-seven years (1311-38) the average increase is only 33 head per annum. From this time onward there is a very marked step forward, the average during the next three years (1338-41) rising to 25 head per annum, and to nearly 30 per annum for the last four years, those between 1341 and 1345. The low average of the years between 1311 and 1338 was probably caused by the famine of 1315-18, and by the inroads of Scots in 1322, the rebellion of Earl Thomas, and the unsettled state of the county in the early years of Edward III. The extraordinary increase between 1338 and 1341 may have been fostered by the great demand for wool, which was at this time being greedily bought up on all hands by English and foreign merchants; it may also have been stimulated by the introduction of Flemish weavers into England in 1331. Lancashire wools may have been affected when in 1336 two Brabant manufacturers were settled under the king’s protection at York ;® or when in 14 Edward III certain northern merchants, among whom was William de Lancaster, made a large purchase * Cf. Introd. to De Lacy Compotus (Chet. Soc. cxii). 7 Smith, Memoirs of Wool(1747), i, 21, par. 27. o 31 Edw. III, quoted ibid. 23 ; also Rymer, Foedera iv, 496. Regulations for the woollen trade were made in 1327 and 1332; and in the former year the king, in order to encourage the home manufacture promised franchises to fullers, weavers, dyers, and clothworkers; Ca/. Pat. 1327-30, p. 98. In 1333 he granted protection for all weavers and workers in cloth coming into the realm ; ibid. 1340-4 396 * Smith, op. cit. 24, note, quoted from Rymer, op. cit. iv, 723. , nee 270 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY of wools both of Yorkshire and other northern counties. Among these there is no mention of Lancashire, but as most of the Westmorland wools were furnished by the abbey of Furness the term Westmorland might be inclusive of Lancashire as represented by Furness and its dependencies. The wools of Cumberland and Westmorland were the poorest and cheapest, only fetching £2 135. 4d. a sack, whereas wool of Yorkshire was priced at £4 10s. a sack, of Derbyshire (the Peak) at £3 35. 4d. per sack, of Leicestershire at £5 65. 8d. (exactly double the value of the cheapest, that is the Westmorland wool), and that of Shropshire at £6 6s. 4d. the sack.” It is noteworthy that the specified entry in the Lytham Roll indicates that the wool of Lytham was sold for 40d. a stone,” or at the rate of £4 6s. 84. the sack. It can only be supposed that the wool of the Lytham sheep was of good quality. Sheep were evidently extensively bred on the demesne estates, for we read of 404 sheep being driven by the king’s order from the manor of Woolton to Holland.® Also in 1324 (17 Edward II) a certain Ranulf de Dacre was paying rent for the pasture of 500 sheep at Halton, near Lancaster.“ Sheep are mentioned in the records of Warrington Manor as being kept by the abbot of Dieulacres at Rossall in the reign of Henry III. But the greatest contribution of northern wools came from the great abbey of Furness. According to the evidence of the mediaeval Italian documents incorporated in Pegolotti’s Mediaeval History of Commerce, and given at length in Dr. Cunningham’s appendix to the fourth edition of his Growth of English Industry and Commerce, Furness supplied a yearly contribution of thirty sacks, of which the good wool was priced at 184 marks and the worst (? ’i locchi mar.’) at 10 marks a sack. ‘There must have been some difference in the weight and size of these north-country sacks to account for this abnormal price of wool. Probably they were double sacks, as the normal price of northern wools was usually at the very highest under {£5 a sack. Even supposing the sacks to be of double size, 18} marks would represent the price of the very best Midland wool, with which it is interesting to learn Lancashire wool was able to compete. Lancashire was required to contribute 256 sacks 5 stone of the 30,000 sacks of wool granted to the king in the Parliament of 1340. In 1342 the community of the county begged that g marks for each sack (4d. per lb.) might be levied instead of the wool, owing to the difficulty of finding ® Smith, op. cit. p. 29, par. 9. In 1338 the collectors at Hull were ordered to send on to Antwerp 500 sacks of wool collected in Lancashire and the West Riding ; Caf Ciose, 1337-9, P- 5°7- Many other references to the wool trade will be found in these calendars. *! Smith, op. cit. i, 29. There were 26 stone to each sack, the Westmorland wool was therefore worth 139d. per Ib. Indentura de—or status de . . . Lytham, 1345. Among the ‘ Receipts’ at the time of the Compotus is the entry ‘38 stone of wool sold at 40d. a stone, and half a stone afterwards sold and omitted from last compotus—{6 8s. 4d.’ The price was 28d. per |b. ® L.T.R. Misc. Enr. Accts. 14, m. 76. Accounts and Receipts of the wapentake of Lonsdale from 15 July in 17 Edw. II, L.T.R. Enr. Misc. Accts. m. 72d. 1 (first skin). % Annals of the Lords of Warrington (Chet. Soc. Ixxxvi), 65, 66. ® The two limits work out at 84¢. and 42¢. per lb., an impossible price, which confirms the supposition that the sacks contained 52 instead of 26 stone. Cf. the prices of wool, Pat. 25 Edw. I, m. 4, m. 4 sched, and m. 2: also 26 Edw. I, m. 32, &c. Cf. also 4 Edw. I, m. 29, burgesses of Lynn paying £96 for 24 sacks of wool; and 20 Edw. I, m. 24 @., 53 sacks at 8 marks, and 50 sacks at 6 marks a sack. 271 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE the amount due that year, the county being greatly depressed by the frequent invasions of the Scots and other misfortunes. How far mediaeval Lancashire took part in the woollen-cloth industry cannot at this distance of time, and in the absence of documentary evidence, be determined. All historians concur in admitting that a great influx of Flemish weavers, patronized by Queen Emma, followed the Norman Con- quest, and some of these are said to have settled in the north near Carlisle, and to have founded the Kendal cloth industry.’ It is a matter of knowledge that a weaving community who obtained a charter from Henry I were settled at or near Preston in the twelfth century, and there was certainly an ancient weavers’ guild at York. Possibly similar guilds were attached to the merchant guilds of Wigan and Liverpool ; at any rate some local woollen cloth industry must have necessitated the fulling mills, which are repeatedly mentioned in the mediaeval surveys, particularly in the parts of Blackburn- shire and Salfordshire.® The grain crops raised on the manors varied a little with the situation of the land. Oats constituted the staple crop of the county,” and though some wheat was sown on almost every manor or monastic estate it seems to have been rather by way of luxury than of necessity, as a provision for the lord’s or abbot’s personal and household requirements. Next to oats barley was most plentifully grown, as it was used in brewing ; beans and peas were also sown in great quantities. A certain amount of flax” and hemp was likewise raised on nearly every manor for the requirements of the lord’s establishment. Grass for fodder was of course grown and mown wherever possible, and doubtless occupied the greatest area of all. Blackburnshire, being partly situated on spurs of the Pennine Range, was not favourably situated for grain crops. One of its best cultivated and most fertile districts would be parts of the valley of the Ribble about Clitheroe ; and at Standen Grange 35% acres of grass were mown in 1295, which ten years later (1304-5) had been increased to 48 acres. Among grain crops oats predominated, the yield being 121 quarters 64 bushels reaped in 1295 as against 2 quarters 1 bushel of wheat in the same year, and ten years later being 187 quarters 34 bushels of oats as against 8 quarters 5 bushels of wheat reaped in 1304-5. Of these oats 94 quarters were used again for seed, 54 only were kept for provender, and 83 quarters were sold for profit, proving that the grange of Standen was something more than a self-supporting establishment. At a slightly later time, in the year 1322, we obtain some details as to the demesne manors of the honour. On the manor of Hale, near the Cheshire border, there were 101 acres of demesne land, and 6 acres besides that were sown with wheat ; the crops for three years ahead were sold to an “= Cal. Close, 1341-3, pp. 257, 399. * Samuel Bros., Wool and Woollen Manufactures of Gt. Brit. 32. “Cf. Colne, De Lacy Ing. 1311 (Chet. Soc. Ixxiv), 8. Burnley, ibid. 8. Cf. also the manor of Man- chester, where the fulling mill of the manor was extended at 26s. 8d. yearly in the inquisition of 1282 (Mame- cestre, 1, 143). Again, in the extent of Manchester for 1322 (ibid. ii, 420) the fulling mill on Irk is mentioned. “ A writer in the eighteenth century, describing Lancashire, says, ‘The chief commodities are oats, cattle ;’ Owen, Brit. Depicta, 236. ” The Duchy Records, hereafter referred to, contain many entries of tithes of hemp and flax being paid from the varying districts of Leigh and Tyldesley (Duchy Rec. ii (Supplement), 1 & 2 Phil. and Mary, 193, m. U). Also ibid. i, 9 Eliz. 338, 254; also ibid. 16 Eliz. iii, 15, 126. Tithes of hemp and flax at Ruf- ford, Bretherton, and Croston. Also at Aighton 17 Eliz. and again 28 Eliz. ibid. 191, 3,5. Tithe of hemp and flax at Kirkham. It is probable tithes had been paid in hemp and flax in these and other districts from a very early period. 272, SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY Italian trading company by the farmer of the manor.” The crop of these 6 acres is subsequently entered at the value of 60s. On the same manor 50 acres of land yielded 100 quarters of oats.” But this high yield of two quarters to the acre was exceptional, and not likely to be generally obtained from even the most fertile of Lancashire lands. The average return, as calculated from Professor T. Rogers’ tables, was about one quarter to the acre.” Wheat was very dear in this year™ (1322), and thus at the usual average of return per acre its price even at Hale would be at the rate of ros. per quarter.” Com- pared with the sheriff's purchasing price of more than one hundred years before (1213-15) the price of wheat had risen to nearly treble its earlier standard, largely due of course to the great famine of 1315, from which the lands had not yet fully recovered. | The priory of Lytham in the year 1311 raised 200 quarters of oats in proportion to 28 quarters of wheat, 24 of barley, and 18 quarters of beans and peas. Thirty-four years later, while the stock of animals had increased the harvest returns were even less, the famine years having evidently caused a dearth of seed.* It may be, however, that the greater attention given to sheep grazing had caused a transference to pasture of certain lands formerly laid down in crop. In the rental of Furness the same preponderance of oats over wheat is noteworthy, 372 quarters of the former being grown as against 52 quarters of wheat and 64 of barley.” Owing to the sparseness of its labouring population it is probable that the manor sufficed for the feeding of its working establishment, but with the monasteries this was not always the case. The abbot of Furness continually imported ‘ victuals’ from Ireland, sending his own ship for the purpose,” as did the other abbots whose houses were similarly situated in the wild parts of the country.” As it was essential in those times of slow and difficult transport that grain should not have to be carried far to be ground into flour, mills were from very early times erected at a convenient spot on the lord’s manor, and thither the tenants were compelled to bring their grain to be milled, the miller taking a toll. At first this arrangement was probably of some con- venience to the tenant, but as lands were more widely cultivated and rented, the lord’s mill was not always the nearest or the most convenient for the tenant’s purpose. ‘The profits of milling, however, had begun to prove so remunerative that the lord found it one of his most considerable sources of income, and would on no account relinquish his power of compelling his tenants to grind at his mill. No manorial obligation was more rigorously enforced or more jealously guarded by the overlord than this ; * free or unfree, his tenants must all bring their ‘ grist’ to his mill. 1 L.T.R. Misc. Enr. Accts. 14. Account of John de Lancaster, in charge of the honour and wapen- take of Lancaster, including the manor of Hale and the wapentake of Salford, castle and town of Liver- pool, &c. ™ Tbid. 'T. Rogers, Agric. and Prices,i, 51. The mediaeval farmer usually ‘ gets no more than one (quarter) to the acre’ and ‘ sometimes less than this.’ ™ Ibid. ii, 81. Prices of wheat at Addridale varied from 135. to 16s. a quarter ; at Appuldrum between ios. and 20s. a quarter and so on. 7 Sixty shillings was paid for the produce of 6 acres. *® Status de Lytham, 1345. 7 Beck, Annales Furnesienses, 335. ® Cal. Pat. 1272-81, p. 2503; 1307-13, p. 203, &c. Cf. Abbot of Holmcoltram, Ca/. Pat. 1292-1301, p. 579. 8 Cf. Prof. Tait, Mediaeval Manchester, 98, et seq. 2 273 35 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE When John, count of Mortain, granted his burgesses of Lancaster their charter in 1193, one of the principal liberties conceded, doubtless in answer to continuous petitioning, was release from the burden of having to grind at his mill.2! But such concessions were few and far between, and the evidence is usually to the contrary. Thus at Warrington in 1305 William le Boteler granted all his leases apparently with the express stipulation that the tenant was to grind all his grain and malt at William le Boteler’s mills of Warrington and Sankey. Similarly the baron of Manchester’s leases to free tenants con- tain the same specification, each finishing with the words, ‘And he ought to grind at the mill of Manchester.’ * While no other mill might be erected on the lord’s land save by the lord’s special licence, he reserved to himself the right of erecting a mill even on land already let, and the right of multure. Thus in the close of the twelfth century the abbot and monks of Wyresdale reserved their right to erect a mill on land conceded to their chaplain, without his being able to claim any right of multure.* The obligation to grind at the lord’s mill (styled ‘soke’ or ‘soken’) was most strictly enforced on all tenants whether bond or free, in respect of all corn grown upon the lord’s land.* Certain tenants had a preference of attention, and were entitled to have their grain ground at more moderate tolls than others.“ With that grim enforcement of dominion characteristic of the mediaeval interpretation of lordship, an interpretation alien to the modern sentiment that nob/esse oblige, the lord was served before all others; and if any man’s corn was in the hopper when the lord’s corn came to the mill, it was removed till the lord’s had first been ground. In the words of the mediaeval copyist, when the lord came to the mill he ‘ put all men out of their grist.’ For this and many other reasons the enforced necessity of grinding at the lord’s mill continued, as will be seen, to be one of the bitterest subjects of dispute between tenant and landlord from the Middle Ages almost to our own times. Where the lord did not work the mill directly by his own servants he let it to farm to a miller who paid him a fixed rent and took the margin of profit. That the profits were great is obvious from the money these mills brought in. In the De Lacy Inquisition of 1311 many entries of mill rents or mill incomes are detailed.” At Clitheroe the water-mill was yearly worth £6 135. 4d. At Standen,* though Henry de Blackburn was a free tenant and occupied a ‘ mansion,’ he was not allowed to erect a mill, but would have to do suit either to Clitheroe or to Worston mill, which was worth 13s. 4d, per annum. Downham mill® brought in 26s. 8¢., a sum nearly as great as the 30s. rent of the 10 oxgangs in bondage there. At Colne“ and Walverden there were two water-mills, and these, with a fulling- mill included, were worth £5 6s. 8¢. At Burnley™ the fulling-mill was *' 12 June, 1193, 4 Ric. I. Quoted (from the original in the possession of the mayor and corporation of Lancaster), Farrer, Lancs. Pipe R. 416. * Lilford D. ; Bold D. Quoted in Annals of the Lords of Warrington (Chet. Soc.), i, 144. 3 Mamecestre, ii, 308, 310. “ Duchy of Lanc. Anct. D. L. 3623 (1194-9), in Farrer, Lancs. Pipe R. 338. ~ Cf. Fitzherbert (temp. Henry VIII), ‘Boke of Surveying,’ printed, London, 1523, quoted Mame- cestre, i, 113. % Cf. Manor of Asht der L i * De Lacy Ing. (Chet. Soc. xxiv), 5-13. e “e Tbid, * Cai perreerss ® Ibid, 5 * Thid. * Ibid. 8. * Thid. 9. 274 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY only worth 5s. a year, so if we allow about 6s. 8¢. for the Colne fulling- mill, the balance, £5, would be the annual worth of the corn-mills there. At Burnley the corn water-mill was worth £5, at Padiham 4os.,™ at Cliviger 20s.,% and at Haslingden ros. per annum.” In every case the pro- ortion of mill rent (or income) to the total land and other rents is very considerable, being as follows :—- Mill Rent Total rent of lands 16. fg At Padiham . . : » as 2 0 0 to 12 19 2 » Cliviger » © 0 0 3 11 6 104 », Burnley » 5 © © “ 16 8 3 »» Colne » © 0 0 i 7 18 33 », Downham . » I 6 8 Pe 9 O11 », Worston » O13 4 3 411 6 », Clitheroe yy O12 4 Ss 24 18 6 From which it will readily be seen that although in some instances it was only an eleventh of the whole income, in other cases it was also, roughly estimated, a seventh, a sixth, three-eighths (Clitheroe), nearly a third (Burnley), and in one place (at Colne) nearly three-quarters of the whole of the manor. On the lands of the honour of Lancaster the mills were equally profit- able. From the inquisition held of the late earl’s lands in 1322 we learn that the mill of Lune and the ‘Brokemilne’ were farmed for £14, though the rent of the borough was only £6 8s. 4d. The water-mill at Salford brought in a rent of £3—more, that is, than the tolls of the fairs and market stallages added together. At Liverpool, again, £4 6s. 8d. was paid for the farm of two mills there, one worked by horse power and one by water. At Tottington the rent of two water-mills was £4 4s. The Lacy lands having come into the king’s hands we get another glimpse at the value of the mills there, about ten years after the inquisition of 1311 above quoted. Thus in 1322 the Accrington mill is entered as worth 485.; the Cliviger mill is farmed for 545., an increase of 24s. on the previous value; while the Clitheroe mill is now farmed for £12 in place of the £6 135. 4d. received in 1311. At Lancaster the combined farm of the one water-mill and one fulling- mill there is £12 6s. 8¢., which shows a slight depreciation from the previous rent of {[14. “In a rental of the Lacy fee for 1324, only two years later, we find that in this short time some of the mills have increased in value, the water- mill at Colne renting for £12 (and the fulling-mill for 135. 6¢.); the Burn- ley water-mill bringing in £7 16s., in place of the previous /’5. The mill of Manchester ” was worth {10 in 1322. Inthe Rentale de Furness, while the income from twenty-five farms was only £66 6s. 8d., that of mills in the abbey’s possession was £20. The wages paid for labour on these Lancashire estates varied of course with the kind of work performed. Of all day labourers the reapers of corn appear to have received the highest wages, close upon 2d. a day.” A keeper % De Lacy Ing. (Chet. Soc. Ixxiv), 10. 4 Ibid. 12. % Tbid. 16. %® Mins. Accts. bdle. 1198, No. 6. 7” Mamecestre, ii, 393-420. %® De Lacy Compotus (Chet. Soc. cxii), 141. Expenses of the vaccaries: ‘Wages of 10g men reaping corn as if for one day, 175. 744. 275 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE of the manor-house or the park received at the rate of 14d. a day.” Carters seem to have received from 4s. to 6s. a year, plus food and lodging, or 25s. 6d. a year, at the rate of 6d. a week, 1d. for each working day, without shelter or rations. Inthe De Lacy Compotus three carters are entered as costing £3 16s. 6d. for a year’s allowance, and their wages, including keep, were 17s. $d. for all three. In another part of the same roll two carters’ wages are entered as 85., probably meaning at the rate of 45. each for the year, including keep and lodging. Again, in another part the food and wages of a wagoner leading carts and carrying hay and fencing are entered at £1 5s. 54d., all which entries go to prove that the average pay of a carter was at the rate of 1d. a day during a week of six working days. Similarly the wages of two men keeping the marches of the forest was at the same rate of £1 6s. each for the year.” Shepherds and ploughmen, an inferior class of labourers, received the lowest pay ; the average rate was 33d. per week, or just a trifle over a halfpenny (8d¢.) a day in a week of six days.* But now and again a higher wage was given, as in the demesne manor of Woolton, where two ploughmen and one shepherd each received at the rate of sd. a week, and a shepherd boy was paid 23d. a week.™ Some miners are mentioned on the De Lacy estate (where precisely is not stated, though it is under the heading of Clitheroe), but they worked on their own account, and the lord’s overseer was paid at the rate of Is. a week. « Next we come to the rented price of land in Lancashire. Land was plentiful in the Middle Ages,’ and, allowing for the difference between the value of the penny then and now, could be had for the almost nominal rent of 4d. an acre for arable and 8d. an acre for meadow land.’” It was usually rented out in oxgangs of varying size, from 4 to 24 customary acres each.” For the convenience of quite small holders the oxgang was itself divided into twelve ridges,’ which might be rented at 2d. each; this, at the calcu- lation of 6 acres to the oxgang, gives a rent of 4d. per acre. But although from 4d. to 1d. was the general average per acre, rents varied very strangely in different places. Obviously land near a town was more valuable than land at a distance from a market. Thus at Worston, near Clitheroe in Blackburnshire, land was let to tenants at will at the stiff price of 6d. an acre,"° though the bondmen in the same place™ paid only 2s. * «For one servant keeping the manor for the said time, taking 1$¢. by the day’; L. T. R. Misc. Enr. Accts. Wapentake of Salford, 14, m. 76d. (second skin) (manor of Hope). See also ibid. manor of Hale, “wages 14d. a day to Park-keeper, for food and wages—collecting rents and keeping the Park there.’ 1 De Lacy Compotus (Chet. Soc. cxii), 170. 1 Tbid. 118. 1 Tbid. The receiver of Clitheroe renders his account at Ightenhill. “8 Cf. L.T.R. Misc. Enr. Accts. Wapentake of Salford, m. 76d. (second skin) (manor of Hope). ‘In delivery to 3 ploughmen going with the plough . . . each by the week, 3242.’ ™ L.T.R. Misc. Enr. Accts. John de Lancaster ; for manor of Woolton. Also ibid. manor of Hale ; “ss. to four ploughmen for 24 days.’ De Lacy Compotus, 116, 186. '$ Cfé T. Rogers, Agric. and Prices, i, 62 ; ‘it (land) was the cheapest commodity of the Middle Ages.’ “Cf. Ing. p.m. Hen. de Lacy, E. of Linc. 4 Edw. II, No. 51, 1311, Standen and Pendleton, &c. The customary acre of 7 yds. to the perch must be understood. "S$ Very generally 6 customary acres might be reckoned for the oxgang, the rent being from 25. to 3s, an oxgang. ™ Cf. at West Derby. "Ing. p.m. 4 Edw. II, 1311, No. 51. Five acres of meadow in the same place fetched 124d. per acre. Cf. also at Downham, where 10 acres of meadow were let for 20s. (ibid.), ™ Ibid. 276 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY per oxgang, probably because, belonging to what has been called the favoured class of tenants in villeinage,™ they paid part of their rent in services also ; whereas the tenants at will, though holding by a less secure tenure, paid the full land rent in money. Yet some explanation is needed, for at Pendleton, only about a mile away, the bondmen paid the comparatively high sum of 6s. 8d. per oxgang,"*’ while at Downham, not very much farther away, the ‘ natives’ or bondmen paid 2s. per oxgang, and 1s. extra per oxgang for remission of services, making a full rent of 3s. per oxgang."* Here the demesne land fetched the usual rent of 4¢. for arable and 8¢. for meadow land per acre. In other parts of Blackburnshire, namely at Burnley and Colne on the Pendle and Trawden side, the oxgang was rented at 3s. 4d., including the charge for ‘works remitted’ ;"* while at Padiham, only 3 miles from Burnley, the customary tenants, holding by the same tenure as those of Burnley, paid the double rate of 6s. 4d. the oxgang, including payment for works remitted there."® Yet this was as nothing compared with the high rents of some of the demesne lands of the Lancaster honour, as for example those at Singleton, where the bondmen held 25 oxgangs for which they paid £21, or at the rate of 16s. 8d. per oxgang."7 At Ribby, not in the demesne, the customary tenants paid at the same rate,”* which seems to prove that the rents even in the same neighbourhood went very variously. To show how differently rent was computed where feudal services were rendered it may be mentioned that at Wray the drengs held 8 oxgangs in drengage, paying only gs. 6d., or at the comparatively nominal rent of 15. 24d. per oxgang. The lord’s payment of wages and the labourer’s payment of rent are facts which militate strongly against the supposition that the condition of the mediaeval Lancashire husbandman was as servile as from the frequent mention of ‘lands tilled in villeinage’ or ‘ held in bondage’ might otherwise appear. A writer in Edward I’s reign™ identifies the ‘serf’ (or servus of Domesday) with the ‘ nayf’ or nativus of the estate. Ina paper read before the Royal Historical Society *° Mr. I. S. Leadam, following this mediaeval authority, maintains that the chief distinction between the ‘serf’ or nativus and the ‘ villein’ is the uncertain nature of the former’s service and the fixed nature of the villein’s. Of the serfs the thirteenth-century writer observes that ‘they do not know in the evening what they shall do in the morning.’ The villein, on the contrary, had fixed services required of him, and these performed he was quit. This clearly-marked distinction seems tenable as a general theory ; but, as in so many other cases, when we come to look for the illustration of it in Lancashire, we find it refuted. It is the mati who here appear as the tenants in villeinage in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries; and yet 4? Leadam, ‘Ing. of 1517,’ in Trans. Roy. Hist. Soc. (1892) (New Ser.), vi, 252. 3 Ibid, ‘The oxgangs were probably larger than at Worston. M4 Tid. M6 Tbid. 6 Tpid. It may be added that in 1526 the oxgangs of land in Padiham contained, some 16, some 20, and some 24% acres (customary). 07 [,,T.R. Misc. Enr. Accts. 14,m. 68 (first skin), under Preston. ‘The rent of the oxgang varied also according to the amount of meadow with it, and the easements and services. 18 Tbid. Ribby. 419 Supposed to be Andrew Horn, the grocer, who compiled ‘ Le myrrour des justices.’ 0 ¢ The Inquisition of 1517,’ Trans. Roy. Hist. Soc. vi (New Ser.), (1892). 1 There is no general reference in Lancashire to ‘villeins’ or to ‘ tenure in villeinage,’ i.e. as opposed to nativi and tenure in bondage. 277 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE their status of ‘serf’ and nativus is in no way differentiated, the word ‘serf’ and ‘native’ being used interchangeably in such expressions as ‘ nothing from dead (serfs, natives) this year,’'” a reference clearly to the lord’s power of acquiring a great portion of the dead serf’s chattels.’* Still more confounding is the further discovery that in Lancashire these nativi of the demesne were even enjoying the very privilege which it is affirmed was the distin- guishing mark of the villein, namely fixed services. Most astounding of all is the fact that these nativ had achieved a further victory, for they were allowed and were sufficiently prosperous to be able to compound every year by a fixed money payment for the definite services they had been bound to render.’* But this was, according to the writers already quoted, precisely the privilege distin- guishing the ‘villeins’ from the ‘ natives,’ yet here are the natives placed upon an obvious equality with the villeins and with the customari or customary tenants.* There appears in fact no distinction between the natiut of Downham and the customari of Burnley; and what establishes their position as beyond cavil is the fact that they paid an equal rent. Thus on the demesne lands at Skerton the ‘ bondman’ paid an average of 125. 4d. per oxgang, while the watruz of Singleton paid at the high rate of 16s. 84d., which was exactly the rent paid by the customarti of Ribby,” so that on the basis of rent they were all equal. On the demesne and customary lands of the honour of Clitheroe the same conditions of equality between ‘natives’ and customarii prevail. Both hold lands ‘in bondage,’ and apparently on the same terms. At Colne and Downham the ‘natives’ pay 35. an oxgang for 10 oxgangs, and commute their services by a payment of 4d. per oxgang or 3s. in common.” At Burnley and at Great and Little Marsden, as at Padiham, the customary tenants pay the same rent per oxgang, and an extra payment for services not rendered.'* Whatsoever, therefore, may have been the origin of the Lancashire ‘ native,’ whether he was a survivor of the ancient British race or merely a depressed Saxon freeman, the mediaeval evidence !” disposes us to conclude that in Lancashire the ‘serfs’ were a less servile class than in other parts of England. Some support is lent to this theory by an entry in the Pipe Rolls for the year 1180, when we learn that Richard son of Waltheve is offering {5 for a writ against his men, who had revolted against their enforced condition of serfdom, and were making themselves free (‘gut se faciunt liberos’) when they were no such thing.’ What is certain is ' L.T.R. Misc. Enr. Accts. 14, m. 68 (first skin), Lands of Thos. oe earl of Lanc. in Preston, Le Wrae, Singleton, Also cf. Mins. Accts. bdle. 1148, No. 6, Rental of the Lacy Fez in 1324. Colne: “Goods of deceased natives—nil.’ '® Cf. also Mamecestre, ii, 279-80 ; also 310-12. Villeins of Gorton, Crumpsall, and Ardwick. '* «Works remitted’ on the De Lacy estate are as follows :—At Downham the ‘ rents and services’ of To oxgangs held in bondage were 3o:., the land being rented at the rate of 3s. per oxgang, and a payment of 3s. was paid in common to the lord by the said men for the aforesaid bondages, probably for works, remitted. At Colne the rate for remission of services was only 44. per oxgang; but at Great Marsden even the custemarit pay as much as 6d. per oxgang for remission. At Little Marsden the customary tenants only pay 4@. per oxgang for works excused, and at Padiham the customary tenants of 24 oxgangs compounded for it at 8s. yearly ; Lancs, Ing. (Rec. Soc. liv), 5-7. "* Fitzherbert’s insistence on the identity of the customary tenant and the bondman of a manor, quoted by nae Leadam (Ing. of 1517), p. 210. L.T.R. Misc. Enr. Accts. Forest of Blackburnshire. Skerton 3 ibid. m. 72d (fi in); ibi 14, m. 68 (first skin). Singleton, Ribby. “7 Ing p.m. 4 Edw. II, Ne ae eee! "8 Thid. ; Cf. Stubbs, Const. Hist. ii, 453. '® Mag. Rot. Pip. 27 Hen. II (1180-1), No. 27, m. 3.2. 278 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY that by the close of the thirteenth century these ‘bondmen’ had banded together to commute their services for money, and so purchased their immunity from the interference of the lord’s bailiff.% The thirteenth century was the golden age of the English peasantry. Never before or since have they been in such a position of advantage with regard to the land, and the peasant was not slow to take advantage of his position. Some of these mativi are said to have amassed wealth.“ That they were frequently highly prosperous is evident, if we consider the accounts of the natives on the manor of Manchester, such, for example, as Henry the reeve, villein and yet mativus of Gorton. This man rented a messuage and an oxgang of land there, paying 8s. 4d. a year for it, and rendering the services required from him by his lord. But he was paid ‘for his services, receiving as follows :—When he ploughed for the lord with his own plough, he was entitled to one meal and 2d. a day; for a day’s harrowing he had his meal and a wage of 1¢.; or for half a day, no food but the same wages. He was further to reap for the lord at 1d. a day plus his victuals, and to carry in autumn, lending his own cart as he had previously lent his plough, at a charge of 2d. a day and one meal of the lord’s victuals. He also, with the other nativi and others who owed suit to the lord’s mill there, was to obtain and convey millstones from the quarry at a charge of 4d. for packing and 3s. for carriage of the same.” There were five other prosperous nativi of Gorton who were holders of land, and who paid similar rents and services ‘as the aforesaid Henry.’ Similarly the nativus of Ardwick, who held two messuages and 2 oxgangs of land there of the lord, and the three zazvz of Crumpsall who rented land and messuages were required to render services according to the same scale and fashion. And in all cases at their deaths the lord claimed a third part of their chattels, or if they left no son the lord took no less than half." Now, husbandmen of this thriving class, who owned their own ploughs and teams of oxen, their own wagons and horses, who cultivated at least 24 acres apiece, and who held, as Henry did, the important and responsible position of farm-bailiff, could scarcely be regarded as so depressed by their abject condition of servitude as not to strive and improve their social status by bargaining for their freedom with the lord. Probably from this period arose the class of small independent farmers who were the forefathers of the famous Tudor yeomanry. It was precisely from this class of semi-free customary tenants that Mr. Leadam derives the origin of those whom Coke styled ‘the inferior copyholders.’** On the manor of Manchester they are classed together. Another class of tenantry, of semi-servile origin, were the tenants at will. These rented from the lord parcels of land and waste belonging to the 1302 Or possibly the lord preferred to take a fixed money rent in lieu of the works. 131 Leadam, ‘Ing. of 1517,” Trans. Roy. Hist. Soc. (New Ser.), (1892), vi, 251. '* Mamecestre (Chet. Soc.), ii, 279-80, also Lancs. Ing. (Rec. Soc. liv), 310, 311, 312. 133 Mamecestre, il, 313, 314 3 Lancs. Ing. (Rec. Soc. liv), si. 4 Ing. of 1517,’ Trans. Roy. Hist. Soc. (New Ser.), vi, 198. Also ibid. 210; ‘Coke . . . notices that in the Year Books “ copyholders ” are so called [i. e. customary tenants] in 1 Hen, V (1413) 3; in 42 Edw. III Ch 25 (1 368), they are spoken of as “custumarii tenentes.” In a case heard in 1224 they appear as “ consuetu- dinarii”’ ; Bracton’s Note Book, iii, case 995. Again in 1221 a defendant is described as “ villanus et consuetu- dinarius” ; Sedden Soc. i, case 188.” ai Mamecestre, ii, 281 and 314-15. 279 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE demesne, and for as long or as short a time as suited his convenience. The lord could cancel the agreement when he pleased, from which Mr. Leadam argues the insecurity of their tenures as compared with that of the holders in villeinage.'** If, however, they were as unprotected as Mr. Leadam infers, it is strange that this form of tenancy should have proved so popular in Lancashire. A great portion of the demesne lands of the honour '*” were let in this way, and so was the greater part of the De Lacy land.'* Though in the counties with which Mr. Leadam deals the tenants at will were of the villein class, in parts of Lancashire they were of a most mixed order, embracing in 1324, at West Derby for instance, the reeve, the physician, the harper, the carpenter, Adam the clerk of Liverpool, Sir Alan the chaplain, Henry the vicar of Childwall, John the smith, and Sir John the chaplain.” The social relation of the tenants at will to their manorial overlord is very precisely detailed for us in an ancient custom roll of the manor of Ashton- under-Lyne for the year 1422. Like some of the tenants on the De Lacy and royal estates, those at Ashton seem to have rented cottages at varying rents, paid annually, and here the tenants at will took their holding for ‘twenty winter terms,’ and the rent was paid by two instalments twice a year. Their labour services were very strictly defined, and among these was a very curious one, namely, ‘the return of a present to the lord at Yule or Christmas for the sake of partaking in the annual feast of the great hall.’ Here again, as in the lord’s privilege of multure previously commented upon, we are struck with the harsh, unbending, ungenial character of the feudal lord’s attitude towards his tenantry. He took all they would or could give, and did not even vouch- safe them the loan of his hall as a hostel for festal relaxation unless each tenant contributed his or her individual payment towards the feast. The tenants appear to have entertained themselves and their lord at this Ashton festival, and from the ungenerous conditions of the entertainment, it was very properly styled the ‘ Drink-lean.”. A king of misrule, ‘known as Hobbe the King,’ presided at the feast, with power to punish ‘all who exceeded his royal notions of decency.’ In these rude festivals the mediaeval peasantry sought relaxa- tion from the monotonous routine of their daily life. Their opportunities for social intercourse were few, but were afforded at the weekly markets and yearly fairs, which from an early period had been established in Lancashire. At these gatherings it was customary to pay bills, transact law business, and pass the latest news from court. Salford market dates from 1228.7 Wigan market and fairs date from the reign of Henry III, when the town was made a borough.“* There were Cf. ‘Ing. of 1517,’ Trans. Roy. Hist. Soc. (New Ser.), (1892), vi, 207. 7 Rentals and Surv. R. 379; Hale, 111 tenants at will; also Rentals of manor of Holland where there were 71 tenants at will ; also Bolton-le-Sands, 15 tenants at will, &c., &c. : "Cf. Ing. p.m. 4 Edw. II, No. 51. At Colne 551 acres of demesne were demised to tenants at will ; at Great Marsden, 335 acres; at Little Marsden, 243} acres; at Briercliffe, 166% acres; at Burnley, over 354 acres; at Padiham, 99} acres ; at Ightenhill, 151 acres; at Accrington, 1064 acres ‘ at Cliviger, 80 acres ; at Haslingden, 183 acres; and so on. } * Rentals and Surv. 379, m. 9. Rentals of (West) Derby (17 Edw. II). T will, including those oe pes Cf. Lanes. he fe Soc. ro. ae Bones gy ncaa at “° From Dr. Hibbert’s ‘ Observations on the Custom Roll and Rental of Ashton-under-Lyne ” read before the Society of Scottish Antiquaries in 1822. This Roll is published by the Chet. Soc. (Ixxiv, 1 17) M\ Ibid. 120. , : ™ Cal. Close, 1227-31, p. 54. *® Quoted by Baines, Hist. of Lancs. (ed. Harland, li, 172), as being granted 42 Hen. III (1258). 280 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY also in the fifty-fourth year of the same reign a fair and market granted to Kirkham.“* The northern towns were then, as they still are, great cattle marts. We find the Clitheroe bailiff visiting Bolton market to buy oxen or to sell them," and the abbot of Chester sent as far as Preston fair for cattle.“* At Roch- dale Edmund de Lacy had a grant of market and fair in 1251.” Clitheroe fair is entered in the De Lacy Inquisition as being only worth 6s. 8¢., but the joint tolls of Clitheroe, Blackburn,and Bowland were worth £4 135. 4d. Stallage of Formby, indicating a market there, in 1325-6 was worth 18s.” The stallage of Liverpool fairs and markets of the same date was farmed for £10,’ proving the transaction of considerable business in the early fourteenth century. The stallage of the market and two fairs of Salford! in the sixteenth year of Edward II is entered at 425. of¢. A small market was held at Tottington, tos. being the rent of the stallage.* At Rochdale the market and fair brought in gos. in the same year.’ Manchester had a weekly market (on Saturday according to Professor Tait) and a fair of three days once a year, granted by Henry III in 1227.% The joint receipts there as given at the inquisition of 1282 were £6 135. 4d. The Butlers had a grant of a fair at Warrington in 1255, and a weekly market there from the previous year.’ Among the great economic grievances, increased by local wars and expeditions of conquest, was the prohibition of markets so that wares might be the more readily and plentifully brought to the king when he was in the neighbourhood. Edward I ordered the sheriff of Lancashire to prohibit the holding of markets in the county during the Welsh expedition, to enforce the carriage of merchandise to the army in Wales.” The existence of fairs and markets and the king’s proclamation that merchants should bring provisions to the army some fifty or a hundred miles away, suggests that by the close of the thirteenth century the channels of internal communication in the country, and even of wild upland Lancashire, were fairly open and passable. There seems to have been a great deal of local riding to and fro. The bailiff of the Lacy lands often had to come and go or send messengers, letters, horses, cloth or cattle from Clitheroe to Pontefract,’ between which places there was obviously some well-recognized route.’ From a study of the old Bodleian map of mediaeval roads it may be inferred that this route was in part of its length probably the old Roman road from Carlisle through Skipton to Isurium (Aldborough), of which one branch went on to York and another turned towards Doncaster wié@ ™ Placita de quo Warranto, Lanc. Rot. 10¢. Quoted in Fishwick’s Hist. of Kirkham (Chet. Soc.). “5 De Lacy Compotus R. (Chet. Soc. cxii), 126. MS Pat. 11 Edw. I, m. 8. “7 Cal. Chart. 1226-57, p. 362. Also Plac. de quo Warranto apud Lanc. 20 Edw. I, Rot. 9. M8 Ing. p.m. 4 Edw. II, No. 51. In the sixteenth year they had increased to £5 6s. 8¢.; L.T.R. Misc. Enr. Accts. 14, m. 68 (second skin). ™° L.T.R. Misc. Enr. Accts. 14. Accounts of John de Lancaster. Tbid. Residue of accounts of John de Lancaster (19 Edw. II), castle and town of Liverpool, m. 34 ¢. second skin. #1 Ibid. 14, m. 68 (16 Edw. II), second skin. Salford. 152 Tbid. m. 69, second skin. 8 Ibid. Rochdale (16 Edw. II). 4 Tait, Mediaeval Manchester, 44. 85 Mamecestre, i, 145. "8 Abbr. Rot. Orig. 40 Hen. III, p. 16. There were other markets and fairs. One at North Meols was disallowed as injurious to others in the neighbourhood. 1 Cal. Close, 1272-9, p. 426. “8 See De Lacy Compotus entries such as p. 126. ‘Carrying money five times to Pontefract,’ ¢ Carry- ing alms cloth from Pontefract to Clitheroe,’ &c. 49 The packhorse route was over ‘ Nick of Pendle,’ vi@ Sabden, Burnley, Todmorden, &c. 2 281 36 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Pontefract.” From the number of fairs and markets and the amount of general traffic that would necessarily ensue it must be supposed the roads of Lanca- shire had improved considerably since the beginning of the thirteenth century, King John was a traveller who stayed for little, and yet though he once, in 1206, passed from Carlisle to Chester through Lancaster he never repeated the experiment, but always travelled back by the Yorkshire route."" No particulars are furnished of his route except that he stopped at Lancaster, and a week later arrived at Chester. The journey was undertaken in February, when the tracks must have been worse than usual, a fact which would not tend to produce a favourable impression on the royal mind. That definite attempts were made to mend the roads for commercial purposes we know from an entry in the De Lacy Compotus, by which the bailiff required the tenants of a certain manor to keep the roads towards the Chester markets in repair." Where it was necessary roads were actually cut, as that made by the bailiff of Clitheroe manor through Accrington wood." Travelling was of course performed on horseback, as wheeled vehicles were only known for purposes of slow transport, and were drawn by oxen. The perils of the way were great, as many lawless men lurked in the forests. Travellers therefore went as far as possible in companies, and well armed. The appointment of special commissioners and of itinerant justices would necessarily give some faint breath of court atmosphere, and the visit of Edward II after the execution of his uncle of Lancaster, though doubtless entailing a heavy purveyance, would bring some show of unaccustomed pageantry into the dull lives of this northern population. We do not know whether any improvements in transit accompanied the king’s visit, though it involved expenditure on the castle at Liverpool.’ The fourteenth century was notable for the building of bridges where there had previously been fords or ferries. Warrington bridge existed in 1305, and tolls were granted for its repair.'* It was rebuilt in 1364-8, and apparently a third time in the fifteenth century."* When in 1495 Henry VII visited the countess of Richmond at Lathom House, the earl built a new bridge over the Mersey at Warrington for the occasion.1% The fourteenth century was also the period when towns began to be paved, and even in Lancashire a few grants of pavage are entered. Certain public regulations were also occasionally issued for the removal of filth from the public highway, and for the restraining of pigs and other animals from wandering in the streets at will. It was during the same century that manor-houses began to be substituted for castles as feudal residences. In some cases the original peel!” or turreted tower was retained and a chamber or great hall built on to it, and to the ‘® The writer has gone fully into this matter of the old mediaeval routes in an article in the E y Rev, July, 1897, entitled ‘English Towns and Roads in the 13th Century.’ ea ras “! King John’s Iters. in description of Pat. R. by T. Duffus Hardy, 1835. '* De Lacy Compotus, 151 ; tenants of Longdendale, 1304-5, under Halton (Cheshire). 18 Tbid. 'L.T.R. Misc. Enr. Accts. Accounts of John de Lancaster, in charge of the h f ' Annals of the Lords of Warrington. 1 Thid. 200. : : ae Ye ; ie ia “* Pat. 2 Edw. III m. 34—Grant to men of Liverpool of three ; in i : years’ pavage ; and again in 1336; Pat. Ke) Edw. nee pt. i, m. 434. Pavage to men of Wigan for five years was granted in 1336; Pat. site Ifl pt. i, m. 432. ‘ '? Peel is not uncommon as a place name, e.g. in Widnes, Hulton, &c. 282 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY sides of this again were added guest-chambers, a room called the ‘ parler,’ and a domestic chapel. Of the same period as that of the hall would be the buttery and kitchen buildings leading directly into the large hall, while round the kitchens would be built the brewhouse, grange, and the necessary stabling. A fine example of the baronial stronghold and manor-house combined is that of the ancient lords of Manchester, now the Chetham Hospital. Precautions had still to be taken in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries for defence from sudden attack. Social disturbances were rife, and one of the worst features of the age in Lancashire was the practice of ‘ wife-stealing’ as practised by the young bloods of the county. Despite all the arrangements for house defence at Bewsy near Warrington Lady Boteler was violently carried off from it in the year 1437, and in the year 1452 the Dame Joan Beaumont, wife of Sir Henry Beaumont, was feloniously carried off by one Edward Lancaster, styled ‘ gentleman.’ ?” It is not clear whether Preston cattle fair, already mentioned, had any connexion with the celebration of the Preston Gild, but it is a matter of common knowledge that the Preston meeting was one of Lancashire’s great social festivals. The first record of the gild meeting seems to be in 1329, after which some others are known to have been held at irregular intervals. From 1543 onwards they have been held with regularity every twenty years.” We do not know if in the mediaeval celebrations of the custom the trades and companies went in procession, though it is probable this is the most ancient part of the ceremony. At later functions some twenty-eight com- panies paraded, and it is possible that on each occasion some rude morality play or interlude was performed for the amusement of the assembled people. It was doubtless by this stately periodic celebration of the gild’s foundation that Preston so long preserved her almost royal position as the most ancient among the boroughs of Lancashire. Despite its rapid growth during the thirteenth century, the county did not afterwards progress in anything like the degree that might have been expected. The great economic hindrances to mediaeval Lancashire prosperity were the three well-known sources of all economic decay : war, famine, and pestilence. The second of these evils has been already referred to, the first ‘also has been previously commented on. Lancashire’s continual liability to preparations for warlike enterprise and military expeditions in countries adjacent to her border has been pointed out. She had been a recruiting ground for the Welsh and Irish expeditions, and was in 1292 exploited for the undertaking against Scotland. In 1305 the great abbey of Furness succumbed beneath the burden of forced loans to the king and debts to foreigners.'” The abbey lands must have suffered when the county became a prey to invasions. More than once Lancashire had to bear the brunt of the Scottish fury, when in the absence of the English army the Scots harried the border. In 1313 the men of Lancaster obtained a grant of murage for seven years to protect them against the fierce northern forages, but in vain, for in 1322 the Scots invaded the north, burnt the town of Lancaster, damaging 19 Annals of the Lords of Warrington, ii, 259, 265. ) Hist, of Preston in Lancs. together with the Guild Merchant (Lond. 1822). 1? Pat. 6 Edw. I, m. 10 ; and 32 Edw. I, pt. i, m. 14. A king’s clerk was appointed to administer its affairs and finances. 283 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE the castle, and wasting the country as far south as the Ribble,’” and even penetrated to Chorley.’ The inquisition taken of the late earl of Lancaster’s lands is full of reference to decays of farms, tofts, burgages, forges, crops, pastures destroyed by the Scots, who stayed four days and nights both at Preston and Skerton burning and plundering, so that at the last-mentioned place we read that ‘all the goods and chattels of the tenants there were sacked by the said Scots, and the corn trampled down by their horses and beasts.’’* The vaccaries of Wyresdale and Bleasdale were harried, and all the beasts there which had not been previously sold by the king’s writ were ‘sacked by the Scots.’ Such Savage attacks begot reprisals, and the war was prolonged into the first years of the reign of Edward III. In the young king’s first year a fresh invasion by the Scots roused England to warlike enterprise, and levies were summoned from Lancashire.” The invasion was checked, but the county seems to have been almost as badly used by its own turbulent soldiery as by the enemy. Terrible depredations were made by armed bands, and special warrants had to be issued to the sheriff in 1328' and in the following year concerning the breaking of the king’s peace in Salfordshire and elsewhere. In the year 1332, and again in 1345, feared invasions from Scotland necessitated the issuing of proclamations'” to the effect that the terrified inhabitants of the threatened districts might withdraw themselves and their sheep and cattle further south. Lancashire was called upon to furnish men for the French wars, and not merely men, but her famed military material. In 1341 the sheriff had been ordered to provide one hundred bows and one thousand sheaves of arrows for the French expedition, and following this came another order for a thousand sheaves of steel-headed arrows and a thousand bow-strings. 1 The Inquisition of the Ninth in 1341 ™ revealed the poverty and distress entailed in Lancashire by these repeated invasions. In all the northern parishes assessed there was the same plea of excuse as at Lancaster, where they could not contribute their quota ‘ propter destructionem ibi factam per Scottos in detrimentum dicti taxationis per annum per xliiij marcas,’ for, as the complaint ran, ‘jacent in eadem parochia . . . terre steriles et inculte’ by reason of the aforesaid devastation.’ With regard to the fifteenth to be levied on the ‘ merchants’ at the same time we learn from the return that there was no city in the wapentake of Amounderness, ‘ nor any borough except the borough of Preston,’ upon which the fifteenth could be levied. Similarly in all Blackburnshire there were no merchants who ought to contribute to it, nor indeed any man in those parts except those living by agriculture. In * L.T.R. Misc. Enr. Accts. 14, m. 72. (first skin). Accounts of John de Lancaster from 15 July, in 17th year (Edw. II), &c. ‘Of the site of the said castle (of Lancaster) he does not answer because it was burned by the Scots.’ Cf. also Rental de Lanc. (17 Edw. II), m. 4—Escheats. Certain tenants pay less wae formerly bag the ‘ burning of the Scots.’ Out of a total rent of £7 15. 34. due for burgages there, no less than £4 115. 6}¢. is lacking for default of tenants and by reason of the burnin of the Scots th "LTR. Misc. Enr. Accts. 14. e ; yo sone? ” Tbid. 14, m. 69¢. (second skin). ‘Decay in the late Earl of Lancaster’s lands in L ter, P : "6 Thid. 14, m. 68 (first skin). eae ne a ‘* Rot. Scot. 1 Edw. III, m. 4. "8 Close, 2 Edw. III d. " Ibid. 7 Edw. UI. pt. i, m. 18, and again 19 Edw III, pt. ii, m. 10d. , sia ® Quoted by Baines, Hist. of Lanc. (ed. Harland), i, 107. *! 15 Edw. III, 27 Feb. 1341. "Ing. Nonarum (Rec. Com.). A like plea was put forward in all the ish f L Amounderness, as well as in Ribchester and Chipping. ? oars eae 284 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY Salfordshire even, where there were ten parishes, including Manchester,’ the same oath was sworn that there were ‘neque burgus nec mercatores seu alli homines qui de quintadecima debeant respondere,’ and the jurors of West Derby wapentake swore similarly that excepting the boroughs of Liverpool and Wigan, respectively assessed at £6 16s. 7d. and £5 gs. 4d., there were none living there except by agriculture.™ The famine of 1315 has been mentioned, and this in turn was followed by the great pestilence known as the Black Death, which visited England in the middle of the fourteenth century. It can never be known how many perished in the visitation which raged in Lancashire in 1349-50. Of the population at this period there is no trustworthy record obtainable. An interesting MS. preserved in the Public Record Office’ must be read with caution." The following table briefly shows the mortality affirmed by the archdeacon of Richmond in his claim for probate dues. Number of Persons worth 100 shillings and upwards _ Parisn oF Number of Deaths Sunt se by Sum assigned by alleged the Jurors Who died and Who died Archdeacon made their will intestate 20 marks Preston. 2. 2. 2 e 3,000 300 200 } £lo : fo) k Kirkham . .... 3,000 600 100 fo : ft 1005, 205. Poulton. . 2 « « «6 « 800 200 40 405. 4d. 65. 8d. 20 marks £4 Lancaster . 2. 2. ee 3,000 400 80 flo 205. Garstang . . . » . «| 2,600 400 140 re 405, 405. 205. Cockerham. . . 2... 1,000 300 60 a re Z Ribchester* . . 2... 100(?) 70 40 1s eR Lytham* ...... 14.0(?) 80 80 oad ee ie i St. Michael’s*. 2. 2... 80(?) 50 40 ay ri Poulton (si) . 2 2 we 60 40 20 L4 (eae Total Deaths . . . . 13,180 By Archdeacon of Richmond—Total claimed, £113 105 (sic). By Jurors—Total assigned, £30 35. 4d. (sic). 183 Mamecestre, iii, 438, 439. 14 Ing. Nonarum. Treas, of the Receipt 222, printed in Engl Hist. Rev. v, 524. Other references to the great pestilence will be found in the accounts of Liverpool, Manchester, and Didsbury. 186 In the case of Ribchester, Lytham, and St. Michael’s there are glaring errors, inasmuch as the dead are more numerous in the claims than in the general estimate given. 285 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE The pestilence is supposed to have carried off a third, and in some cases one half, of the population.’ Upon this estimate of a third, the population of Amounderness according to the numbers of the document would have been close upon 40,000 persons in the middle of the fourteenth century. Professor T. Rogers discounts this estimate as the exaggeration of panic,'* and the severe ‘taxing’ of the archdeacon’s charges indicates the jurors’ scepticism as to the numbers. There is, unfortunately, no clear evidence for an estimate of the population of the county at this period. In the seventeenth (1323-4) and again in the nineteenth year of Edward II (1325-6) we get a rough outline of the rents due on the manors of Preston and Lancaster,” affording an estimate for a few townships.’ Economically and socially regarded, the Black Death divides the mediaeval period from the modern. A system of bondage that had been tolerated hitherto in name only now practically came to an end.” It is also very generally supposed that the so-called Agrarian Revolution of the four- teenth century dates from this occurrence.” But the struggle by the landlords to resume lands lavishly granted to peasant or other small tenants when land was of no marketable value lay further back, and had been feebly stirring in the last few decades of the thirteenth century, from the period of the great increase in the wool trade of the reign of Edward 1. At first the tendency was precisely the reverse of what it afterwards became, for undoubtedly the first seizures were made on pasture lands which were relet to tenants for purposes of tillage. This was obviously the result of a growth in population, and of an increased and profitable demand for corn. As this demand for plots of land increased the landlord cast about for an additional supply. Not satisfied with his own demesne he cast envious eyes towards the common lands. Occasions for seizing these were presented most conveniently when the lord’s estates were in ward. The owner of the ward- ship for the time being was a more or less irresponsible person whose sole object was to make a profit out of his temporary possession.’ An instance of this deliberate seizure of common lands occurred on the manor of Man- '? See Gasquet, The Great Pestilence ; also T Rogers, Agric. and Prices, i, 60 et seq. ' T. Rogers, Agric. and Prices, i, 60. "See L.T.R. Misc. Enr. Accts. 14, m. 65 (first skin). Also ibid. Accounts of John de Lancaster, 15 July, 17 Edw. II, to Michaelmas, for castle and town of Lancaster, &c. '™ There were 22 bondmen and 13 cottars at Skerton, and Overton was somewhat larger. On the average of five toa family there were at the lowest computation 175 persons in Skerton, and probably fifty persons who were tenants at will or free tenants may be added without overstraining the estimate. This would make a total of 225 for Skerton, and as Overton was larger its population may be reckoned at 300 upon a very modest estimate. Taking Slyne and Hest upon a similar basis of calculation we should get a total population of at least 1,000 for the four townships. Slyne had the largest rent of bondsmen, and therefore probably more than the others ; while Hest paid practically the same bondage rent as Skerton. In 1422 the church of Ashton-under-Lyne was required to accommodate 107 women, with their maids, thirty free tenants 117 tenants at will and their men servants. Allowing two maids for every dame, and 5 men servants for every free tenant, and adding at least 100 children, we arrive at a modest estimate of 718, which might easily be extended to 800 as the possible population ; Rental of Ashton-under-Lyne, 1422, in Three Lancs. Documents (Chet. Soc.), 112 et seq. ‘In the rental of 1473 socage tenants have replaced the villeins of Gorton ; ibid. sor. ‘* The Contrarient Roll (Lanc. Ing. [Rec. Soc. liv]), tells over and over again of bondmen and tenants at will entering their fathers’ lands for very small fines. ' aCe T. Rogers, Agric. and Prices, i, 64. ‘The feudal lord was liable . . . in the person of his infant heir, to contingencies more oppressive and ruinous than those which befel the inferior . . . tenant . . . the profits of his [the heir’s] estates were appropriated and waste . . . was freely practised.’ 286 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY chester between the years 1282 and 1300, in the minority of the heir, when out of three hundred and fifty acres of common pasture . . . namely common for all the (aforesaid) tenants, Sir John Byron and Sir John de Longford (keepers of those lands), have inclosed ta themselves one hundred acres of land . . . at the time when Sir Thomas Grelle was last in keeping . . . of the lord the King.!™ ‘And their one hundred acres,’ the writer goes on to say— they have tilled as arable land, and these are now held by tenants of Nicholas de Longford and Richard de Byron !—by the aforesaid disseisin. And one and the same Sir John de Byron and the lady Joan de Longford have lately inclosed to themselves thirty-six acres of land, and these acres they have tilled as arable land. And be it also known that the lord can approve to himself the aforesaid one hundred and thirty-six acres, and inclose these at his pleasure ; saving sufficient pasture to all the aforesaid commoners. . In the extent of these lands two years later, in 1322, the lord is mentioned as having ‘136 acres pastures there . . . to wit (the lands) which John de Byron and John de Longford and John de Longton Aave tilled and inclosed.’ The same thing took place at Cuerdley in the same lordship, where various ‘ pastures’—‘in which the tenants . . . were wont to claim common of pasture’ were ‘assarted and farmed’ to other tenants.’” It seems clear from these examples that the desire to increase income from farms and assarts was the origin of the seizure of common lands, and that such disseisins for turning pasture to tillage were already taking place up and down the county in the end of the thirteenth century. The first English sovereign who made a royal progress in the county (as distinguished from a hurried passage through its boundaries) was Henry of Richmond, who, in visiting his mother and her husband the earl of Derby at Lathom in 1495, passed through the towns of Warrington and Manchester.” The Tudors were, indeed, the greatest patrons and saviours of the county, and from the time of Henry VIII onwards the county received grace and encouragement from the crown. The prosperous villein of an earlier period became the small copyholder or socage tenant of the fifteenth century, and developed into the sturdy yeoman of Tudor times, when copyholders and tenants at will alike united to resist the encroachments of landlords who sought by every possible means to resume ancient land grants. ‘The whole question came to a head in the Inquisition of 1517, * Mamecestre (Chet. Soc.), ii, 326, 327. "5 Thid. 327. 8 Ibid. 389. 7 Thid. 388. 8 Mr. Leadam (‘Ing. of 15177’) suggests that ‘ the enclosure of arable land was a movement contemporary with that of conversion to pasture,’ and supports his theory with a quotation from Fitzherbert’s Surveying, where lords are advised to ‘enclose their lands for tillage as well as pasture.’ Prof. Gay disputes Mr. Leadam’s theory, but without much justification. The lands at Manchester were inclosed for tillage. A reconciliation of both theories seems to be provided by Hale’s Discourse of the Commonweal, where he suggests that land was first inclosed apparently for tillage and afterwards turned to pasture when inclosing had begun to escape notice ; Discourse, 50. Prof. Gay’s argument is given in a paper read before the Roy. Hist. Soc. and printed in their Trams. (New Ser.), xiv, 243. 9 Annals of the Lords of Warrington (Chet. Soc.), pt. il, 254. % The disforesting of Pendle, Trawden, Rossendale, and Accrington was due to Hen. VII, the lands being let at nominal rents by copy of court roll. Queen Elizabeth sanctioned inclosures of waste within the demesne manors of the honour of Clitheroe. The forests of Wyresdale and Bleasdale were let at low rents to tenants—nominally at will, but soon subject to tenant right. ™! Trans. Roy. Hist. Soc. (New. Ser.), vi and xiv. 287 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE but, unfortunately, its scope did not extend to Lancashire.” There IS, however, enough general evidence provided by the unrest and violence exhibited in the north at this time, which in 1536 culminated in the Pilgrimage of Grace, to justify us in supposing that agrarian grievances were throughout the fifteenth century as rife in Lancashire as elsewhere.** During the northern rebellion there were frequent outcries against the landlords’ inclosures of wastes and common lands, and when disturbances threatened in Lancashire the king instructed his commissioners that if any commons have been enclosed or any gentleman take excessive fines that their tenants cannot live, the Earls shall labour to bring such enclosures and extreme takers of fines to such moderation that they and the poor men may live in harmony.” Other valuable evidence as to the struggle for the possession of the wastes and common lands of Lancashire is afforded by the pleadings and depositions made before the Duchy Court which extend throughout the whole Tudor period. One of the first of these entries is a dispute concerning the inclosure of Bold and Widnes Commons, and another concerns that of Walkden Moor. Another is a complaint against Lawrence Townley’s encroachments on Emmott’s Moor at Colne, again raised in the 35th year of the reign of. Henry VIII, when the king appointed a commission to examine the alleged inclosure of pasture on Colne Waste. In the reign of Henry VIII numerous disputes arose (or were con- tinued) as to the right of getting turves from the moors; such was that about Irlam Moss.2% Common rights were disputed at Hindley, Ince, and Aspull in 1528-30,%” and in 1532 a great litigation arose as to the common rights over Nuthurst, Chadderton, and Oldham Wastes between the lords of the manors and certain others who disputed their rights there.” Other similar disturbances caused by the tenants’ claim to common of turbary took place at Pleasington,™ at Crosby in West Derby lordship,” at Formby Moss,”! and at Croston.*? The abbots were very unpopular and short-sighted offenders in respect of encroachments on common lands, where they often disputed the rights of the local inhabitants to pasture, as did the prior of Lytham in respect to lands at Poulton le Fylde, Bispham, Lytham, and Hawes Waste.” The dissolution of the monasteries, while satisfactory to the landowning class, who aspired to profit at the Church’s expense, was not altogether popular with the people. According to Aske, the leader of the Pilgrimage of Grace, this measure was one of the causes of the great northern insurrection 32 Lancashire was again omitted in 1607 ; Trans. Roy. Hist. Soc. (New Ser.), xiv, 235 (June, 1900). ™ Ibid. xix, ‘The Midland Revolt and Depopulation Returns.’ : ae L. and P. Hen. VIII, xii (1), 302. Quoted in Note 5, to Mr. Leadam’s paper on the “Ing. of 1517.’ *8 The record of this contention in the original rolls is to this effect :—Viz. that L. Townley occupies a close of land to the value of £5, which close is a pasture inclosed from the king’s waste belonging to Colne for which said encroachment Henry Townley, father of Lawrence, has been amerced in the Halmote of the said manor divers times, and no remedy had, whence the king’s tenants made suit to the king’s court, and divers commissions were directed into the county upon the same and no end made, wherefore the said Henry Townley perceiving the said closes to be let and plucked down, made suit to Sir T. Townley, knt. cousin of the said Henry, who made order, &c.; but the king’s tenants pray for a new commission; Duchy of Lanc. Depositions, xliv, T. 1 ; also 1, P. 2. *6 Duchy of Lanc. Plead. iii, B. 12. * Ibid. v, H. 11. ™ Thid. vil; C: 9a. *® Ibid. xvii, A. 4 (no date). 70 Ibid. C. 1 Ibid. xx, D. 3. "9 Thid. xxviii, C. 1. ™8 Tbid. viii, P. 3 (24 Hen. VID). 288 “SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY of 1536, since ‘in the North partes much of the relef of the comyns was by sucor of Abbeys.’** They ‘lent money to gentlemen, took charge of evidence and moneys, were a convenience in disposing of younger sons and in educating daughters, and were great maintainers of sea walls, highways and bridges.’"* With their dissolution arose a prominent form of dispute between the king’s farmer or grantee of their freshly-distributed lands and the local inhabitants, who had enjoyed centuries of privilege both of pasture and turbary under the abbot’s tenure. In 1543-4 the king appointed a commission to inquire into these matters, and particularly into the disputes in connexion with the lately dissolved monastery of Furness. At Low Furness the commissioners found that about four hundred tenants of the late abbey had common of turbary and pasture for their oxen and horses on Angerton Moss. The abbot had formerly 16 acres of the moss, which since the abbey’s suppression had been let to farm. Certain of the late abbot’s tenants were allowed to inclose 30 acres of the moss, which they converted to arable and meadow land, were allowed to build houses there, and paid a rent of 33s. 4d. yearly for the same, which they subsequently paid to the king. On another part certain tenants had improved 50 acres from the waste and occupied it at a rent of 52s. 2d., afterwards paid to the king. One Barker, however, had inclosed 20 acres, which before the Dissolution was used as common pasture for the tenants’ oxen and horses, for the which 20 acres the said Barker paid no rent and had no title to such possession. The said 20 acres were worth about 4d. an acre, and the sixteen turbary acres would let for 2d. per acre. The rest of the moss was so full of water that it was useless for pasture, and the water threatened the king’s tenants’ turbary there unless it was drained.” Under the popularly sympathetic but weak policy of Protector Somerset the disputes between tenants and landlords increased rather than diminished in Lancashire. The old undecided claims as to common of turbary were resumed not merely at Penwortham, but also at Hindley and Aspull, at West- houghton, Burnley, Colne, Ightenhill,”"” and Longton Moss.”* Other similar disputes were carried on also at Claydon, Cuerd:n, and Turton,”* Deane Moor near Bolton,” and at Stalmine Moss.¥! In 1549 the tenants of the earl of Derby were fighting for their rights over Ashworth and Bury Com- mon,” and there were lawsuits for trespass on common of turbary at Prest- wich and at Tonge Moor.”* Disturbances of pasture took place at Brokhurst Manor, at Lowton Waste, and at Newton.™ In 1550 there were disturbances of common at Chatburn.”* Under Philip and Mary there was little abatement. In 1553-4 disputes occurred at Ribby lordship near Kirkham,”* and at Haslingden,”’ where the tenants were the plaintiffs. In the same year we get protests against the encroachments on the common of Gressingham Manor,” and at Tottington *« Aske’s Statement, printed in Engi. Hist. Rev. v, 345, 558. *8 Ibid. quoted by Prof. Gay, Trans. Roy. Hist. Soc. (New Ser.), xviii, 198, note 6. 76 Duchy of Lanc. Dep. xlviii, R. 5. 71” Ibid. Plead. xxiii, B. 14 (2 Edw. VI). 78 Ibid. F. 6 (2 Edw. VI). 9 Ibid, xxiv, K. 4 (2 Edw. VI). *0 Ibid. R. 4 (2 Edw. VI). #2) Ibid. S. 13 (2 Edw, VI). ™ Tbid. Dep, liv, H. 2, 8 Ibid. Plead. xxii, C. 5 (3 Edw. VI). ™ Ibid. xxiv, R. 4. 8 Ibid. xxvi, K. 4. 76 Thid. xxxili, B. 2. 27 Thid. xxiv, H. 17. ™ Ibid. xxiv, T. 4. 2 289 37 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Waste.” In the second year a disputed title to turbaries was tried between rival claimants to Kirkby Moss and Simondswood Moss,"® which goes far to prove the keenness with which the landowners were inclosing or contending between themselves for the great peat beds of Lancashire. Again a commission was issued to inquire into these encroachments upon commons and wastes, and to discover ‘concealed lands’ and mills erected without licence.*! As before, the Townley inclosures of waste were a prominent subject of litigation, and a commission was appointed under presi- dency of the Vice Chancellor of the county to inquire into the cases cited above as well as into the complaints of the copyholders of Burnley and Cliviger Wastes, and as to their rights to common of pasture in Horelowe pasture inclosed by Sir John Townley, deceased, and others.” In 1554-6 a dispute arose as to right of pasture and turbary between the lord of Over Darwen Manor and the tenants who claimed common rights upon Darwen Maoor™ Throughout Elizabeth’s reign the fight over the turf moors went on fiercely. The Nowells, lords of the manor of Read, refused the rights of common of pasture on Sabden Waste and Read Moor. At the same time there were disturbances at Turton Moor, and again at Haslingden.** In 1564 right of pasture was claimed by the tenants on 500 acres of waste, moor, and turbary at Woolston Manor, Poulton, and Rixton.** In 1577 there was a dispute of this kind at Cartmell Fells,’ and at Worston, Downham, Mearley, Chatburn, and Pendleton the tenants claimed right of pasture for their cattle on the common land, which the lord of the manor refused.”* At Preston in 1595 the mayor and burgesses were plaintiffs in a suit brought for exercising the alleged right of digging for turves on Penwortham Moss,” which claim, as in a previous case, the king’s farmer opposed. In 1601, at Heyton, the _lord of the manor brought a suit against certain who made a forcible entry ~on Heyton Moss and threw his inclosures down there.” A dispute as to the tenants’ right to quarry slate or stone upon the manor was carried to law by the Nowells of Read in 1565, and in 1590 a similar question was litigated about the ‘ delfts’ at Bury,’” while in connexion with the ‘ mines, delfts of stone and slate’ at Chester Brook and Sprodspool, Ribchester, there was a suit for breach of contract.* In 1593, at Downham Green and at Chatburn the tenants fought for their right to get lime and burn it in kilns,“ and in 1597 the same suit was brought again. At Wigan ** in the same year a suit was brought about the right to dig clay and stone, and there was a dispute at Copholt Common, Rainhill, where a popular right was claimed to quarry firestone and ‘marl.’*’ Stone, slate, turf, and *° Duchy of Lanc. Plead. xxxiv, T. 9. ™ Thid. Dep. Ixii, G. 1. *31 Thid. Ixvi, R. 4. * Commission to inquire as to encroachments of waste ground on complaint and claim of the copyholders of Burnley and Cliviger Wastes to common in Horelow pasture, inclosed by Sir J. Townley, deceased, Sir Richard Townley, deceased, and Frances Townley, widow, and of divers other encroachments in Burnley and Cliviger, and of divers encroachments within Barrowford, particularly of land called Blackowe . . . and other lands, Ribby Waste, Much Singleton, Wrae Waste, and of inclosure of Gressingham Common of which the inhabitants of Gressingham town claimed the occupation and profits ; Duchy of Lanc. Dep. Ixxiii, R. 9. *8 Duchy of Lanc. Dep. lxxix, O. 3. 4 Tbid. Plead. xlix, N. 2. * Tbid. H. 19. 3 Thid. lix, H. 32. *7 Thid. civ, K. 3. *8 Thid. cliii, G. 7. 9 Thid. clxxiv, P. 12. 9 Thid. cxcvi, B. 3. 41 Thid. lxiv, N. 2. ? Thid. cliv, L. 7. *8 Ibid. clvi, W. 16. ** Ibid. clxvi, R. 3. *8 Thid. clxxix, A. 8. *6 Thid. clxxxix, F. 9, "7 Thid. ccii, E. 8. 290 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY coals were similarly claimed on Harwood Common in 1601," and the lord of the manor in this instance defended his alleged rights by bringing a suit for trespass against the claimants. While these continual disputes and forcible entries made by tenantry upon common and waste lands, which the lords of the manor were endeavour- ing to inclose for their own possession, testify to the survival of the great pastoral and grazing pursuits of Lancashire, they also offer highly important evidence to the beginning of quite another character of enterprise—the great mining industry. The continuous struggle for the possession of waste grounds all over the county proves that the value of such land had become enhanced in some striking way, as indeed it had. Forsome time past it had been discovered that the great Lancashire wastes not merely abounded in peat— which was increasingly sought as the demand for fuel grew with increasing population—but were rich in minerals, and contained great slate or stone quarries and, most important of all, valuable beds of coal. The digging of turves, like the cutting of firewood, had from early times been the privilege of the peasant, and the gradual merging of the villeins and bondmen into small copyholders of the towns, as at Colne and Burnley, to quote two con- stantly recurring instances, endowed these tenants with the so to speak hereditary claims that had been accorded them centuries before, when they ranked in a slightly lower and more dependent status. The gradual discovery of the value of waste lands containing rich coal- beds brought these struggles between landlord and tenant to an acute issue in the early sixteenth century. The exploitation of minerals, particularly of coal, was undoubtedly the source of much of the keenness with which the landowners sought to possess themselves of common lands. Of this the long dispute about the Burnley waste at Broadhead is a conspicuous example. In 1526-7 Richard Townley was the farmer of the coal mines in the waste ground there, and naturally, in his own interest, resented the claim of the Burnley copyhold tenants to dig coals as freely as they had formerly been accustomed to dig peat-fuel.*” In 1528-9 a similar dispute was taking place on another rich coalfield, the waste at Hindley Manor.*° In 1546 the dispute over Tottington and Rossendale Wastes was so acute that the king, as plaintiff, issued a commission to inquire concerning the coal mines there.™ Here then we get the early stir and beginnings of the great coal-mining industry of Lancashire, a source of latent wealth that was for the first time beginning to be quietly exploited in the Tudor period. Some idea of the potential wealth of the county seems to have got abroad, for under Edward VI a commission was appointed to survey the coal mines, slate quarries, and other hereditaments in Lancashire and in the precincts of Bow- land Forest.*” In 1567 there was a suit for trespass brought by the farmer of the ‘coal pits’ at Winstanley.“ At Blackburn Moor coals were being dug from the waste,** and in 1576 the Townleys were still owners of the Cliviger coal mines at Burnley.** At about the same time coal mines were *8 Duchy of Lanc. Plead. cciv, M. 4. 9 Duchy of Lanc. Dep. (18 Hen. VIII), xix, T. 3. It should be remembered that whilst copyholders had certain rights to get peats in surface workings, they had no rights in minerals lying beneath the surface. Their tenure was of the surface soil only. 250 Ibid. xxii, L. 3. 51 Ibid. xlvili, R. 10. *? Thid. lxi, R. 2. 258 Tbid. Plead. Ixxiii, O. 5. 75 Thid. Ixxviii, A. 7 (11 Eliz.). 5 Thid. C. G. 4. 2g1 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE leased or worked by the same family at Great Marsden and Colne, and in 1577 coal mines are mentioned at ‘Falinge’ and at Spotland town (near Rochdale).**’ : In 1580 the leasing and working of coal at the Broadhead mine, Burnley, were again a source of dispute,” and the attorney-general is mentioned as taking up the case for the crown. In the same year coal mines are mentioned at other places in this district, notably at Pendle Forest and on Ightenhill Manor.** In 1583 coals are being dug at Todmorden™ and also at Tock- holes, Livesey, and Lower Standen. In 1590 coal pits are a subject of dispute at Bury Manor,” and again at the same place in 1597," while in 1591 the Townleys were again disputing concerning the leasing of their coal pits at Great Marsden and Colne.** The Ightenhill coal pit was again in dispute in 1598,°* and in 1599 the claim to the digging of coals at Kearsley on Pilkington Manor was raised.”* An intrusion on the premises of the queen’s farmers of the Colne coal mines took place in the same year.*” In 1601 coal pits are mentioned at Orrell ** and at Harwood (in Blackburnshire) ;* and there is a reference in 1602 to the earl of Derby’s coal mines at Kearsley in Barton-upon-Irwell.’” The struggle for the commons was the popular expression of the rising spirit of opposition to the claims of exclusive privilege that has animated the Lancashire people from the fifteenth century onwards. It was of a piece with the sturdiness that bowed so reluctantly to the Norman yoke and that enabled the bondmen on many manors to combine and buy off their dues of service. This spirit, as has been shown, survived particularly in the descen- dants and successors of these bondmen, that is in the copyholders who con- tested for their rights of free pasture against the lord of the manor on which they rented land and dwellings. Another form of this spirit was shown by the townsmen and burgesses who contended with the lords of the manors for the control of their markets. This struggle had been going on a long time, and was never more obstinately waged than during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. At Lancaster, in the reign of Henry VII, the mayor, bailiffs, and burgesses were opposing the claim of the duchy receiver to take customs and tolls there, and to the allotment of Quernmoor Common." At Bolton le Moors, about the same period, certain persons would not suffer the agent of Sir Edward Stanley, farmer of the fairs and markets there, to collect the tolls for his master.?” It was equally difficult to enforce the farming of the Mersey ferry at Run- corn, where for two years a certain ‘ Harryson’ and others had provided four boats in defiance of the king’s farmer, and had taken over such passengers as came to be ferried across.?” The ancient mediaeval exemptions from toll and lastage at fairs and markets throughout the realm, which appertained to the citizens of London and certain other towns, was falling into disuse, or at least the corporations *€ Duchy of Lanc. Plead. cii, T. 10. *7 Tbid. civ, H. 8. 8 Thid. cix, A. 5. *9 Thid. A. 9. * Ibid. cxxxi, A. 27. *I [bid. A. 32. ** Thid. cliv, L. 7. *3 Ibid. clxxxii, H. 3. * Thid. clix, T. 7. *S Ibid. clexxv, T. 12. *6 Ibid. cxlix, H. 8. Thid, clxxxix, L. 7, and again ibid. exciv, L. 1. *8 Ibid. calv, S. 5. * Ibid. cciv, m. 4. ™ Thid. cii, D. 20. ™ Tbid. i, L. 3 (Hen. VIII). *7 Thid. ii, S. 24 (no date, but attrib. to reign Hen. VII). ™ Thid. iv, A. 3. 292 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY were strong enough to dispute them. In 1529-30 the bailiffs of Lancaster refused to acknowledge the right to exemption from tolls of a certain Leicestershire man who had bought cattle at Lancaster fair to drive through to Leicestershire. In 1530-1 one Robert Hatton challenged the right of Sir Thomas Butler to take tolls of corn at the markets and fairs of Warring- ton Manor.** This very year the king himself was disputing the right of the abbot of Furness to customs, tolls, sheriff's tourn, and the prisage of wines at Furness and other places in the abbot’s lordship.” Again, in 1545, another case of refusal of exemption from ‘tolls, piccage, and lastage at fairs and markets’ occurred, the defendant being the mayor of Preston, who had denied this privi- lege to the plaintiffs, inhabitants of ‘ Salford,’ visiting Preston fair.”” At Wigan fair in the same year the servants of Sir T. Langton threw down the booths in defiance of the mayor and burgesses, who claimed the tolls.” Exemption from toll was pleaded by one of the king’s tenants of Clitheroe Manor in 1547," while in Philip and Mary’s reign arose a great dispute between the farmer of the lordship and the mayor and bailiffs of Liverpool. In 1581 Edward Butler made a claim to have the right of holding fairs and markets at Warrington Manor and at Leigh;*° and in 1585 Lord La Warre was contending for his right to take stallage, tolls, and pannage in the manors of Manchester, Blackley, Gorton, Droylsden, Failsworth, and Clayton, which was opposed by certain persons.™' In 1597, again, the mayor and alder- men and burgesses of Wigan claimed the right to take the tolls and profits of fairs and markets against Edward Fleetwood, clerk and parson of Wigan, who disputed it.** Three years later the mayor and bailiffs and burghers of Preston were contending against W. Singleton and others as to their right of taking tolls and stallage of the markets and fairs of Kirkham.™ The church shared the unpopularity of the landlords, being, in fact, the most prevailing and absolute landlord of them all. By the close of the fifteenth century the payment of tithes seems to have become extremely onerous, and in numerous cases during the following century was refused. Cases of prominent refusal occurred at Kirkham, Great Marsden, Clitheroe, Pendle Forest, where the payment was to the abbot of Whalley,** Burscough, Warrington,” Leigh,” and indeed in so many places throughout the period that it is impossible to detail separate instances. When the monasteries were suppressed the king’s farmers of their lands continued to claim the tithes the abbots had claimed, and this caused great opposition, as at Kirkham for instance, where the inhabitants claimed tithe exemption against Thomas Clifton, farmer of Kirkham Church. Similarly the claim of the warden of Manchester College to have tithes of wool, lambs, calves, hay, hemp, flax, corn, and grain in divers towns and villages, as well as in Broughton, Cheetham, Chorlton, Didsbury, Withington, Hulme, and Salford, was opposed and brought to a lawsuit in the Duchy Court.” \ 4 Duchy of Lanc. Plead. v, H. 12. ”§ Ibid. vii, H. 1. 6 Ibid. viii, R. 1. See also ibid. ix, R. 2 (26 Hen. VIII). 7 Tbid. xi, B. 24. 778 Thid. xvi, W. 2. 9 Ibid. xxiv, W. 2. 380 Ibid. cxx, B. 23. 8 Ibid. cxxxiii, H. 2. 8 Thid. clxxxix, F. g. 8 Thid. P. 5. 4 Thid. vi, S. 7. 785 Ibid. ix, W. 12 (25 Hen. VIII) and again, ibid. xxi, W. 14 (no date), Bernard Hartley and others refuse tithe corn and herbage, at Whalley, Clitheroe Castle, Pendle Forest, Trawden and Bowland Forests. 786 Tbid. xi, H. 4. 7 Ibid. xxiii, B. 24. *8 Tbid. Dep. Ixxx, U. 1. 89 Ibid. Plead, xxx, L. 1 (5 Edw. VI). * Tbid. Ixx, B. 25 (9 Eliz.). 293 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Of all the struggles against mediaeval monoply, that waged against the monopoly of milling was one of the bitterest. The landlords were deter- mined to push their advantage and make the tenants’ extremity their oppor- tunity. The demand for increased milling facilities due to the increase of population was very great, and had raised a demand for the expenditure of capital on new mills which only landowners could satisfy. New mills were built whose interest clashed with those of the more ancient ones, and between the rival claimants the tenants were much harassed. A clear instance of this is afforded by the suit of 1544-5, where the farmer of the king’s mills of Burnley and Padiham is bringing a case against one Lawrence Townley, who had built a rival mill in Pendle Forest to meet’ the convenience of the king’s tenants in the said forest, who had ‘latterly increased and multiplied’ in number. ‘These tenants had long been ‘troubled’ by the carrying of their corn to the mills of Padiham and Burnley, and Townley obtained a commis- sion to inquire ‘how many of them desired a new mill.’ A grant to build such a mill was given him, and thereupon custom was naturally taken from the mills leased to the king’s farmer at Burnley, who brought a suit against Townley.™ In many other places there were like disputes. In Philip and Mary’s reign we find the farmer of the mills at Low Furness and Dalton enforcing his right to grind the corn and grain of the tenants of that lordship, which tenants had ground at other mills because the farmer had not enough water to grind in due time.*” That there was a deficiency of mills is clear, and the outcry for more facilities is a distinct proof of the growth of population induced by the settled order of the Tudor rule. Some action, however, was necessary both to appease popular discontent, and to insure the prosperity of the lessees to whom the royal mills were rented, and who appear throughout the period to have been contending against the local claim to grind where they pleased or were best served. In order to provide sufficient facilities for grinding the tenants’ corn the queen ordered a commission to view the state of the royal mills at Lancaster (Lune Mill) and elsewhere.?* Other mills were put into repair about this time.”* In 1561 the farmer of a water-mill at Bradford, near Manchester, was suing the inhabitants of Manchester for multure and tolls at four water- mills. In 1566 the lessee of Henry VIII claimed suit and service from the tenants of Ightenhill Manor at the queen’s water-mill, of which he was the farmer, whereas the tenants claimed their right to grind elsewhere, at the mills of Padiham, Burnley, or Hapton.” Similarly the farmer of two mills on Ormskirk Manor Waste was litigating against the inhabitants of Ormskirk, who claimed the right to grind at divers mills in the neighbourhood.*” The feoffees of the free school at Manchester claimed soke and suit from the in- habitants of Manchester for their three water-mills there, formerly belonging to Lord La Warre.* The rent of these mills provided for the maintenance *! Duchy of Lanc. Plead. xv, T. 7. *? Ibid. Dep. Ixii, R. 3. This question of the Furness mills recurs more than once ; see ibid. Ixxx S. 43 and lxxxi, R. 3. , * Duchy of Lanc. Dep. Ixv, R. 3 (1 Mary). ™ Tbid. Ixix, Chatburn, Sladeburn, Grindleton, Bradford (3 & 4 Phil. and Mary). ** Ibid. Plead. 1, R. 12. * Thid. Ixix, R. 5 *" Thid, Ixxiv, S. 19. The divers mills were Creetby Mill, Our Lady’s Mills, Cross Hall Mill, and Bes lebaas Mill * Ibid. Ixxxi, B. 7. ; 294 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY of the school. At Lancaster the mayor and burgesses petitioned to be allowed to rebuild a mill on the Lune to support the free school there.” In 1573 the inhabitants of Hawkshead parish were claiming to grind elsewhere than at the mills of the queen’s lessee, alleging them to be ‘ insufh- cient.” The fight was hottest near the large towns of Liverpool and Manchester. In 1588 the inhabitants of Liverpool opposed the claim of the queen’s lessee (Sir R. Molineux) that they should be compelled to grind and pay toll to the queen’s mills at Eastham, Townsend, Derby, Ackers, and Wavertree. In 1592 the lord of the manor of Manchester was contending with the burgesses there as to the tolls and multure of various mills at Manchester, Cheetham, Ordsall, Bradford, and Smedley.” In 1594 the attorney-general was disputing the claim of a new mill erected at Clitheroe in detriment of the multure owed to the queen’s mill there ;°* and in 1595 a similar claim was entered at Colne for soke and suit to the queen’s mill against certain copyholders of the manor. The new free spirit that after the Pestilence and the Peasants’ Revolt had arisen among the people, showed itself in this challenging of the claims of privilege wherever they arose. ‘The suppression of the monasteries caused a scramble for the rich liberties thus scattered, and the king’s farmers and lessees had, as has been shown, considerable difficulty in obtaining the reserva- tions they looked for. The monastic fisheries that went with the lease of the lands were especially the subject of popular plunder. There was a great wrangle of this kind at Penwortham *” in 1537-8, and upon the Wyre fishery in 1546.°% The farmer of the Mersey fishery had much trouble with certain who disputed his rights over the Thelwall and other Mersey fishings.°” In 1561 the farmers of the Lune salmon fishery, formerly belonging to Furness Abbey, had to go to law with certain who claimed the moiety of the fishery there.** Similar disputes occurred about the fishings at Levens Water *® and Winder- mere, and numerous other places, in 1562. Often the disputers of privilege carried things too far, as when they refused to recognize the sturgeon caught at Penwortham*” and seized by the king’s bailiff for the crown, as a royal fish, or disputed the crown’s claims to wreck of sea there. Although there is little documentary evidence, if any, as to the progress of the woollen-cloth industry in Lancashire during the fifteenth century," we know it had assumed very large proportions before the close of the reign of Henry VII. The industry seems to have been carried on mainly in the north-eastern and south-eastern parts of the county, tending to group itself °° Duchy of Lanc. Plead. Ixxxiii, N. 1. 8 Tbid. Ixxxiii, S. 4. 51 Tbid. cxlvii, M. 2. 8° Tbid. clxii, A. 7. 393 Tbid. clxvi, A. 1. 54 Tbid. clxii, A. 7. 8 Thid. x, F. 1. 36 Thid. xvi, E. 1. 8°? Tbid. Dep. xxxili, C. 1. 508 Tbid. Plead. xlix, F. 24. 3 Ibid. lii, P. 3. 81 Tbid. x, C. 6 (29 Hen. VIII). 3a The rentals of the honour of Clitheroe supply the following data for a comparison of the rents of fulling mills over the period extending from 1296 to 1440. In the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries the whole of the repairs to buildings, works, mill wheels and gear, were made by the lord; but in the fifteenth century mainly by the farmer. 1296 1305 1324. 1342 1423 1440 Colne . - 335. 44d. 245. 135. 6d. 185, 65. 8d. IIs. Burnley . 65. 8d. 245. 10s. 10d. 185. 135. 4d. 195. 4d. The Burnley Mill had only been at work one year, in 1296. 295 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE in the hilly district of Blackburnshire and Salfordshire within a radius of thirty or forty miles from Manchester. This we gather rather from the evidence of Tudor times when the industry had been fully established for more than a century previously. At the time when cloth-making had become the staple English manu- facture, at the close of the fifteenth century, various kinds of weaving—in- cluding a somewhat new departure, the manufacture of ‘ fustians,’ a mixture of wool and linen, and subsequently styled ‘cottons ’—were being busily pro- secuted in the hundred of Salford, and particularly in the town and neigh- bourhood of Manchester. The contemporary references to the supremacy of the Manchester woollen trade indicate that it had flourished there for a con- siderable period, and was in a condition of prosperous stability in the first few decades of the sixteenth century. Leland, visiting these parts somewhere about the year 1538, writes noticeably of Manchester as ‘The fairest, best builded, quickhest and most populous town of all Lancastreshire.”"' Other towns also connected with the woollen manufacture were not far behind their leader, and Bolton le Moors is especially mentioned by the antiquary as standing mostly by cottons and coarse yarn ;’ ‘ Divers villages in the moors about Bolton,’ he adds, ‘do make cottons.’*? In the Duchy Records of the reign of Henry VIII references occur to the fulling mills of Bolton, Mid- dleton, and Bury.” Evidence of the commercial importance of Manchester in the early six- teenth century is afforded by the removal of the privilege of sanctuary for thieves from there to Chester, effected in 1543,°* in order to add to the security of the ‘cotton’ trade. In the next reign the Manchester ‘ cottons,’ so called,** were again the subject of legislation, when in an Act ** entitled ‘for the true making of woollen cloth’ it was enacted that ‘all the cottons called Manchester, Lancashire, and Cheshire cottons . . .’ should be of a certain length, breadth, and weight. An entry in the Duchy Records for this reign refers to the cloths and cottons of Bury and Manchester," while as early as 1562 the towns of Radcliffe and Bury are named as furnishing packs of ‘ cloths called cottons.’ Again, in 1566 the towns of Rochdale, Bolton, Bury, Leigh, and Man- chester were noted for this ‘ fustian’ or so-called ‘ cotton’ manufacture.**® The regulations applying to the woollen trade were extended to the fustian manu- facture. Two years previously a case was brought to the Duchy Court to recover the aulnager’s fees for the sealing of woollen cloths, cottons, friezes, and rugs of a certain length, breadth, and weight according to the statute, at Bolton and Bury.”° In 1566 an attempt was made to counterfeit the aulnager’s seal on cottons, friezes, and rugs at Salford, Manchester, Rochdale, Bury, and Bolton.™' In 1567 ‘cottons’ and cloths are referred to as being "Leland, Itin. By ‘quickhest’ Leland probably meant the ‘most bustling,’ the most a/ive town in Lancashire. 517 Tbid. vii, 56. 3 Duchy of Lanc. Dep. xliv, R. 8. 5 Statutes of the Realm, 33 Hen. VIII. cap. xv. ** The word ‘cottons’ here, and subsequently until the middle of the eighteenth century, refers to ‘fustians,’ as previously explained. It was probably a coarse fabric akin to the ‘linsey-woolseys’ commonly in use among the poorer classes as late as the middle of the nineteenth century. 36 > & 6 Edw. VI. 37 Duchy of Lanc. Dep. xlix, C. 2. 58 Tbid. Plead. xlvi, M. 5. °° Statutes of the Realm, 8 Eliz. ; also Ure, Cotton Manuf. 221 (1835, reprinted 1861). *° Duchy of Lanc. Plead. lix, L. 4 (6 Eliz.). # Ibid. Ixvili, L. 3 (8 Eliz.). 296 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY sold at Rochdale; and in 1578 a debt is claimed there for woollen cloth.” Fulling mills at Heap hamlet and Bury are referred to in 1575, and in 1587 we come across a lawsuit to recover a debt on ‘Lancashire Cottons’ at Manchester and Rochdale. That such fabrics as are mentioned in the statutes and records of Eliza- beth’s reign were not ‘cottons’ as we know them is obvious from the word- ing of the statute.** They were at best but clumsy imitations of the ‘cottons’ and ‘ fustians’ wrought abroad, which were not attempted here in their actual fineness till the close of the sixteenth century, when religious persecution drove the Netherland weavers to our shores. Of these some are supposed to have settled near Manchester and were patronized by the wardens and fellows of the college there.” The period occupied by the struggle between York and Lancaster marks the beginning of the modern age, and was noticeable for a more lavish display of riches, and a certain amount of general luxury. Men lived in more comfort, and slept more softly than in the former age. By the opening of the sixteenth century linen sheets and pillows, feather beds, mattresses, blankets, coverlets, and table linen were in use in the monasteries” and country houses. ‘Twenty silver ‘standing cups’ and goblets, silver ewers and basins, and silver bowls were assigned at Whalley Abbey for the use of the monks and their visitors. Silver plate was of sufficient value to be left by will, and among items bequeathed such small things as silver salts and spoons were severally mentioned.””? Closely associated with the value attached to the precious metals was the practice of alchemy, and in 1448 two Lancashire knights, Sir Thomas Ashton and Sir Edmund Trafford, were solemnly licensed by the king to transmute base metals into gold and silver. The Tudor Age, notwithstanding its social and intellectual advance, clung desperately to the mediaeval theory of the Philosopher’s Stone and the Elixir of Life, and Dr. Dee, a prominent scholar and astrologist of the day, appointed by Queen Elizabeth to the wardenship of Manchester College, had early in the following reign to clear himself of the charge of necromancy, because such practices found little favour in the eye of James I. The royal condemnation of witch- craft had the effect of bringing many alleged witches and wizards to judge- ment, and in no county in England did the superstitious belief in the power of witches prevail more strongly than in Lancashire. Doubtless the wild and inaccessible nature of much of the north-eastern hill country contributed to the hoarding up of many vulgar errors and of folk-lore, which the light and healing brought by a fuller knowledge could alone dispel and eradicate. A great persecution of Lancashire witches took place in 1612, and many executions resulted.*” A more cheerful social tone was, however, given to the county by the royal progress of 1617, when King James travelled from Kendal through Myerscough Park by way of Preston to Hoghton Tower, and on to Lathom 3 Duchy of Lanc. Plead. lxxii, H. 25. 8 Thid. cvili, W. 5 ** The coarsely woven Kendal cloth went by the name of ‘ Kendal cottons’ for a long time, and ‘Welsh cottons’ were also of a similar rough woollen material. Cf. Ure, Cotton Manuf. 100. 3% Baines, Hist. of the Cotton Manuf. 99. °° Whalley Coucher (Chet. Soc.), iv, 1258. 7” Cf, the bequest of Thos. Butler’s Plate Chest, 1520, in Annals of the Lords of Warrington, ii, 413. 8 For a detailed account of the ‘Lancashire Witches,’ see Baines, Hist. of Lanc. (ed. Harland), i, 199- 208. Also Potts’s Discovery of Witches in the Co. of Lanc. (Chet. Soc.). 2 297 38 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE House, and thence southwards by way of Bewsey.*? Great festive prepara- tions were made in hospitable Lancashire to receive the king, and hunts, banquets, rustic merrymakings, and country sports were arranged for his amusement. The Lancashire people took the opportunity of the King’s presence among them to solicit the withdrawal of the Puritan restrictions against Sunday wakes and festivals, which petition the king was graciously pleased to receive and intimate his royal pleasure that henceforth all honest and harmless Sunday sports might continue, except bull or bear baiting, interludes and bowls. The recreations which were to be permitted included those Whitsun Ales, morris dancing, maypole gatherings, and rush-bearings for which Lancashire was exceptionally famous, but which, having proved a source of great local disorder, had been prohibited in 1579. The provision of grammar schools was one of the features of the sixteenth century. The Manchester school had been founded in the sixteenth year of Henry VIII, and there was one already established at Liverpool.*™ Reference occurs during the reigns of Mary and Elizabeth to the grammar schools of Penwortham, Lancaster, Preston, Bolton, Clitheroe, Prescot, Whalley, and Blackburn.** Kirkham School is first mentioned in the local records for the year 1585, and was subsequently helped by charitable donations and subscriptions from the gentlemen of the county. The Stuart period, like the Tudor period before it, was characterized by many charitable bequests, and one of the greatest of these was the endowment of a school for the sons of honest parents by the will of Humphrey Chetham, a great cloth merchant of Manchester, who died in 1651. The historic buildings of the college, the ancient hall of the barons of Manchester, were secured for the purpose, and to the hospital was attached an admirable library. Lancashire, and Manchester in particular, was thus educationally equipped for the intelligent part it was shortly destined to play in the drama of religion, politics, and industry. Some Martin Marprelate Tracts had originated from a Manchester press, and in the reign of Charles I Lancashire divines were well to the front in protesting against the excesses of the king’s party and of the Papists. The economic disturbances caused by the Civil War affected Lancashire in a greater degree than many other counties because party feeling on both sides ran very high there. The men of Salfordshire fighting for the Parlia- ment had, according to their petition of 1646, ‘with the assistance of Blackburn Hundred,’ reduced ‘the rest of the whole county ;” and this, as they go on to recount, ‘ with as little foreign assistance either of men, moneys or arms, nay less than any county whatever invested like them in like measure.’ **# How Lancashire was called upon to suffer for her support not merely of the Parliamentary party but of the royal cause, is set forth in another 5 See Fourn. of Nicholas Assheton (Chet. Soc.). *° Referred to in Duchy of Lanc. Plead. clviii, H. 12 (34 Eliz.). 551 Referred to ibid. iv, C. 2. ** Penwortham, Duchy of Lanc. Plead. xlv, F. 20; Lancaster, ibid. xxxviii, C. 16; Bolton, ibid. Ixxxv, B. 11; Clitheroe, ibid. cxxxvi, N. 3; Prescot, ibid. xl, T. 18; Whalley, see Clitheroe ; Blackburn, ibid. xxxvi, L. 8. The schools of Lancaster are mentioned as early as 1339; Cal. Pat. 1338-40, p. 339. *° Fishwick, Hist. of Kirkham (Chet. Soc.), 92. “ Petition of 1646, from 12,500 and upwards of the ‘well affected’ gentlemen, ministers, freeholders, and others of the county Palatine of Lancaster, 5, 8, &c. 298 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY petition of 1649, which offers ‘A true representation of the present sad and lamentable condition of the county, . . . and particularly of the towns of Wigan, Ashton and the parts adjacent.’ ** The petitioners show that The hand of God is evidently seen stretched out upon the county, chastening it with a three-corded scourge of Sword, Pestilence and Famine all at once afflicting it. They have borne the heat and burden of a first and second war in an especial manner above other partes of the nation: through them the two great bodies of the late Scottish and English armies passed, and in their very bowels was that great fighting bloodshed and breaking. In this county hath the Plague of Pestilence been ranging these three years and upwards, occasioned manifestly by the Wars. There is a very great scarcity and dearth of all provisions, especially of all sorts of grain, particularly that kind by which that country is most sustained *¥ which is sold sixfold the price that of late it hath been. All trade (by which they have been much supported) is utterly decayed; it would melt any good heart to see the numerous swarms of begging poor, and the many families that pine away at home, not having faces to beg. Very many now craving alms at other men’s doors who were used to give others alms at their doors; to see Paleness, nay Death, appear in the cheeks of the poor, and often to hear of some dead found in their houses or highways for want of bread. But Particularly the towns of Wigan and Ashton with the neighbouring parts (are) lying at present under some stroke of God in the pestilence: in one whereof are 2,000 poor, who for three months and upwards have been restrained, no relief to be had for them in the ordinary course of law, there being none to act at present as justices of the peace ; the col- lections in the Congregrations (their only supply, hitherto,) being generally very slender, those wanting ability to help who have hearts to pity them. Most men’s Estates being much drained by the Wars and now almost quite exhaust by the present scarcity and many other burdens incumbent upon them: there is no bonds to keep in the infected, hunger-starved Poore, whose breaking out jeopardeth all the neighbourhood . . . All which is certified to some of the reverend Ministers of the city of London by the Major (Mayor), Ministers and other persons of Credit, inhabitants or well wishers to and well acquainted with the town of Wigan. The Lancashire towns suffered also from the disastrous plundering committed by the soldiery. In Wigan in 1643 after the entry of the Parliamentary troops we read that ‘ great heapes of woollen Cloth of the drapers’ were laid in the streets,’ *7 and at the taking of Bolton by the Royalists in the following year, ‘the soldiers were greedy of plunder’ and ‘being many of them very bare, they carried away abundance of cloth, of all sorts.’** When the ‘ Black Regiment ’ was quartered at Kirkham in 1648 we read that they went over ‘most of the Parish, plundering and stealing whatever they could conveniently carry away.’*® And apart from plunder it is obvious that the marching and countermarching of the bodies of armed men who traversed the Fylde district, Lytham, Rossall, Preston, Lancaster, Wigan, Warrington, Blackburn, Bolton, Liverpool, and Manchester, must have disturbed ordinary commercial pursuits and occupations to an incalculable degree. The really remarkable thing was the rapid recovery of Lancashire. The stern repression of the Royalist party, and the peaceful, compromising policy of Charles II, gave the county time for economic recovery. Manchester, whose Protestant virtues and great stand for the Parliament had proved her great reward, was in 1654 endowed by Cromwell with Par- liamentary representation, and this dignity, together with the prosperity indicated by the steady pursuits of her weaving industry and cloth trade, enabled her to take the lead in the exhausted county. In the year 1650, 835 Petition of 24 May, 1649. #6 Probably oats. 387 4 Discourse of the Wars in Lancs. (Chet. Soc.), 36. $8 Tbid. 45. 589 Ibid. 67. Baines, Hist. of Lancs. i, 324 (ed. 1868). 299 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE almost immediately after the war, a contemporary writer resident in the town describes the trade there as inferior to few places in the kingdom. It consisted, he says, ‘ of woollen frizes, fustians, sackcloths, and mingled stuffs, caps, inkles, tapes, points, &c.’ In addition to these there were, says the writer, ‘all kinds of foreign merchandise, bought and returned by the mer- chants of the town, amounting to the sum of many thousand pounds weekly.’ More evidence of the manufacture of so-called ‘cottons’ or ‘fustians,’ for which Manchester was now famous, is given by Fuller in 1662. In another part of the same work he tells us that these ‘ fustians’ were manufactured from ‘Cotton wool or yarn coming from beyond the sea. Bolton, he says, was ‘the staple place for this commodity, being brought hither from all parts of the country.’*? A more precise interpretation of the division of work among the Lancashire towns is given by Dr. Aikin, who explains that fustians were manufactured round Bolton, Leigh, and the adjacent places, bought ‘in the grey’ at Bolton market by the Manchester merchants, finished at Manchester and despatched from there to other markets.“ Fuller tells us that haber- dashery or small wares were also a marked feature of the Manchester trade. In spite however of all this apparent prosperity, the close of the seven- teenth and early part of the eighteenth century proved a particularly trying time to English cloth and fustian manufacturers. They had now a great and dangerous rival in the East India Company, who were doing an enormous trade in the export of fine stuffs, particularly muslins and calicoes, from India to the British market. This, combined with the French cloth trade, which during the close of the seventeenth century had almost driven English cloth out of the European market,™* caused a very serious trade depression in late Stuart and early Georgian England.” The importation of cotton wool, which remained almost stationary during the first half of the eighteenth cen- tury, affords proof of the stagnant condition of the weaving trade. The enterprise of Manchester may, however, have saved the situation in Lanca- shire, for Dr. Stukely reported the trade there to be still ‘incredibly large.’ This may have been due to the support gained from the ‘ fustian ’ trade, for Defoe, touring about Britain in 1726-7, testifies to the increasing size of Manchester at that time.’ Another writer, whose work was published in 1749, mentions Manchester as being noted for its ‘cottons’ or *fustians,’ and for various other articles known as ‘ Manchester wares.’ *° Although the south Lancashire trade was largely in the mixed material known as fustian, the evidence tnat the tendency during this period was towards a species of hybrid cotton manufacture is too strong to be disregarded. The Manchester weavers and merchants wished to produce a cotton cloth, but they were hampered by the lack of the contributing materials. By the middle of the seventeenth century they were evidently struggling bravely in 3 Worthies of England, notice of Humphrey Chetham, a celebrated Manchester cloth merchant who flourished ¢. 1635. Also quoted, Baines, Hist. of Cotton Manuf. 101-2. 38 Worthies, i, §37 (ed. 1811). “4? Hist. of Manchester, 158. 34 Worthies, ibid. * Ure, Cotton Manuf. 99. ed Ibid. ; also Samuel Bros, Wool and Woollen Manuf. 85. *° Cf. Daniel Defoe’s observations in the Weekly Review (Jan. and Feb. 1708), that Indian fabrics were worn by everyone, even by the queen herself, and nothing remained for the English people but to ‘see the bread taken out oftheir mouths and the East India trade carry away whole employment of their people.’ “8 Ttinerarium Curiosum 1724, quoted, Baines, Hist. of Lancs. 1, 328. “° Tour through the whole Island of Britain (1727), ili, 219. *° Owen, Brit. Depicta (ed. 4), (1729), 24. 300 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY this direction, for a certain Lewis Roberts, writing in 1641, criticizes their Sige 3 ae attempt as distinctly noteworthy :—‘ The town of Manchester, in Lancashire, he says, must be also herein remembered, and worthily for their encouragement commended, who buy the yarn of the Irish in great quantity, and weaving it, return the same again into Treland to sell: Neither does their industry rest here, for they buy cotton wool in London that comes first from Cyprus and Smyrna and at home work the same, and perfect it into fustians, vermillions, dimities, and such other stuffs and then return it to London, whence the same is vented and sold, and not seldom sent into foreign parts . . . Yet ‘fustians’ were not genuine cottons, and the problem before the Lancashire manufacturer from the middle of the seventeenth century to the middle of the eighteenth was how to produce a pure cotton fabric ; and above all how to rival the surpassing fineness of the Indian calicoes. The economic history of the latter half of the eighteenth century, during which period this problem was actually solved, is that of one of the most crucial periods in the life story not merely of the county, but of Great Britain itself. After the year 1750 the main burden of the nation’s wealth as we know it to-day has hung upon the single hinge of Lancashire: with its fate has been linked the commercial fate of Britain.*! It is scarcely too much to affirm that upon the solution of the problem which the county had, how- ever unconsciously, to face, depended the ultimate expansion of that gigantic world-commerce which had been initiated and kept going by the fertile brains and busy hands employed in the teeming hives of northern industry. That Lancashire and not another county should have become the first of British trade and industry is no accident, but the result of a natural process of gradual evolution from a very early period to the present day. All the evidence points to the conclusion that Lancashire beyond any county in England has a natural aptitude for the cotton manufacture, largely derived from a spirit of industry practised for generations in hand spinning and weaving in farm-houses and cottages during hours of cessation from farm work and other labour, and that during a period of nearly two hundred years before the actual weaving of a pure cotton cloth was achieved it had been extending its utmost endeavour it that direction. The particular stumbling-block was not merely the deficiency of cotton or woollen weft, but its ill quality, and what - Mr. Ure calls the ‘mongrel’ character of the fabric resulting from the use of a linen warp. The spinners could not produce enough weft to keep the weavers going, and in spite of improvements in ‘carding’ and other processes the woven material did not as yet attain in any degree the soft fineness of the Indian fabrics that were the despair of the Lancashire manufacturers. Yet Lancashire determination succeeded in finding a solution to the problem. This was of course the invention of the Hargreaves spinning jenny in 1764, by a Blackburn weaver. This invention, wonderful as it was, was %! Cf Leader on the Cotton Trade in the Manch. Evening Ness (Thursday, 17 May, 1906). ‘Without cotton the county would be an inconsiderable place ; without cotton England would have no claim to pre- eminence in the commercial world.’ Again, Sir. W. Houldsworth in a deputation to the Premier (Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman) observed that the whole country depended on the prosperity of the cotton trade, and the Premier in reply emphasized the national character of the question of ‘the cotton industry, which affected the whole of the people of this country.’ The trade of Lancashire was a benefit to every part of the kingdom. (Ibid.) ‘Anything that caused misfortune to Lancashire would cause misfortune to other parts of the country . every man and every woman, every labourer, and every employer in all the industries of the country are affected directly by any misfortune happening to the great industry of cotton. This is therefore a national question’ ; Manch. Guardian, 18 Mar. 1906. 301 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE almost immediately surpassed by Arkwright’s idea of spinning a cotton thread from a ‘roving’ drawn out by rollers, the special merit of which machine lay in the production of a cotton thread (styled a water twist) of superior even- ness which could be used as warp in place of linen. As soon as the Lancashire manufacturers grasped the epoch-making character and profitableness of Arkwright’s invention they set about copying it as fast as possible. Machines of a similar kind were rapidly produced in defiance of the inventor’s patent until, in self-defence, Arkwright engaged in business at Manchester.** To promote the sale of the new cotton cloth the legislature had to be set in motion, and the Repeal Act of 14 George IIIJ,** enacted that ‘stuffs made entirely of cotton spun in this kingdom’ were ‘a lawful and a laudable manufacture’ and were ‘ permitted to be used on paying 3d. a square yard when printed, painted or stained with colours.” As a proof of the impetus given to the cotton manufacture by these wonderful discoveries we need only quote the figures of the imports of cotton wool, which between the years 1750 and 1764 had increased by a million bales—from 3,000,000 to 4,000,000, ‘ betokening,’ as says Mr. Ure, ‘the auspicious noonday of the cotton trade of England.’ ** Lancashire’s remaining ambition was happily attained after 1776, when the inventive genius of a third great Lancashire mind produced that combination of the spinning jenny and of Arkwright’s roller spinner, known as the spinning mule of Samuel Crompton, a Bolton man, by which, as perfected for public use in 1784, could be produced threads of a fineness sufficient for the weaving of muslins which rapidly rivalled those of India. By the nineties the muslin manufacture was established at Stockport,** and soon afterwards at Manchester*” and elsewhere. The introduction of ‘ mule’ spinning, Mr. Ure assures us,** made England able to outstrip and crush all foreign competitors in the manufacture of muslins. Thus was Lancashire launched upon its career as the world’s first great cotton manufactory, and in order to meet the demands of the European and other markets which the disorganization of French industry in the nineties had thrown open to her, nothing was lacking but sufficient speed and power to drive the machinery as fast as it could be made to go. One of the facilities possessed by Lancashire to a greater extent than many counties, was the abundance of water power, for producing sufficient falls to work the mills that now began to be erected in increasing numbers on the river banks.*® Arkwright had used horse and water power for his machines, but an enormous and undeveloped force was at this time brought into play, destined further to revolutionize the whole manufacturing system. By the year 1787 steam was introduced to drive the spinning machinery at Warrington,” and in 1789 in a calico mill at Manchester." In 1793 the mules in Drinkwater’s mill in Piccadilly, Manchester, were run by steam power.” But it remained for the experimenters of the nineteenth century to apply power to the working of the loom, which was obviously only a deferred invention. *? Ct, Baines, Hist. of Cotton Manu,. 163. *° 1783, Arkwright and Simpson had a mill at Shude Hill, Manch. ; ibid. 226. ** Statues of the Realm, 14 Geo. III, cap. 72. 5 Ure, Cotton Manu. 222. 6 Thid. 289. *7 Thid. 292. * Ibid. 298-9. *° Baines, Hist. of Cotton Manuf. 186. Ure, Cotton Manuf. 288-9. *! Tbid. Also Baines, Hist. of Cotton Manuf. 226. *? Ure, op. cit. 292. 302 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY Meanwhile the construction and wider distribution of spinning machines had greatly affected the woollen trade, so that the spinning of woollen yarn went on with incredible swiftness, and the geographical vicinity of Colne, Bury, and Rochdale to the West Riding of Yorkshire drew them into the woollen manufacture which flourished there.*® The almost magical increase in the speed of producing cotton yarn caused a great drain upon the raw material, which, till the middle of the eighteenth century, had been but sparingly imported from Smyrna and the West Indies and forwarded to Lancashire from London.’ Now and henceforth the only thing that could keep the spinners going was a large, continuous, and cheap import of cotton. The crying necessity for Manchester and the industrial districts of Blackburnshire and Salfordshire was a seaport where the cotton might be delivered directly from foreign parts on to Lanca- shire soil. Among the remarkable coincidences which went so far to make possible the profitable working and development of the cotton industry in Lancashire was the fact that it fortunately possessed exactly such a seaport as was needed, and that at the actual critical moment when it was needed it became available. This was no other than the port of Liverpool. During mediaeval and Tudor times Liverpool was overshadowed by the domination of Chester. It had, however, a growing importance as the port of arrival and departure for Ireland, and early in the sixteenth century wool was being imported from that country by way of Liverpool to be sold, spun, and woven at Manchester.** But Liverpool also had its own market, and ‘Irish silks’ and other goods were being sold there in 1538.° Early in Elizabeth’s reign (1564), a merchant was imprisoned there for exporting or otherwise dealing in ‘ Manchester ruggs’ and other goods ; *” and in the same year a citizen and grocer of London was suing for the prices of certain wares, spices, and ‘calico cloth,’ sold to a merchant at Liverpool.** Some kind of foreign trade evidently came there, for in 1573 the queen was suing the searcher of ports for the subsidies of tonnage and poundage on wines, wools, leather, and other merchandise from foreign parts that came either to Liverpool or to any other ports of Lancashire.” Leland mentions the trade of Irish merchants, and the imports of Irish yarn which Manchester merchants bought at Liverpool ; *° and Camden refers to this port as affording ‘ the most convenient and most frequented passage to Ireland.’ Still, the traditional dominance of Chester repressed its strivings after independence, and in Elizabeth’s reign the burgesses styled the place ‘ her majesty’s poor decayed town of Liverpool.’ ” By the middle of the seventeenth century Liverpool had attained a position of some distinction,’ for in the Lancashire petition of 1646 it is 368 Samuel Bros, Wool and Woollen Manuf. At the same time it must be observed that the evidences of the antiquity of the woollen industry in north-east and east Lancashire are quite as plentiful as they are for the West Riding of Yorkshire. 364 Ure, Cotton Manuf. i (ed. 1861), 186. 868 Duchy of Lanc. Plead. v, m. 2 (19 Hen. VIII), and ibid. viii, T. 2. 356 Thid. xi, W. 9 (30 Hen. VIII). 8&7 Tbid. lix, G. 1. 368 Thid. lix, M. 14. 36 Thid. cv, H. 3. 370 Trin, (Hearne, ed. 3), vii, fol. 56, p. 47. *! Quoted by Baines, Hist. of Lancs. (ed. Harland), ii, 300. 37 A comparison between Chester and Liverpool in 1618, instituted by the Privy Council, showed that Chester with its creeks had 15 vessels of 383 tons aggregate, manned by 63 men, while Liverpool had 24 of 462 tons, manned by 76 men, which sufficiently disposed of Chester’s claim to precedence. 393 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE referred to as ‘the prime haven in all that countie.’ When in 1672 the earl of Derby was required by the king to impress seamen from Lancashire, he submitted the following account of Lancashire shipping, which sufficiently shows the already established pre-eminence of Liverpool both as to ships and men-—— Ships Tons Seamen Liverpool and Derby Hundre i 65 2,600 500 Lonsdale Hundred ‘ z 7 17 259 oo Amounderness . ; E . 37 698 — Total ‘ : . wo chTrg 35557 500 The earl added that he was ‘informed that in Wyre Water . . . there were about 60 good ships and boats and above 300 seamen.’ *”* Liverpool was in fact growing larger and more important chiefly by reason of its Irish trade, whereby Manchester was supplied with yarn for the fustian manufacture. In the eighteenth century another source of temporary profit arose in the African slave trade, and the first dock was laid in the very year in which the first vessel sailed for Africa, in 1709. The opening of the Mersey and Irwell Canal in the twenties, as well as that of the duke of Bridgewater in the sixties, connected Liverpool with the inland markets, and brought increased traffic. In 1738 a second dock was begun, and by the fifties the number of vessels sailing to Africa was 53. Between the years 1700 and 1760 the sailings had increased from 60 vessels of 4,000 tons aggregate burden, to 226 vessels of 23,665 tons aggregate burden. A certain amount of Irish and Spanish wool was shipped to Liverpool for Lancashire consumption, but neither the import of wool nor of linen yarn from Ireland could have developed the prosperity of Liverpool in anything like the degree in which we know it did develop in the close of the eighteenth and the opening of the nineteenth century. Wool and yarn were after all indigenous products, though it was easier and cheaper to obtain them from Ireland. Cotton, on the contrary, was not indigenous to this country, and with the advent of the cotton industry during the last three decades of the eighteenth century the economic position of Liverpool may be said to have been altogether revolutionized. It had suffered during at least four centuries from isolation, its face, so to speak, being turned away from the great ports of Europe. This very drawback was now its greatest source of advantage. The Lancashire cotton industry was, as it is still, entirely dependent on large and cheap imports of the raw material from abroad. Hitherto it had come to the north from Smyrna, Turkey, and the Spanish colonies, by way of London.** The quantity was, of course, comparatively small, and the cost of transport very considerable. When the American planters determined to try to meet the profitable and daily Lancashire demand for cotton, they naturally decided on Liverpool as the port whither they should carry it for purposes of immediate sale. It was of the greatest convenience to the Georgia shippers that they could send vessels laden with their fine long-stapled cotton ** right across the Atlantic to the good and safe harbourage of Liver- pool. The commercial credit of the town appears to have been very strong,*” ** Cal. §.P. Dom. 1672, p. 282. 3 Ure, Cotton Manuf. i, 185. ™ Thid. ** Rep. of Select Committee on Manuf. etc. (1833), 246, par. 3986. 304 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY except in the matter of cotton. The brokers would not give long credits to the cotton speculators,** or guarantee cotton debts.*” The cotton trade brought a train of kindred or affiliated industries in its wake, and Liverpool at the opening of the nineteenth century became noted for the manufacture of steam engines, chemicals for distilleries, for the manufacture of soap and of cables, and for the shipbuilding trade. It was not, however, profitable to build ships there, great as was the desire of the shipbuilders to do so, owing to the heavy timber duties, which the shippers and builders desired to see removed.’® The best ships were thought to be those built at Whitehaven or Liverpool, owing to their frames being of English oak in preference to the soft foreign woods largely used at New- castle.” Owing to the dearness of timber in England most of the cotton was brought over in American ships, which were faster and cheaper than ours. At the opening of the nineteenth century the increase of dock accommo- dation at Liverpool was enormous. In 1818 the dues were {£60,000 per annum, and in 1833 over £180,000. And though the dues were higher the dispatch of vessels was equal to that of London.’ The trade between Liverpool and the Brazils was done in English vessels apparently,” and another very important service was rendered by a fleet of twelve packets plying daily between Liverpool and Dublin. This company was established as early as 1824, and in four years possessed a dozen vessels whose gross tonnage was 2,400 tons. Owing to the shortness of the voyage by steamboat and the certainty of its punctual arrival, this fleet had entirely displaced the use of sailing vessels for the carrying of live cattle to the Liverpool market, and was quickly absorbing the anciently-established corn and dried-provision trade also.” The importance of this trade between Ireland and Lancashire can be estimated more nearly by its volume. In the years 1832-3 the amount of agricultural produce annually imported into Liverpool both by sail and steamboat was of the value of 43 millions sterling. The rapid rise of Liverpool seems to have attracted general comment at this time. Even the Chairman of the Committee on Manufactures and Commerce questioned a witness as to whether ‘ the trade of the country had not taken a determination to the port of Liverpool more than formerly,’ and as to whether it had not, in particular, drawn the trade from Bristol.* Judging from the tables of wool imports it might appear that it had. In 1830 Liverpool imported 2,042 bales from Spain and 649 from Australia against Bristol’s 2,235 from Spain and 39 from Australia. Next year Liver- pool was only 25 bales below Bristol in the Spanish import, while exceeding the Bristol import from Australia by 1,392 bales. In 1832 Liverpool had passed Bristol in respect of imports of both Spanish and Australian wool, importing 2,161 bales of Spanish to the former’s 1,681 bales, and 1,990 bales of Australian wool, of which Bristol imported none. Among the causes to which the prosperity of Liverpool was assigned by various witnesses before the committee of 1833 were its proximity to the 58 Rep. of Select Committee on Manuf. etc. (1833), 247, par. 4.000. 37 Thid. 578 Tbid. Evidence of J. Aiken, shipowner, 419 et seq. 57° Tbid. 423, par. 7088. 38 Ibid. 247. A West Indian vessel would be discharged and refitted in six days. 381 Rep. of Select Committee, 248, par. 4037. 58? See above as to mediaeval imports from Ireland of victuals and corn for Furness Abbey, &c. 553 Rep. of Select Committee, §35, par. 8839-40. 5 Thid. 250, par. 4082-3. 2 305 39 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE salt and coal beds and to the potteries, and also its exceptional facilities for communication by canals and other ways with the industrial district around it. Not only did Liverpool feed Manchester with the raw material for manufacture, but by means of its steam service the dried provisions and food stuffs to supply the now teeming populations of the county were brought from Ireland. Hitherto cattle had been supplied chiefly from the Craven district ; now the import of live cattle from Ireland took the place of this supply. The services of Liverpool to Lancashire in these respects were enormous, nor can the vital importance of Liverpool in the development of the Manchester cotton trade be over-emphasized. Even in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, as has been pointed out, the Manchester fustian trade was largely dependent on the import of Irish yarn brought to Liverpool, and for the expansion of the cotton trade at the opening of the nineteenth century the co-operation of a great and friendly neighbouring port was even more essential. The honours of Lancashire’s greatness must always lie equally divided between these cities ; it is hardly saying too much to affirm that while Liverpool has been made prosperous by carrying the world commerce of Manchester, Manchester in its turn could have had no such commerce if Liverpool had not been at hand to carry it. But the plentiful importation of raw material and the rapid production of cotton fabrics would have been comparatively useless unless accompanied by an equal power of distribution. A pressing question at the close of the eighteenth century, when bales of cotton were requisitioned from east and west, and when the finished cotton goods of Lancashire were packed for distant markets, was that of transport. The greatest hindrance to mediaeval exchange of commodities was the difficulty of carriage ; of getting anything to anywhere. Lancashire was in a remote corner of England, and though the ‘ packhorse on the down’ had long been a useful and indispensable carrier of goods, its usefulness, like that of the domestic spinning-wheel, was limited by strength and by numbers. Obviously all the packhorses in England would soon not suffice to carry the enormously increasing output of the Lancashire mills; and even had they sufficed, the cost of transport would have become almost prohibitive. Here, as before, ingenious minds were bent upon the problem, and as before it was solved just when cheap or quick transport was most needed. The first solution was the canal system of Lancashire, copied subsequently by the rest of England. This lacework of canals was made possible by the close neighbourhood of the various industrial centres to one another, and their comparative proximity to Liverpool and the sea. The Bridgewater Canal,** begun in 1758, arrived at completion just at the time when the marvellous inventions of Hargreaves and Arkwright were multiplying the production of cotton goods. The ramifications of the canal supplied cheap and easy water transport for heavy goods (and even for passengers) between Manchester, Salford, Worsley, and Leigh, and most important of all between Manchester and its then great and indispensable seaport, Liverpool. The greatness of the scheme was only matched by its complete success, and thus, as Mr. Ure pertinently remarks, was Lancashire ‘ providentially supplied at a most critical period with a great arterial trunk ** For a detailed description of the canal see Baines, Hist. of Lancs. (ed. Harland, 1868), i, 334. 306 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY and numerous branches to supply its industry with vital warmth and circula- tion, as also to open up channels of commercial intercourse with the Eastern and Western seas.’ *° Other canal systems followed ; that of Manchester to Bolton and on to Bury was commenced in 1791, and next year a cutting was made connecting Manchester with Ashton under Lyne and with Oldham. ‘Two years later Rochdale was joined by the Oldham route through Fox Denton, Chadderton, Middleton, and Hopwood to Manchester.” Not merely was a cheap and powerful method of transporting raw cotton and the finished goods essential to the success of the trade, but the use of machinery and the application of steam power required large quantities of two great mineral products of exceeding bulk and weight; these were, of course, coal and iron. ‘The coal, as has been already pointed out, was close at hand. The canal just mentioned, which joined the Bridgewater cutting at Manchester, and went by way of Oldham through Chadderton and Middle- ton to the east of Rochdale into Yorkshire, passed through the coal country ;*” so did the Worsley Canal towards Leigh, and other branches of it. This facilitated the supply of an indispensable and heavy fuel necessary for the generation of steam. Iron, on the other hand, not indigenous to the county, had to be brought, by other canal systems which were started in emulation of the Bridgewater scheme, from the Staffordshire beds where it abounded.” With the application of power to spinning machinery it had seemed likely there would follow a glut of yarn, and an insufficiency of looms and weavers to use it up. This apprehension was, however, almost immediately dissipated by the invention of the’ power-loom, which, though designed as early as 1803, was only brought to perfection ten years later.*° This inven- tion multiplied the speed and quality of the weaving process to such a degree that, in spite of the usual demonstrations against it, it became almost univer- sally adopted by the leading manufacturers. In 1833 there were, we are told, 85,500 power-looms at work in England.* Henceforth many spinning and weaving sheds were built side by side, especially in the districts of Bury, Bolton, and Ashton under Lyne,*” because the invention of Horrocks in 1803, being built entirely of iron, occupied so little space that hundreds of machines could be worked in one mill-room. The manufacture of these looms, which could scarcely be turned out fast enough for the demand, and a variety of depen- dent industries that were bound up with the machine-making business, gave a tremendous impetus to the iron trade and iron-working industry ; thus iron foundries became a marked feature of the coalfields in the midst of which they were situated, because of the difficulty of transporting such heavy materials from one place to another. At the very time when the difficulty of rapid transport for heavy goods had become crucial it was solved by the application of steam power for purposes of traction. In 1830 the first railway in England was opened in Lancashire, and as might have have been expected from the imperative necessity of supplying the raw material of the cotton trade, was constructed from Manchester to Liverpool. Thus was Manchester connected both by 38 Ure, Cotton Manuf. 215-16. 387 Baines, Hist. of Lancs. (ed. Harland, 1868), i, 338, 339, 350. 88 Ibid. 339. 58 Ure, op. cit. 216. ‘The waterways of England now radiate from six central points—Manchester, Liverpool, Birmingham, Hull, London, and Bristol.’ 590 Baines, Hist. of Cotton Manuf. 234. 59 Thid. 235. 58 Thid. 236. 397 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE land and water with her great seaport, and the railway was continually fed with the shipments of cotton which America sent over. The ‘Chat-Moss line’ was followed by other developments. In 1840 the Manchester to Leeds railway was opened—the beginning of the great Lancashire and Yorkshire system—and this was followed in 1842 by exten- sions to Bolton, Stockport, and Birmingham, and shortly afterwards to other places. Within twenty years the county was intersected with railways in all directions which afforded facilities for the spread of industry even to the remoter country places, and tended to restore to the villages that rustic employment which the town factory system had compelled them to abandon. While all this revolution in industrial processes was going on at the close of the eighteenth and the opening of the nineteenth century there was, it may be well imagined, no small stir and ferment among the working population at large, many of whom saw themselves deprived of their accustomed means of livelihood by the new inventions. The destruction of the new spinning machinery was their first reply, but finding the task fruitless and endless this class of malcontents had to be satisfied with an attitude of sullen resentment and disapproval. A more intelligent section of them went with the times, realizing that increased spinning facilities would bring with it increased demand for cloth and workmen. The French war proved popular in so far as the stagnation and confusion of foreign markets enabled English exporters to profit at the foreigner’s expense. Another element of pacification was that the wages of the spinners were attractively high, ranging between 8s. and 1gs. in Man- chester,** and possibly rather less in the districts round. There was a great and increasing demand for spinners, and they were in full employment everywhere. So, indeed, were the handloom weavers in the first decade of the nineteenth century, and even in the year 1814 a weaver was earning 7s. 6d. for one piece of ‘Second Seventy-four Calico.’ ** A clever weaver could turn out at least one piece per week, sometimes one and a half pieces, or with the help of his wife working a second loom he could make 145. a week. A family of three, two parents and a boy or girl, could earn as much as 19s. a week,’ and money went, of course, somewhat further a hundred years ago than it does to-day. Most of the weaving of cloth for calico printing was done in the parts of Blackburn and Preston at this time (c. 1800-20). The new inventions, coinciding as they did with the stagnation of foreign trade, gave a tremendous impetus to Lancashire’s prosperity, but the close of the war and the restoration of foreign markets caused subsequent depression. During the eighteenth and at the opening of the nineteenth century Manchester and the adjacent parts were overrun with poor Irish weavers who helped to lower the rate of wages in the fustian weaving trade. About this time the poor rates all over the count were so high that some alleviation was imperative. The ranks of the poor *$ Baines, Hist. of Lancs. i (ed. Harland), 346, 350, 351. CE. Rep. of Evidence before the Select Com. on Manufacture, Commerce, and Shipping, 223. ° Parl. Rep. 1793 Rep. of Select Com. on Poor Laws, 1817, p. 47 (1816). 6 Table of average earnings of weavers at Barrowford, near Colne, furnished b Grimsh the Select Committee on Manufacture, &c. 1833, Rep. 605. : a *” Table of average earnings of weavers in the parts of Blackburn and Prest Handloom Weaving, 130. . Sper au enero 88 Tbid. 142-50, 308 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY were largely swelled by the surplusage of weavers, many of whom were being gradually but hopelessly deprived of their occupation as cloth or fustian weavers by the introduction of the power-loom.®’ So acute was the distress both of the poor and of those who had to support them that a Parliamentary committee was appointed to inquire into the working of the poor laws in parts of Lancashire. The Reports of the Lords Committee,” which sat in July, 1817, and examined many witnesses from Manchester and Bolton, revealed a very distressing and economically disastrous condition of things. The number of applicants for relief in Manchester had increased from 354 persons in March, 1816, of whom 146 were Irish, to the alarming number of 1,413 in the following year, 806 of these being Irish. The Manchester Board, by way of following out the spirit of the Elizabethan statute enjoining the local authorities to ‘set the poor on work,’ had provided a factory where work was given to those who applied. In 1816 out of seventeen weavers working there the rates of pay per week were as follows :— Four at 45.; two at 5s.; one at 7s.; one at 8s.; four at gs.; and one at ros. In 1817 there were nine at 4s.; twenty-five at 5s.; fourteen at 65. 6d. ; four at 7s.; five at 85.; three at gs.; and one at 1os. Other statements of wages were, in 1816 :—Batters, pickers, and reelers, from 1s. 6d. to 55. a week ; carders, 2s. to 65.; labourers, 35. to 7s.; tailors, 3s. 6d. to §s.; shoe- makers, 35. to 55.; joiners, 6s. to 8s.; spinners, 8s. to 19s. These were maintained in the local workhouse at a daily cost of 3s. 103d. The town of Manchester was described by the witnesses “” as contain- ing in the year 1811 a population of 78 to 79,000 and Salford contained from 1g to 20,000. The whole hundred of Salford is spoken of as embrac- ing an extensive population of about 350,000 in this year, and of these 170,000 belonged to the parish of Manchester, which comprised no less than thirty townships. A great number of the distressed poor were con- tributed by the Irish who settled there, and the majority of the suffering poor were weavers out of work. The greatest period of distress was the month of December, in the last week of which 549 Irish and 484 English had applied for relief. The main cause of distress appeared to be the rapid fall in the wages of the weavers, who a few years before could earn 155. a week, but now only 6s. or 7s., and often not more than 4s. The spinners on the other hand were not in a state of depression. ‘They were employed in factories, and earned as much as 1gs.a week. One reason assigned for the distress was the early marriages of the working class: young married couples frequently applied for relief. Questioned as to the food of the working class, it was stated to be chiefly potatoes and oatmeal with some bacon. Wheat flour was only used as a luxury when their means enabled them to obtain it. The poor law officers did their best to help the sufferers, in many cases paying their year’s rent to prevent the looms being seized by the bailiffs. Soup kitchens were started also by private charity, and there were many 599 Rep. of Select Com. on Manuf. &c. 659, par. 1110-12. ‘I cannot name the year accurately, but I should think they have been manufacturing fustians 10 years by power’ (1833). 4 Parl. Rep. 179 ; Rep. from Select Com. on Poor Laws, 4 July, 1817. “l The Report gives a list of the numbers maintained and the sex and employment of each ; ibid. 47. 3 Ibid. Parl. Rep. 399 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE benefit clubs and friendly societies. The evidence pointed to the fact that in 1816-17 whole families in Manchester were being supported out of the rates, that the chief distress was caused by lack of work among the weavers, and that more than half the applicants for relief were Irish. The witnesses further affirmed that the methods of pauper relief were not appreciated either as regards the offer of work in the workhouse factory or in street scavenging. At least three refused for one that accepted it. At Bolton *® the witnesses declared the population in 1811 to be 18,000 persons and the poor rate there had gone up to such an extent that in 1817 it had increased to more than double that of the previous year. The in- habitants were chiefly engaged in cotton weaving, wage averages being 45. 6d. for weavers, 15s. for spinners, and for labourers gs. a week. The workhouse was full, the poor wishing to enter. Early marriages were frequent and illegitimate children upon the increase. Though there were many friendly societies there were no savings-banks there. To add to the miseries of the population a period of commercial dis- tress and of extensive bankruptcy accompanied the wild speculation in the cotton business. From the lucrative possibilities of the trade numbers of small men had gone into the business, much capital was sunk in mill build- ings and machinery, many mills were started without sufficient capital to finish them or to stock them when finished, some were built on the fragile credit of paper money. The panic of 1825 involved hundreds in ruin, and the mills became the property of the contractors or of the mortgagees.“™ The spinning and weaving trade did not recover the effects of this disas- trous crisis until the thirties, by which time new men, who had taken over the abandoned mills at panic prices and who had set more cautiously to work, were beginning to gain ground once more.** Trade was improving, but once more the speculative element regained its ascendancy, and in the words of a manufacturer giving evidence before the commission, Lancashire speculation promised ‘to be as wild as ever.’** The new features in the trade were (a) the rise in the prices of the raw materials, which by the year 1833 had risen 15 to 20 per cent.*” and (4) the rise of foreign competition. Nevertheless, in spite of these drawbacks, evidence was given on all hands before the Parliamentary committees investigating the matter, that the state of trade was excellent, and that there was a profit to be obtained from the manufacture of cotton even at the increased price of raw material.” The calico printing trade was admittedly prosperous and satisfactory,“ and between 1814 and 1830 it was acknowledged that the yarn export trade had never flagged.“ The silk trade had been started in Manchester on the ruins of the hand- loom cotton and fustian trade, and was not in the thirties fully, though partly, absorbed by the power-loom. About 10,000 to 12,000 silk weavers, “° Parl. Rep. on Handlom Weaving, No. 179, pp. 196-7. Bolton. aes Parl. Rep. on Handloom Weaving (1834-5), 167, par. 2349 et seq. A witness gave evidence that just about the time of the panic there were ‘either just built or in course of building or contracted for 100 mills within thirty miles of Manchester.” Elsewhere a witness before the Select Committee on Manufactures &c (1833) observed that out of thirty-two cotton manufacturers he knew personally in the trade from 1812-26, twenty-eight had failed ; Rep. of Select Com. on Manuf. &c. 559, par. 9278. , “$ Cf ibid. 558, par. 9253, 9254. “° Parl. Rep. on Handloom Weaving, 167. “T Rep. of Select Com. on Manuf. &c. 96. “* Ibid. g1, 96. ? Ibid. 221, Clitheroe. “° Ibid. 251, par. 4127. 310 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY formerly handloom cotton weavers, were employed in this industry at Man- chester alone, and at Westleigh there were a great number similarly employed.’ This industry was admitted to be flourishing in the thirties.“ The profits in all these branches of industry were made possible by the extreme cheapness of human labour, which the now general employment of machinery had greatly reduced in value. If the wages of an ordinary power- loom weaver were low, what must be the remuneration of the handloom weavers, whom no one now wished to employ? Their condition was in fact becoming desperate. The evidence of Mr. James Grimshaw, a manu- facturer living at Barrowford near Colne, who employed about four hundred handloom weavers, testified to the almost starving condition of the population there, and handed in statements“ which show at a glance the straits of poverty and wretchedness to which these handloom weavers were now reduced. The Parliamentary Commission of 1834 went very closely into the subject of the handloom weavers, and summoned many witnesses. One of these, a woollen manufacturer ‘ able to speak’ to the condition of the hand- loom weavers in the neighbourhood of Manchester and the surrounding districts as well as further north, in the districts of Rossendale, Padiham, and Burnley, found it ‘very hard.’ Even if a man and his wife and two children were regularly employed in full work, they could not at the present prices of labour make anything like a decent living. ‘Their furniture was exceedingly poor, in many houses there was hardly a chair. Their clothing was equally bad. As for their beds, some had not a blanket, and the witness added that they generally ‘ e upon straw. This he averred he had seen with his own eyes. At Bolton another manufacturer gave testimony that there was full work and yet wages were lower than he had ever known them at any former period. Their food was chiefly oatmeal and potatoes, with butchers’ meat not more than once a week. The workers were literally clothed in rags, and had no bedding or furniture beyond a chair and three-legged stool or a chest to put their clothes in and to sit upon. Similar evidence was given by the member for Oldham, who also mentioned the fact that many workers slept upon straw. Their labour he said, was excessive, frequently sixteen hours a day. This drove many to drink, or to embezzle the materials entrusted to them.‘ This trade in ‘receiving’ was further encouraged by a certain class of dis- honourable manufacturers who bought from the wretched operatives at a low price the weft thus stolen. The weavers could not change or better their condition, for they were so abjectly poor that they must remain with the master who gave them work, neither could they afford to change their weaving gear or implements to suit the requirements of a new cloth.’ Further evidence showed how the hand- loom weaver was handicapped by having to find not merely his loom and “1 Rep. of Select Com. on Manuf. &c. 557, par. 9226. 42 Evidence of John Scott, broad silk weaver of Manchester, before the Committee of Handloom Weav- ing (1833), Rep. 171, par. 2401-2451 and 176, par. 2502. ‘13 See in Appendix to this article Tables I and II, taken from Minutes of Evidence before Select Committee on Manuf. Com. and Shipping (1833), 605-6. 44 This charge of embezzlement was repudiated by the evidence of a silk weaver, who pointed out that it was the warehousemen who did the pilfering, not the weavers. Parl. Rep. on Handlom Weaving, 225. “16 Thid. pt. i, sect. 8. 311 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE shuttle, but the winding and dressing of the yarn. How could he compete against the power-loom weaver, who, though he only received a third the price that the handloom weaver got, yet, by managing two or three looms could turn out as many as five pieces to the handloom weaver’s one? Thus the fine handloom weaver would charge 7s. 6d. for his piece, and the power- loom weaver would only get 2s. 6d. for his, but as he could produce five pieces at this price his week’s earnings were 125. 6d. as against 75. 6d. of the hand- loom weaver’s.** The following table gives the earnings of five weavers, average workmen, at Blackburn, and other places, for twenty successive weeks, reduced to an average of one weaver per week in the years 1831-4:—*” Yrar Place Per Week: One Weaver Wage s. da 1833. «-| Blackburn 3 «= ca 6 ae) POG4 ems ¢ ¥5 ee ee a 1834. . . | Preston . rams 1831.0. 6 i 6 st LS 3808 om os ae 7 of 1833.0. . ” 7 4 1834 ye | st fe o30 1831 . . .» Bamber Bridge. 8 0 1832 2 « in ‘ oF. 1833... . ” 7 9 PSZ4 5 2 3 5 8 6 ae ‘ a Fe 1892 2 2 « 9 e 4 9 82 18364 aed * a ae 8 13 1834... ~~. | “ 7 of 1830... | Chorley . 7 10 1831 . 3 a . 82 1832 . : e 9 0 1833 . | 35 8 of 1834 . : | * | 11 24 A Preston firm gave evidence that there were fifty-one handlooms in Preston and the neighbourhood whose total weekly earnings were £23 155. 6d., averaging gs. 33d. per loom. ‘These weavers, who were all most industrious people, and weaving a finer quality of cloth than those of the Colne district, could earn amongst them 7s. per loom, or a man and his wife working two looms, 145. between them. One couple, mentioned as aged thirty-four and thirty-five years respectively, were earning 16s. 10d. the pair; and another family of a father, mother, and a lad could earn 19s. 3d. the family. But all these weavers would be shortly out of employment, for the manufacturer who gave the evidence admitted he was going to employ power. The evidence of the witnesses was most emphatically given to the effect that almost every week the power-loom was making encroachments on the handloom ; that all fustians were now made by power, as well as all printing ae Parl. Rep. on Handloom Weaving, 151. “’ Copied from the Parl. Rep. on Handloom Weaving, 130, par. 1751. 312 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY cloth, which was formerly made in Blackburn and Preston by handloom, whereas ‘ there is no such thing made there now.’ Since 1813 the power- loom had been gradually coming in, but only since 1820 had it become the victorious rival of the handloom. Formerly fustian-weaving employed from 6,000 to 8,000 handloom weavers, yet now the witness thought there would not be more than 200 handloom fustian-weavers in the whole of Lancashire. In Heywood, where there were formerly above 3,000 handloom fustian- weavers, a manufacturer had observed to the witness that he would ‘be sorry to be compelled to find six’ before he went to bed. In the year 1834 between 4,000 and 5,000 handloom weavers were employed by the witness’s firm at Preston, but the firm had now decided to go in for power as they could not otherwise compete with other cloth makers. Nearly all the ‘journeymen’ weavers as a class had taken to power-loom weaving. At Bolton twenty-five per cent. of the handlooms were standing idle, and during the last ten years not a single handloom was known to have been made. The neighbourhood of Ashton and Stockport was all busy with power, and at most two-third parts only of the handlooms formerly employed were now in use. In fact the handloom weavers only existed upon sufferance. It was useless to try and bolster up their wages artificially by legislation. The weaving industry was in a state of transition“*® from one species of employ- ment to another, and the only chance for the handloom weaver was to seek other employment. The remedy was clear and obvious. Factory hands were, strange to relate, scarce, and not only in Manchester, but in Bolton and Preston. There was employment waiting for the distressed population, but for various reasons the poor people would not enter the mills. One reason assigned was the long hours of labour ; *” another, the noise of the factory, and the extreme heat in which the workers had to labour from six in the morning till eight at night.“° One of the strongest reasons finally was the danger offered by the new machinery, of which many workers were afraid. The evidence of a silk-weaver, whose son had been fatally injured by a spinning mule, was to the effect that if he had seventy-seven children he would not send one to a cotton factory. Evidence points to the fact that many of these Lancashire weavers could have got other employment had they been so minded. The factories were short-handed and handloom weavers were taken in preference to others because they had been ‘accustomed to care and minute attention’ to weaving processes.*" Many weavers did apply and obtain employment at the Bury mills ** and elsewhere. Buta section held aloof, partly from dislike and fear of the factories, partly from a determination to protest by inaction against a condition of misery not of their own creation. ‘The dislocation of their particular arm of industry had produced a festering sore, and many had not the force of character or scientific cast of mind that could reconcile itself to amputation as the only possible cure. Apart from the natural disinclination to change their mode of life and methods of industry, these weavers were not physically fitted for rough labour. It appears that when McAdam, the great "8 Parl, Rep. 137-8. “8 Thid. 139. “ Thid. 185, par. 2648. "1 Rep, of Select Com. on Manuf. &c. 677, par. 11364. Thid. 684. a 313 40 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE friendly societies, formed to assist the workman in time of sickness, to help to bury him and to succour his widow after his death, or to give financial aid in case of accident or temporary disablement. As the stress of competition grew fiercer a new policy was initiated: the unions became militant and progressive. The idea of carrying the principles of protection into the labour market appealed very forcibly to workmen who had suffered from the extreme depression of wages. ‘Trade unionism, as we know it to-day, sprang from the idea of meeting the arbitrary commands of capital by the equally insistent demands of labour: of fighting one monopoly by another.*’ By the year 1833 the idea had rapidly gained ground, and unions were organized on an extensive basis. They had agitators and agents everywhere who led the attack against those who did not come in, threatening them with heavy fines and exclusion from the ultimate benefits of the combination. The men became so intimidated by these threats that they often ioined reluctantly from fear rather than from choice. The evidence of a Liverpool builder was to the effect that all building operations when in full swing had been suspended there by the withdrawal of the workmen at the order of the union. The men admitted they had no grievance, but they had received orders which they dared not disregard.** It may be asked how it came about that with these advantages of combination available the Lancashire weavers were in such pitiable case. The answer lies in the astounding fact, already mentioned, that the trade unions of the thirties did not recognize the weavers.‘ There was, however, about this time another great ameliorating move- ment to which these poor operatives did not appeal in vain, and which aimed at achieving the moral and material rescue of the poverty-stricken workers of Lancashire by peaceful and constructive rather than by warlike and de- structive methods. This was the great co-operative movement initiated by the famous Robert Owen, who as a mill manager and cotton spinner in Manchester from 1791 to 1799 had come into close contact with the working class there, and had been struck with their condition of ‘ ignorance, vicious- ness and discomfort.’ “His aim was to show the people how to help them- selves by uniting intelligence with industry. ‘He taught Pity to leave off weeping and to ally itself to Improvement.’*! The economic importance of Owen’s idea lay in its practical application to the needs of the people at the particular moment. In the opening decades of the nineteenth century the population were nearly starving, and owing to their extreme poverty they were in the hands of the shop-keepers, who charged them higher prices because of the risk of not receiving payment.*” Owen’s idea was that if the working class ‘ had the sense to unite’ in the scheme, they ‘might make something of shop-keeping.’“* They might become their own supply “" Cf Rep. of Select Committee on Manuf. &c. 293, par. 4882. ‘I have no doubt that the ultimate intention . . . is to get up the price of labour and to make a monopoly of it.’ ‘8 Tbid. 291, par. 4853. “° Parl. Rep. on Handloom Weaving, Analysis of Evidence, 7, pt. i, sect. ii. “° G. J. Holyoake, Hist. of Co-operation in Engl. i, 55. “Ibid. 86. “? Cf. evidence of Jas. Grimshaw before the Select Committee on Manufacture, &c. Rep. 609, par. 10202—4. “3 Holyoake, op. cit. i, 59. 316 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY stores, and take the profits which the retail store-keeper was making at their expense : It was not going too far to infer that one good, well-stocked shop would, properly served» supply the wants of a thousand families and supersede twenty smaller shops and save to the customers all the cost of the twenty shopmen and twenty shop rents and rates in addition to the economy in price and advantage in quality in buying wholesale in a degree small shops could not compass.**4 The idea gradually gained ground and was eagerly canvassed among the people of the industrial districts, where the factories afforded ample occasion for gatherings of workmen. In 1829 Lancashire newspapers were discussing it and lectures were delivered on the subject at Lancaster, Liverpool, Bolton, and Blackburn. The first co-operative congress was held at Manchester in 1830, the fourth in Liverpool in 1832. In Lancashire the socialist side of the movement occupied itself with the education of the masses. ‘ Halls of Science’ were instituted at Man- chester, Liverpool, Rochdale, and other places.“* The idea was being borne in upon the better-class artisans that the great disadvantage they were under with regard to their so-called social superiors was the want of education. The fruit of this idea was the founding of the Mechanics’ Institute up and down the country in the large towns. That in Manchester was founded in 1825, and one in Liverpool ten years later. In both these great cities learned societies already existed under the more or less exclusive titles of Literary and Philosophical Societies,“* but these were in no respect popular or of any benefit to the poor ie man who wished to ‘improve’ him- self in his spare evening hours. By the forties, however, many of the wild socialistic enterprises, having proved costly failures, were abandoned, and enthusiasm for the idea of co-operation in particular was conspicuously flagging, until ‘John Stuart Mill inspired it with hope by saying there was no reason in political economy why any self-helping movement of the people should ever die.’ The movement was in fact not dead: the ‘vital spark’ was there, and was first fanned into a flame by the efforts of the indefatigable workers of Rochdale, who according to Mr. Holyoake, the historian of the co-operative movement, discovered the successful method of keeping it alive by ‘ feeding it on profits.’ “7 The history of the Rochdale store as given by Mr. Holy- oake is extremely pathetic. The necessary capital was raised by weekly sub- scriptions of 2d. ‘The merit of the scheme,’ says its gifted historian, lay in the fact ‘that it tended to create Capital among men who had none, and allured purchasers to the store by the prospect of a quarterly dividend of profits upon their outlay.’ The beginning of the year 1844 was very slow and laboriously uphill work. ‘Ten shillings’ were the first year’s profits, the result of twelve months’ active and daily attention to business. It took several “4 Holyoake, op. cit. i, 60. “8 Ibid. 297. That at Liverpool, Mr. Holyoake tells us, cost £5,000, and that at Manchester has been since purchased for the City Free Library. In Rochdale the building was styled ‘The Science Hall.’ Ibid ii, 45. “6 Baines, Hist of Lancs. (ed. Harland), i, 393 (Manchester) ; and ii, 369 (Liverpool). “7 Hist. of Co-operation, ii, 9. 317 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE vears to attain the substantial profits which were finally made, but the effect of success was astonishing : The store was talked of in the mills. It was canvassed in the weaving shed. The farm labourer heard of it in the fields. The coal miner carried the news down the pit. The blacksmith circulated the news at his forge. Chartists . . . took the store into considera- tion in their Societies . . . and thus it spread far and wide that the shrewd men of Roch- dale were doing a notable thing in the way of co-operation.“ The following table shows at a glance the enormous strides made by the society between the years 1844 and 1876 at Rochdale.” YEAR No. of Members Funds Business Profits £ £ £ 1844 28 28 —_ —_ 1845 74 181 710 22 1850 600 2,289 13,179 880 1876 8,892 254,000 305,190 50,668 Meanwhile the depression in wages, the high price of foodstuffs and the want of employment were bringing matters in Lancashire to a social crisis. By the end of the thirties 22,000 handloom weavers again petitioned Parliament (1838) for relief. They prayed for the repeal of the Corn Laws of 1828, which prescribed a duty of 36s. 8d. when corn was at sos. a quarter, decreasing to 16s. 8d. at 68s. and to 1s. at 735., but increasing in inverse ratio with the fall in price. The demand for the repeal of the Corn Laws was no new suggestion. In the examination of witnesses before the committee of 1833 it was stated in reply to a question as to how relief could best be afforded, that ‘a very material relief,’ would be ‘a repeal of the Corn Laws . . . We want nothing else. *° Owing to the dense population of Manchester and other large towns in Lancashire, the food question was fast becoming a most crucial problem. To enable more united pressure to be brought to bear, the famous Anti-Corn Law League was started in 1839, composed of delegates from many towns, the central office of the league remaining in Manchester. Circulars were issued and meetings called and great efforts were made to nationalize the movement. The first half of the forties were, as is well known, occupied with the great struggle against that most powerful of all monopolies the land monopoly. The landlords were bitterly opposed to any change, though the agricultural distress seemed in no whit assisted by the maintenance of the tax. Amongst the prominent promoters of the cause in the north were Mr. Cobden, the member for Stockport, and Mr. John Bright. In the parliamentary debate of May 1843, the former pointed out the iniquity of maintaining a law having for its object to inflict scarcity upon the people, and this, not in the interest of the farmer or of the agricultural labourer, but of the landlord. All the Corn Laws from 18 15 tol 841 had not prevented agricultural distress, but they had fostered terrible distress among the large working populations of the north. In 1842 money was voted rapidly and lavishly for the furthering of the agitation, and . ee of Co-operation, ii, 43. “9 Ibid. 45. ep. of Select Com, on Manuf. &c. 567. 318 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY in 1843 a sum of £100,000 was asked for, and towards this no less than 412,000 was subscribed in an hour and a half at Manchester, Liverpool following with £4,600. With this capital behind it even the landlords had to acknowledge the strength of the agitation, and in 1844 the marquis of Westminster, one of the wealthiest among them, joined the league. The funds of the league were applied largely to the purchase of freeholds for registration purposes, and in this way a great hold was secured upon parlia- mentary representation.*" It is a matter of history how, influenced by the distress in Ireland, Sir Robert Peel completely changed his views, and took office in 1845 pledged to the policy of repeal of the Corn Laws, in which he had the support of the Free Trade members. The bill promoting the gradual abolition of the duties was read and passed through both Houses in the spring of 1846. The operation of the tax was practically to cease after 1 February, 1849. Meanwhile a strong agitation had been going on to promote the curtailing of the hours of factory labour, and in July, 1847, the Ten Hours Bill passed both Houses. Scarcely, however, had the Lancashire people emerged from one disastrous period than they were called upon to meet another. The out- break of Civil War in America in 1861 stopped the import of cotton into Liverpool, and with the suspension of their staple employment ruin and starvation stared the unhappy operatives in the face. Population had made great strides by the sixties, and large families had been reared to feed the demand for factory hands. The distress was consequently on an unprece- dented scale, and became a matter of national concern. A Central Relief Committee was formed to meet the deficiency in wages, the weekly loss of which was estimated at £168,000. In Manchester and the immediate neigh- bourhood the destitution was terrible. Out of a population in 1862 of 357,604 persons 5,906 factory hands were out of work, 10,011 were partially employed, and only 8,388 were on full work.“’ The returns published at a later date show 13,484 working short time, 21,317 full time, and 13,314 persons out of work. Out of 84 cotton mills in the city of Manchester, 22 were entirely stopped and 30 working short time. At Ashton-under-Lyne in 1862, among a population of 36,791 persons, 10,933 were employed in cotton. Of these 3,395 were out of work, 6,370 partially employed, and 1,228 only on full time.“* The guardians give 9,000 as the number receiving relief, ‘leaving a population of 10,000 entirely unrelieved and dependent on private ~ charity or their own resources.’ ** In Preston, referred to as the third town of importance in Lancashire, there were by September 14,289 out of a population of 83,000 receiving relief from the rates. In Blackburn, with a population of 62,126, about 30,000 were receiving relief. In Bolton the distress was not nearly so great, as this town did not entirely depend on cotton, but had large iron foundries, machine shops, and bleach works. One of the most wonderful things about the situation was the calm courage with which the people faced this calamity. Here was the fruit of 451 Hist, of the Anti-Corn Law League. “9 The Distress in Lancs.; a Visit to the Cotton Districts (Lond. 1862), 8. “8 Thid. ‘4 Thid. quoted from The Times correspondent, 16 Sept. 1862. 319 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE the seed sown in the twenties and thirties. Education and humanitarian efforts had their reward in the self-restraint and patience which the workers exhibited in this time of trial. The evidence of the relieving officer who accompanied the visitor to the cotton districts is entirely to this effect :— I have gone into the room of the English operatives when they have not had a mouthful of bread under the roof . . . and nothing but shavings to sleep on through the night, yet talking as cheerfully and resignedly as if there was every prospect of employment on the morrow. ‘Of the patience and noble endurance of the people in Ashton’ during the trouble the writer says it was ‘beyond praise . . . with every induce- ment to crime the returns show that it is not on the increase.’ In Preston also he observed that ‘crime is decreasing although the inducements to crime are daily on the increase.’ The people ‘bear their misfortunes with wonderful patience and endurance. Here, as in every other town, there 1s a great reluctance to receive relief . . . and readiness to do any honest work which is not degrading.’ ** The Blackburn people seem to have suffered the extremity of misery. In one house where the writer called ‘there were twenty inmates or their families occupying two rooms and an outhouse.’ The place, he says, ‘ was scrupulously clean and tidy.” The occupiers had been neighbours in times of prosperity, and had ‘ agreed to take their present habitation and to share the ups and down together.** In Blackburn and the district evidence was given that ‘the Relief Committees have frequently to seek out cases and compel them as it were to apply for relief, so reluctant are they to accept it.’ These evidences sufficiently testify to the fact that the characteristic sturdy manliness and independence of the Lancashire people had not been destroyed by even a century of continual privation. Possibly, too, the reorganization of the Poor Law had helped to brace up the moral character of the people, which it can hardly be a matter of surprise that the misery of ‘the twenties’ had somewhat worn down. Certain it is that when their greatest trouble came upon them the spirit and courage of the Lancashire populace never failed. They bore themselves with what the writer styles ‘manly dignity,’ and seem to have taken as their watchword the words, * Never give up, 47 Sources of amelioration in the distress were the savings banks, the building societies, and the co-operative stores. The run upon these was very great, particularly in Blackburn, where ‘from 1855 to 1861 the annual deposits in the savings banks had risen from £18,118 to £49,943, a satis- factory proof that habits of saving were on the increase.“ It was also a proof that food was cheaper and wages higher, or no margin could have been saved. The weavers were, in fact, the most numerous depositors, next to them came the carders, and lastly the mechanics and others. The co-operative societies met and stood the strain in a most success- ful manner, except where, as in Blackburn, they were just commencing operations, and consequently had to be abandoned. Elsewhere, however, “S A Visit to the Cotton Districts, 43. 6 Ibid. 51. “7 Thid. “° The Times correspondent, quoted ibid. 320 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY Mr. Holyoake tells us they weathered the storm. He gives the following figures for the towns of Oldham (where there were two societies), Liverpool, Bury, and Bacup :— *° Piace Year Members Capital Profits Business £ Pa £ Oldham. 2 « % s & @ 1857 482 1,745 — 13,522 Bi leo AB Se Wee, J ae. 1861 924 9,130 — 47,675 —_ 1862 824 8,034 _ 41,901 —_— 1863 861 9,165 — 63,366 Liverpool . . . . . . [1862 ?] 35154 — 3,201 44,355 Bury: oe ss Ss eS 1862? 1,412 _— 4,689 47,658 Bactupo bre a we 1862? 2,296 — 6,618 53,663 Bacup, he says, suffered more from the cotton famine than did Rochdale, where more of the woollen industry was carried on. Bacup had scarcely any other trade than cotton, and the society’s receipts ‘ went down half.’ Other towns such as Mossley, Dukinfield, Stalybridge, Ashton, Heywood, Middle- ton, and Rawtenstall and Hyde, being ‘ almost entirely cotton towns,’ suffered greatly, yet none of the stores failed, so that ‘taken altogether,’ writes Mr. Holyoake, ‘the co-operative societies in Lancashire are as numerous and as strong now as before the cotton panic set in. Even Manchester, which 1s good for nothing now, except to sell cotton, has created a Manchester and Salford Store, maintained for five years an average of 1,200 members, and made for them £7,000 profit.’ The co-operative societies had added milling “" and manufacturing * to their branches of enterprise ; they also built cottages for their members to occupy, and provided educational facilities, newsrooms, and science classes.** At Rochdale and at Oldham they had spinning mills, but their chief efforts have been expended on the maintenance of the great stores now to be met with in nearly every town of ordinary size. In the year of the cotton famine out of 454 societies in the whole of England and Wales more than a quarter of this number belonged to Lancashire, which had 117 societies to the 96 of Yorkshire.“* Reviewing the respective methods of co-operation and of trade unionism Mr. Holyoake describes the strikes organized by the latter as ‘a contest of starvation.’ (Co-operation, he argues, is a mutual arrange- ment ; competition, on the other hand, is war, capital offering the least it can, and labour exacting the most it is able to win. Outside co-operation, concludes Mr. Holyoake, ‘ there is no right, it is all claim and contest.’4 The great moral value and object of the co-operative principle was that it sought to place the working classes beyond the need of charity, and ‘to supersede goodwill by establishing good conditions.’ ** It rescued them effectually from remaining at the tender mercy of monopoly, which had hitherto made the poor man’s extremity the rich man’s opportunity. Just about the time when co-operation was reviving, trade unionism was also making great strides. By the forties it was extended to the spinners, “9 Hist. of Co-operation, ii, 62. Mr. Holyoake does not expressly name the year for which the estimates of Liverpool, Bury, and Bacup are given, but presumably it was the year he is speaking of, 1861-2. ‘0 Tbid. 63. This was referring to the year 1875. *) Thid. 52. “© Thid. 48 Ibid. ‘4 Thid. 64. *° Thid. 261 et seq. “© Thid. 2 321 41 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE and in 1844 was formed the Northern Counties Association ot Operative Spinners, who assigned inequality of wages as the cause of their combination. They claimed that the object of their union was to secure fair reward of their labour, putting an end to all differences between employers and employed, if possible without having recourse to strikes, and also to secure the enforce- ment of the Factory Acts and their amendment if necessary.” By the end of the fifties it is important to note that the weavers and other operatives employed in the manufacture of cotton had associated them- selves into large societies of this character, such as the North Lancashire Power Loom Weavers’ Association, founded in 1858. The origin of this league was admittedly ‘The tyranny to which the men were forced to submit from the defenceless position of the trade after the ‘‘ great” lock-out of 1853-4.’ ** Its confessed object was— To keep up the present rate of wages, to know when to ask for an advance, to resist any attempt at reduction when the state of trade will not justify the same, . . . to prevent one employer paying less than another for the same amount and quality of work performed, and to render assistance to strikes when such become necessary and cannot be evaded, and also to members who may be made victims through furthering the objects of the Society, and for insuring a certain sum of money at the death of its members.*® By the sixties nearly every imaginable trade and occupation had its society for the protection of its members and for the furthering of their rights.“ The detailed object of the North of England Amalgamated Associ- ation of Beamers, Twisters, and Drawers which was established in 1866 was, like that of the Associated Spinners and Weavers, ‘'To keep the present state of wages up to the standard list, to resist attempts to reduce the same, . and the redressing of any grievances between the employers and employed.’ *” By the seventies the working man’s cause had sufficiently triumphed to place him beyond the reach of any danger either to his social or financial welfare. The two systems of trade unionism and co-operation were as lions in the path to guard him effectually from the onslaughts of capital. The main social movement of the close of the century was towards the better housing of the working classes and for the workman’s more efficient education. The author of the History of Co-operation deplores the comparative failure of the Mechanics’ Institutes,‘ which had been founded with such enthusiasm in the thirties. But a second wave of impulse, started by the disquieting reports of foreign trade competition, swept over the country in the eighties, and as the result of the investigations of a royal commission in 1882-4, many technical schools were started in the industrial centres of Lancashire. Another commission in the eighties took evidence upon the housing of the poor, and out of all Lancashire selected Liverpool alone as a place where much reform was, in this particular, urgently needed. The 2,500 ‘ Courts’ occupying a strip of 4 miles along the Mersey, containing 14,500 houses constructed before 1846 and largely occupied by poor Irish, were condemned as highly conducive to the persistent fostering of infectious diseases, and to the high mortality which prevailed in Liverpool. The corporation received “" Trade Unions Commission, App. to Eleventh and Final Rep. p. 72, No. xxvi. “8 Ibid. 74, No. xxx. * Thid. Thid, On pages 316-29 of this Report may be seen tables of all the trade societies within the know- ledge of the commissioners. Of these nearly fifty appertain to Lancashire industries. | Ibid. App. 68, xviii. “? Holyoake, Hist. of Co-operation, ii, 261. 379) SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY powers to buy out the owners of these slums, and to destroy them as fast as was consistent with rehousing their tenants elsewhere.” The second half and the last decade of the nineteenth century in particular saw the development of a new elemental force of which the potentialities and possible applications are still unknown and almost incalcu- lable. The recent and present use of electricity for traction and driving power promises to revolutionize all existing systems and opens out an almost in- conceivable future for Lancashire, not merely in swiftness, absence of noise, and cleanliness of working, but in the removal of the atmospheric impurities resulting in the use of carbon fuel. Already the experiment is being tried of establishing generating stations for supplying electricity to works situated miles away. Mills are already run by electric power, and have long been lighted by this luminant. Before the century closed the wheel of mechanical invention and of trade enterprise in Lancashire had come full circle. The same endeavours to obtain a perfected driving power, the most direct shipment of the raw material and the cheapest methods of distribution, which were conspicuously agitated at the close of the eighteenth century, were once more to the front a hundred years later. The spirit of mediaeval monopoly and of inter- municipal jealousy which were thought to have passed with the Dark Ages that gave them birth, sprang into life again, and appeared in the guise of corporate despotism, railway monoply, and town rivalry. Manchester commerce was greatly hampered by excessive railway freight charges between the coast and the inland manufacturing centres. It lay too much at the mercy of Liverpool, or at least thought so. What between dock dues and railway rates the cost of raw material became so enhanced that with the prevailing conditions of home and foreign competition the looked-for profit on its manipulation was much reduced. How to obtain the necessary raw material more cheaply, more abundantly, and more directly, was the problem agitating the mind of Manchester in the eighties and nineties.‘ With the characteristic determination which had already raised their city to eminence in the county, the people decided to solve the problem of transit by cutting a deep sea and ship canal from their city to the coast, by which Manchester was to be connected with the ocean, and Atlantic steamers were to unload their cotton-bales and other goods directly upon the Manchester wharves, without the necessity of an intermediate railway transport. The scheme, which was an amazingly daring one, was initiated in December, 1893, wholly by private enterprise, though eventually the Manchester Corporation came to the help of the embarrassed shareholders. The scheme, though a popular one with the masses, seems to have roused the powerful antagonism of the merchant aristocracy of Manchester, many of whom were, it appears, committed to the support of steamship lines sailing from Liverpool. The railway shareholders naturally opposed the scheme ™ Her Mayesty’s Commissioners First Rep. on the Housing of the Working Classes, 1885, Liverpool, par. 13336-99, etc. (see Index, Liverpool). 44 Cf, a paper read by Mr. W. H. Hunter, chief engineer of the Ship Canal, before the Manchester Association of Engineers on Harbours, Docks and their Equipment, Saturday, 24 March, 1906 :—‘ When prices had to be cut owing to fierce and strenuous competition and when even with cut rates the trade was found to be declining in the inland districts, the demand for cheaper carriage led to the inevitable suggestion that . . . it was possible and desirable to provide the dock accommodation where the works and mills were situated, and where the population to be fed had its domicile and place of Occupation.’ 323 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE because they looked on the canal as a competitor, and further difficulties lay in the development of the canal because the ‘commercial machinery of a seaport did not exist in Manchester.’** The great object of the canal was the direct shipment of cotton, and the Liverpool Cotton Association struck a blow at this prospective traffic by refusing to ‘recognize cotton stored in Manchester as tenderable in fulfilment of contracts.’** Other difficulties were presented, notably the hindrances to trade with Canada for want of cattle ‘lairages.’ No Australian trade could be obtained because Manchester possessed no cold-air store for the reception of frozen meat. These and countless other obstacles had to be overcome. Like other things that had been fought for in Lancashire the struggle was long and costly, but courage and intelligence have triumphed. That success has finally been obtained is largely due to the formation of a Manchester Cotton Association, promoted to balance the Liverpool ‘ boycott,’ to assist the direct shipment of cotton, and to form a ‘spot’ cotton market there. The transit and wharf facilities afforded by the purchase of Trafford Park, the building and deepening of new docks, the erection of a grain elevator, and the starting of a special company of Manchester liners trading to Canada have wonderfully increased the utility of the canal, which now promises to be the great and successful achievement that was planned at the outset. Reviewing the situation at the close of the first decade the writer in the Manchester Guardian Supplement previously quoted sums up in the following words :— Looking back over the ten years that have elapsed since the Canal was opened, one cannot but be impressed by the magnificent services which it has rendered to Manchester and Lancashire, and by the wonderful success which has been achieved in the transformation of an inland city into a great ocean port competing, and competing not in vain, with the greatest ports of the country. For the port of Manchester has been pitted not as Glasgow was, against some small old-fashioned rival ; she has had to measure herself against Liverpool— a veritable giant among the seaports of the world. For every kind of traffic which she sought Manchester has had to offer facilities as great or greater than those of Liverpool. . . . So high a standard set up, so great a measure of accomplishment in a single decade, cannot fail to strike the imagination.4” So marvellous indeed was the advance that by the year 1g00 Manchester, by virtue of her trade values, ‘took the sixth place among the ports of the United Kingdom, being only inferior to London, Liverpool, Hull, Glasgow, and Southampton, and not far below the last named.’ *” The great advantage the Ship Canal promoters looked to obtain over rival routes was the saving of freight charges. This hope has been justified in actual fact, as the following tables prove :— [ | Frozen Meat ex Ship From Liverpool, per ton From Manchester, per ton | s od sod, To Bolton . | 19 II 14 2 | i sg Oldham, gas we Sy 23 11 16 2 » Rochdale 23 § 16 2 “° The Port of Manch. A Ten Year? Retrospect. Supplement to the Manch. Guardian, Thursday, 31 Dec. 1903. 8 Thid. “7 Thid. 8. “2 Thids 7% 324 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY On wool the cost of forwarding ex ship Manchester to Bradford and the principal Yorkshire towns is 15s. a ton as against a charge of 215. 7d. per ton ex ship Liverpool to the same places. For other produce the following table *” shows the saving in forwarding ex ship Manchester as against Liverpool :— — On Flour, per ton Grain, Wheat, per ton Fruit, per ton Butter, per ton sod. sd i @ sod To Blackburn . . 4 3 3 6 5.0 4 0 » Oldham . . . . 53 4 6 8 4 7 4 In the Appendix will be found tables showing the imports to Manchester for eleven years,1895 to 1905 (III), andthe rank of the place as a port (IV). The whole object of the Ship Canal scheme has from the first been to obtain large, direct, and cheap imports of raw cotton,“ while Liverpool maintains its colossal ascendancy as a port of entry for foodstuffs.** As to cotton, Manchester imports compare a little more favourably, though even here Liverpool has a vast predominance, as is seen by the table issued under the Cotton Statistics Act,*” 1868, for the twelve weeks ending 22 March, 1906 :— Liverpool imports a total of . . F ; é 1,072,438 cotton bales Manchester ,, 5 : ‘ : : ; 211,046 4, yy Liverpool exports _,, ‘i ‘ ‘ ‘ é HASZOS ogy ny Manchester _,, % ‘ 18,154 4, 55 The making of the Ship Canal has caused the whole question of the commercial utility of canal systems to be reviewed, and the Canals Commission has been appointed to investigate the subject. The other burning question of the hour for Lancashire, the necessity for a cheap and abundant supply of the staple raw material of the county, has also come before the public very urgently during the last few years, when the attempts of American speculators to ‘corner’ the world’s supply of cotton have threatened the Lancashire trade with paralysis. In their panic fear of a cotton famine some of the spinners and manufacturers were for a time coerced or coaxed into a faint half-hearted support of a great scheme for cotton growing in one of our colonies. But the scheme is apparently one which does not appeal except under stress of famine prices; and a glut of cheap American cotton threatens the British Cotton Growing Association with disaster. A start has, however, been made. Not only has a deputation been received by the Premier, who in a sympathetic speech acknowledged the national importance of the Lancashire cotton trade,** but—as was recently 4 Manch. Guardian Supplement, 31 Dec. 1903, p. 27. Thid. 1905. ‘81 Manch. Guardian, April 1906, in an article on imported foodstuffs, in connexion with the Ship Canal and compulsory examination, shows, for example, that at Liverpool in 1905, 2,033,000 sheep and lambs were landed, but at Manchester only 5,000 lambs; at the former port 630,000 quarters of beef, at the latter, none. 482 Quoted from tables issued in The Manch. Evening News. 488 See above, note 351. In the course of his speech on this occasion, Mr. Winston Churchill urged the great responsibility that rested upon the captains of Lancashire industry to avail themselves of this new opening. He went on to say that in looking at Manchester he was ‘ almost appalled by the consideration of what might happen if Lancashire failed to get cotton, J+ would mean ruin to Lancashire, and that meant ruin to England. Manch. Guardian Rep. 24. Aug. 1907. 325 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE announced by the Rt. Hon. Winston Churchill, Under-Secretary for the Colonies, and Member of Parliament for North-West Manchester, at a banquet given in his honour by the British Cotton Growing Association at Manchester—a grant has been made by the government for the immediate building of a railway connecting Northern Nigeria with the coast, and so facilitating the transport of cotton from the vast area which has been opened up in Northern Nigeria by the Cotton Growing Association. In looking back through the centuries even the casual observer may see that Lancashire has continuously fought the battle of political, religious, and economic freedom. It struggled for it against the Normans; its great mediaeval overlords, Thomas of Lancaster and John of Gaunt, died protest- ing against tyranny ; it wrested freedom by force of arms in the middle of the seventeenth century, and it has founded labour unions and upheld the standard of free trade throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth and even into the twentieth century. The inconsistency which has been pointed out between the ideals of the Manchester School and the protectionist lines on which the great textile labour unions of Lancashire are founded is more apparent than real. Each in its own way has aimed at the goal of freedom, at social progress, and at the development of industry. The Manchester School, while advocating free trade in labour as in everything else, did not see as clearly as one would have expected that they were harking back to the old mediaeval conditions from which the Lancashire artisan was struggling to free himself ; that capital in fact was merely the old dragon monopoly in a new guise, and could only be fought by the bringing up of an army, or of another giant, who should parley with him on equal terms. The issue with both parties, Cobdenites and Trade Unions respectively, was confessedly the happiness of the greatest number ; but the admitted interest of capital is the financial dominance of a few operators at the expense of the many. Labour was merely taking a leaf out of the handbook of capital in desiring to buy in the cheapest market and sell in the dearest. But since the working man has nothing to offer in exchange for the commodities he desires other than the labour of his hands, it is imperative he should put such a price upon that labour as will buy him the amount of food, light, fuel, clothing, shelter, and recreation that is abso- lutely necessary to keep him in a condition of health and comfort. This is the justification of the so-called protection policy of the trade unions. A study of the more recent relations (1905-6) between the textile labour unions of Lancashire and the Employers’ Federation goes to prove that in a happy compromise between the demands of both parties lies the real welfare, not merely of the people, but of industry. Enough has doubtless been written to show how fully the social and economic history of Lancashire lends colour to the happy phrase of an eigh- teenth-century traveller who, halting upon the borders, observed that now they were about to enter the county of industry and spirit. How great a part this last quality has played in achieving Lancashire’s supremacy in the former respect is almost beyond calculation. It is indeed no exaggeration to affirm that, wealthy as it is in material resources, by no means the least of its im- perishable commercial assets has been the strong and sterling character of its people. 326 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY o1 VI pos rea _ - toa) or Er o1 ¢Z 41 a _ or Il for €1 ©9 w For £1 $l Lt for zz £z ost ie) EE gz g oil II 2 9 ZI Ol gz II gl es hoe) Ol gz Il gz fe) N+ Jvak yora ul yoom tod Su1yz079 pue poof r0y Yay pey suossod xts jo ATruryy oy} uns 239 ys ‘tong ‘surooy JJ° tiedar Joy suos -rad xis jo Aprurey ayi jo sostadxa AT -yooa a[qesuadsipuy Jeof yora ut yam D UIea p[NOD ‘staavam Sutaq AT -TUIey BY} JO 9014} ‘uaIplIyo pur sjuaivd ‘suosied xis jo Ayiuiyy ev urng Teak yora UI UES P[Nod 3A -BaM Pood k ‘yzI03 god ‘ums o8vioay { soaid sad ‘vad yova jo aor o8eisay aoaid ged read yore ut ut aod ysaMmoy pue woysty oy ffg1 zegr 1£g1 ofg1 6zg1 BzQI Lzgt 9781 Szgr bzg1 fzgr Zzgi Izgr ozgr 61g1 8igr Ligt 91gt S1gt Prigi SONIMOHS LNIWALVLS HAISNTONI £Egr Ataf OL F1gI Wows ‘GoIwag ONINIVWAY AHL WOR OOTIVS) WNOs-ALNTATS GUIH I, GNV ‘Suva NHAXG LSU AHL OOTIVD UNOA-AINAATG GNOG 4O AAG INO ONIAVAMA WOd ava SHoINg AHL ONIMOHS LNIWILVIG—'] aTaV[, I XIQGNUddV 327 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE ¥z oftz o\€ ° -— #1 0 ffZ 1 6 £9 L fit g ($6 zjo £€]o F+ | | fir b S$ + |frr + i Oe ae 2 zZtgi $z oOo |f1 o 1 6 $z 9 G1 + 6 € Fir b igs z pos lop oss ofgr 6zg1 41 z et pos 8z38t re) fo o ez 6 £ + fri + pos czgi zo gz 0 b+ oL GZ of fg £ age lay gzgt EE oo fo § Ol g for £ BS 6 $zgi $b oO S -£ + 6 fr + §ri + pos fzgr Sir + $9 0 to (F1. f9 8 £4 ¢ fir + pot 1zgt $9 gb $1 SNOSUAY XIG AO ATINV A UOA L300) GNV GNIN ASINIVIG FHL AO GOOY AO ALILNVOD) ATHIIAA $ o|f9 o ZL ond £1 z 6/9 o1 fr + igh S fo $ 1 §$ sy | ey | Grgt gigi $5 0 fe 9 $l 71 Colmer fr S$ pot igi 9 0 gz for g ors: fo § pos gigt ¥g 0 fir 61 fir g fo § fr oi ze LE {tr 6 fr + Gr oS poss bigt hop 13d wos tod guo s0y Sus -yjoj) pur poof 104 apquoydde sadea wory 9WoOdul o junoule [Ny ey T, ppnos Apuezy ayy wins snypdins ayy, pee} Je ysOD gaogy Ulva suos -rod x1s Joy pooy Joy yunoure Apyo9 A, (qt oFz sod (6s qv prounre) 5 “NOP ul Jopurrvaur -or pur cq, Z1 so “qy 9z ‘prounrea (svoqvj0od “ql oz ‘uodeq “q] z 4yprur onyq sqaenb St) cavdns pur vo} “Qayod ‘s907e} -od ‘uosvq ‘yjtu Joy apqrpieau Aauoyay AHL ONIMOHS LNAWALVLG— J] ITA T, 328 AND ECONOMIC HISTORY SOCIAL zz zz zz zz zz gz Lt Lz FE fe ee “ ; ; * QsIAA}seOD patajzua spossoA WIkIIG Ol $1 $1 gi gi gi gi 1z Sz “ ee ee . : * — aSTaJoy parajua s[assaA WIeAIS gi oz 61 oz 1z Iz oz fz gz (e8euu0} pesoysI8o1 you) : * QsIAA}seoo Pue USIOI0J parojua s[assa A 8 6 6 8 £ £ £ L ro “ : mapas] peu jo soinjorjnueut pure aonpoid jo syi0dxq $ 4 § II ZI el €1 g1 Li ee : ; asIPULYIOM [eIUCTOD pue usresoy jo syzodury 9 9 9 8 8 6 6 II gl (anjea) : : ; : ’ : : * syzodxe pure sjiodury z061 1061 0061 66g1 g6gr Z6g1 96g1 S6gr v6g1 IL —syiod ysaug 911 ay} yssuoWE YIUSAIXIS sem Jasoyoueyy Jey} suvauT QI snyjJ—ysI] ay3 uo saysayouepy Aq patdnos0 aoxjd ay} Juasoidar samsy sy], ‘uoNesiavu puv[ul Zuo, B JO peoy ay} 3 pazenyis SI pue ope sosuassed ou sey yorym yod & 0} aquinoayun Apefnoiqied st ‘pajou aq pynoys 3 SuoayID J9V ey J, ‘od ay} Burayua Buiddiys ay? jo adevuuo0} posoysiSe1 jou ayeSo189e ay} pue apesy sz jo onfea ayy Aq pauiwuojop se ‘zo61-¥6g1 sivak oulU ay] Ul WOGONTY GaLINGQ] AHL dO sluog SWOLSAD) QII AHL ISONOWV WALSHHONVIA] 40 LUOG AHL JO NOLLISOg ay} saaid (adios aus ay} Wo) AIAV], ONIMOTIOY FH]—* A] AAV, zLh‘og Egf*Sor | SLofgor | Shi‘So1 | €gz‘16 | 659'96 | ozz‘1g | gédigé | 6bL‘gt = — : ° . : ° * sjeumue aary pesH peeH peo pesH peeH peeH pesH peeH pesH ozg‘6E zZLesgs vzLl‘ob 10V‘SE 1gh‘zb zzS‘ob ECesLe PLSSSE 1z0'@E b6o0'gz | Fgo‘L1 a : ¢ . . * ~ re8ng tgg‘Lh obothh | GEESE | obbt1E SgosSz | ogz‘zz | zxrbbe | ogz‘61 S61‘91_ | 619%E1 —_ : ; : 7 : * syns poog ELS‘ly zEvry | ibS‘gh | gr €sSS | SgLiEb | og1 bE 169‘ZE | Gggthé | oLS*ZE | oFL*1€ — ; 5 * ‘92g ‘eulrey “Teaur “mop 696‘EL 60£‘Sg | ghifgS | S£6‘gh | BgE1E | b9g9%gz | ggg*ge | LiI‘tz | S6S‘gz | g£otlz IgoeE | - a ‘ ‘ . * ymyg user Log‘t11 | Sgb611 | Sgz‘Li1 | PrL‘6Z | 66g%0g | g£6‘oor | ggg‘6g | z1z*ZS | 6Fof1z — — : : . 5 : * (q[Nq wu) TIO Egz‘ce gES*1€ | oLggé | LEzHE | bhIfo€ | giSSz | FES*Le | gSgizz | zLL‘br ibz‘Lt SS1°g i g : . * (syseo UI) IO LzSof LSgth | zib‘zh | Lobzb | Sog’gé | gt ‘gz E1EEE | gogtrz | Ege 1 zo£’g = : : : : 2% ‘101]0ds ‘peay 81g Lg0‘gg gbo‘fg | SLL‘9g | S6z‘ov | 1£9'6z | 6POSEE | Szo‘6E | ogo‘gf | 6hofge | LhIchh | Higtiz | ° : : saysdd pur o10 uoly Sir :— Ireby Township*] 1,145] — 100 115 109 145 III 113 103 78 63 70 Tunstall :-— 9.354] 637} 665 757 862 721 814 803 678 693 748 | 624 Burrow with} 2,425 156 163 198 306 177 228 225 236 214 242 188 Burrow Town- ship Cantsfield 1,227 138 123 120 88 114 155 116 708 104 138 103 Township Leck Chap.t 4,631 219 268 284 326 288 285 324 229 271 249 BIT Tunstall 1,077 124 177 155 142 142 146 138 105 104 779 22 Township Warton :— 12,882] 1,574 | 1,667 | 2,050 | 2,159 | 2,209 | 2,099 | 2,161 | 3,390 | 4,817 | 5,702 | 5,918 Borwick 846 208 212 251 278 214 199 194 209 246 281 174 Township Carnforth 1,505 219 215 294 299 306 294 393 | 1,097 | 1,879 | 2,680 | 3,040 Township ¢ 81a See note 6, ante. 82 Aldcliffe returned with Bulk in 1801. 82a See note 65, post. 82b See note 30, ante. 33 Lancaster Castle returned with Lancastey Township in 1801-1821. %4 Tatham Parish includes Iveby Township (in Thornton in Lonsdale Parish) in 1801. 35 Thornton in Lonsdale Parish is contained in (1) Lonsdale Hundred, South of the Sands; and (2) Staincliffe and Ewcross Wapentake (Yorkshire, West Riding). 341 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE TABLE OF POPULATION, 1801—1901 (continued) ParisH cial 1801 r81r | 1821 1831 1841 1851 1861 1871 1881 1891 1901 Lonsdale Hun- dred—(South of the Sands) (cont.) Warton (con?.) Priest Hutton 7,085 168 190 213 263 254 234 218 185 213 242 172 Township * Silverdale Chap.} 1,467 171 196 243 240 252 240 294 343 489 589 582 Warton with 4,267 464 443 558 558 633 600 587 1,035) 1,471) 1,384) 1,492 Lindeth Town- ship Yealand Conyers] 7,582 196 230 264 294 322 306 272 300 309 304 267 Township Yealand Red-] 2,736 148 181 227 227 228 226 209 227 210 222 197 mayne Town- ship Whittington t | 4,418] 384] 411} 461 | 542] 425} 414] 421 460, 346] + 349] += 390 Salford Hundred sau ara | 294 15,632 |19,052 |25,967 |33,597 |46,304 |56,959 66,801 | 64,558) 75,310] 80,991| 86,001 yne * Bolton-le-Moors:— }33,413 |29,826 39,701 |50,197 {63,034 |73,905 [87,280 197,215 |112,503'124,7631134,4001141,272 Anglezarke 2,792] 162) 181 215 168 164 179 134 195, 99 92 93 Township * Blackrod Chap.} | 2,392} 1,623 | 2,117 | 2,436 | 2,591 | 2,615 | 2,509 | 2,911 | 3,800| 4,234) 4,021| 3,875 Bolton, Great 826 [12,549 |17,070 |22,037 |28,299 |33,610 |39,923 |43,435 | 45,313| 45,694| 47,067| 47,968 Township Bolton, Little 1,779 | 4,867 | 7,079 | 9,258 12,896 |16,153 |20,468 [25,891 | 36,698| 44,452| 47,072| 47,118 Chap.t Bradshaw Chap.} 7,756 380 582 713 773 827 853 792 870 755 647 594 Breihtmet 873| 734] 852} 963 | 1,026 | 1,309 | 1,540 | 1,562 | 1,500} 1,525| 1,720, 1,773 Township Edgworth 2,925} 1,003 | 1,302 | 1,729 | 2,168 | 1,697 | 1,230 | 1,350 | 1,675] 7,862| 1,861| 1,949 Township Entwistle 1,668) 447 577 677 701 555 486 422 339 347 287 315 Township Harwood Chap.| 7,240] 1,287 | 7,430 | 1,809 2,017 | 1,996 | 2,057 | 2,055 1,976| 1,811) 1,564) 1,617 Lever, Darcy 499 589 792 956 | 1,119 | 1,700 | 2,091 | 2,077 2,048) 1,994) 1,979| 1,797 Township Lever, Little $08} 1,276 | 1,586 | 1,854 | 2,231 | 2,580 | 3,517 | 3,890 | 4,204 4,413) 5,168 5,119 Chap.t¢ Longworth 1,654 249 226 238 179 149 152 154 113 106 102 100 Township Lostock 7,520} 509 540 576 606 625 620 580 670, 782 891 852 Township Quarlton 798| 238 295 320 376 370 361 253 264 271 251 254 Township Rivington 2,771 519 526 583 537 471 412 369 531 330 373 421 Township *° Sharples 3,999 873 | 1,374 | 2,065 | 2,589 | 2,880 | 3,904 | 3,294 3,315} 3,710| 4,216) 6,726 Township t Tonge with 7,099| 1,158 | 1,402 | 1,678 | 2,201 | 2,627 | 2,826 | 3,539 | 4,050 6,731] 10,735| 14,012 Haulgh Town- ship Turton — Chap.| 4,674] 7,369 | 1,782 | 2,090 | 2,563 3,577 | 4,158 | 4,513 | 4,942 5,653| 6,354) 6,695 Bury (part of)* :— [21,702 }21,161 26,542 |32,383 144,877 59,023 66,761 |76,710 | 81,138 94,789] 97,389) 98,297 Bury Township] 2,330 7,072 | 8,762 |10,583 |15,086 20,710 |25,484 130,397 32,611) 39,283 41,038) 41,022 Elton Township 2,553] 2,080 | 2,540 | 2,897 | 4,054 | 5,202 | 6,778 | 8,172 9,591| 11,947 12,589, 13,269 Heap Town- 2,938 4,283 5,148 6,552 \10,429 14,856 |16,048 17,353 | 17,252 17,686, 17,276) 18,442 ship ¢ Tottington, 3,545] 1,246 | 1,556 | 1,728 | 2,572 3,446 2,958 | 3,726 | 3,595| 3,926 3,850) 3,634 Higher Township *° 86 Priest Huttcn.—The 1811 population is an estimate. 8? Whittington.—The decrease in 1841 is partly due to the absence of about 50 workmen present in 1831, engaged in erecting a mansion. 87a See note 46, fost. 8S Anslezarke.—The increase in 1871 is attributed to the presence of workmen employed in enlarging Rivington Waterworks. *? Rivington.—The increase in 1871 is attributed to the presence of workmen employed in enlarging Rivington Waterworks. 89a See note 11, ante. ‘© Tottington, Higher, includes Foe Bank, which was at one time reputed Extra Parochial. 342 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY TABLE OF POPULATION, 1801—1901 (continued) ParisH — r8or | 1811 1821 1831 1841 1851 1861 1871 1881 1891 | Igor =) Salford Hundred (cont.) Bury (part of) (cont.) Tottington, 5,271] 4,314 | 5,917 | 7,333 | 9,280 | 9,929 |10,697 | 11,764| 12,531| 16,428] 16,837| 16,457 Lower Township Walmersley-cum | 5,065] 2,766 | 2,679 | 3,290 | 3,456 | 4,880 | 4,802 | 5,298| 5,558) 5,579| 5,799] 5,473 Shuttleworth Township t Deane :— 20,107 {12,843 |16,129 |18,916 |22,994 |26,217 |29,819 | 35,746] 49,008] 68,632) 91,485|111,800 FarnworthChap.| 7,504] 7,439 | 1,798 | 2,044 | 2,928 | 4,829 | 6,389 | 8,720) 13,550) 20,708| 23,758] 25,925 Halliwell 2,480] 1,385 | 1,828 | 2,288 | 2,963 | 3,242 | 3,959 | 5,953) 8,706) 12,551] 16,525| 23,953 Township Heaton 1,744 677 765 826 719 713 826 955, 1,126 1,461) 1,599) 1,896 Township ¢ Horwich Chap.t] 3,257] 1,565 | 2,374 | 2,873 | 3,962 | 3,773 | 3,952 | 3,471! 3,671| 3,761| 12,850| 15,084 Hulton, Little (or] 7,699] 7,498 | 7,886 | 2,465 | 2,987 | 3,052 | 3,184 | 3,390, 4,805| 5,714) 6,693| 7,294 Peel) Chap. Hulton, Middle} 7,577 819 900 938 934 902 888 790) 911| 2,051, 2,703) 2,984 Township % Hulton, Over 1,316 619 612 597 538 445 452 447 574 984) 1,533) 2,567 Township Kersley (or 1,005] 1,082 | 1,388 | 1,833 | 2,705 | 3,436 | 4,236 | 5,003| 5,830| 7,253, 7,993; 9,218 Kearsley) Township Rumworth 1,244] 700| 768] 847 | 7,164 | 1,298 | 7,386 | 7,867] 3,226| 4,952 6,754| 9,540 Township : Westhoughton | 4,347] 3,059 | 3,870 | 4,277 | 4,500 | 4,527 | 4,547 | 5,156] 6,609; 9,197, 11,077| 13,339 Chap. Eccles :— 22,029 {16,119 |19,502 |23,331 |28,083 |33,792 |41,497 | 52,679, 67,770, 98,187,121,817/149,154 Barton-upon- —_{70,627] 6,797 | 6,948 | 7,977 | 8,976 |10,865 |12,687 | 14,276] 78,975| 25,994| 35,826| 40,144 Irwell Township Clifton Town- | 7,795] 872 | 904 | 1,168 | 1,277 | 1,360 | 1,647 | 2,140| 2,366] 2,578 2,775} 2,944 ship f Pendlebury 1,031] 437 | 694 | 1,047 | 1,556 | 2,198 | 2,750 | 3,548| 8,163) 8,162; 10,605| 13,435 Township + Pendleton 2,254| 3,617 | 4,805 | 5,948 | 8,435 |17,032 |14,224 | 20,900, 25,489| 40,246 46,321| 61,632 Chap.t+ Worsley 6,928] 5,062 | 6,157 | 7,197 | 7,839 | 8,337 |10,189 | 11,875, 18,837, 21,207, 26,290] 30,999 Township Flixton :— 2,556] 1,625 | 1,982 | 2,249 | 2,099 | 2,230 | 2,064 | 2,050] 2,508) 4,018, 6,828} 10,250 Flixton 1,564 | 7,093 | 1,387 | 1,604 | 1,393 | 1,459 | 1,334 | 1,302) 1,572| 7,776] 2,786| 3,656 Township Urmston 992 532 595 645 706 771 730 748 996) 2,242) 4,042} 6,594 Township { see th (part |27,536 [21,901 |26,126 |32,224 143,155 |57,207 |72,522 |IOI,145 140,251/225,312 283,367 372,721 of) # :— Blackley Chap.| 7,840} 2,367 | 2,389 | 2,911 | 3,020 | 3,202 | 3,503 | 4,112| 5,173| 6,075| 7,332| 9,012 Broughton 1,418] 866 | 825 | 880 | 1,589 | 3,794 | 7,126 | 9,885| 14,961| 31,534) 37,864| 49,048 Township *7 Burnage 666 383 454 513 507 489 563 624 706 848) 1,599| 1,888 Township + Chorlton-cum- | 7,280] 573 | 679 | 624| 668| 632] 767 739| 1,466, 2,332| 4,741| 9,026 Hardy Chap.t Crumpsall 733) 452| 628| 910 | 1,878 | 2,745 | 3,151 | 4,285| 5,342) 8,154] 10,377| 11,995 Township 4° Denton Chap.| 1,706| 1,362 | 1,594 | 2,012 | 2,792 | 3,440 | 3,746 | 3,335| 5,117, 7,660, 8,666, 9,988 ca 1,553] 679 | 738) 933 | 1,067 | 1,248 | 1,449 | 1,829| 3,064| 4,607| 7,370| 9,234 ap.t Droylsden 7,621| 1,552 | 2,207 | 2,855 | 2,996 | 4,933 | 6,280 | 8,798] 8,973 11,254, 12,972| 19,257 Township t Failsworth 1,072] 2,622 | 2,875 | 3,358 | 3,667 | 3,879 | 4,433 | 5,113| 5,685, 7,912, 10,425 14,152 Township t Gorton _Chap.] 7,484] 1,127 | 1,183 | 1.604 | 2,623 | 2,422 | 4,476 | 9,897| 21,616, 33,096| 41,207| 55,417 Heaton Norris | 2,776] 3,768 | 5,232 | 6,958 |11,238 |14,629 |15,697 | 16,333| 16,481| 20,347| 23,532| 26,540 Township 41 Manchester Parish is contained in (1) Salford Hundred; (2) Manchester Town; and (3) Salford Town. 43 Broughton includes in 1841 67 persons in booths on the race-course. 48 Crumpsall.—The increase in 1861 is partly attributed to the erection of a workhouse, and in 1881 it is also partly attributed to the opening of another. 343 ee A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE TABLE OF POPULATION, 1801—190t (continued) PARISH es 1801 1811 1821 | 1831 1841 1851 1861 1871 1881 1891 1901 Salford Hundred (cont.) Manchester ‘part of ) cont.) Haughton 887] 1,139 | 1,526 | 2,084 2,914 | 3,319 | 3,042 | 3,371) 4,276) 5,051) 5,327) 4,946 Township : Levenshulme 606 628 674 768 | 1,086 | 1,231 | 1,902 2,095| 2,742 3,557; 5,506) 11,485 Township Moss Side 421 150 156 172; 208 436 943 2,695| 5,403, 18,184, 23,993) 26,583 Township Moston 1,297 618 614 593 615 671 904 1,199| 1,663, 3,466, 5,179) 11,897 Township Openshaw 579 339 459 497 838 | 2,280 | 3,759 8,623) 11,108 16,153 23,765) 26,690 Township ¢ Reddish 1541) 456| 532. 574| 860 | 1,788 | 7,278 | 1,363| 2,329, 5,557; 6,854| 8,668 Township Rusholme 974 726 796 913 | 1,078 | 1,868 | 3,679 5,380, 5,910) 9,227| 10,696, 16,437 Townshi Stretford Chan, 3.2401 1,477 | 1,720 | 2,173 | 2,463 | 3,524 | 4,998 8,757| 11,945| 19,018) 21,751| 30,436 Withington 2,502 743 917 892 | 1,048 | 1,277 | 1,492 2,712| 6,291| 11,286| 14,217| 20,022 Township t * Middleton :— 12,101} 7,991 |10,408 |12,793 14,379 |15,488 |16,796 | 19,635] 21,191] 25,213] 28,362] 34,042 Ainsworth for} 1,309] 1,240 | 1,422 | 1,609 | 1,584 | 7,598 | 1,787 | 1,803| 1,854) 7,729| 1,821| 1,696 Cockey) Chap. : Ashworth 1027 295 267 280 294 325 277 233 174 142 137 119 Chap. ¢ Birtle-cum- os 1,429| 753 | 1,055 | 1,207 | 1,650 | 1,753 | 1,850 | 2,350) 2,148| 2,265] 1,774) 2,015 Bamford Township * + | Hopwood 2,126] 948 | 1,083 | 1,384 | 1,413 | 1,545 | 1,575 | 2,281) 3,655) 4,440) 4,774) 5,432 Township Lever, Great 867 398 613 631 637 657 713 722| 1,423| 3,673) 5,400) 8,904 Township Middleton 7,930) 3.265 | 4,422 | 5,809 | 6,903 | 7,740 | 8,717 | 9,876| 9,472] 10,346, 17,694| 12,720 Townshi Pilsworth P 7,483 418 454 499 443 414 373 343 386 758 867| 1,025 Township : Thornham 1,936) 674 | 1,098 | 1,374 | 1,455 | 1,456 | 1,510 | 2,027; 2,079} 1,860) 1,895] 2,131 Township ‘ Prestw:en-cum- 22,024 131,065 |41,342 52,510 67,579 78,545 94,470 |117,961/135,177|179,230/213,790,228,822 Oldham :-—— i Alkrington 798 319 349 365 367 338 373 423 388 380 446 565 Township ! Chadderton 3,138| 3,452 | 4,133 | 5,124 | 5,476 | 5.397 ' 6,188 | 7,486) 12,203] 16,899] 22,087| 24,892 Township *° | Crompton 2,865) 3,482 | 4,746 | 6,482 | 7,004 | 6,729 | 6,375 | 7,032| 7,302) 9,797; 12,901| 13,427 Townshi Heaton, Great “ 875 267 234 224 181 159 150 159 197 376 397 460 Township Heaton, Little 532 494 626 630 771 808 800 838 786 828 872| 1,056 Township Oldham 4,666 12,024 16,690 21,662 '32,381 42,595 52,820 | 72,333 82,629 111,343.131,463|137 ,246 Township * Pilkington 5,469| 5,786 | 7,353 | 8,976 11,006 11,186 |12,863 | 12,303| 11,949) 13,144) 14,472) 15,275 Township ! Prestwich 1,917| 1,811 | 2,175 | 2,724 | 2,941 3,180 | 4,096 | 5,288 6,820) 8,627| 10,485) 12,378 Township | Royton Chap.‘"] 7,372] 2,779 | 3,970 | 4,933 | 5,652 | 5,730 | 6,974 | 7,493) 7,794| 10,582] 12,568| 13,942 Tonge Town- 392) 771 | 1,126 | 1,390 | 1,800 2,423 | 3,831 | 4,606, 5,115| 7,254) 8,099| 9,581 ship Radcliffe 2.533] 2:497 | 2,792 | 3,089 3,904 | 5,099 | 6,293 | 8,838) 11,446, 16,267, 20,021| 20,595 44 Withington.—The increase in 1861 is attributed to the erection of the new union workhouse 43 Birtle cum Bamford.—The increase in 1861 is partly due to the establishment of the union workhouse. 46 Oldham and Chadderton Townships and Ashton-under-Lyne Parish. The boundaries of these were altered by 43 & 44 Vict. c. 47, viz.: (1) Parts of Chadderton Township and Ashton-under-Lyne Parish added to Oldham Town- ship; and (2) part of Oldham Township to Chadderton Township. The populations of Oldham and Chadderton cannot be corrected for 1881, nor can those of any of the three be corrected for 1891 and 1901. The net result was that Oldham gained 64 acres—8 from Ashton-under-Lyne and 56 from Chadderton. the three places, frtor to the alteration. 47 Royton.—The return in 1821 mentions the presence of children apprentices from London, and states that the Poor Laws and the late Vagrant Act are injurious to property. 344 The areas given in the Table are for SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY “TABLE OF POPULATION, 1801—1901 (continued) Parisa ee r8or | 181r | 182r | 1831 | 1841 1851 | 1861 | 1871 1881 | 18gr | 1g01 Salford Hundred (cont.) Rochdale (part | 41,829 129,092 37,229 147,109 |58,441 |67,889 |80,214 |100,900|119,191}131,149,132,757)140,545 of) 8: — Blatchinworth | 4,787] 17,647 | 2,480 | 3,143 | 4,221 | 4,456 | 3,895 | 4,860| 6,692| 7,891] 8,384) 8,562 and Calder- brook Town- ship Butterworth 7,766} 3,930 | 4,872 | 5,554 | 5,648 | 5,088 | 5,786 | 6,704) 7,923| 8,411) 9,438) 9,909 Township Castleton 3,812] 5,460 | 6,723 | 7,894 |11,079 |14,279 |17,400 | 23,771] 31,344] 35,272| 38,509| 42,998 Township Spotland 14,174] 9,031 |10,968 |13,453 |15,325 |18,480 |23,476 | 30,378| 35,611| 40,140| 37,828) 37,777 Township Todmorden and] 7,007] 2,575 | 3,652 | 4,985 | 6,054 | 7,311 | 7,699 | 9,146| 9,333} 9,237} 8,904) 9,085 Walsden ; Chap. Wardleworth 766} 3,289 | 4,345 | 6,451 | 9,360 |11,400 |14,103 | 17,840| 19,300) 19,711) 19,238| 20,272 Township Wuerdale and | 3,523| 3,220 | 4,189 | 5,629 | 6,754 | 6,875 | 7,855 | 8,201] 8,988] 10,487| 10,456| 11,942 Wardle Township Wigan (part of) 4:— Aspull Township| 1,906] 1,253 | 1,650 | 1,894 | 2,464 | 2,772 | 3,278 | 4,290} 6,387} 8,113) 8,952] 8,388 West Derby Hlundred Altcart . 4,216] 271 408 | 499; 505 490; 501 540 570} 550 599 545 Aughton{ . 4,612] 987 | 1,032 | 1,279 | 1,462 | 1,560 | 1,655 | 1,870] 2,597) 3,145! 3,456] 3,517 Childwall :— 16,341} 4,194 | 5,383 | 6,618 | 7,706 10,714 [14,409 | 17,917) 25,340] 31,053) 37,324] 52,753 Allerton 1,589 178 258 328 374 443 482 559 717 830 914| 71,1707 Township Childwall 830 152 162 127 159 186 166 174 197 187 199 219 Township Garston 1,673 458 597 874 | 1,147 | 1,888 | 2,756 4,720, 7,840 10,271) 13,444) 17,289 Township Hale Chap. . 1,654 537 527 630 572 645 629 648 665 577 518 524 Halewood 3,873 777 903 934 930 | 1,107 | 1,146 1,205, 1,790| 1,857| 2,296) 2,095 Township SpekeTownshipt} 2,526} 374 409 462 514 548 534 577 509 513 469 381 Wavertree Chap.j 7,837] 860 | 1,398 | 1,620 | 1,932 | 2,669 | 4,011 | 5,392; 7,810| 11,097, 13,764| 25,303 Woolton, Little] 7,389] 479| 528| 673 734]| 969 1,016 | 1,062 1,128] 1,159} 1,731) 1,097 Township Be Much} 970] 439 601 970 | 1,344 | 2,265 | 3,669 | 3,586, 4,684) 4,568) 4,589) 4,750 hap.t Croxteth Park 960 14 20 30 42 57 41 46 31 39 76 61 Extra Par. Halsall :— 16,700} 2,701 | 3,017 | 3,538 | 4,159 | 4,445 | 4,510 | 4,672) 4,996) 5,418] 5,451| 5,404 Downholland 3,475 482 552 629 704 740 756 748 757 748 771 692 Township Halsall 6,995] 751 | 781 970 | 1,169 | 7,278 | 1,194 | 1,204) 1,336] 1,368| 1,264| 1,236 Township Lydiate 1,994| 532| 614] 6917| 770| 848| 842 848} 848| 1,071| 1,079| 1,024 Township Maghull Chap.t | 2,099] 534} 599] 720| 957 | 1,032 | 1,056 | 1,144) 1,284) 1,429| 1,422| 1,505 Melling-cum- 2,137 402 471 528 559 607 662 728 771 802 915 947 Cunscough Chap.tt Huyton :— 10,387 | 2,013 | 2,402 | 3,046 | 3,412 | 3,749 | 3,952 | 4,054} 5,114] 5,910] 6,361) 6,557 Huyton 2,879| 862} 955 | 863 | 1,094 | 7,263 | 1,295 | 7,672| 2,542| 4,033] 4,587| 4,642 Township ¢ °° Knowsley 5,061] 739 | 913 | 1,174 | 1,162 | 1,302 | 1,486 | 1,349] 1,283) 1,248) 1,150| 1,325 Township t RobyTownship”}| — — — 310 401 444 490 467 642; — _ _ Tarbock 2,447 412 534 699 755 740 687 626 647 629 630 590 Township f 48 Rochdale Parish is contained in (1) Salford Hundred ; and (2) Agbrigg Wapentake (Yorkshire, West Riding) 49 Wigan Parish is contained in (1) Salford Hundred; (2) West Derby Hundred; and (3) Wigan Borough. 50 Huyton includes the area of Roby and its population in 1801 and 1811 and 1881-1901. 345 2 44 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE TABLE OF POPULATION, 1801—1901 (continued) ParisH ny 1801 18II | 1821 1831 | 1841 1851 1861 1871 1881 1891 1901 ' =e et aoae al 4 ae West Derby : Hundred (cont.) | | Leigh :— 13,793 [12,976 |15,565 {18,372 20,083 |22,229 |25,996 )30,052 |33,592 | 46,959, 59.984! 73,878 Astley Chap.t .] 2,685 7,545 | 1,723 | 1,882 | 1,832 | 2,017 | 2,237 | 2,109 | 2,030 | 2.609. 2,552, 2,823 Atherton Chap. | 2,426] 3,249 | 3,894 | 4,745 | 4,787 | 4,475 | 4,655 | 5,907 | 7,537 12,602, 15,833, 18,895 Bedford 2,826 | 1,985 | 2,372 | 2,830 | 3,087 | 4,187 | 5,384 | 6,558 6,610 ee, nite 71,163 Township : k Pennington 1,483] 1,759 | 2,124 | 2,782 | 3,165 | 3,833 | 4,573 | 5,015 | 5,423 6.640 §325 9,977 Township Tyldesley cum ] 2,490] 3,009 | 3,492 | 4,325 | 5,038 | 4,718 | 5,397 | 6,029 | 6,408 | 9,954) 12,891| 14,843 Shakerley : ; Township Westleigh 1,883] 1,429 | 1,960 2,408 | 2,780 | 3,005 | 3,750 | 4,434 | 5,590 wate 10,928 16,177 Township ' Meols, North :— 13,142] 2,456 | 2,887 | 3,177 | 5,650 | 8,331 | 9,319 |15,947 [25,649 | 42,468, 55,413] 64,105 Meols, North 10.443 2,096 | 2,496 | 2:763 5,132 7,774 | 8,694 (14,661 22,274 | 33,763 43,026, 49,908 Township * Birkdale 2,699 360 391 , 414 5718 | 557 625 | 1,286 | 3,375 8,705, 12,387, 14,197 Township * . Ormskirk :— 31,027] 8,251 | 9,908 12,008 '13,535 14,608 |16,490 |17,049 19,212 | 23,310) 24,138 23,905 Bickerstaffe 6,453| 811 | 977 1,212 1,309 7,579 | 1,667 | 1,637 | 7,910 | 2,269 a7 2,096 Township t — Burscough 4,965| 1,139 | 1,492 1,755 | 2,244 | 2,228 | 2,480 | 2,467 | 2,202 | 2,290 2,427, 2,752 Township Lathom 8,695] 2,179 2,514 | 2,997 | 3,272 3,262 | 3,291 | 3,385 | 3,659 4,161| 4,371) 4,367 Township Ormskirk 574| 2,554 | 3,064 | 3,838 | 4,257 | 4,891 | 6,183 | 6,426 | 6,127 | 6,651, 6,298, 6,857 Township Scarisbrick 8,398] 1,154 | 1,386 | 1,584 | 1,783 | 1,957 | 2,109 | 2,112 | 2,143 2,232) 2,237| 2,140 Township Skelmersdale 7,942 414 541 622 676 691 760 | 1,028 | 3,177 ae 6,627| 5,699 Chap.t i Prescot :— $36,804 117,152 [19,738 22,811 |28,084 135.902 146,527 63,540 |80,520 |105,478 128,025 141,212 Bold Township | 4,484 713 773: 898 866. 712 773 798 927 880, 947) 950 Cronton 1,154 317 334-358 293 402 439 412 429 468 560 583 Township t¢ Cuerdley 7,563 251 248 = 321 319 221 193 192 187 227 209 193 Township Ditton 7,898 4071 422 455, 466 513. 584 764 | 1,139 7,412) 2,247, 2,605 Township ¢ Eccleston 3,569} 1,362 | 1,584 | 1,931 | 3,259 | 6,247 | 8,509 11,640 |13,832 | 18,026 24,624) 28,718 Township Parr Township .| 7,633] 1,783 | 1,405 | 1,523 | 1,942 | 3,310 | 4,875 | 8,253 | 9,287 | 11,278 13,203) 14,962 Penketh 7,008 326 341 477 548 652 679 784 | 1,042 7,239, 1,673; 1,735 Township Prescot 270] 3,465 | 3,678 | 4,468 | 5,055 | 5,451 6,393 | 5,136 | 5,077 | 5,546) 5,839 6,813 Township Rainford Chap.{] 5,877] 7,785 | 7,315 | 1,375 | 1,642 | 1,855 , 2,333 | 2,784 | 3,336 | 3,745| 3,472, 3,359 Rainhill 1,658 402 545 640 679 | 1,164 | 1,522 | 2,130 | 2,308 2,219) 2,294) 2,208 T hi ’ ti ’ z ownship i Sankey, Great 7,922 4371 466 551 563 | 567 527 563 630 630 580 1,034 Chap. ' Sutton Township] 3,725] 1,776 | 2,114 | 2,329 | 3,173 4,095 | 5,288 | 9,223 10,905 | 12,695| 15,668 18,295 Whiston 1,783} 1,031 | 1,015 | 1,306 | 1,468 | 1,586 | 1,825 | 1,727 | 2,058 | 2,705| 3,117, 3,430 Township | | Widnes 5,110} 1,063 | 1,204 | 1,439 | 1,986 | 2,209 | 3,217 | 6,905 14,359 | 24,935 30,011, 28,580 Township i ! Windle ‘: 3,150] 3,252 | 4,294 | 4,820 5,825 , 6,918 | 9,370 12,229 15,016 | 19,473 23,581| 27,747 Township | : ; Sefton :— 13.124] 2.412 2.852 | 3.433 | 4,485 6.164 | 7,278 |10,159 '14,047 | 19,707, 31,867: 45,846 eas or 853} — 238 260 247 | 317 312 300 278 | 277) aad) 261 ownship | eg Great] 2,453 425 499 674 | 1,201 | 1,946 | 2,403 | 3,794 , 6,362 | 9,373 13,288 17,394 ap. ! ; bein Yn 7,903 317 353 359-414, «394, «9407 478 432 | 553 641 563 ownship ee Hiundell 2,318 419 413 472° ~=—-505 | 528 567 572 540 © 516 471, 392 ownship | | : ' | 51 North Me:ls Township includes Southport. Southport Village contained 1346 persons in 1841; the Municipal Borough had a population of 48,083 in roor. . ski os 51 Birkdale—The r8o1 population is an estimate. 53 4tntree and Orrell and Ford included with Litherland in 18or. 346 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY TABLE OF POPULATION, 1801—1901 (continued) Acre- ParisH age r8or | 181r | r82r | 1831 | 184x | r85x | 1861 | 1871 | 188r | 1891 | gor West Derby Hundred (cont.) Sefton (cont.) Litherland 1,263] 538 362 501 789 | 1,586 | 2,252 | 3,632 | 4,884 | 7,204 | 14,887) 23,855 Township 5 Lunt 478) — 65 75 67 59 75 78 103 104 &3 80 Township Netherton 1,124) — 180 186 273 289 258 286 350 386 551 589 Township *4 Orrell and Ford 727) — 146 217 244 295 279 358 414 637 1,066} 2,104 Township 5 Sefton 1,237 483 357 389 403 430 433 430 390 382 398 343 Township *4 Thornton 7741 230 239 300 342 326 298 291 294 275 225 265 Township ToxtethPark,Extra} — | — —_ —_— _ 1,060 | 1,393 | 2,598 | 5,450 /10,368 | 21,046) — Parochial (part of) * Walton - on - the- 25,056] 3,642 | 4,110 | 5,079 | 5,853 |14,668 |21,497 |30,242 54,306 |85,831 |136,851 169,630 Hill (part fo} 56.__ Bootle cum Lin-] 7,576] 537 610 808 | 1,133 | 1,962 | 4,106 | 6,414 16,247 |27,374 | 49,217| 58,556 acre Township Fazakerley 1,710 272 329 418 407 428 427 407 454 533 1,251} 1,887 Township Formby Chap. .| 7,490} 7,045 | 1,107 | 1,257 | 1,312 | 1,446 | 7,594 | 1,780 | 2,016 | 3,908 | 5,944) 6,956 Kirkby Chap. .] 4,780] 833 | 972 | 1,035 | 1,790 | 1,476 | 1,460 | 1,475 | 1,397 | 1,407 | 1,419] 1,283 Simonswood 2,626) 274 364 390 411 493 470 461 451 465 426) 358 Township + Walton-on-the-| 7,944] 687 | 794 | 1,177 | 1,400 | 1,759 | 2,469 | 3,598 | 6,459 |18,715 | 40,892) 54,615 Hill Township West Derby] 5,530] — _ — — | 7,104 |10,971 |16,167 27,282 |33,435 | 37,702) 45,975 Chap. (part of) °7 Warrington :— 12,962 |13,180 |14,614 |16,698 |19,155 |21,901 |23,651 |26,960 |32,933 [44,352 | 53,486) 62,014 Burtonwood 4,195] 773| 868| 911| 944| 3836| 837 | 990 | 1,112 | 1,268 | 1,584) 2,187 Chap. Poulton with ; 71,320) 417 560 631 709 693 708 672 687 742 7,083, 1,453 Fearmhead Township Rixton with 2,994} 887 886 990 906 843 796 752 739 881 1,195 998 Glaze Brook Township Warrington 2,887 |10,567 |11,738 |13,570 |16,078 |18,981 |20,800 |24,050 |29,894 |40,957 | 49,126) 56,892 Township f *8 Woolston with} 7,566 5¢2 562 596 578 548 516 496 501 504 £98) 484 Martinscroft Township + Wigan(part of)**? : [24,942 [13,310 |15,771 |18,708 |21,248 [23,699 [28,068 |36,242 147,302 |61,418 | 75,916) 88,763 Abram 7,984 4975 502 504 577 9071 968 911 | 1,065 | 2,638 4,309) 6,306 Township Billinge Chapel] 7,76 765 | 1,002 | 1,279 | 1,550 | 1,777 | 2,015 | 1,961 | 7,935 | 1,983| 2,068 End Township 1.141 Billinge Higher] 7,573)] °? 555 | 670| 676| 712} 900 | 1,057 | 1,267 | 1,402 | 1,445| 1,600 End Township Dalton 2,102 352 464 486 468 483 462 453 497 494 456 422 Township t Haigh Township} 2,730 798 | 1,178 | 1,300 | 1,271 | 1,363 | 1,220 | 1,177 | 1,207 | 7,186 1,170, 1,164 Hindley Chap. .| 2,672] 2,332 | 2,962 | 3,757 | 4,575 | 5,459 | 7,023 | 8,477 |10,627 |14,715 | 18,973 23,504 Ince -in-Maker-| 2,320] 962 | 1,065 | 1,362 | 1,903 | 2,565 | 3,670 | 8,266 |17,989 |16,007 | 19,255] 21,262 field Township Orrell Township} 7,677] 7,883 | 2,002 | 2,106 | 2,578 | 2,478 | 2,762 | 2,932 | 3,567 | 4,299 | 4,914| 5,436 53a See note 53, autie. 54 Lunt and Netherton included with Sefton Township in 1801. 55 Toxteth Park is contained in (1) West Derby Hundred; and (2) Liverpool Borough. In 1851 it is stated that it pays tithes to Walton-on-the-Hill. It is returned as a Parish in 1861, doubtless becoming so under 20 Vict. c. 19. The area and the population, 1801-1831 and 1gor, are entirely shown under Liverpool Borough. 56 Walton-on-the-Hill Parish is contained in (1) West Derby Hundred; and (2) Liverpool Borough. 57 West Derby is contained in (1) West Derby Hundred; and (2) Liverpool Borough. The whole population is shown under Liverpool Borough in 1801-1831. It is described as a Parish in 1861. 58 Warrington Township included in 1861 a large number of Irish agricultural labourers come over for the hay- making. 58a See note 49, ante. 347 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE TABLE OF POPULATION, 1801—1901 (continued) PaRIsa dni 1801 | 1811 1821 1831 1841 1851 | 1861 1871 1881 1891 Igor West Derby Hundred (cont.) Wigan (part of) (cont. PembertonChap. 2,895 | 2,309 | 2,934 3,679; 4,276) 4,394; 5,252) 6,870| 10,374) 13,762 pres ers Upholland 4,686| 2,427 2,663 | 3,042) 3,040) 3,113 3,359| 3,463| 4,158) 4,435| 4,4 4, Township | Winstanley 7,860 637 ' 747 800) 731 681 675 633 602 cr 568 564 Township : Winwick :— 26,517 |12,290 14,290 16,229, 17,961} 18,148) 19,934] 25,536] 31,066) 37,387 45,160 Seer Ashton in Maker-+| 6,257] 3,696 4,747. 5,674) 5,972) 5,410| 5,679) 6,566] 7,463 9,828 13,379| 78, field Town- | ship *° Culcheth 5,373} 1,833 | 2,117 2,163; 2,503) 2,193, 2,395} 2,214| 2,266 alia 2,285| 2,294 Township © Golborne 1,679] 962 | 1,117 | 1,310 1,532) 1,657; 1,910) 2,776| 3,688) 4,502 5,601| 6,789 Township tf * Haydock ae 2,411] 734| 805 916| 934) 1,296] 1,994] 3,675] 5,286, 5,863, 6,535| 8,575 Township °° Houghton, Mid- 855 295 273 280 286 293 238 252 252 242 240 214 dleton and Arbury Town- shi Kenyon 7,686 384 415 396) 349 323 293 274 234 233 241 329 Township © Lowton Chap.” | 7,830] 7,402 | 1,647 | 1,988, 2,374] 2,150) 2,140] 2,384| 2,144| 2,357| 2,657| 2,964 Newton-in- 3,105} 1,455 | 1,589 1,643) 2,139| 3,126) 3,719} 5,909| 8,244] 10,580 12,861 16,699 Makerfield Chap. Southworth with} 7,887 956 | 1,016 1,257| 1,329' 1,155 1,097 1,094| 1,033) 1,032 914 970 Croft Town- : ship t 4 Winwick — with] 7,440 573 570 602 603 545 469 4571 456 487 447 595 Hulme Town- ship Lancaster Borough Lancaster (part of, 4 ;— Lancaster T49T] 9,030 | 9,247 | 10,144 12,167) 13,531, 14,378] 14,324] 17,034) 20,558 26,380] 31,224 Township ° Liverpool Borough Liverpool... 1,858 177,653 (94.376 '118,972 165,175 223,003 258,2361269,7421238,411 210,164 156,981|147,405 eae a ee 2,375] 2,069 | 5,864 | 12,829 aa 49,235 59,941| 66,686] 80,392 106,660 107,341|136,230 xtra arochia i H (part of) 66a | : | ae on the 2,289] 3,528 | 5,276 9,686 16,722 23,249 $7,778 107,510 174,602,235,684 253,658 277,549 part o = i : Everton Chap. .| 693] 499 913 | 2,109 4,518 9,221 25,883] 54,848| 90,937,109,812,110,556 121,469 Kirkdale 921) 393} 665} 1,273 2,597 — 9,893) 16,135| 32,978| 58,145| 66,131 69,386 Township} { i West Derby 675] 2,636 | 3,698 6,304 9,613 9,760 22,002, 36,527 60,687, 67,727; 76,971 86,694 Chap. (part of) ®« : ! | | | i, 89 The Townships of Ashton in Makerfield and Haydock are said in 1861 to constitute the Parish of Ashton in Makerfield. 6° The Townships of Kenyon and Culch 61 Golborne is said to be a Parish in 18 52 TL owton is said to be a Parish in 186r. °S Newton in Makerfield is said to be a Parish in 1861. °* Southworth with Croft is said to be a Parish in 1861. 65 Lancaster Township. added to Lancaster To distinguished in rgor, townships as existing prior to the change. 65a See note 33, ante. 6° Liverpool includes, in 1841, 491 men of the King’s Cheshire Yeomanry 66a See note 55, ante. 66> See note <6, ante. —Parts of Skerton and Scotforth Townships ( wnship by the Lancaster Corporation Act, 18 and so is included in Lancaster, 348 eth are said in 1861 to constitute the Parish of Newchurch Kenyon. Ory 54a See note 6, ante. Lonsdale Hundred, South of the Sands) were 88. The part of Scotforth so added cannot be The areas given for Lancaster and Scotforth are for the 66¢ See note 57, ante SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY TABLE OF POPULATION, 1801—1901 (continued) PaRisH ea 1801 1811 1821 1831 | 1841 1851 1861 | 1871 | 1881 1891 IQoOL Manchester Town near (part | 6,359 176,788 91,130 |129,035'187,022242,983 316,213 '357,979|379,374|393,5 85 4 16,1 85|426,944 to} : | Ardwick Chap.t| 509] 7,762 | 2,763 | 3,545] 5,524} 9,906 15,777| 21,757| 28,066| 31,197| 34,996| 40,847 Beswick 96 6 14 35| 248} 345 = 40d) = 881] 2,506] 7,957| 9,697] 17,516 Township 7 Bradford 288] 94] 106 95| 166 911| 1,572) 3,523] 7,168] 16,121) 19,981| 23,427 Township Cheetham Chap.] 979] 752 | 1,170 | 2,027) 4,025] 6,082 11,175) 17,446| 21,617| 25,721| 29,590| 37,947 Chorltonon Med-] 646] 675 | 2,587 | 8,209| 20,569| 28,336 35,558 44,795| 50,281| 55,598 59,645| 57,953 lock Townshipt | Harpurhey 193 118 172 297 463 438, 458 827| 1,571| 4,810) 8,380) 15,489 Township | Hulme 477 1,677 | 3,081 | 4,234) 9,624 aii 53,482| 68,433| 74,731| 72,147| 71,968| 66,916 Township Manchester 1,646 170,409 |79,459 |108,016|142,026|163,856 186,986 185 ,410,173,988|148,794|145,100|132,316 Township Newton Chap. .] 7,585] 7,295 | 1,784 | 2,577| 4,377| 6,127) 10,801) 14,907| 19,446| 31,240| 36,834| 40,533 Salford Town Manchester (part of) 864. ,__ Salford 1,354 [13,611 |19,114 | 25,772] 40,786] 53,200, 63,423] 71,002] 83,277|101,584)109,732|105,335 Township Wigan Borough Wigan (part of)®7 ; Wigan Townshipj 2,188 |10,989 |14,060 | 17,716] 20,774] 25,517] 31,941] 37,658] 39,110] 48,194] 55,013] 60,764 The following Municipal Boroughs and Urban Districts were co-extensive at the Census of 1901 with one (or more) Places mentioned in the Table :— Borough or Urban District Abram U.D. Accrington M.B. Adlington U.D. Allerton U.D. Ashton in Makerfield U.D. é Aspull U.D. Billinge U.D. Birkdale U.D. Blackrod U.D. Bootle M.B. : Carnforth U.D. Childwall U.D. Chorley M.B. Church U.D. Clayton le Moors UD. Clitheroe M.B. . Crompton U.D. Croston U.D. . Denton U.D. Failsworth U.D. ; Farnworth U.D. Fulwood U.D. Garston U.D. . Golborne U.D. . 66d See note 41, 67 Beswick is described in 1851 as ‘an Extra Parochial Township belonging to Manchester Parish.’ ante. Place, and Hundred in which Contained . Abram Township (West Derby Hundred) Ashton in Makerfield Township (West Derby Hundred) Aspull Township (Salford Hundred) (all in the West Derby Hundred) Birkdale Township (West Derby Hundred) Blackrod Chapelry (Salford Hundred) Bootle cum Linacre Township (West Derby Hundred) Carnforth Township (Lonsdale Hundred, South) Childwall Township (West Derby Hundred) Chorley Parish (Leyland Hundred) Church Kirk Township (Blackburn Hundred, Lower) Clayton le Moors Township (Blackburn Hundred, Lower) Clitheroe Township, including the Castle (Blackburn Hundred, Higher) Crompton Township (Salford Hundred) Croston Township (Leyland Hundred) Denton Chapelry and Haughton Township (both in Salford Hundred) Failsworth Township (Salford Hundred) Farnworth Chapelry (Salford Hundred) Fulwood Township (Amounderness Hundred) Garston Township (West Derby Hundred) Golborne Township (West Derby Hundred) In New and Old Accrington Townships (Blackburn Hundred, Higher) Adlington Township (Leyland Hundred) Allerton Township (West Derby Hundred) Billinge Chapel End, Billinge Higher End, and Winstanley Townships 1861 it is said to have become a Parish under 20 Vict. c. 19, and in 1871 it is described as a Township in Manchester Parish. 67a See note 49, ante. 349 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE application of the term ‘Industrial Revolution’ to the extraordinary economic development which took place, than from that of Lancashire. First among the circumstances which led up to the factory system we must notice the invention of new machinery and the improvement of old machinery, which previously had been of a very rudimentary type, remembering that the use of specialized appliances was conditional upon the division of labour which can frequently be secured by means of group production only. So far as the new contrivances related to textiles, they were as a rule employed first in the cotton industry, but before the end of the eighteenth century the factory system was being intro- duced into the Lancashire woollen industry. Another cause leading to the establishment of the factory system was the increased use of water power, especially in cotton-spinning. In early years roller-spinning was almost always effected by water power, and the economies of the use of water power proved to be a strong decentralizing force, as the small Lancashire streams could not supply sufficient power for a group of mills in any given spot. But far more important for the development of the factory system in Lancashire than the increased use of water power was the application of the steam engine to driving machinery. The old atmo- spheric engine of Newcomen had been in use since early in the eighteenth century for pump- ing water out of mines, and Baines asserts that an atmospheric engine was used in a cotton mill in Manchester in 1783. James Watt had taken out the patent for his steam engine in 1769. His chief improvements on Newcomen consisted in the separate condenser and in the arrangement for dispensing with the need of atmospheric pressure. It was several years before the steam enzine was first employed in production proper. The first engine of this type known to have been set up in a cotton mill was that constructed by Boulton and Watt, at Soho Iron Works, Birming- ham, in 1785, and used at Papplewick in Nottinghamshire. It was not till 1789 that a Lancashire cotton mill was driven by a Watt steam engine. In the same year a steam engine was erected at St. Helens to grind and polish plates of glass made by the British Cast Plate- glass Manufactory. By 1795 steam engines were being put to yet another use, for Aikin, writing in that year, mentions that they were employed in the neighbourhood of Manchester ‘for winding up coals from a great depth in the coal pits.’ Improvements in the process of manufacture, quite apart from mechanical inventions, are another cause which led to the development of the factory system. An improvement, which particularly affected Lancashire at the time, was the substitution of chlorine bleaching for the old process of ‘grassing.’ The bleaching properties possessed by chlorine were discovered by a French chemist, Berthollet, in 1785, and the process was further developed by other chemists, includ- ing the Manchester chemist Henry. Prior to the discovery of the new method, bleaching was carried on in the neighbourhood of Manchester and Bolton by whitsters doing business on a small scale. After the discovery of the new system bleach-works on a large scale were established in various towns of the county. Towards the end of the eighteenth century improvements in the process of smelting iron led to the disappearance of the small forges which had previously predominated in the industry. In 1784 Henry Cort, a Lancashire inventor, took out a patent for refining iron by puddling with mineral coal, and four years later a steam engine was first applied to blast furnaces.’ Both these inventions tended to increase the scale on which the iron industry was conducted. It is uncertain how soon they were adopted in Lancashire, though it seems likely that coal was being used for smelting purposes in the Wigan iron industry at the end of the eighteenth century. Another advance which led to the growth of Lancashire industries and to the spread of the factory system was the great development of transport facilities which took place during the eighteenth century. In 1720 the River Douglas was rendered navigable as far as Wigan, which assisted materially in aiding the expansion of the coal industry of that town. Shortly afterwards the Mersey and Irwell were canalized as far as Manchester. “Two canals which contributed to the use made of the Haydock and the Worsley coalfields respectively were the Sankey and the Bridgewater canals, both finished about 1760. Another aspect of the development of transport facilities, quite apart from the new waterways, was the improvement effected in the condition of the highways. The direct consequence was a great augmentation of commerce. Another out- come of the improved transport facilities was the attraction of new industries to their routes. Thus the banks of the Sankey Canal at St. Helens offered a home to two new industries : the one was the plate-glass works established at Raven- head in 1773, and the other was the copper- smelting works which commenced business at Greenbank in 1780. To the latter works copper for smelting was brought by water from Paris Mountain in Anglesey. If we turn to the nineteenth century and seek reasons for the rapid progress of Lancashire industries during that period, we discover that the process of the substitution of the factory system for the domestic system, and the large- scale for the small-scale system, continued long after it began, and that the new economies of specialization and co-ordination rendered possible 1 Toynbee, Industrial Revolution, 91. 352 INDUSTRIES by the new methods of production only slowly evolved. The struggles between the hand-loom and the power-loom, and between the hand- mule and self-actor, were of long duration. It was only at the beginning of the second quarter of the nineteenth century that the manufacture of alkali passed over to the factory system, and it was many years later before the Prescot watch industry yielded itself to the new power. Steam- driven machinery was first employed in the latter industry during the ‘sixties,’ but it was not until the end of the ‘eighties’ that the domestic system was entirely replaced by the factory system. As has already been stated, one of the most important aspects of the industrial revolution was the invention of new machinery, but it was the nineteenth century which saw the establishment of the machine-making industry in Lancashire. Some textile machinery and a certain number of steam engines were being built in this county at the end of the eighteenth century, but no great progress was possible until the means at the disposal of engineers had been improved. Thus many of the greatest Lancashire engineers during the first half of the nineteenth century devoted themselves to the development of the machine- tool industry ; three men who particularly dis- tinguished themselves in this direction being Richard Roberts, Joseph Whitworth, and James Nasmyth. The manufacture of textile ma- chinery, steam engines and machine tools, has continued in Lancashire till the present time, but during the course of the nineteenth century many new branches of the engineering industry were developed. Several of these were closely connected with the improvements in transport effected from time to time during this period. Locomotive building was started early in the county ; the first Lancashire railway, the Man- chester and Liverpool, was opened in Septem- ber, 1830, and within a few years several existing, or newly established, local firms were undertaking the construction of locomotives. This industry has steadily increased up to the present time, together with the construction of railway carriages and wagons. Another result of the growth of railways was a_ prodigious expansion of the demand for iron, as a conse- quence of which the exports of iron ore from the Furness district were greatly augmented. The displacement of wooden sailing vessels by iron steamers intensified the demand for iron, and the new needs of the shipbuilding industry gradually forced it from Liverpool to Barrow, where the first shipbuilding works were established in 1870. The most important event in the iron industry was the discovery by Bessemer, in 1856, of a process for the direct conversion of pig-iron into steel. As a result of this, the iron-smelting industry was re-established in Lancashire both in Furness and at Wigan. It is from 1859, when Messrs. Schneider, Hannay & Co., built furnaces in Barrow, that the new growth dates. Recent developments of electricity as a motive power have led to the expansion of one or two old works and the establishment of several new works in the county. An example of the former is Messrs. Mather & Platt, Ltd., of Salford Iron Works, who attached an electrical branch to their business in 1882; examples of the latter are Messrs. Dick, Kerr & Co., Ltd., and the United Electric Car Co., Ltd., founded at Pres- ton, in 1900, and the British Westinghouse Company, which commenced business in Trafford Park, Manchester, in 1901. "The appearance of certain new industries in Lancashire during the nineteenth century may be accounted for by the fact that they were subsidiary to other indus- tries already established there. An important aspect of the most recent indus- trial history of Lancashire is the growth of industrial combination. The movement is only some fifteen years old; the earliest ‘combine’ was formed in 1890. This was the United Alkali Co., Ltd., which is an association of alkali manufacturers employing the Leblanc process. In 1897, Sir Joseph Whitworth & Co., Ltd., amalgamated with Armstrongs of the Tyne to form Sir W. G. Armstrong, Whitworth & Co., Ltd. About 1900, the combination movement was exceedingly active, and in rapid succession the Fine Spinners’ Association, the English Sew- ing Cotton Co., the Bleachers’ Association, the Calico Printers’ Association, and the Wallpaper Manufacturers, Ltd., were established. Some of these combinations have not hitherto proved financially successful. The debt which Lancashire industries owe to foreign immigrants is very uncertain. It has been frequently alleged that Flemish weavers settled in Lancashire during the fourteenth cen- tury, but the only authority we can find for the assertion is a passage in Fuller’s Church History, written in 1655,? and Lieut.-Col. Fishwick has pointed out * that contemporary documents con- tain no names indicating Flemish origin. Some doubt also attaches to the statement that the cotton industry was brought to Lancashire in the sixteenth century by refugees from the Nether- lands. Another traditional case of early foreign immigration is that given by James Nasmyth, the inventor of the steam hammer, in his Auto- biography* :— I was first informed of this circumstance by William Stubbs, of Warrington, then the maker of the cele- brated ‘ Lancashire files.” The P.S. or Peter Stubbs’s files, were so vastly superior to other files, . . . that every workman gloried in the possession and use of such durable tools. . . . Mr. Stubbs proceeded to ? Bk. iv, 112. 8 Hist. of Lanc. 83 ; and Hist. of Rochdale, 33. ‘4 pp. 214-15. 2 353 45 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE give me an account of the origin of this peculiar system of cottage manufacture in his neighbourhood. It appeared that Hugo de Lupus (sic), William the Conqueror’s Master of Arms, the first Earl of Chester, settled in North Cheshire shortly after the Conquest. He occupied Halton Castle and his workmen resided in Warrington and the adjacent villages of Appleton, Widnes, Prescot, and Cuerdley. There they produced coats of steel, mail armour, and steel and iron weapons, under the direct superintendence of their chief. The manufacture thus founded continued for many centuries. Although the use of armour was discon- tinued, these workers in steel and iron still continued famous. The skill that had formerly been employed in forging chain armour and war instruments was devoted to more peaceful purposes. The cottage workmen made the best of files and steel tools of other kinds. Their talents became hereditary and the manufacture of wire in all its forms is almost peculiar to Warrington and its neighbourhood. Mr. Stubbs also informed me that most of the workmen’s pecu- liar names for the tools and implements were traceable to old Norman-French words. Neither Nasmyth, nor any other person who has repeated his statement, has given authorities to justify it. Another, and better authenticated, case of foreign immigration is that of German miners into the Furness district, but it is not clear that they came in any large numbers. The register book of the parish of Hawkshead at the beginning of the seventeenth century con- tains the following entries :— Baptisms, 1608. April 1st Burials, 1609. December xxvth Michaell Suckmautle, a Dutchman Baptisms, 1607 March 3rd Anthony. Hans Mozer fil : Martini. Margaret Godmunte fil : These names, as well as others, were brought in- to the Lake district in the sixteenth century by the German copper-mining colonies at Keswick, and perhaps also at Coniston.” A reference toa German miner also occurs in a licence, dated 10 October, 1564, to Thomas Thurland, clerk, and to David Loughsetter, a German, to dig for NATURAL Of the natural products of Lancashire, other than coal and iron, there is very little to be said. Deposits of salt at Preesall, near Fleetwood, were discovered early in the ‘seventies,’ in the course of a search for iron-ore; but it was not until 1888 that the salt mines were systematically worked. At the present time all the brine re- 5H.S. Cowper, The Oldest Register Book of the Parish of Hawkshead in Lancashire, 1568-1704. Lon- don, 1897, cil. metals and minerals anywhere in the county of Lancaster.6 Another industry which appears to have been benefited by foreign immigrants 1s the St. Helens plate-glass manufacture. In this case French workmen were brought over in 1773 to introduce the industry into the country. During the nineteenth century _ several foreigners commenced business in Lancashire, employing British workmen. In earlier cen- turies skilled artisans had migrated to Lancashire from abroad; in the nineteenth century it was highly trained chemists and engineers, coming chiefly from Germany, who settled in the county. As examples such names as Steiner, Schwabe and Beyer may be mentioned. But probably the immigrants who had the greatest influence upon our prosperity were those who flocked to this country at the end of the eighteenth century and throughout the nineteenth century, from France, Germany, Spain, Greece, Italy, Armenia, and other parts of Europe to direct the export trade from Lancashire. The chief cotton industry of the world being localized in Lancashire, and the foreigner knowing best the requirements of con- sumers in his own country, it was natural that foreign merchants should find it advisable to transfer their base to Lancashire. English dealers and producers have found it highly advantageous to have the index of foreign demand, so to speak, at their doors. With emi- gration we are not here concerned, but we may just remark that there have been at times con- siderable effluxes of skilled artisans, who, when their freedom of movement was restricted inter- nationally prior to 1824, were compelled to migrate secretly. In this way the gift of the cotton industry (if we accept tradition) was returned with interest to the Netherlands in 1805, after England had transformed it by new inventions, when forty Englishmen and seven- teen spinning-mules, bearing 16,000 spindles, were smuggled out of the country under the direction of Liévin Bauwens. Russia obtained her power-spinning through Ludwig Knoop, who had learnt the trade in Manchester, but that was not until about 1840 when the prohibition on the export of artisans and machinery had been removed. PRODUCTS quired for the United Alkali Company’s chemical works at Fleetwood is obtained by pipes from wells sunk at Preesall. Since 1894 the company’s works at Widnes, St. Helens, Glasgow, and other places have been supplied with rock-salt from Preesall. The rock-salt bed here varies in depth from 300 to 500 ft. below the level of the ground, and in some portions the floor of the mine is 450 ft. below the surface of the earth. The out- * Duchy of Lanc. Misc. Bks. vol. 23, fol. 279 2. 354 INDUSTRIES put from the mine is about three thousand tons per week, and what is not required at the United Alkali Company’s works is sold in the open market. Salt-beds also exist on Walney Island, opposite Barrow, but so far it has proved im- practicable to work them on a commercial scale. Slate and flags are quarried in the Furness district, particularly in the parish of Hawkshead. It does not appear that any quarrying except what the tenants of the manor required for their own purposes was carried on until the eighteenth century. At this time the quarries of Tilber- thwaite became particularly famous. West refers to the quarries as the ‘most considerable slate quarries in the kingdom,’ and tells us that the principal quarries were in the hands of a Hawks- head firm of Rigges, who exported 1,100 tons a year and upwards.!_ Baines mentions? that there were three considerable slate quarries in Hawks- head, Monk Coniston, and Skelwith, and three flag quarries in the same district, all the property of the duke of Buccleuch as lord of the manor. Flag-stones are also worked in the neighbour- hood of Darwen. Much fire-clay is also mined in this district.3 Similar products have been worked at Haslingden, as mentioned by Aikin in 1795: ‘Near Haslingden is Cold-Hutch-Bank, under a hill from which the finest flags and slate are quarried out.’ 4 An early reference to millstones occurs in Richard Gough’s edition of Camden’s Britannia. ‘At Whittle, near Chorley, is a plentiful quarry of millstones equal to those . . . in the Peak.’ ® An anonymous writer at the beginning of the eighteenth century also mentions the existence of a ‘plentiful quarry of millstones’ at Whittle, near Chorley. The same writer notes that a lead mine had been lately found in the same neighbourhood, in the ground of Sir Richard Standish. Gough also refers to a lead mine at this place. A hundred and fifty years ago limestone was being quarried at Clitheroe, as it is at the present day. This we gather from Dr. Richard Pococke, who wrote as follows in 1751: Clitheroe. This small town is chiefly supported by limekilns. . . . They send their lime to the distance of twenty miles both for building and manure, and sell it for about 34¢. per bushel on the spot.’ Another mention of these limekilns occurs in Baines’ Directory and Gazetteer of the County of Lancashire for 1824 :8 At Pimlico, to the north of Clitheroe, on the banks of the Ribble, is the valuable and inexhaustible bed of limestone, where ten kilns are kept burning for forty weeks in the year, and yield collectively four thousand windles or twenty-eight thousand strikes weekly. This lime, which is of a dark blue colour, is in high repute as a manure, and is fetched from a great distance to quicken the powers of vegetation. The copper mines of Coniston, of unknown antiquity, and employing 140 hands in Elizabethan times, came to an end in the Civil Wars, although they were re-opened and worked in a moribund fashion during the eighteenth century. In 1820 they were again discontinued, but about 1835 they took a new lease of life, so that by 1855 monthly wages were paid to the amount of £2,000.° COPPER SMELTING During the second part of the eighteenth century copper-smelting works existed at War- rington. ‘The earliest reference to them appears to be in Pococke, writing in 1750 :} Near the town [Warrington] is a smelting-house for copper-ore brought from Cornwall, which turns to account here by reason of the great plenty they have of coals. It is first burnt twelve hours, then cast, afterwards ground and burnt about twelve hours more, and then melted a third time and cast into pigs. Some of it is sent near to Holywell to be beat into plates, and some to Cheadle in Staffordshire to make brass. In 1755 Chamberlayne states that ‘Warrington is much noted for a large smelting-house for ’ Cowper, Hist. of Hawkshead, 292. ® Hist. of Lanc. (1835), iv, 710. 5 Shaw, Hist. of Darwen, 5 and 162. * Aikin, 4 Description of Manchester, 278. 5 Camden, Brit. Enlarged by Richard Gough (London, 1787), ili, 138. 8 The New Description and State of England (London, 1701), p. 83. copper.’? For some years previous to1795 the industry had ceased to exist at Warrington, as may be gathered from Aikin’s remarks : Large works for the smelting of copper were estab- lished near the town [Warrington] and used for several years, but have for some time been discontinued.® The present Lancashire copper-smelting in- dustry has its seat at St. Helens. Messrs. Hughes, Williams & Co. established their copper works at Greenbank in 1780 for the purpose of smelting and refining copper ore from the Paris mountain in Anglesey, North Wales. According to Aikin these works manufactured weekly thirty tons of ’Dr. Richard Pococke, Travels Through England (Camd. Soc. 1888), i, 200. § Vol. i, 612. ° Cowper, Hist. of Hawkshead, 291. 'Dr. Richard Pococke, Travels Through England (Camd. Soc. 1888), i, 9. ? Chamberlayne, Present State of Great Britain (ed. 38, 1755). 3 Aikin, 4 Description of Manchester, 302. 355 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE small copper bars of less than seven ounces troy weizht, for the East India Company, which ex- ported them to China, where they were supposed to pass for coins.4 The works were discontinued in 1815. Since then they have been succeeded by others, such as the Belvoir Mining Co. in 1831, the Staffordshire Co. in 1832, and many others more recently. In 1850 6,971 tons of copper ore were imported at Liverpool to be smelted on the Lancashire coalfields.6 At the present time the business of metal extraction 1s rather extensive at St. Helens.® COAL MINING All the Lancashire Coal Measures lie to the south of the Ribble, where the prevailing rock is the New Red Sandstone, which overlies all the best English coal deposits. The measures extend from Pendleton to Colne in the north-east and St. Helens in the west, and together constitute three groups of coalfields: (a) Burnley, (é) Manchester (Ardwick, Pendlebury, Pendleton, &c.), and (c) Mid-Lancashire (from St. Helens to Wigan and Chorley, and thence through Bolton round the semi-circle of hills to Rochdale and Ashton, continuing south through Stockport into Cheshire as far as Macclesfield). From a mining point of view the Lancashire coalfield is associated with three special features : steep inclinations, thin seams, and great depth.! The greatest inclination is probably at Moston Colliery, ranging from forty degrees to twenty degrees, or from 1 in 1} to I in 23. At a number of collieries extending from Ashton- under-Lyne to Pendleton and Clifton, and again at St. Helens, the dip is from 1 in 24 to rin 34. The inclination of the seams is associated with the large faults which traverse this coalfield, the Irwell valley fault having a throw of 3,000 ft. and other faults of 1,800 ft., 1,500 ft. and 1,200 ft. have been proved. Probably in no coalfield except Somerset are thinner seams worked than in Lancashire. Billinge, Bacup, Burnley, Accrington, Blackburn, Chorley, Rivington, Rochdale, and Littleborough produce coal from the Mountain Mine Series, from seams less than a foot in thickness to some- thing over two feet in thickness. The matter of the depth of the Lancashire mines will be referred to again below in detail, as it is a ques- tion of some importance. First, however, we must point out the various modes of mining which have been used up to the present time, and give some account of the earliest evidence of working. The material relating to the early history of coal-mining in Lancashire is not very plentiful. One reason for this probably is that for a long * Atkin, 4 Description of Manchester, 313. * Parl. Paper No. 457, Session 1851, quoted in Baines, Hist. of Liverpool, 763. ® James Brockbank, Hist. of St. Helens, 23, 24. 1 John Gerrard (Chief Inspector of Mines for the Manchester district), Presidential Address to the Manchester Geological and Mining Society, Nov. 1904. time even the local use ot coal was very slight, the principal fuel being turf, which could be easily procured from the large tracts of mossland, Turf had the further advantage of producing a moie aromatic and less sulphurous smoke in the days ot chimneyless rooms.” The earliest reference to the working of coal in Lancashire relates to Colne at the end of the thirteenth century. Possibly from this neigh- bourhood the monks of Bolton Priory procured the sea-coals which they used for their forge in 1294,° as they continued to send to Colne for fuel for this particular purpose long subse-~ quently. A more direct record, however, occurs immediately afterwards. In the de Lacy accounts of 1296 we find the items: ‘’Trochdene 4 [Trawden], sea-coal, 10s. ; Clivachre ® [Cliviger], sea-coals sold there 3d.’ In 1305 there is another reference :® ‘Colne, sea-coal there, 16s.’ At the court of Penwortham, held 3rd De- cember, 1323, John son of Richard the smith paid 12d. for licence to get coals in Middilford,’ but the ‘coal’ (carbo) may have been charcoal. In the account of the issues of Penwortham in 1323-4 there is the item of 12d. of the same substance sold there that year,® and in the same account under ‘Trawden’ we read ‘2s. 6d. of coals sold there the year.” By one of the Standish Charters, dated 30 November, 1350, the grant of certain lands and tenements is made, with the exception of fire-stone and sea- coal, if it be possible to find them within the said lands and tenements.’ A little later coal at Bolton is mentioned for the first time. In 1374 Richard de Heton brought a plea against Hugh de Machon and Henry Scolecroft, both of Bolton, for digging for sea-coals at Bolton.!° * On the question of the use of turf, see H. T. Crofton, ‘Lanc. and Ches. Coal Mining Rec.’ Trans. of the Lanc. and Ches. Antig. Soc. (1889), 26, 27. ° Whitaker, Craven (ed. 2), 384, quoted in Gallo- way, Annals of Coal Mining and the Coal Trade (ser. 1), 28. * Chet. Soc. Remains, vol. 112, pp. 4,119. ° Ibid. 12, 124. ® Ibid. 100, 176. ” Lancs. Court R. (Rec. Soc. xli), 39 (‘pro licencia habendis carbonibus’). * Duchy of Lanc. Min. Accts. bdle. 1148, No. 6. * Local Gleanings Relating to Lanc. and Ches. (ed. J. P. Earwaker), ii, 47. De Banc. R. No. 48 Edw. III. 455, m. 395¢. ‘Trin. 356 INDUSTRIES In the time of Edward III the monks of Bolton Priory were sending to Colne for supplies of coal." During the reign of Henry VI we find references to the mines of ‘Sclateston at Lang- ford-longhende’ in the town of Marsden and at Padiham, and to the farm of sea-coals in Colne and Trawden,” which was held in 1472-3 by Lawrence Lyster at a rent of 6s. 8.3 In 1488 Henry VII leased these mines for seven years, and in 1509 the lease was regranted for twenty years. With regard to coal in the Cliviger district, which is a few miles to the south of Colne, T. D. Whitaker" says: How long the coal so abundant in this rocky district has been wrought for sale does not appear from any document which I have seen.’® I only know that in the 3rd and 4th of Philip and Mary (1556-7) these sovereigns granted to my ancestor Thomas Whitaker, of Holme, gentleman, his heirs and assigns for ever, “All their coole mynes and coole pitts in Clyvecher’ which in the year 1567 this improvident grantee transferred to John ‘Townley Esq. for the trifling sum of £20, and by this bargain his descendants have during the last forty years been deprived of at least £1,000 per annum. In the sixteenth century we find the first references to the working of coal in two other Lancashire districts. “The one is to the cannel coal of Wigan, the chief mine for which was situated at Haigh (or Hawe), where a Mr. Brad- shaw lived, of whom Leland remarks in 1538 that ‘he hathe founde moche canal like se coal in his grounde, very profitable to him.’ The other is to coal at Little Hulton, between Bolton and Manchester, where in leases of farms at the end of the sixteenth century powers were reserved for getting the coal. Thus in the lease relating to the tenements and lands called Fernyslacke in Little Hulton, dated 24 October, 1575, the lessor reserved power ‘to come with horses, carts, car- riages, and workmen to dig and carry away all such coals as shall be found growing within or upon’ the lands and grounds demised. In the leases of the same premises, dated 1501 and 1550, no mention is made of coal.” During the seventeenth century the districts in which coal was worked increased, but the Wigan coalfield appears to have been the most "Whitaker, Craven (ed. 2), 401, quoted in Gallo- way, 61. 2 Duchy of Lanc. Misc. Bks. vol. 21, fol. 4; Duchy of Lanc, Mins. Accts. bdle. 76, nos. 1498 and 1500; Farrer, C&theroe CR. 490. 13 Whitaker, Hist. of Original Parish of Whalley and Honour of Clitheroe (ed. 4), ii, 361, quoted in Gallo- way, 77: 4 Duchy of Lanc. Misc. Bks. vol. 21, fol. 33-. 6 Hist. of Whalley (ed. 4), ii, 237, quoted in Gallo- way, 115. 16 A reference to the sale of coal there in 1296 will be found mentioned above. Y Leyland, vii, 47. 18 Crofton, 42. important. The new districts were those of Manchester and St. Helens. In 1610 there were coal mines at Bradford, near Manchester.’ In 1688 we find a reference to coal mining at Clifton, near Manchester. On 13 February, 1688, an Exchequer commission was issued in an atin by James Butler against Thomas Gooden, relative to coal mines and coal pits in the manor of Clifton.” With regard to St. Helens, we learn from the autobiography of Adam Martindale, who was born in 1623 at Moss Bank, that coal-mines were being worked in St. Helens in 1629,”! though it is very possible, to judge from the will of Richard Halsall of Whiston, dated 14 November, 1557, that coal was being worked in the neighbourhood three- quarters of a century earlier : I bequeath unto Henry Halsall, my son, all my tackle of the ‘Delffe of Coles,’ which I have taken off Thomas Nelson, my wife having coals free so long as she liveth.” It is only by single references that we know that coal continued to be worked in the neigh- bourhoods of Bolton and Colne. At an in- quisition held at Bolton on 4 September, 1611, George Hulton, of Farnworth, was found to have possessed ‘one coal mine with the appur- tenances in ffarnworth.’*? In September, 1652, Anthony Freston and John Hobart petitioned the ‘Honorable Commissioners for removing obstruction in the sale of the late King’s lands,’ on the ground that their lease of certain coal mines at Colne had still eighteen years to run, and that the new purchasers refused to recognize the validity of this lease. ‘The commissioners referred the matter to Richard Darnell ‘ of Councell for the Commonwealth,’ who reported as follows :— *4 The late K. Charles by his Lres Patents as well under the Seale of the County Palatine of Lancaster dated 20 Nov. in the 15th yeare of his raigne [1640] in consideration of three pounds six shillings and eight pence by advice and consent of his Chancelor and Councell of the duchy Did Graunt and to farme lette unto the sayd Anth. Freston and John Hobart the Mynes of Seacoales within the Mannor of Colne, p’cell of the sayd Mannor and P’cell of his possessions of his Duchy of Lancaster. And also one myne of coals within the Forest of Trawden p’cell of ye Lordship of Clitheroe in the County of Lancaster to hold the same from Michaelmass then last past for 31 ® Local N. and Q. Manchester uae, No. 173, quoted in Crofton, 53. ° Lanc. Rec. Soc. 1X, 73, 76, quoted in Crofton, 63. 31 Quoted in Brockbank, Hist. of St. Helens, 20. * Lance. and Ches. Wills (Lanc. and Ches. Rec. Soc.), xxx, 184. 3 Lanc. Ing. Stuart Period, pt. iii (Lanc. and Ches. Rec. Soc.), xvii, 468. “Tanner MSS. Bodleian Lib. xlviii, 109-10, quoted in Earwaker’s Local Géeanings relating to Lance. and Ches. ii, 278. 357 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE years, paying yearcly to the sayd late K. his heyres and successors for the sayd Coalemynes within the sayd Mannor of Colne eleven shillings* and for the sayd coalemyne within the sd forest of Trawden, at the Annunciation and Michaelmass by even and equall portions as by ye sayd Letters patents may appeare. On the presentation of the above quoted certi- ficate of Mr. Darnell, the petitioners granted the petition of Anthony Freston and John Hobart on 21 October, 1652. With regard to Wigan an interesting notice of the working of a colliery there in 1600 is still in existence, showing us that coal of two kinds was mined, worth 4d. and 2d. per load respectively.2 In November, 1619, Bishop Bridgeman, rector of Wigan, gave permission to Peter Platt of Wigan, chandler, to drain the water from his coal-pit near the mill-gate into the street for a short time, to see if that would enable him to get rid of the water and work the pit.” Later in the century Roger North and Bishop Gibson mention the lordship of Sir Roger Bradshaw at Haigh, near Wigan, as famous for yielding cannel coal. What struck them par- ticularly about it was the bright light it gave when burnt and the facility with which it could be formed into various kinds of vessels, such as sugar-boxes, spoons, and candle-sticks.* The same point is referred to by an anonymous writer in 1701. In Haigh, near Wigan, in the lands of Sir Roger Bradshaw, are mines of coal, good not only for fuel, but for making candlesticks, boxes, spoons, salt-sellers, etc., they have met with good acceptance and are both useful and lasting. During the eighteenth century the Lancashire coalfields continued to develop, largely assisted by improvements in the means of water trans- port. In 1720 the River Douglas was rendered navigable, so as to afford a cheap outlet for the coal measures of Wigan. About the same time the Mersey and Irwell were made navigable as far as Manchester. Later the Sankey Canal, which provided Haydock coalfield with a water- way, and the Bridgewater Canal, which assisted the development of the Worsley mines, were built. At this time coal mining was steadily increasing everywhere in Lancashire; neverthe- less contemporary references are entirely restricted to Wigan. Of these by far the most interesting is that of Dr. Richard Pococke, who was * From the petition of Freston and Hobart we learn that 5s. was paid in respect of the coal mines in Colne Manor and 6s. for those in Trawden. * Folkard, Industries of Wigan, 11. 7 Folkard, to. * Galloway, Annals of Coal Mining (ser. 1), 88. ® The New Description and State of Engl. (Lond. 1701), p. 83. * Dr. Richard Pococke, Travels through Engl. during travelling in 1751, and who wrote the follow- ing account on 8 June of that year :—” We crossed the moors towards Wigan and came to the Canal Coal Pits; they told me they were forty yards deep. The work is called a delft or mine, the vein a drift, which is about three feet thick and ‘dips from north-west to south-east about a yard in twenty. What is above the drift they call the top stone, which is of a lighter black colour than the bottom stone. They find some copper mundich in the coal and the drift is something broke by a stone running across, which they call a foull. The water is pumped up and goes off by a channel on that side of the hill, which is called a souk, and they do not look on it as unwholesome. They are much troubled by what they call fiery air. They know when it rises by the smell, and send down a person with a candle to try it; if it is dangerous they see a blaze from the candle near half a foot long. One man was burnt with it that he died, and it raised blisters on his body. When it is very bad they let down a candle by a rope to set fire to the fiery damp as they call it. As the vein is about a yard thick, so the coals rise about two feet, and six inches long, and at most four feet in girt. This they sell for 3d. a 100 wt; that which is broken they sell for a shilling the load which weighs 1200 wt. When first they open a pit they let down a round iron grate full of fire to draw out the damp by setting it on fire. The people are let down to the work by a rope. This coal is probably in all the rising ground, which is not of great extent. They work it now from the north at Kirkle to the south-east about as far as Endley Mill, and from the west at Ince to Dr. Kendrick’s pit eastward in the same parish. Referring to the cannel coal of Wigan some twenty years later, Pennant says :—* It is found in beds of about three feet in thickness, the veins dip one yard in twenty ; are found at great depths with a black bass above and below and are subject to the same damps fiery and suffocating as the common coal. Another writer gives us information of a different character about this coalfield. In the year 1802 cannel coal was sold in the Wigan district at 5d. per hundredweight at the pit’s mouth.*? A reference to the duke of Bridge- water’s coal mine at Worsley occurs in the papers of an American refugee writing in 1777 :—* A hundred men are daily employed and each turns out a ton a day; the miners’ wages are 2s. and the labourers’ about 1s. Price of coal at the pit, two pence per hundredweight, at the quay, threepence halfpenny and at the door, fourpence halfpenny. ee 1751, and later years (Camden Soc., 1888), i, 206. * Tour in Scotland, 1772, quoted in Galloway, 328. * Rev. Richard Warner, Tour through the Northern Counties of Engl. 1802, quoted in Folkard, Industries of Wigan, 13. ®G. A. Ward, Journal and Letters of an American Refugee in Engl. from 1775 to 1784 (New York, 1842), quoted in Earwaker’s Local Gleanings, i, 259. 358 INDUSTRIES The ‘first method of obtaining coal in the county was probably by means of the quarry- like openings called ‘delfs’ at places where the seam cropped out at the surface of the hill-side. Another very early method was that of sinking bell or beehive pits, that is, the small pit sunk through the surface cover and widened out or belled at the bottom to lay bare as much mineral as was consistent with safety. When working became dangerous a new pit would be sunk along- side. The only place in Lancashire where it is quite certain that this method was employed is in the neighbourhood of Oldham. On the Coppice Estate near that town some sixty of these beehives or bell-shafts have been discovered.* It is also possible that the system was employed near the outcrop of the Arley mine, not far from Wigan. With regard to more recent times any re- mains of old shallow workings show that the coal was got in a somewhat irregular fashion. Considerable areas of coal were taken away, portions of the seam being left at intervals to support the roof. The proportion of coal obtained depended on the character of the roof.%® At first the coal was probably raised by jack rolls, then by horse whims, and finally steam-engines were applied to the deeper shafts. ‘This last stage had already been reached in Lancashire in 1795; Aikin mentions that steam-engines were used in the Manchester neighbourhood “for winding up coals from a great depth in the coal pits.’ 3” During the first half of the nineteenth century the system in use was principally the ‘pillar system’ in some of its modifications. ‘There also existed to a slight extent the ‘long way’ or “long work’ or ‘longwall’ system, that is the contrary method of working without pillars, but as late as 1862 this system was regarded as a novelty in Lancashire.*® Examples of reversed methods of working also existed in Lancashire. The usual manner is to begin in the proximity of the shaft and carry the workings outward. Under the reversed system the opposite course is pursued: roads are driven out to the boundary and then workings opened out and carried in- wards towards the shaft.*® The chief objection to the pillar system was that the coal in the pillars was subjected to a *H. 'T. Crofton, ‘Lanc. and Ches. Coal Mining Rec.’ (Lance. and Ches. Antig. Soc. 1889), p. 33. % R.L,. Galloway, Annals of Coal Mining (ser. 1), 32. %R. Bentley, Coal Mining, 22. 37 4 Description of Manchester, 177. 3 Goodwin, Trans. of Manchester Geological Soc. Vv, 23. 3° Galloway, op. cit. cap. Xviil. considerable deterioration of quality, from the action of the air and the pressure, before it could be removed. In consequence of this, during the last fifty years or so, the long wall method has greatly predominated. By this system the whole of the coal is removed at one operation by having a long and continuous working face divided, step-like fashion, into a series of places, each worked by a set of men. In working, supports are set a very short distance behind the men, and as the coal is removed the supports are moved forward, the roof being allowed to sink almost immediately behind the workmen. ‘The roads are maintained by packing. By this method more round coal is obtained, and the ventilating is simplified. Formerly the system was thought suitable for thin seams only, but it is now applied in the working of seams of very con- siderable thickness. The great depth of the Lancashire coal mines has already been mentioned. It was not until after the middle of the nineteenth century that really considerable depths were attained, although as early as 1795 Aikin speaks of the ‘great depth’ of the coal-pits.© In 1869 a depth of 2,448 ft. was reached at Rosebridge, Wigan. The great mine of the Ashton Moss Colliery, Audenshaw, near Manchester, was sunk to 2,688 ft. in March, 1881, and during more recent years coal was wound there a vertical distance of 2,820 ft., while in 1904 it was being raised from a depth of 2,60oft. At the Alexandra pit the Wigan Coal and Iron Co. are working coal at a depth from the surface of probably 2,700 ft. At the Abram Coal Co.’s Colliery a similar depth has been attained. The Bradford Colliery is now being sunk to lower seams, and the shaft will probably measure a depth of 2,838 ft. But the greatest descent in Great Britain is that at Messrs. Andrew Knowles & Sons’ Pendleton Colliery, near Manchester, where coal was being won in the autumn of 1904 at 3,483 ft. from the surface.*! The following figures from the census returns give some indication of the size of the coal- mining industry of the county. In 1881 there were 59,557 men employed as coal and shale miners in Lancashire. In 1891 the number had increased to 77,509, whilst in 1901 the coal miners had further increased to 86,539. A Description of Manchester, 177. “The material for the above paragraph is taken from Crofton, op. cit. 72 and 73, Gerrard’s Presi- dential Address to the Manchester Geological Soc., the Rep. of the Recent Coal Commission, particularly the evidence of W. FE. Garforth, H. Hall, and H. Bramall, and from information kindly supplied by Mr. John Gerrard. '359 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE IRON There are no direct references to the working of iron in Lancashire previous to the thirteenth century, but in High Furness and the northern parts of Lancashire there are about thirty known sites where iron was smelted in the ancient way with charcoal into blooms—lumps of metal made by blowing in the furnace—whence the name bloomeries. The opinion is now sometimes held that bloomeries were being worked not far from Coniston in Roman and Saxon times, but other authorities think that mediaeval iron working is sufficient to account for the large number of sites! Facts are hidden in obscurity till the thirteenth century, from which time up to the dissolution of the monasteries Furness Abbey was closely associated with the working of iron.” The chief original authority concerning the iron industry of Furness in pre-Reformation times is the Coucher Book of Furness Abbey.? The book contains no information, however, either of a direct or inferential character, such as to enable us to arrive at any conclusions as to the extent to which the ironstone was worked by the convent, or as to the fuel used, or as to the source or sources from which fuel was obtained. One characteristic of the bloomeries of this district is that they were always established near flowing water, and in Furness charters we hear of water privileges, the water being ad favandum, i.e. for washing the ore.‘ We also know that the convent bestowed on its tenants each year one ton of malleable iron, called /ivery iron, for repairing their ploughs and farm gear.® On 3 Nones of March, 1235, John prior of Cartmel and the convent of that place declare that they make no claim, nor will ever make any claim by reason of any right or ownership, to use the iron mine in Furness (uti mina ferrt infra Furnes), which they have sometime had by the gift and grace of the abbot and convent of Furness during their pleasure.® In 1292 a valuation was made, for rateable pur- poses, of the temporalities belonging to Furness Abbey, in which the value of the mineria ferri deductis necessarits et expensis is given as £6 135. 4d., which greatly exceeds any other receipts of the abbey.’ Obtaining the relation between the ‘See H. S. Cowper, Hawhstead, Its Hist., Mon., &c. 281 et seq.; and W. G. Collingwood, The Anct. Tron Works of Coniston Lake (Hist. Soc. Lanc. and Ches.) (New Ser.), xvii, 3. * Collingwood, op. cit. 5. ° The Coucher Bk. of Furness Abbey (ed. J. C. Atkin- son, Chetham Soc. Remains, New Ser.), ix, xi, xix. * See Atkinson’s Introductory Chapter, xi. 5 Tbid. xv. *“ Coucher of Furness, Addit. MSS. 33244, fol. 20. ‘ Chetham Soc. Remains, xiv, 634. value of land and ironworks from a contem- porary document relating to another district, Mr. Atkinson concludes that no fewer than forty furnaces must have been in operation in the district in 1292, in order that their total annual value might equal £6 135. 4d.° The next piece of evidence is the commis- sioners’ certificate of 1537. From this we learn that after the dissolution of the monastery, three smithies for the working of iron were let to William Sandes and John Sawrey for a rent of £20 per annum.’ In 1564 the smithies were abolished by royal decree in consequence of the destruction of the woods. The tenants, however, were permitted to make iron for them- selves, with the loppings and underwood.” This decree was probably an important factor in lead- ing to the establishment of some of the bloomer- ies in the Rossendale Forest, as it was easier to carry the ore to the place where the charcoal was burnt, than to bring the charcoal to the ore. On the other hand some of the references to iron in this district are as old as those in the Furness district. The earliest references to iron in Rossendale occur in the de Lacy compoti of 1296 and 1305 and in the great de Lacy inquisition of 1311. 1296. Akerington." Los d. Brushwood and ore sold to a forge there for 27 weeks . . I 14 0 1296. Halton." Rent of Gilbert the Smith for a plot of waste at the forge, this year being the first. . . . o 1 6 1296. Haslendene."* A forge for iron farmed out in Roscyndale . . . . . . 3.0 °0 1296. Hoddesdene."* Old brushwood for a forge for I3weeks . . . .. Cliderhou."” A plot for a forge under the castle, this year being the first o 1 0 Clivachre. Iron ore sold for 10 weeks . . 0 6 8 Pendle. , The profits of the iron mines old brushwood and charcoal sold in the said forest one year with another bo Oo 9 For the year 1323-4 the following entry relating to Rossendale has been discovered, 1305. 1305. 1311. * Introductory Chapter, xviii. ° H. S. Cowper, Hist. of Hawkshead, 283. ” Tbid. 284. " Chetham Soc. Remains, cxii, 12, 123. ” Thid. 43, 142. 8 Ibid. 5, 120. “ Ibid. 7, 121. * Ibid. 110, 182, Thid. 109, 182. 360 INDUSTRIES ‘£7 1s. of old brushwood (busca), and ore (minera) of iron sold there during 47 weeks, viz. 3s. the week, and in the same source under Trawden, £7 16s. 8d. of old brushwood and ore of iron sold there during 47 weeks, viz. 35. 4d. the week.’ The four bloomeries which have recently been discovered in Rossendale were probably at work at a much later date. The remains of these old bloomeries are at Millar Barn, Meadow Wood, near Newchurch; Cinder Hill, near Rams- bottom ; Priest Booth, near Bacup ; and Rake- head, near Stacksteads. The last of these was worked by a family of Ashworths, who were originally cutlers in Sheffield. They were at work at Rakehead from about 1480 till 1700.'8 The probability is that all these bloomeries were worked by charcoal in the time of Eliza- beth, with red haematite ore of the Furness district. This supposition is supported by the fact that bloomeries were suppressed in High Furness in 1564, to prevent the woods from being used up. Rossendale offered the advan- tages of being well wooded and of being fairly accessible, water carriage being employed as far as Preston. The richness of the scoria about the sites of these Rossendale bloomeries also points to the use of haematite ore.” In the eighteenth century iron appears to have been worked near Wigan and near Rossendale, as well as at Furness. At the first place iron- smelting was carried on in a very small way on the estate of the earl of Crawford at Haigh, the iron being made from ironstone found on the estate"? In 1773 the will of James Morris of Haigh, parish of Wigan, ironmaster, was proved.” Baines”? informs us that the noble proprietor of Haigh commenced a foundry upon his estate in 1787, but this was probably quite distinct from the smelting of iron, which, according to Baines, was discontinued about 1809, on account of the low price of the metal. The only mention of iron mining near Rochdale is that in Baines. ‘Iron mines have been wrought in this town- ship [Milnrow] since 1744, at a place called Tunshill.’ 8 The following interesting account of a bloomery at Brackenthwaite in the early eighteenth century appears in a recently discovered MS. of John Lucas, History of Warton (ii, 464 et seq.) :— Soon after the Beginning of this (18th) Century, the Proprietors of the Iron Works in Forness, having 4 Duchy of Lanc. Mins. Accts., bdle. 1148, No. 6. 18 James Kerr, ‘On the Remains of some Old Bloomeries,’ formerly existing in Lancashire (Hist. of Lanc. and Ches. xii), 62. ® Kerr, loc. cit. 67. 70 Folkard, Industries of Wigan, 15. Lanc. and Ches. Rec. Soc. xxxvii. 2 Lanc. Directory and Gat. 1824, ii, 611. 3 Hist. of Lanc. (ed. 1836), ii, 641. 2 361 purchased the Fall of Leighton Park, and several other considerable Quantities in that Demesn and Places not far distant, erected a Furnace here upon a Goit drawn out of Leighton Beck for the Smelting of Iron ; as a Forge had been a few Years before built at Kere Holm very near the Borders of this Parish upon Account of the Fall of Dalton Park &c* The mighty Destruction of Wood, occasioned by the great Quantity of Iron made in this Kingdom has long been com- plained of in all Parts of the Nation ; and not with- out very good Reason : for in the County of Sussex alone there are, or lately were, no less than One Hundred and Thirty Furnaces and Hammers, which by an exact Computation are found to con- sume yearly Ninety four Thousand nine Hundred Loads of Charcoal, to the extravagant Consumption of Timber. But to come to a particular Description of this Furnace. It is built like most others, against the Side of an Hill, in a square Form, the Sides descending obliquely about Six Yards, and drawing nearer one another towards the Bottom like the Hopper of a Mill. These oblique Walls terminate at the Top of a perpendicular Square called the Hearth whose Side is about 44 Feet which is lined with the best Fire Stone to take off the Force of the Fire from the Walls, and to hold the fluid Metal which drops into it as it melts. The Top of the Furnace is covered with a large thick Iron Plate, in the Middle of which is a Hole about # of a Yard square where they throw in the Fuel and Ore. When they begin to work a new Furnace, they put in Fire for two or three Days before they begin to blow, which they call Seasoning ; at first they blow gently, gradually increasing till in about three Weekes Time the Fire will be so intense that they can run a Sow and Pigs once in about twelve Hours: and after they are once kindled they are kept at Work Day and Night for many Months or Years, still supplying the Wast of the Fuel & other Materials w*"® fresh poured in at y* Top. The Ore they use here is brought across the Bay by Coasters from Stonton in Furness, where it is found lying in the Cliffs of the Rocks of gray Limestone. The Veins are sometimes an Inch, sometimes a Foot, and sometimes three or four Yards broad, which they have followed towards the Centre of the Earth for many Fathoms. The Ore which lies at the outside of the Vein or near the Rock on either Side is hard, and that which is in the Middle is commonly soft like Clay. They are both red or else bluish, and smooth as Velvet to the Touch when broken. As for the medicinal Uses of this Ore, they use the soft sort frequently, and with great Success, for the Murrain in Cattle, and for most Diseases in Swine they give a Handfull or two in Milk. When the Ore which the Workmen here commonly call the Mine, is brought to the Furnace, their first Work is to burn it in a Kiln, much after the Fashion of our ordinary Limekilns ; a Thing we find practised not only in the Iron Works in Sweeden, but also in all the Mines in Hungary, whether Gold, Silver, Copper, Iron, Lead or Lapis Calaminaris. These Kilns they here fill up to the Top with Turf and Ore Stratum super Stratum, and then putting Fire to the Bottom let it burn till the Fuel be wasted, and the mere drossy Part of the Ore consumed, and the other 46 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Part rendered more soft and malleable ; otherwise if it should be put into the Furnace as it comes out of the Earth, it would not melt but come away whole. Care also must be taken that it be not over much burned, for then it will loop, ice. melt and run together in a Mass. After it is burnt they beat it into small pieces on the Rost-Hearth as the Germans call it w® an Iron Sledge or large Hammer, and then cast it into the Furnace (which is before charged with a certain Quantity of Charcole and Turf) and with it a small Quantity of Limestone and old Cinders ; these all run together into a hard Cake or Lump which is sustained by the Fashion of the Furnace, through the Bottom of which, the Metal as it melts by the Violence of the Blast, trickles down into the Hearth or Receiver, where there is a Passage open much like the Mouth of an Oven, by which they clear away the Scum and Dross, which they always take off from the melted Iron before they let it run. When they find the Fuel to have subsided some- thing more than a Yard (which they prove by an Iron Gauge or Instrument much like a Flail) which is in the Space of about an Hour, they fill the Furnace again. Their Charging here consists of a certain Quantity of very hard black Turf (the best in its Kind of any perhaps in England which is dug up in Arnset Moss, about half a Mile from them) and Charcoal, upon which they throw Four Hundred Weight of burnt Ore of different Sorts and Goodness, together with a 10™ or 12" Part as much Slaken as the Ger- mans call them, or old Cinders w® they here call Forest Cinders, and the same Quantity of Limestone beaten into small Pieces, to make it melt freely and cast the Cinders. We find that in Hungary they not only mix its own Cinders in melting their several Sorts of Ore, but also a certain Quantity of Stone, generally Pyrites : and a late Author” informs us that the French in their Iron Furnaces make use of a Sort of Sand Stone w® they call Flux Stone, which they say not only helps the Fusion, and separates the metalick from the earthy Particles, but that the vitri- fied Sand, being a liquid Mass of Fire, keeps in a State of Agitation the finer Grains of Sand and the saline and earthy Particles, which after Ignition fix into a consistent Body. And this they think prefer- able to Lime Stone which in their Opinion serves only as a Crust or covering to reverberate the Heat, and to make it act with more Force inwardly on the Ore which is mixed with the Coals : But if the longest and largest Experience may be allowed as Judge, we shall find Limestone pronounced the most proper Assistant in melting Iron Ore: for the Swedes who (notwithstanding the great Quantities we make) do yet furnish us with near two thirds of the Iron wrought up and consumed in the Kingdom, besides the vast Quantity they export to other Parts of the World, have always used it, and find it so absolutely necessary that the Mine will not run to so good Advantage without it. They have found here by Experience that Turf whichis here both very good and very cheap, doth not only spare Char Coal, but makes better Iron than Char- coal alone: upon which Account it is that the Iron made at the Furnace is much preferable to that which was made some years since at Milthorpe in this Neighbourhood, where Charcoal was the only Fuel they made Use of. “ Nature Display’d, vol. iii, dial. xxvi, pp. 330, 331, 332. The Water does not here blow the Fire by a Pair of Philosophical Bellows, as at the Brass Works of Tivoli, near Rome: but behind the Furnace are placed two huge Pair of Bellows each 74 Yards long, and 14 Yard broad, whose Noses meet at a little Hole near the Bottom of the Furnace. These Bellows are compressed together by certain Buttons placed in the Axis of a very large Wheel, which is turned about by Water in the Manner of an Overshot Mill. As soon as these Buttons are slid off, the Bellows are raised again by the Counterpoise of Weights, whereby they are made to play alternately, the one giving their Blast all the Time the other is rising. The Axis of this Wheel is 12 Yards long, and its Diameter is ten Yards within the Rim ; so that allowing for the Thickness of the Rim, and the Depth of the Buckets, it will, I think, be found to exceed those at the great Copper Mines in Sweden whose Circumference accord- ing to Naucleus is but about one Hundred Foot ; and to be much about the Size of that observed by Dr. Brown a considerable Depth in one of the Hungarian Mines, which being turned about by the Fall of a subterraneous Torrent moved Engines which pumped out the Waters from the Bottom of the Mine into a Cavity wherein this Wheel (whose Diameter is 12 Yards) is placed, whence it runs out at the Foot of the Mountain ; but it will be found to fall short of the Size of that mentioned by Dr. Leopold, the Diameter of which he says was forty eight Foot, and the Machien it moves draws up Buckets full 800 Foot. When the Furnace is fit to run, as they term it, which is once in about 12 Hours, they make a long Furrow through the Middle of a level Bed of Sand directly before the Mouth thereof, which they call the Sow, and out of it on each Side eleaven or twelve smaller for the Pigs, and all these they make greater or lesser according to the Quantity of their Metal which is then nothing but a Torrent of liquid Fire ; made so very fluid by the Violence of the Heat, that when it is let out of the Receiver or Hearth, by breaking a Lump of Clay out of a Hole at the Bottom thereof, with a long Iron Poker, it not only runs to the utmost Distance of the Furrows, but stands boil- ing in them for a considerable Time. Upon the Extinction of the Fire the Redness goes off and the metallick Particles coalesce and subside one upon another, and it begins to look blackish at the Top ; then they break the Sow and Pigs off from one another ; and the Sow into the same Lengths with the Piggs, which is now done with ease; whereas if let alone till they were quite cold, the doing of it would be much more difficult. This Running of the Iron calls to my Mind what is said by Mons. le Grand and others about the Invention of Metals by Tubal Cain: for he, they say, observing Iron to run from a burning Mountain, and to grow hard in what Form it happened to meet with a Mould, took the Hint thereby to contrive the casting of Metals. The Hearth grows wider by using, so that their Runnings are much larger at the latter End than at the Beginning : for the Master Founder here told me on the 12™ of June 1717 that they then ran abt Six- teen or Seventeen Hundred Weight at a Time, and in the Year 1721, he told my Brother they then ran twenty two Hundred Weight. When they Cast Backs for Chimneys, Rollers for Gardens, Pots or Pans &c*. they make Moulds of fine Sand, into which they pour the liquid Metal with great Ladles, as they do 362 INDUSTRIES who cast Brass or other softer Metals. But this Sort of Iron having not undergone the Preparation of the Finery and Chafery in the Forge, are so very brittle that with one Blow of a Hammer, it will break all to Pieces, especially if it be hot. We are told by Dr. Brown that the Silver Ore in the Mines of Hungary affords but about an Ounce, sometimes scarce half an Ounce in 100 Pounds Weight ; but that the Ore of the Copper Mine of Herm Grundt is very rich, and in an 100 Lb. yields ordinarily 20, and sometimes 30, 40, 50 and some- times 60 Pounds. By the same Reason the Mine here may also be said to be very rich, for if we com- pare the Chargings and Runnings in 12 Hours as above we shall find that 100 Lb. of Ore yields 40 Lb. of Iron, or upwards. I have observed above that they take off the Scum or Dross from the fluid Iron at a Place even with the Top of the Hearth, and throw it down the Hill before the Door of the Furnace. Amongst this Slag I observed Abundance of Glass ; for the Limestone, which of its own Nature would burn immediately into a Calx, is here, by Reason of a metalick Mixture, melted into opack vitreous Substance. This account may be suitably supplemented by a description, extracted from the same source, of charcoal burning* :— In this Part of the Country they generally let their Oaks stand a Year after they are pill’d,”* which Custom Dr. Plot observed in Staffordshire, and recommended it to his Majesty. For the Winter Air closes the Pores of pilled Wood, and so consequently consolidates all Trees, but especially the Oak does thereby, according to the Opinion of the Ancients, acquire a Sort of Eternity in its Duration. . . . Their Top & Under- wood they here make into Charcoal, the Method of which is this. ‘They cut or rive the Wood into Pieces which they make up into Cords or Stacks (a Cord by Statute is to be 8 Foot Jong, 4 Foot broad, and 4 high, and every Stick at least 3 Inches about), They place their Pieces all upright in 3 several Stories, S. S. S. in a Conic, or rather in a Cupalo Form, having first struck a Stake into the Ground in the middle of the lowest Floor for the rest to lean upon. Such a Pile they call their Hearth, and in some Places, though very improperly, a Pit. They cover the Wood with a thin Covering of Straw or Stubble, and over that they place a Layer of Sind or Earth. They leave a Hole at the Top of the Pile, where they put in the Fire, and then cover it up. ‘They make here and there small Vent Holes for the Smoak as they see Occasion, and take particular Care never to let it Flame, for that would consume the Wood. A whole Hearth will be coal’d in six or seven Days. Six Loads of Wood will make but one of Charcoal. The greener the Wood the weightier and more lasting is the Coal made of it. ”Tis computed that about Five Hundred Thousand Pounds’ worth of Timber is fell’d, and about as much spent in Fireing, in England every Year, besides what is imported from our Colonies in America; ... > Quoted from Lucas’s Hist. of Warton, ii, 605. For this and the preceding extract we are indebted to J. Rawlinson Ford, F.S.A. 6 See the ‘ Prejudice of felling Oak in Summer,’ in the Mystery of Husbandry, by J. W. Gent, 234. About 1738 Isaac Wilkinson, his wife and son John, later a famous ironmaster in South Staffordshire, settled in the village of Backbarrow in High Furness. His first business was the manufacture of ordinary flat smoothing irons, and having no furnace of his own, he obtained leave, for a suitable remuneration, to take metal in a molten state out of the local iron furnace, which, with the forge, was then worked by the Machell and other old families in the neighbour- hood. ‘This metal was removed in large ladles across the public highway to an adjoining shed, where Wilkinson had his moulds. In 1748 he purchased or built the iron furnace and forge at Wilson House, near Lindal, in the parish of Cartmel, and endeavoured to smelt the rich haematite ore with peat moss. To facilitate moving the ore, a small canal was cut, and an iron boat was constructed for use on it. Smelting by peat did not prove a success, and eventually common wood charcoal was used. About 1753 Wilkinson first appears in connexion with Ber- sham Iron Works, near Wrexham, and though he still owned property in Furness, his later activities were unconnected with Lancashire. During the tenure of Wilson House, Isaac and John Wilkinson took out a patent for the common box- smoothing iron.”” Mention has been made above of the Back- barrow furnace from which Wilkinson obtained his iron. It was built in 1710 by the Machell and Sandys families. As this furnace has a most interesting history some details about it will be given below, but first mention must be made of one or two earlier furnaces. About the middle of the seventeenth century charcoal smelting furnaces were re-introduced into Furness as private ventures. “There is known to have been a bloomery at Coniston Forge in 1650, which continued its existence throughout the eighteenth century. About 1750 it was turning out 80 tons of iron yearly. Ironworks were commenced at Force Forge by William Rawlinson of Rus- land Hall (1680) and soon after by Myles Sandys of Graythwaite.”® As already mentioned the Backbarrow Forge was founded in 1710. In 1728 this furnace turned out 16 tons of pig-iron ; in 1750 it pro- duced about 260 tons of bar-iron, and in 1796, 769 tons of cast iron.*” In 1747 the forge at Newland was founded,*' and also during the course of the eighteenth century that at Leigh- ton. In 1788 the production of these three furnaces is recorded as 2,100 tons. A return ” The information for this paragraph was found in Francis Nicholson, ‘Notes on the Wilkinsons, Ironmasters,’ Mem. of the Manchester Lit. and Phib- sophic Soc. 1905, No. 15, and J. Stockdale, unals of Cartmel, 209, 210. *8 Collingwood, op. cit. 9. ” Cowper, Hist. of Hawkshead, 288. * Thid. 287. ) Tbid. 286. 363 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE for 1796 gives the make of Newland and Backbarrow as 700 tons each, and that of Leigh- ton as 780 tons, that is, an aggregate of 2,180 tons. In 1839 the charcoal iron made in Lancashire at the Newland and Backbarrow furnaces of Messrs. Harrison, Ainslie & Co. did not exceed 800 tons. In 1857 Lancashire produced 1,233 tons of charcoal pig-iron.** In 1880 these three furnaces were still in opera- tion, though only at intervals. In 1898 con- siderable alterations were made at Backbarrow, but the old hearth still remains, with a lintel inscribed ‘T.M.W.R.C.s. 1711 #* H.A. & CO. 1870.’ The earlier date is doubtless that on which it was first put in blast. The first initials are those of T. Machell, William Rawlinson, and C. Sandys, and the latter refer to Harrison, Ainslie & Co.*® In 1903 there was only the one furnace at Backbarrow, about three miles to the south of the Windermere lake, on the banks of the Leven.” This furnace is fed with a good quality of native ores and with charcoal supplied from the various woods which abound in the Furness district. The supply of charcoal is too small to keep even this one furnace in constant blast. The reason it continues to exist is that a good price can be obtained for charcoal pig-iron, which is demanded for the more delicate work of parts of sewing machines, and of the mechanism of gun mountings.* Although so little pig-iron was made in Fur- ness at the end of the eighteenth century, a certain amount of ore was exported to be worked up clsewhere. At the beginning of the nine- teenth century, the ore exported was probably less than 3,000 tons. It was about 1830, when the demand for iron for railway construction purposes was beginning to increase, that people in the iron trade became more interested in the Furness haematite deposits. At this time want of transport facilities retarded the development of the Furness mines. Nevertheless in 1844, two years before the opening of the first part of the Furness Railway, the export of ore had increased to 50,000 tons.4? It was not until after the discovery of the Park Mine, near Barrow, by the late Mr. H. W. HARDWARE AND The earliest seat of the metal industries in Lancashire appears to have beenat Wigan. Here for more than two centuries pewterers and bra- ziers carried on their trade. During the course of the eighteenth century brass and iron foundries were established in this place. In the seventeenth century it was famous for its bell-founders. *R. Meade, Coal and Iron Industries of the United Kingsm, 448. % Thid. 449. * Fairbairn, Iron, its Hist. and Manufacture, 225. * R. Meade, op. cit. 449. Schneider, that he conceived the idea’of smehing the ore on the spot. For this purpose the firm of Schneider, Hannay & Co. was started in 1859. In that year there were twenty-two iron mines in the district, which yielded 464,853 tons of metal, the whole of which was sent away. The iron-smelting industry of the locality rapidly increased after it had once commenced. In 1864 the yield of the iron mines had risen to 691,421 tons, but of this no less than 239,523 tons were used at the Barrow furnaces.“ In 1866 Messrs. Schneider, Hannay & Co. transferred their works to the Barrow Haematite Iron and Steel Co., Ltd. The works of this company are of considerable interest because they were among the first put down for the manufacture of steel on anything like a comprehensive scale by the Bessemer process. In 1901, 1,765 men were employed in the manufacture of iron and steel at Barrow. The second site of the iron industry in modern Lancashire is Wigan. In 1858 four blast fur- naces were erected at Kirkless, near Wigan, and in 1863 one more was added, all with open tops. In 1864 the movement for utilizing the enor- mous amount of heat was making headway, and blast furnaces were erected with closed tops, with the object of collecting the gases, which were used for generating steam. In 1865 the Wigan Coal and Iron Co. was founded by a union of the Haigh Collieries of Lord Crawford, the Standish and Shevington Collieries, the Broomfield Collieries, the collieries of Mr. John Taylor, and the ironworks and collieries of the Kirkless Hall Co. Immediately five new blast furnaces, 80 ft. high, were erected. More re- cently a steel plant on the open-hearth system (basic process) has been laid down. At the present time in Lancashire, besides the ironworks at Wigan and Barrow, there are others at Carnforth (founded 1864), Warrington, and Darwen. The number of ironstone miners in the county has decreased of recent years. In 1881 there were 3,742. In 1891 there were only 3,066, and ten years later the numbers had further fallen to 2,296. ALLIED TRADES The first reference to these industries which we can find is the will of Adam Banke, of Wigan, brazier, dated 19 July, 1557 :} I give to my son Humphrey Banke all my pewter moulds, with the condition and Provision that he * Cowper, op. cit. 286. * Iron, Steel and Allied Trades, Barrow-in-Furness 1903, 16. ; % Ibid. 18, ® Thid. 23. © Ibid. 23. " Ibid. 28, * Lanc. and Ches. Rec. Soc. xxx, 183. 364 INDUSTRIES the said Humphrey shall permit and suffer my sons William Banke and Thomas Banke to cast in them at their pleasure and liberty at all times. Also it is my will that the said Humphrey shall foresee that the said ‘Thomas be set to . . . his occupation of the Pewterer Craft. Here there isa gap in the chain of evidence till the will of Robert Forth, of Wigan, brazier, was proved in 1622.7 From this time on, the Index to Wills at Chester® indicates the existence of a very considerable metal trade at Wigan, entries being made for the years 1631, 1637, 1642, 1647, 1663, 1688, 1690, 1691, 1692 (2), 1693, 1695, 1696 (2), 1699, 1701, 1702, 1703, 1704, 1706, 1716, 1718, 1720, 1722 (2), 1724, 1725 (2), 1726 (2), 1729, 1734, 1739, 1740, 1741 (2), 1743) 1747, 1750, 1753, 1756 (2), 1757, 1762, 1764, 1767, 1769, 1779, 1789. Contemporary references to the Wigan metal trades are made by Richard Gough, in the ‘ Additions” to Camden’s Britannia, published in 1787—he says ‘Wigan has a manufactory of brass and pewter,’ *—by an anonymous writer in 1788 who states that ‘the braziery, pewtery, brass foundry, iron foundry, and iron forgery businesses find employment for a great number of hands’;® and by Aikin in 1795, who men- tions that ‘Wigan has long been noted for its braziery works,’ but adds, ‘the braziery is now on the decline.’ ® During the eighteenth century foundries ap- pear to have existed at Wigan, for in the Index to Wills we find entries under 1726, 1757, 1781, and 1799. But far more famous were the bell- foundries of the seventeenth century. It was customary at that time to carry the metal to the place where the bell was wanted and there melt and pour it into a place prepared for the casting in the churchyard. This, however, was not the way of the Wigan bell-founders. All the work was done in their own establishments in the town, and the finished work was then dispatched to the places where it was required. There were several firms in the town, but only one on a large scale, namely that of the Scotts. The first bell known to have been cast by a Scott bears the date 1647, and hangs in Trinity Church, Warrington. The Wilmslow church bells were cast by some Scott in 1657, and one of the old bells in Taxal church was cast by the same family in the previous year. Mr. Ear- waker was of the opinion that these bells were all cast by John Scott,’ but if so, there must have ® Lanc. and Ches. Rec. Soc. iv. 3 Ibid. vols. ii, iv, XV, XVlll, XX, Xxli, xxv, Xxxvii, xxxviii, xliv, xlv. 4 Camden, Brit. (1787), iii, 138. 5 Quoted in H. T. Folkard, The Industries of Wigan, (Wigan, 1889), p. 8. 6 John Aikin, 4 Description of the Country from 30 to 40 miles round Manchester, 1795. ” Hist. Soc. Lanc. and Ches. 1890, p. 170. been a John Scott who died later than the one ‘ of Wigan, brazier,’ whose will was proved in 1647.8 Possibly they were cast by James Scott or by Geoffrey Scott, who were certainly casting bells in 1657. The will of the latter, in which he is described as ‘bell founder,’ was proved in 1665. He was succeeded by his son William, who cast bells for Wigan church in 1677 and again in 1694. He appears to have died in 1703. The last bell which there is any record of his having cast is the great bell at Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, which was recast at Wigan on 6 August, 1701. In the early eighteenth century there was a family of Ashton at Wigan, who were bell- founders. Ralph Ashton cast a bell for Wigan church in 1717, and a few years later Luke Ashton cast a set of bells for Wallasey church. In 1732 the bells of Wigan church had to be sent to Gloucester to be recast; it is therefore highly probable that the industry of bell-founding had ceased to exist in Wigan.° Another seventeenth and eighteenth century metal industry was that of pin-making at War- rington. Among the wills proved at Chester we find the following :— 1700 John Bird, of Warrington, pinmaker 1712 Thomas Harrops, of Warrington, pinmaker 1718 Richard Rylands, of Warrington, pinmaker 1726 Andrew Hollinworth, of Warrington, pin- maker 1735 Joseph Rylands, of Warrington, pinmaker 1738 John Cotton, of Warrington, pinmaker 1744 John Cooper, of Warrington, pinmaker 1747 Thomas Trillwind, of Warrington, pin- maker 1756 John Cotton, of Warrington, pinmaker 1773 William Gaskell, of Warrington, pinmaker 1775 Richard Owen, of Warrington, pinmaker 1777 John Trillwind, of Warrington, pinmaker In the pin-making industry much child labour was employed, in some places at least. ‘Here’ [at Warrington], writes Arthur Young, ‘is like- wise a small pin manufactory, which employed two or three hundred children, who earn from one to two shillings a week.’! Aikin mentions that ‘the making of pins has been, and still is, carried on toa pretty large extent’ at Warrington.” Another industry which was to be found in Lancashire during the eighteenth century was nail making. Nailors appear to have carried on their trade in many places, but particularly in Atherton. 8 Lance. and Ches. Rec. Soc. iv. ® The material for the account of bell-founding was taken from Sinclair, Hist. of Wigan, i, and Earwaker, ‘ Bellfounders in Lanc. and Ches. in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries,’ Hist. Soc. Lanc. and Ches., 1890. ” Lanc. and Ches. Rec. Soc. xviii, xx, xxii, xxv, XXXVii, XXXVIll. " Tour in the North of England, 1769 (ed. 2), iii, 165. " A Description of Manchester, 1795, 302. 365 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE WATCH-MAKING This industry has been carried on for some two centuries in South-west Lancashire, in par- ticular in Liverpool, Prescot, and the district lying between these two places. It seems im- possible to fix the exact date of the introduction of the industry into Lancashire, though Baines attempts to do so. Speaking of watch-making he says, ‘ This branch of manufacture was intro- duced about 1730 by Mr. John Millar from Yorkshire.’? This, however, is certainly incor- rect, as the following entries in the Index to Wills proves? :— 1663 Christopher Horrocks, of Warrington, watch- maker 1694 Henry Higginson, of Liverpool, watchmaker 1699 Peter Lewis, of Liverpool, watchmaker 1700 Charles Ratcliffe, of Liverpool, watchmaker 1705 Matthew Gleave, of West Derby, watch- maker 1716 John Burges, of Toxteth Park, watchmaker 1726 Robert Whitefield, of Liverpool, watchmaker 1726 Samuel Williamson, of Croxton, watchmaker 1729 John Plumb, of Wavertree, watchmaker From another source we learn that watch- making was established at the time of the Commonwealth ;? but some watch-making was practised in Lancashire before this, as a Robert Wilson, of Manchester, watch-maker, died in 1638.4 Prescot has been famous chiefly as a centre for the making of watch ‘ movements ’—that is the frames, barrels, fusees, detent works, indexes, silver pieces, wheels, pinions, ratchets, springs, &c. Besides these, other branches of watch- making were located in the Prescot district, such as those producing balances, hands, rollers and levers, pallets and wheels, verges and motions. Watch-tool making also had its seat in Prescot ; lathes, turn benches, mandrels, nippers, pliers, sectors, sliding tongs, vices, files, broaches, gravers, &c., all being manufactured in the vicinity. In the later part of the seventeenth century William Houghton devised the system of pinion wire-drawing, which was first carried on at Hale Bank, near Prescot, and afterwards at Huyton and Appleton, villages in the neighbourhood. Most of this trade has since been absorbed by the borough of Warrington, which supplies home and foreign watch-makers with the wire there made. In 1881 there were 1,883 men and 77 women wire-workers in the county ; in 1891 | Hist. of Lane. iii, 706. * Lanc. and Ches. Rec. Soc. xviii, xx, xxii. ° The Lanc. Watch Company, Ltd. its Rise and Pro- ETeSS, Q. ‘ Index to Wills (Lanc, and Ches. Rec. Soc.), iv. the numbers had increased to 2,409 and 116 re- spectively, and in 1901 to 3,897 and 286 respectively. “T'wo other important inventions originated in this neighbourhood during the eighteenth century. The first was the invention of the wheel-cutting engine by John Wyke, and the second that of the pinion engine by Joshua Hewitt some twenty years later. In order to show more definitely the sites of the watch-making industry in its various forms, we may have recourse once more to the Index to Wills.® Watch-makers died at Prescot in 1765 (2), 1769, 1771, 1773, 1782, 1785 (2); at Liverpool in 1743, 1747, 1754, and 1767; at West Derby in 1767 ; at Wavertree in 1773; at Bickerstaffe in 1737 ; at Ormskirk in 1754 ; at Bold in 1768; at Warrington in 1750 and 1776; at Rainhill in 1786 and 1798; and at Eccleston in 1798. Watch-tool makers died at Speke in 1726; at West Derby in 1749; at Toxteth Park in 1754; at Upholland in 1755 and 1776; at Sutton in 1760; at Prescot in 1761, 1782, 1788, and 17973 at Liverpool in 1764, 1770, 1785, and 1789; and at Hale Bank in 1790. Other references are to file-cutters at Liverpool in 1761, 1767, 1778, 1790, and 1794, and at Hale Bank in 1770; watch-case makers at Liverpool in 1756, and at West Derby in 17473 watch-spring makers at Liverpool in 1766 and 17773; a watch-gilder at Liverpool in 17533 a pinion wire-drawer at Aughton in 1742; awatch-engraver at Bootle in 1796; a wire-worker at Liverpool in 1795; a wire- drawer at Prescot in 1791 ; a watch-finisher at Liverpool, 1789 ; and at Prescot a watch-motion maker in 1784 ; a watch-hand maker in 1784 ; and a watch-wheel furnisher in 1774. The system of manufacture in vogue was domestic. The manufacturer gave out his orders on the Monday morning and received the work from the job-masters on the Saturday. Having assembled the parts, he dispatched them to cus- tomers in other towns. At the end of the eighteenth century, Aikin gives the following account of the watch-making industry * :— Prescot is particularly distinguished as the centre of the manufacture of watch tools and movements. The watch tools made here have been excellent beyond the memory of the oldest watch-makers. . . . The drawing of pinion wire originated here, which is carried as far as to fifty drawings and the wire is completely adapted for every size of pinions to drive the wheels of watches. . . . They make here smaller ° Lane. and Ches. Rec. Soc. xxii, XXV, XXXVii, XXXvill, xliv, xlv. ° A Description of Manchester, 1795, 311. 366 INDUSTRIES files . . . they do not attempt making the larger files. They make watch movements most excellent in kind. - . . They likewise excel in what is called motion work, such as dial wheels, locking springs, hour, minute, and second hands, etc. Main-springs, chains for movements, and watch-cases were not part of the original manufacture, but are now made here. The watch trade reached its greatest magni- tude about the middle of the nineteenth century, when great numbers of watches were exported to America and the colonies. After the Ameri- can Civil War, heavy import duties were imposed by the Americans, and the home manufacture of machine-made watches was pushed forward at a great rate, About the year 1865 Mr. John Wycherley, who was a movement manufacturer in Prescot, conceived the idea of making frames on the interchangeable plan, by steam-driven machinery. Fora time prejudice was so strong that he was unable to sell his movements. He accumulated stock which he succeeded in dispos- ing of when the continental watch trade was disorganized by the Franco-German war. Their quality was pronounced good, and his work became known as the J. W. movement, An important effect of the introduction of steam power was the replacement of the domestic by the factory system. During the same decade another important change was introduced by Mr. T. P. Hewitt, who established works for the making of keyless movements by machinery. In 1882 Mr. Wych- erley disposed of his business to Mr. Hewitt, who carried on the two concerns jointly under the style of Wycherley, Hewitt & Co, The next step was to undertake the manufacture of com- plete watches. For this purpose the Lancashire Watch Co., Ltd., was registered in 1888 with a capital of £50,000, which has since been in- creased. ‘The existing Prescot manufacturers sold their businesses to the company and became merged in it on 1 January, 1889. Since this time complete watches have been made at Prescot on a considerable scale. In 1881 there were employed as watch- makers and clock-makers in the county 3,038 men and 79 women, in 1891, 2,704 and 133, and in 1901, 2,777 and 444. ENGINEERING The beginnings of the great Lancashire engineering industry are shrouded in mystery. Contemporary writers, with the single exception of Aikin, entirely ignore the subject; and we have been unable to learn whether any pamphlets or manuscript materials bearing on the subject exist. Of later writers Edwin Butterworth gives much interesting information with regard to Oldham. For the rest of our account we have had to rely on early directories, the indexes to wills, biographies of one or two well-known engineers, and information kindly supplied by various engineering firms. At the commencement it would seem probable that the mechanical industries were regarded as a branch of the trades carried on by the smiths, the millwrights, and the ironfounders. Thus, in 1795, we find the best-known Manchester firm of engineers described in the Directory as iron- founders. Smiths have carried on their trade in Lancashire for centuries, and the frequent mention of them in the Index to Wills can be of no assis- tance tous. The case of millwrights and iron- founders is different. Mention of these hardly ever occurs before the eighteenth century. Thus three Manchester millwrights were Francis Wrigley who died in 1736, Joseph Wrigley who died in 1738, and Francis Wrigley who died in 1762.1 The will of Edmund Fletcher of Red- vales in Bury, millwright, was proved in 1762.” We have no doubt that the millwrights whom 1 Lanc. and Ches. Rec. Soc. xxii, XxXviil. * Tbid, xxxvii. we find living in Aughton, Upholland, Haugh- ton, Rainow, Parbold, and Westhoughton were real millwrights. On the other hand, we feel inclined to think that the Wrigleys and Fletchers who resided in the midst of industrial districts, the later seats of the engineering industry, were very possibly engaged during part of their time in making some of the earliest machines con- structed in Lancashire. If we consider the early ironfounders we find most of them situated in Liverpool. The follow- ing are taken from the Index to Wills :—3 1776 John Pyatt, of Liverpool, ironfounder 1785 David Walker, of Liverpool, ironfounder 1786 William Atkinson, of Liverpool, ironfounder 1793 Joseph Rider, of Liverpool, ironfounder 1795 Robert Hankey, of Liverpool, ironfounder 1798 Robert Streets, of Liverpool, ironfounder Two Warrington ironfounders, who died in 1797 and 1799 respectively, were Edward Birkett and John Fallows. As neither of these towns has at any time been a centre of the engineering industry, we are inclined to believe that these were iron- founders in the narrowest sense of the word. ‘Towards the end of the third quarter of the eighteenth century various forms of the metal industries had become established in Manchester. Thomas Rider, of Manchester, ironfounder, died in 1779.4 From the contemporary directory we 8 Tbid. xxxviii, xliv, and xlv. ‘Index to Wills (Lanc. and Ches, XXXVIii. Rec. Soc.), 367 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE gather that he was already carrying on his business in 1772. Whether he was also a machine maker there is no evidence to show, but it seems probable. In 1772, also, Joshua Wrigley was carrying on his trade as pump-maker and bell- hanger in Long Mill-gate. In 1773 Meredith and Mayall were established as pin-makers at Salford Bridge. At the same time the firm of John Milne and Co., of Cannon Street, were wire workers. Our attempt to trace the rise of the hardware and allied trades in Manchester might have been more satisfactory had directories for the town been published between 1773 and 1788, and again between 1788 and 1794. ‘These gaps make it impossible to fix, even approximately, the date of the foundation of several firms. The best-known Manchester firm of engineers at the end of the eighteenth century appears to have been Bateman & Sherratt, of Hardman Street, Salford. In 1795, Aikin wrote the following account of the firm :—® A considerable iron foundry is established in Salford, in which are cast most of the articles wanted in Manchester and its neighbourhood, consisting chiefly of large cast wheels for the cotton machines ; cylinders, boilers, and pipes, for steam engines. . . . This work belongs to Bateman & Sherrard.® ... Mr. Sherrard is a very ingenious and able enginecr, who had improved upon and brought the steam engine to great perfection. Most of those which are used and set up in and about Manchester are of their make and fitting up. They are in general of a small size, very compact, stand in a small space, work smooth and easy and are scarcely heard in the build- ing where erected. We have been able to gather only very little about the history of this firm. It is first men- tioned in the Directory of 1794. In 1788 the firm does not appear to have existed, but James Bateman is described as an ironfounder. The last mention of the firm occurs in the Directory of 1824-5. In 1829 James and Thomas Sherratt were established in Hardman Street as ‘ironfounders, steam-engine manufacturers, etc.’ In 1836 this same firm is described as ‘ iron- founders, engine manufacturers, millwrights, and hydraulic press-makers.’ In 1838 the name of the firm is no longer given in the general part of the Directory, but only under the list of trades. After this all mention of the firm ceases. The deduction we draw from the Directsry of 1838 is that the firm came to an end after the list of trades had been drawn up, but before the Directory proper was completed. We have been unable to dis- cover whether the firm merely lost its identity through amalgamation with some other firm, or whether it really died out. 5° A Description of Manchester, 176. * A more usual spelling appears to have been Sherratt. In addition to Bateman & Sherratt, Aikin says’ ‘there are five other foundries in Manchester, which do a great deal of business.’ He gives their names as Brodie, M’Niven & Ormrod, Smith & Co., Bassett & Smith, Mrs. Pheebe Fletcher, and John Smith. From the Directory we learn that a firm of Smith & Co., ironfounders, existed in 1788 and 1811. Of the history of the others we know nothing. As far as engineering is concerned, Aikin’s list does not appear to have been complete. In 1794 Heywood & Belshaw were established as ‘ ma- chine-makers’ at 4, Redcross Street, and William Marsden as ‘machine maker’ at 31, Hilton Street. John Buxton, machine maker, of 18, Fleet Street, is mentioned for the first time in the Directory of 1797. The only reference to George Hughes, of Manchester, machine maker, is that in the Index to Hills for 1799. °® With regard to the early developments of engineering in other parts of Lancashire, Butter- worth’s information about Oldham is the most detailed. The first machine makers in the neighbourhood of Oldham were Messrs. Edmund & Samuel Elson of Tetlow Fold, Northmoor. They constructed nu- merous jennies of 14 and 20 spindles, Other machine- makers than Elsons speedily appeared on the field, and the first individual who established a machine- making workshop in the village of Oldham was Mr. Jonathan Ogden. . . . Messrs. Heap & Cowper, of Glodwick, are said to have been machine makers on a small scale.!° The machine-making business was as yet in its infancy and never became of more than ordinary extent till the great enterprize and perseverance of the late Elijah Hibbert, Esq., fully developed its capabili- tie. About 1797 Mr. William Rowbottam . established a small machine-making workshop in Schoolcroft and a roller making concern at Bell- Factory. A few years afterwards Messrs. John Garnett and William Jackson commenced machine- making works. The first iron foundry established at Oldham was erected by Mr. John Mackie in 1805." Although the business of machine making had made great progress in Manchester and other large towns, yet in Oldham that branch of trade had not attained to a tithe of its present [1847] magnitude as late as 1820. In 1815 there were only four machine makers in the town, Messrs. John Garnett, William Jackson, John Watson, and John Winterbottam, and one ironfounder, Mr. John Mackie.” Rochdale appears to have been a very early centre of the engineering trade, though the in- ” A Description of Manchester, 177. * Manchester and Salford Direct. 1794. * Lane. and Ches. Rec. Soc. xlv. * Butterworth, Historical Sketches of Oldham, 127. It is not clear from Butterworth to what date exactly the passage refers. Probably the ‘eighties’ of the eighteenth century. " Thid. 153. ¥ Ibid. 184. 368 INDUSTRIES formation forthcoming about it is very slight. James Hill, of Rochdale, engineer, died in 1787, and in 1792 the will of Thomas Lord, of Roch- dale, engine maker, is recorded. We do not know to what firm these two men belonged, the first Rochdale firm of which we are aware being that of James Lord, of Bradshaw Street, in 1824.44 We now purpose considering separately the development of some of the principal branches of the engineering trade. The textile machinery manufacture calls for the first mention as being the oldest and most characteristic branch of the engineering industry in the county. From the Manchester Directory of 1773 we learn that Henry Brogden, Swivel-loom maker,!® lived in Wood Street, and John Charnock, loom maker, lived in Parsonage. These are the earliest references we can find to machine-makers in the county. In 1784 the will of John Har- greaves, of Blackburn, cotton machine maker, was proved.!§ We have been unable to discover whether this John Hargreaves was any relation of James Hargreaves, of Blackburn, the inventor of the spinning-jenny. Another isolated early reference is that to John Occleston, loom maker, of Water Street, Salford, in 1794." Of the textile machinery works existing at the present time, Messrs. Dobson & Barlow, Ltd., of Kay Street Works, Bolton, can trace their origin back to 1790. In that year Isaac Dobson and Peter Rothwell established themselves as Dobson & Rothwell, Machinists and Engineers, and amongst the earliest machines they made were complete spinning-jennies. In 1816 Rothwell died, and Isaac Dobson took his nephew Benjamin Dobson into partnership and the firm became Isaac and Benjamin Dobson. The two partners died in 1833 and 1839 respec- tively and the name of the firm was altered to ‘The Executors of the late Benjamin Dobson.’ In 1851 Mr. Edward Barlow was admitted to the business and the name of the firm was changed to that of Dobson & Barlow. In 1892 it was transformed into a limited company. The removal from the old premises in Black Horse Street to the present in Kay Street took place in 1846. In 1850 the number of hands employed was 950: the present number is about 4,000. The principal products of the firm are cotton-gins, bale breakers, feed lattices, hopper feeders, vertical and horizontal openers, scutchers, carding engines, grinding machines and rollers, sliver lap machines, Derby doublers, combing machines, draw and lap ma- 18 Index to Wills (Lanc. and Ches. Rec. Soc.), xliv and xv. 4 Baines, Direct. and Gaz. of Lanc. 18 For a description of the swivel-loom see Chapman, Lanc. Cotton Industry, 21. 16 Lanc. and Ches. Rec. Soc. xxxvii. 1” Scholes, Manchester and Salford Direct. 1794. 2 369 chines combined, drawing frames, fly-frames, self-acting mules, self-acting twiners, self-acting billeys, ring and flyer throstles and doublers, reels and bundling presses, winding frames, and gassing frames and banding machines. The origin of Messrs. Asa Lees & Co., Ltd., Soho Iron Works, Oldham, may be traced from the roller-making works established by Samuel Lees at Holts Mill, Lees, near Oldham, during the last decade of the eighteenth century. In 1816 the business was removed to the Soho Iron Works, Oldham, where at first rollers and spindles were the principal products. In 1822 130 hands were employed, and by 1830 the number had increased to 200.8 In 1846 the works became the property of Eli and Asa Lees, the sons of Samuel Lees, the founder. At this time 270 hands were employed. In 1872 the concern was formed into a limited liability company. The machinery made by the company comprises every variety of machine used in the manufacture of cotton yarn, from the opening and cleaning processes to the spin- ning and doubling of the yarn. They also turn out machinery for woollens and worsteds. Among the machines for which the company is said to be well-known, may be mentioned their openers and scutchers; carding engines of all kinds, notably the revolving flat cards; drawing frames, speeds, mules, twiners, ring-spinning and ring-doubling frames, and worsted and woollen mules. The next of the large textile machinery works in order of antiquity is Messrs. Platt Brothers & Co., Ltd., Hartford New Works, Werneth, Oldham. In 1821 Mr. Henry Platt, a maker of woollen spinning and weaving machinery on a small scale at Saddleworth, established himself at Ferney Bank, Oldham, as a maker of carding engines. In 1824 he was joined in partnership by Mr. Elijah Hibbert, who had commenced an iron and brass foundry at Soho, Greenacres, about a year previously. About 1830 the firm estab- lished the Hartford Works at the east end of the town. In 1837 John and Joseph Platt, the two eldest sons of the founder, entered the business, which became Hibbert, Platt & Sons. Mr. Henry Platt died in 1842 and Mr. Hibbert in 1846. In 1854 new partners were admitted and the style of the firm was changed to Platt Brothers & Co. In 1868 the firm was converted into a limited liability company. Meanwhile the size of the works had been steadily growing. In 1843 the number of workmen employed at the Hartford Old Works was upwards of 500. In 1844 the Hartford New Works were established next to the railway at Werneth. In 1846 the number of workmen employed in the old works was 473 and at the new 400." ‘This last-named works itself contains over 6,000 operatives at * Butterworth, Hist. of Oldham, 184. ® Ibid. 185. 47 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE the present time, and the total number of the firm’s employees at its two works and three collieries approaches 12,000. Many varieties of textile machinery are built at the Hartford Works, including opening, card- ing, combing, preparing, spinning, doubling and weaving cotton, wool, worsted, silk waste and asbestos machines; also cotton seed opening and ginning machinery. ‘The specialties of the firm are many, the chief among them being the cotton gin, hopper bale breaker, hopper feeder, lattice feeding machine, Creighton opener cylinder part, exhaust opener lap, and Chapon’s patent cup spinning machine for cotton wool and wastes. Special mention is made by the firm of its carding engine and fine spinning mule, the latter prepared for spinning counts of gos. and upwards. Messrs. Mather and Platt, Ltd., Salford Iron- works, Manchester, are primarily engaged in the making of bleaching, dyeing, calico-printing and textile-finishing machinery. Business was begun at the Salford Ironworks in 1830 by Messrs. William and Collin Mather and W. W. Platt, though the firm had already been founded earlier by a Mr. Mather of an older generation. During the nineteenth century several changes in the firm’s partners took place, and in 1899, after absorbing the business of Messrs. Dowson, Taylor & Co., Ltd., the firm became a limited liability company with a capital of £800,000. The chairman is Sir William Mather and the vice-chairman Dr, Edward Hopkinson. Among the chief products of the firm may be mentioned machines for sinzeing, shearing, wash- ing, chemicking, souring, soaping, starching, &c.; mangles, dyebecks, and calenders ; forcing and ageing machines; electrolizers; mercerizing ranges ; padding and printing machines and hot- air drying plant.2? In this connexion the ‘sprinklers’ made by the firm may be men- tioned. The ‘Grinnell’ sprinkler was intro- duced by Messrs. Mather & Platt over twenty years ago, and is now manufactured by the firm at their Park Works, Newton Heath. One striking feature of the organization of the firm’s works is the eight-hour day (strictly speaking forty-eight hours per week) which is adopted there. First tried as an experiment in 1893, it was found to work satisfactorily, and has been retained ever since. The firm of Messrs. Howard & Bullough, Ltd., Globe W orks, Accrington, was founded in 1853 by Mr. John Howard, who was joined a few years later by Mr. James Bullough. After belonging to Mr. John Bullough and later to Sir George Bullough, the business was converted into a public limited liability company in 1894 with a share capital of £1,000,000 and debenture stock ® The electrical and other products of the firm are mentioned beneath. to the amount of £250,000. The growth of the firm is well illustrated by the steady increase in the number of hands employed. In 1855 they numbered 80; in 1860, 200; in 1870, 350; in 1880, 700; in 1890, 1,600 ; in 1900, 3,500; in 1905, 4,100. At the present time the chief products of the firm are hopper bale openers, hopper feeders, exhaust openers, Buck- ley openers, scutchers, revolving flat carding engines, drawing frames, slubbing, intermediate, roving and ‘Jack’ frames, ring-spinning frames for twist and weft, ring-doubling frames, self- acting mules, and winding, beaming and sizing machines, Messrs. Brooks & Doxey, Ltd., of Union Ironworks, West Gorton, and Junction Iron- works, Newton Heath, Manchester, originated in 1859, when Samuel Brooks became the tenant of a room in Union Mills, Minshull Street, Manchester, and commenced to make temples and repair cotton machinery. Shortly afterwards he moved to Union Ironworks, West Gorton. He first became known in connexion with drawing frames, but the firm’s reputation was chiefly made by ring-spinning and doubling machines. The Junction Ironworks were acquired in 1888, four years before the name of the firm was changed to Brooks & Doxey. At present the firm employs over 2,000 hands, and manufactures all the machinery for cotton spinning, from the bale breaker to the bundling press, including carding, preparing, spinning, winding, and reeling machinery. A specialty is made of doubling machinery for every variety of doubled yarns, particularly sewing cottons, and machines for making upand finishing the same. Turning to another class of the textile machinery, we may mention first among Lanca- shire loom-makers Messrs. Robert Hall & Sons, Bury, Ltd., of Hope Foundry, Bury. It was in 1844 that the late Robert Hall, in conjunction with three other working men, founded the firm of Diggle, Tuer, Hodgson & Hall. They started in a cottage-like building with general engineer- ing and repairs, all the partners sharing in the ordinary work. In a short time the con- struction of power-looms, with the necessary preparation machinery for the same, was com- menced. In 1845 Diggle’s drop-box motion for power-looms was brought out at Hope Foundry. As the business extended, special looms of all classes were added, including the ‘Moxon Carpet Loom,’ When Diggle and Hodgson retired the style of the firm became Tuer and Hall, until Tuer died in 1862, when the title became Robert Hall. On the founder’s death in 1888 the firm became Robert Hall & Sons, which was converted into a limited liability company in 1894. At the present time 500 hands are engaged in making machinery for weaving and all preparation. Other loom- makers are Messrs. Henry Livesey, Ltd., Black- 370 INDUSTRIES burn ; Messrs. Harling & Todd, Burnley ; Messrs. William Smith & Brothers, Ltd., Hey- wood ; Messrs. Hacking & Co., Bury; and Messrs, William Dickinson & Sons, Blackburn. Various kinds of finishing machines are made by Sir James Farmer & Sons, Ltd., Salford ; and raising machinery is a specialty of Messrs. ‘Tom- linsons, Ltd., Rochdale. Some mention has already been made of the earliest engineers of the county. These firms were occupied with making all classes of machines, and although the amount of specialization in the industry is very great, it is not always pos- sible even at the present time to define the principal product of any one works. Put- ting aside textile machinery, as the chief mechanical trade of the county, the two most important branches of engineering in Lanca- shire, from an historical point of view at any rate, are machine-tool making and locomotive building. ‘Three Lancashire engineers, Richard Roberts, Joseph Whitworth, and James Nasmyth, largely contributed to the development of the former, whilst the latter industry commenced immediately after the opening of the Manchester and Liverpool Railway in 1830 and has steadily increased up to the present time. Now there are no fewer than five large works devoted to the construction of locomotives. We shall now pro- ceed to give an account of some of the most famous Lancashire engineering firms and take them in the order of foundation, for want of a satisfactory system of classification. As far as we can learn, the oldest of the large Lancashire engineering firms is Messrs. Gallo- ways, Ltd., of Knott Mill and Ardwick, Man- chester. The firm was founded in 1790 by Mr. William Galloway, who was joined after- wards by James Bowman and later by William Glasgow, the name of the firm then being Gallo- way, Bowman & Glasgow. Miscellaneous machine building, especially the construction of water wheels and the gear connected with them, occu- pied the attention of the firm in its earliest days. With the adoption of gas about 1800, Galloways designed and constructed a number of complete gas-making plants for various mills and works in the district. A large portion of the trade con- sisted of steam engines and mill-gearing gener- ally. From 1830 onwards the firm became closely connected with the development of rail- ways, a great amount of castings and structural ironwork being supplied by it. Many of the bridges which they built still exist. The first locomotive produced in Manchester was constructed by Galloways in 1831 to the order of the Manchester and Liverpool Railway. In 1835 the concern became Messrs, W. & J. Galloway, the two heads being sons of the William Galloway above mentioned. About this period the name of the firm came to be especially associated with boilers. In 1856 the firm was altered to W. & J. Galloway & Sons. In 1889 it became a private company, and ten years later a limited liability company. In 1845 Galloways patented the ‘ Breeches’ boiler, which was improved in succeeding years. In 1849 the first ‘Galloway ’ boiler was completed. This boiler, in an improved and altered form, is still one of the principal products of the firm. Other boilers manu- factured by the firm are the ‘Lancashire,’ the ‘Cornish,’ and the ‘ Multitubular.’ All the boilers at present made by the firm are manu- factured at their Hyde Road Boiler Works, which were first established in 1872. Here some eight hundred men are employed, and on an average one boiler a day is produced. At the Knott Mill shops, which are exclusively devoted to engine construction, 500 men are at work. The firm, which during the later part of its existence in Manchester was known as Sharp, Stewart & Co., Ltd., was established in 1805, when Thomas Sharp began an iron business in Market Street Lane. He was soon joined by his brother, Robert Chapman Sharp, and the firm was known as Sharp Brothers. Later the young- est brother, John, was admitted into the firm. In 1828 Richard Roberts, the well-known inventor, was taken into partnership and the style of the firm became Sharp, Roberts & Co. At this time the firm devoted itself chiefly to the manufacture of cotton-spinning machinery, and Roberts’ self-acting mule was particularly suc- cessful. Gradually as the demand for machine tools increased, the firm devoted themselves to meeting it. Machines for planing, slotting, wheel-teeth cutting, punching and shearing, and numerous lathes, were made on the lines of Roberts’ inventions. A new departure was taken in 1834, when the building of locomotives was commenced at the Atlas Works. Early in the ‘forties’ John Sharp became head of the firm, Thomas Sharp dying and Roberts retiring. About the same time John Robin- son of Skipton entered the firm, which became Sharp Brothers & Co. In 1852 Charles Patrick Stewart became a partner, and another change in name made the firm Sharp, Stewart & Co. In 1863 it was transformed into a limited liability company. Gradually the manufac- ture of locomotives had become the leading feature of the firm. ‘This was probably due in part to the fact that it had acquired the ‘Gifford’ injector, which enabled locomotive boilers to be supplied with fresh water by means of their own steam pressure. With the growth of business the condition of the Manchester works became cramped, and in 1888 the firm amal- gamated with the Clyde Locomotive Company, Glasgow, to which town the business was re- moved, ‘The name of Sharp, Stewart & Co., Ltd., was retained by the amalgamated firms until 1903, when further amalgamations led to 371 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE its being lost in that of the North British Loco- motive Co., Ltd. In the middle of the nineteenth century a well-known Manchester engineering firm was that of William Fairbairn & Sons. The original firm was Fairbairn & Lillie, estab- lished in 1817 in High Street, and later in Mather Street. It was not until 1824 that the works were removed to Canal Street, Ancoats. At this time the firm was chiefly occupied with providing machinery for cotton mills. The partnership was dissolved in 1822, and Fairbairn became sole proprietor of the works. He turned his attention to iron shipbuilding and the construction of steam engines. After a short time the shipbuilding department was removed to Millwall on the Thames. In 1832 Fairbairn began to make steam engines and boilers. About 1838 he undertook the construction of loco- motives, of which more than six hundred in all were built in his shops. In 1841 he was joined by his son Thomas, in 1846 by another son, William Andrew, and the name of the firm was altered to William Fairbairn & Sons. About this time Fairbairn became much interested in bridge building, and among others constructed several tubular bridges. Sir William Fairbairn retired in 1853 from the business, which was continued by his sons. In 1864 it was converted into a limited liability company under the name of the Fairbairn Engineering Co., Ltd. A few years later the concern was wound up owing to a depression in trade. The Vulcan Foundry, Ltd., Newton-le- Willows, is devoted almost entirely to the construction of locomotives. The firm was founded by Mr. Charles Tayleur between 1830 and 1832, and at the same time he went into partnership with George Stephenson and _ his son Robert. Both the latter withdrew when Robert Stephenson was appointed engincer-in- chief to the London and Birmingham Railway. Many changes in management occurred before the firm became a limited liability company in 1864. Vulcan engines Nos. 1 and 2 were built in 1833 for Mr. Hargreaves of Bolton. The cylinders were 11 in. by 16in., and the wheels (four coupled) 4 ft. 8 in. Vulcan No. 3, called Vulcan, was built for the War- rington and Newton Railway, being No. 1 on the line. Vulcans Nos. 4 and 5 were built for Camden and Woodbury, U.S.A. Since then locomotives have been built for all parts of the world, and at the present time the firm has an output of about 100 locomotives per annum, half of which, on an average, are sent abroad. Locomotives of every type of gauge from Ift. 6in. up to 7 ft. have been built by the firm, among them many types of Fairlie engines. In 1892 between 400 and 500 men were employed; at present the numbers are about 1,300. The Manchester branch of Sir W. G. Arm- strong, Whitworth & Co., Ltd., was founded by the late Sir Joseph Whitworth in 1833. In that year he rented a room in Chorlton Street, Manchester, and put up a sign ‘Joseph Whit- worth, tool-maker from London.’ For the first twenty years he devoted himself chiefly to the improvement of machine tools, including the duplex lathe, planing, drilling, slotting, shaping, and other machines. His first great discovery was that of a truly plane surface, obtained by making three surfaces coincide. On the basis of this true surface he introduced a system of measurement of ideal exactness. At first roto00 of an inch could be measured, later gggdoo0 of an inch, Gradually Whitworth developed _ his system of standard measures and gauges. His uniform system of screw threads proved of the greatest practical utility. The firm founded by Sir Joseph Whitworth continues to the present time to be a large maker of machine tools of every description, up to the largest that have ever been made. Recently a large lathe capable of admitting 18 ft. in diameter and 50 ft. between centres, weighing about 250 tons, for making the large turbines for the new Cunard steamships, was built at the Openshaw Works. Another important pro- duct of the firm is large shafting made of Whit- worth fluid pressed steel. Among the first big shafts built were those for the turret-ship H.M.S. Inflexible in 1876. Since then shafting has been constructed at Openshaw for nearly 100 battleships and other ships of war, and for as many great liners. The largest products of this class are the great hollow forged shafts, 86 ft. long and 26in. in diameter, with an 18in. bore, recently made for H.M. ships Achilles, Warrior, and Duke of Edinburgh, The firm was converted into a limited liability company in 1874 as Sir Joseph Whitworth & Co., Ltd. Six years later the present premises were established at Openshaw. On 1 January, 1897, the firm was united with that of Arm- strong’s of Elswick, and became Sir W. G. Armstrong, Whitworth & Co., Ltd. The growth of these Manchester works is well illus- trated by the number of hands employed at different times. In 1844 the number was 172; in 1854, 368; in 1864, 636; in 1074, 751s in 1884, 1,003; in 1894, 1,831; in 1904, 3,740, and at the end of 1905, 4,020.7! James Nasmyth set up in Dale Street, Man- chester, as a machine tool-maker in 1834. Two years later he removed to the Bridgewater Foundry, Patricroft. A few years later Hol- * These numbers include the men employed in the ordnance and armaments departments, which are dealt with below. The account is based on the article on Sir Joseph Whitworth in the Dictionary of National Biography, and on information kindly supplied by the firm. 372 INDUSTRIES brook Gaskell was taken into partnership, and the firm became Nasmyth & Gaskell. They built machinery of all kinds, steam engines, locomotives, and especially machine tools. An early invention of Nasmyth’s was the safety foundry ladle, but the invention with which his name is generally associated is the steam hammer. In 1839, when the paddle steamer, Great Britain, was to be built, it was found that there was no forge hammer in England or Scotland powerful enough to forge the paddle shaft of the engines. To meet this difficulty Nasmyth invented the steam hammer, the first drawing of which bears the date 24 November, 1839. In the end the forging did not take place, as the screw was substituted for the paddle-wheel. The first steam hammer was put in use at Schneider’s works at Creuzot, France, where Nasmyth saw it in 1842. Shortly after this the first steam hammer was constructed at the Bridgewater Foundry. About 1844 Nasmyth constructed the first steam pile-driver for use in the extension of Devonport Docks. Many other pile-drivers were built. In 1854 Nasmyth took out a patent for puddling iron by means of steam, but this process was entirely eclipsed by Bessemer’s invention of 1855. A year later Nasmyth retired from business, but the firm continued to exist, and at the present time Messrs. Nasmyth, Wilson & Co., Ltd., carry on business as loco- motive and general engineers at Bridgewater Foundry, Patricroft, near Manchester.” The first brick of the locomotive works of Beyer, Peacock & Co., Ltd., at Gorton, Man- chester, was laid in March, 1854. Charles F. Beyer was a Saxon by birth, and prior to 1854 had been employed for many years in the firm of Sharp, Roberts & Co. of Manchester. Richard Peacock, a Yorkshireman, had also had consider- able experience in the practical working of locomotives. ‘These two men became partners at the end of 1852, and in the spring of 1855 the first locomotive was finished. ‘This firm is said to have been the first in the locomotive industry to adopt the practice of drawing out in complete detail every part of the engine before commenc- ing the work of construction. ‘The works were greatly enlarged in 1870. Six years later Mr. Beyer died, and a few years after the firm was converted into a private limited company. In 1902 it was changed into a public company. The firm has been building locomotives for fifty years. During this time 4,621 loco- motives have been delivered, and 4,720 have been ordered. In other words, roughly speaking, the firm has built 100 locomotives per annum on an average. At the present time the com- pany employs some 2,000 men at its Gorton works. ™ The account of this firm is taken from Smiles’s Life of Nasmyth, and the article on Nasmyth in the Dictionary of National Biography. Though we are unable to give any more details with regard to large general engineering firms, owing to considerations of space, the names of some more firms may be mentioned, if only to give the reader some idea of the size of this great Lancashire industry. The Great Central Railway and the Lancashire and York- shire Railway have locomotive construction works at Gorton and Newton Heath respectively. Messrs. Yates and Thom of Blackburn are boiler and engine makers. Other engine makers are Messrs. Hick, Hargreaves & Co., Ltd., Bolton ; Messrs. Musgrave & Sons, Ltd., Bol- ton; Messrs. Buckley & Taylor, Oldham ; and Messrs. Browett, Lindley & Co., Patricroft. Another industry which has grown up with the railways is the building of railway carriages and wagons. ‘Two firms carrying on this trade are the Metropolitan Amalgamated Railway Car- riage and Wagon Co., Ltd., Openshaw, Man- chester, and the Lancaster Railway Carriage and Wagon Co., Ltd., Lancaster. Another branch of the Lancashire engineering industry is the manufacture of gas engines. Amongst the principal makers may be mentioned Messrs. Crossley Brothers, Ltd., Openshaw ; the National Gas Engine Co., Ltd., Ashton-under- Lyne; Messrs. Dempster, Moor & Co., Ltd., Manchester ; and Messrs. Mather & Platt, Ltd., Manchester. At the present time the electrical industry of the county is of very considerable importance. It is a comparatively recent industry, having been begun, as far as we are aware, in 1882 by Messrs. Mather & Platt, Ltd., of Salford Iron Works, Manchester. In that year Mr. (now Sir) William Mather visited the United States and arranged with Mr. Edison to take up the manufacture of the Edison dynamo at the Salford Iron Works. Drs. J. and E. Hopkinson greatly improved the machine, which became known as the Edison-Hopkinson dynamo. Since 1882 the electrical department of Messrs, Mather & Platt, Ltd., has steadily grown, and recently the motor department has been transferred to the company’s New Park Works, at Newton Heath, Manchester. A large firm of much more recent origin is the British Westinghouse Electric and Manu- facturing Co., Ltd., Trafford Park, Manchester. Building operations were commenced early in 1go1 and finished a little over a year later. The promoters, with a typically American optimism, laid their plans on a very large scale, so that within four years of commencing work over 5,000 hands were employed. The firm is, how- ever, too new for us to enter into details with regard to its works. The great movement for the electrifying of tramways has led to the establishment of other firms in Lancashire. About 1900 two large works were established on opposite sides of 373 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Strand Road, Preston. The one was that of the English Electric Manufacturing Co., Ltd., and the other that of the Electric Railway and Tramway Carriage Works, Ltd. Both appear to have been closely connected with Dick, Kerr & Co., Ltd. and a short time ago the English Electric Manufacturing Co. became merged in Dick, Kerr & Co. The Electric Railway and Tramway Carriage Works, Ltd., now forms part of the United Electric Car Co., Ltd. The growth of the electrical industry in the county is well shown by the census figures. In 1881 there were 251 electrical apparatus makers in the county. In 1891 these had increased to 1,426, and by rgo1 there were 7,896 such workers. Two other branches of the electrical industry are those of cable-making and the manufacture of accumulators. W. T. Glover & Co., Ltd., cable makers of Trafford Park, Manchester, owe their origin to the small bell-wire industry established in 1869 by Mr. W. T. Glover in Salford. He undertook the manufacture of insulated wires for electric bells, telegraph, telephones, &c. In 1886 Mr. Henry Edmunds joined the firm, which gradually came into touch with the heavy department of electrical construction. In 1898 the firm became a limited company with a capital of £150,000. In 1900 the works in Trafford Park were begun, and by 1902 the entire industry was located on the new site. Other cable makers are the British Insulated and Helsby Cables, Ltd., Preston, and the St. Helens Cable Co., Ltd., St. Helens. Electrical accumulators are manufactured by the Chloride Electrical Storage Co., Ltd., Clifton Junction, near Manchester. It had its origin in 1891 as the Chloride Electrical Storage Syndicate, Ltd., formed for the purpose of taking over a number of patents held by the Electrical Storage Battery In 1902 the syndi- . of Philadelphia, U.S.A. Co. of Philadelphia, eapeliged cate was converted into a company, at £135,250. Ae at this point we have far from exhausted the list of important branches of the Lancashire engineering industry, we have very nearly reached the limit of space allotted to us, and shall be obliged to content ourselves with a short sketch of what remains. Roller-milling machinery and wood-working machinery are two specialties of Thomas Robin- son & Son, Ltd., Rochdale. ‘The Power Pulley Co., Ltd., the Unbreakable Pulley and Mill Gearing Co., Ltd., and the Vaughan Pulley Co., all of Manchester, are some of the principal pulley makers in the county. Bolts and nuts are made by George Marsden and Sons, Man- chester, and Davis & Sons, Chorley. Two well-known firms of safe makers, whose works are situated in Lancashire, are Milner’s Safe Co., Ltd., Liverpool, and Chatwood’s Patent Safe and Lock Co., Ltd., Bolton. Steam hammers are made by Nasmyth, Wilson & Co., Ltd., Patri- croft, and B. & S. Massey, Manchester. Frank Pearn & Co., Ltd., John Cameron, Ltd., and William Mathews & Co. of Manchester, are all firms occupied in making pumps. Sewing machines are manufactured by the Jones Sewing Machine Co., Ltd., Guide Bridge, and Bradbury & Co., Ltd., Oldham. Two Accrington firms, Messrs. Taylor & Wilson, Ltd., and Whittaker Brothers, make wringing machines, One of the most recent mechanical industries to be intro- duced into Lancashire is that of motor-car building, which is carried on by the Belsize Motor Co., Ltd., Clayton, near Manchester, and by Crossley Brothers, Ltd., of Openshaw, Man- chester. In 1901 there were 1,708 people in the county occupied in cycle and motor manufacture. ORDNANCE AND ARMAMENTS The manufacture of ordnance and arma- ments in Lancashire is chiefly carried on by two large firms, viz. Sir W. G. Armstrong, Whit- worth & Co., Ltd., of Openshaw, Manchester, and Vickers, Sons & Maxim, Ltd., of Barrow- in-Furness. As both these firms were primarily established for other purposes, a sketch of their history is given elsewhere, and here we give an account only of their guns and armour plates. Whitworth’s connexion with ordnance and armaments commenced in 1854, when the Board of Ordnance asked him to give an estimate for a complete set of machinery for manufactur- ing rifle muskets. Only after experiments had been made at a specially constructed gallery at Fallowfield did Whitworth submit a rifle for ofhcial trial in 1857. It greatly excelled the existing rifles in accuracy of fire, in range, and in penetration ; nevertheless it was rejected by the War Office on the ground that the calibre (*45) was too small.1_ About 1860 Whitworth turned his attention to big guns, and after a course of experiments began to produce weapons of great power and precision. Several 20-pounder guns were supplied in 1863 to the Confederate Army in the American Civil War. At first all guns were made of iron, as it was believed that steel was unsafe for the purpose. In 1865 Whitworth patented his fluid pressed steel, by means of which the uniformity so indispensable to gun steel could be obtained. The process consisted of applying extreme pressure to the fluid steel by means of an hydraulic press. The same steel was next used in 1879 for the con- ' The present Lee-Metford rifle has a - 303 bore. 374 INDUSTRIES struction of armour-plating, which was built up in hexagonal sections. Since then the armour-plate department has been largely de- veloped at Openshaw, and recently several battle- ships and cruisers have received their complete equipment of armour from these works. At the present time in the gun department all sizes of ordnance are manufactured from 3-pounders up to the largest guns of 134in. bore. Amongst other works some hundreds of the new 184-pounder field artillery guns for the British and Indian armies are being made at Openshaw. The manufacture of gun-mountings is also carried on here ; there are several pits in which ammunition hoists can be fixed, and turrets with guns mounted complete, as on shipboard, and worked and tested before being sent out. Vickers, Sons & Maxim have manufactured guns and gun-mountings at Barrow-in-Furness since their establishment there in 1897. In this connexion the manufacture of projectiles may be mentioned. For the large armour-piercing shot the steel ingots are cast at the Sheffield works of the firm, and are generally forged there prior to being sent to Barrow to be completed in the machine shop. At Barrow the forged projectile, after having been centred, is turned externally to the finished size, and the nose is formed to the correct radius. ‘The rear end is then machined and a groove formed near the base to take the copper band which fits into the rifling of the gun. The cavity in the shot is next bored, after which the projectile is hardened by a special process. It is then gauged and threaded at the base, so that a steel plug can be screwed in tightly to close up the cavity. The copper band, after being fixed by means of a special hydraulic press, iis finally turned in a capstan lathe to ensure absolute accuracy. In the case of semi-armour piercing shells, the steel is supplied from the Sheffield works in billets and is forged and drawn at Barrow, prior to completion there, by the same processes as described above. Another specialty of the Barrow works is the equipment for making the forged steel caps, which are frequently fitted to ar- mour-piercing shot and to shells carrying a highly explosive compound. Another product of the establishment is cast-steel shells, which are to be used with explosive charges fired by a fuse. The construction of large gun-mountings by Vickers, Sons & Maxim at Barrow has already been mentioned. To understand what this really means, some acquaintance with the mounting of a large naval gun is necessary. It consists of a great number of separate units; there are the slides supporting the weapon itself, the mechanism for elevating or depressing the muzzle, the mechanical gear for running the gun along the slide to the firing position, and the hydraulic cylinders for taking up the recoil after discharge, as well as the charging appliances, which include hoists from the magazine below and rammers for pushing the great 850-lb. projectiles and pro- pelling explosives into the chamber of the gun. The turn-table carrying these several units, which together form what is known as a barbette mounting, is in effect a platform, having upon it, or suspended to it, a great collection of mechanism, and the whole, weighing 350 tons, is rotated by hydraulic power upon a roller-path immediately within the 12-inch steel walls of the barbette, which completely protect the mounting. It is all this complicated mechanism, which as a whole constitutes a gun-mounting, that is made at the Barrow Works. SHIPBUILDING This industry has been connected with Lanca- shire for more than two centuries, though our knowledge concerning it is very limited. At the time when all ships were built of wood Liverpool was the centre of the industry. Throughout the eighteenth century the Index to Lancashire Wills contains numerous references to shipwrights, sail~ makers, &c., but this is practically the only in- formation we possess. With the displacement of wood by iron in shipbuilding this Lan- cashire industry has largely left Liverpool for Barrow. In 1870 the Barrow-in-Furness Iron Ship- building Co. was formed, and secured a large tract of land on Old Barrow Island, having one frontage to Walney Channel, admirably adapted for launching purposes, and another to the Devon- shire Dock.1 Later the works were transferred 1 Francis Leach, Barrow-in-Furness, 50. to the Naval Construction and Armaments Co., Ltd.,’ from whom they were purchased in 1897 by Vickers, Sons & Maxim, Ltd., of Sheffield. Since then the capacity of the works has been more than doubled, and electricity has been adopted as the motive power. The number of men employed has increased from 5,260 to 10,300, and the weekly wages bill from £7,550 to £17,250.> The works are now equipped for the building of all types of naval and merchant vessels, with their machinery, guns, and gun- mountings.* The reason the company decided to construct everything for their ships was that the town of Barrow is in some respects isolated. * Iron, Steel, and Allied Trades, Barrow-in-Furness (1903), 38. ® Richardson, Vickers, Sons & Maxim, 6. * These last departments have been dealt with under the heading of ‘ Ordnance.’ S75 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE It is impossible to give here a list of all the principal vessels built at Barrow. It must sufhce to say that battleships, armoured cruisers, protected cruisers, 25-knot scouts, gun-boats, torpedo-boats, torpedo-boat destroyers of 30-knot speed, submarine-boats, merchant ships for passengers and cargo, steam yachts, dredgers, and hopper barges have been built during the past few years at Messrs. Vickers, Sons & Maxim’s works. From the census returns we learn that 7,558 men in 1881, 7,758 in 1891, and 8,564 in 1901 were employed in the county in the con- struction of ships and boats. TEXTILE INDUSTRIES THE WOOLLEN INDUSTRY Nothing definite is known as to the com- mencement of the woollen industry in Lanca- shire. We have been unable to find any foundation for the statement of Baines,’ that an aulnager was appointed in Bolton as early as the reign of Richard I, which would lead one to believe that the woollen cloth trade existed there in the twelfth century. The first introduction of the industry has been ascribed to Flemish settlers in south-east Lancashire in the reign of Edward III. It is, however, quite certain that the woollen industry existed in the county prior to 1327. The presence of fulling mills on the Irk at Manchester, and at Colne and Burnley, at the end of the thirteenth century, conclusively proves the existence of the woollen industry at that period. The Kuerden Manuscripts? show that there was a dyer in Ancoats, near Man- chester, about the middle of the thirteenth century, which points to some textile industry in the neighbourhood at that earlier date. The first definite reference to the woollen industry is in 1282. In that year, on the death of Robert Grelet, seventh baron, an inquisition was held into the extent of the manor of ‘Mamecestre.’ It is therein recorded, ‘there is in the aforesaid manor... a certain fulling mill, which is worth yearly 26s. 84.23 From the survey of the same barony, June, 1320, we learn that there is ‘a certain fulling mill running by the stream of the Irk, worth by the year 135. 4d.’* Two years later the fulling mill is described as worth 8s, 4d.° In 1473 the rental had risen again as high as £2.° The other early reference to fulling mills comes from the Accounts of the Lancashire and Cheshire manors of Henry de Lacy, earl of Lincoln, for the year 29 September, 1295, to 29 September, 1296, rendered 30 January, 1297. Dig ae Colne: Rent of the fulling mill of Kaune 2: ane ae ee eer ane ms Se ae Brunley: Rent of fulling mill there, this year the first® . @. die hs o 6 8 1 Hist. of Lane. iii, 70. * Chetham Soc. Rec. Ixviii, 77 and 78. 3 Tbid. lili, 143. * Ibid. lvi, 315. * Ibid. 393. * Ibid. lviii, 504. ” Ibid. cxii, 4, 119. ® Ibid. 8, 122. 5d. Expenses: Repairing the fulling mill of Kaine? ea a i Ge we ae OE 8 Foreign Expenses: Fulling mill at Brun- ley builtanew® . . . . . . 2:12 64h Though the existence of the woollen industry in Lancashire at the end of the thirteenth century can be established, it must be admitted that it was only of very slight importance compared with that in other parts of the country. The first reference to it in an Act of Parliament appears to be in 1514,/! where it is enacted that the statute is not to apply to ‘any cottons or playne lininge orfrise made ... in . . . Lanca- shire.’ A similar exemption occurs in an Act in 1523. In 1538 Leland writes :¥8 ‘ Bolton apon Moore Market stondith most by cottons and cowrse yarne. Divers villages in the Mores about Bolton do make cottons.” By 22 Henry VIII, cap. 15, the privilege of sanctuary was removed from Manchester, on the ground that it was pre- judicial to the woollen and linen manufactures of that town. An Act of 1552 regulates the length and weight of Manchester and Lancashire cottons and Manchester rugs and friezes. Under Mary an attempt was made to stop woollen goods being made outside corporate towns, certain dis- tricts, however, being excepted, including Lanca- shire.'* In 1566 it was enacted that the ‘aulnager for the county of Lancashire shall appoint and have his lawful deputy within every of the several towns of Manchester, Rochdale, Bolton, Blackburn, and Bury.’* In 1577 the clothiers of Lancashire petitioned that middlemen, forbidden by an Act of Edward VI, should be allowed.” They described themselves as ‘poore cotagers whose habilitye wyll not streche neyther to buye any substance of wolles to mayntayne work and labour, nor yet to fetche the same.’ They feared that if the statute were enforced the trade would be driven into the hands of a few rich men. * Ibid. 15, 125. " 6 Hen. VIII, cap. 9. * 14 and 15 Hen. VIII, cap. Il. 8 Itinerary, vii, 56. “5 and 6 Edw. VI, cap. 6. ** 4 and 5 Phil. and Mary, cap. 5. *° 8 Eliz. cap. 12. " §.P. Dom. Eliz. cxvii, No. 38, quoted in Economie Journ. x, 23. Ibid. 16, 126. 376 INDUSTRIES A list of woollen goods exported, with the duty on them, at the end of Elizabeth’s reign, includes ‘30,000 peeces of Lancaster newe devised carseys,’ ® and among the pieces of cloth entered for export in the year 1594—-5 are 53,942 northern cottons, 19,669 Manchester cottons, and 34 Manchester friezes.1° Towards the end of the sixteenth century Camden writes that Manchester— surpasses the neighbouring towns in... a woollen manufacture. . . . In the last age it was much more famous for its manufacture of stuffs called Manchester cottons. It may be mentioned here that the ‘cottons’ to which various references have been made above were a coarse kind of woollens. This is proved alike by the weight of the ‘cottons’ mentioned in 5 and 6 Edward VI, cap. 6, and by the milling which ‘cottons’ are to undergo according to 8 Elizabeth, cap. 12.7 Camden also refers to the ‘woollen cloths, which they call Manchester cottons.” About the end of the sixteenth cen- tury cotton began to be used for spinning the weft for ‘cottons,’ though it was not until after the invention of the water-frame in 1769 that cotton yarn could be spun strong enough to take the place of woollen and linen warps. In 1635 a petition from the Lancashire clothiers complained of the conduct of the deputy aulnagers appointed in accordance with the provisions of 8 Elizabeth, cap. 12, from which it is evident that this Act was still in force.” Similar evidence occurs in 1640, when we find another petition of the drapers and clothiers of the county of Lancaster to the Council.” One Walter Leacocke, being made deputy aulnager, has endeavoured by indirect practices to extort greater fees from some than have heretofore been paid and to others has denied the seal . . . by which grievances our clothing trade is likely to be overthrown and our poor people to perish for want of employment... . Pray that the aulnager may be commanded to seal the clothes upon the ancient accustomed fees and duties. In 1654 another reference to the Lancashire woollen industry occurs. “Thomas Waring peti- 8 S.P. Dom, Eliz. ccl, No. 76 ; quoted in Economic Fourn. X. 9 Thid. Fourn. X. 0 ¢ All the cottons called Manchester, Lancashire, and Cheshire cottons full wrought to the sale, shall be in length twenty-two yards, and contain in breadth three-quarters of a yard in the water, and shall weigh thirty pounds in the piece at least.’ «Every of the said cottons, being sufficiently milled or thickened, clean scoured, well wrought and full dried, shall weigh 21 pounds at the least.2 The process of ‘milling’ was not performed upon cotton goods, 2 §.P. Dom. Chas. I, lxxix, 69. 3 Thid. cccclxxv, 61. ccliii, No. 1223 quoted in Economic tioned the Council on behalf of the poor of Lancashire for liberty to bring in cotton wool from France, Holland, &c. on account of the dearth of wool. There are not five bags of wool in all the merchants’ hands in Lancashire for 20,000 poor in Lancashire who are employed in the manufacture of fustians. Unless cotton wool is brought much lower the manu- facture will revert to Hamburg.” With regard to the exact seats of the woollen industry in Lancashire during the seventeenth century, very little is known, By the Act of 1566, mentioned above, the aulnager for the county of Lancaster was to have deputies at Manchester, Rochdale, Bolton, Blackburn, and Bury. It is to be presumed that these towns continued to be centres of the woollen industry during the seventeenth century. Two other districts are Oldham and the Forest of Rossendale, but of these we have no first-hand evidence. In the words of Mr. Edwin Butterworth %— there can be no doubt that the woollen business was introduced into Oldham in the early part of the fifteenth century, if not a remoter period. . . . The goods made were white and coloured coarse cloths. Mr. Newbigging, the historian of the Forest of Rossendale, informs us that the woollen manu- facture was introduced into the district in the later years of the reign of Henry VIII.” The eighteenth century saw two important changes in the Lancashire woollen industry. The worsted industry began to be established in the Burnley and Colne districts soon after the close of the seventeenth century, and at the earliest period the manufacture consisted of striped and plain calamancoes, shaloons, tammies, and moreens.” During the course of the eighteenth century the cotton industry becomes the dominant textile industry in the southern half of the county. ‘Thus Pococke, writing in 1750, says of Manchester, ‘there is a great manufacture here of linen and cotton,’ omitting all mention of the woollen industry, for which the town had formerly been famous. Besides Manchester, Pococke mentions several other Lancashire towns. ‘There is a manu- facture [at Bury] of woollen cloth.’®® ‘Bolton is a town which thrives by cotton and woollen manufacture.’ * Of Clitheroe he says: ‘This small town is chiefly supported by limekilns and spinning worsted yarn.’ *! ‘Whalley is a village chiefly supported by farming and the spinning of *$.P. Dom. 1654, Ixix, 7. %® Hist. Sketches of Oldham, 82. © Hist. of Forest of Rossendale, 283. 7 James, Hist. of the Worsted Manufacture, 633. ® Dr. Pococke, Travels through Engl. (Camden Soc. 1888), i, 11. *® Pococke, op. cit. i, 11. 1 Ibid. 200, * Tbid. 11. 2 377 48 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE woollen yarn.’ * ¢ Colne subsists by a manufacture of shaloons, serges, and tamies.’* Burnley is ‘a small market town with some share of the woollen trade,’ * whilst Bacup is ‘a large village where they have a great manufacture of woollen cloths, which they send white to London.’ * The last place he mentions is Rochdale, where ‘they have a large manufacture of blankets, baies, and shaloons.’ %8 During the second half of the eighteenth century Colne appears to have been the centre of the woollen and worsted trade of north-east Lancashire. In 1775 a company of proprietors erected a piece hall there on the principle of the Bradford hall, and for a long time this formed the great mart of the district.27 With regard to the production of worsteds in this locality, the following figures are given by James.** In 1781, 42,843 pieces were made in the chapelry of Colne to the value of £54,900, and 19,991 pieces in the chapelry of Burnley valued at £32,166. The industry had probably reached its zenith about this time, as Aikin, writing in 1795, says of Colne: ‘The trade formerly con- sisted in woollen and worsted goods, particularly shalloons, calimancoes, and tammies.’ *’ Its place was gradually taken by the cotton trade.*° A town where the woollen industry was not suppressed by the cotton industry was Rochdale, which is the principal Lancashire woollen town at the present time. An interesting description of Rochdale occurs in a book published in 1778." This place is famous for manufactories of cloth, kerseys, and shallon. Every considerable house is a manu- factory, and is supplied with a rivulet or little stream, without which the business cannot be carried on. The water, tinged with the dregs of the dyeing vat, with the oil, soap, tallow, or other ingredients, used by the clothiers, enriches the land through which it passes beyond imagination. The bounty of nature with respect to this county, in the two essential articles of coals and springs of running water from the tops of the highest hills, is not to be equalled in any part of England. The place seems to have been designed by Providence for the very purpose to which it is allotted, viz. the carrying on a manufacture, which can nowhere be so well supplied with the convenience necessary to it. The women and children are all employed here; not a beggar or idle person being to be seen. In 1795 Aikin writes of Rochdale : ¢ A branch of the woollen manufacture is its staple, of which the principal articles are bays, flannels, kerseys, coatings, and cloths,’ # *? Pococke, op. cit, i, 201. $ Ibid. 204. 4 Thid. * Ibid. 205. % Ibid. 7 James, Hist. of the Worsted Manufacture, 292. 8 Op. cit. 633. ° Aikin, 4 Description of Manchester, 279. © James, Hist. of the Worsted Manufacture, 633. " Beauties of England (ed. 4, 1778); quoted in Earwaker’s Local Géeanings, ii, 17. * Op, cit. 248. The first reference we can find of the exten- sion of the factory system to the Lancashire woollen industry, relates to Tyldesley. Our authority is again Aikin’s book of 68" Lately Mr. Johnson has erected a large factory six stories high and a steam engine, with dye-houses and other extensive buildings for the woollen business, which consists of kersey meers and various fancy goods in all woollen and silk and woollen. There are two other factories upon the estate, intended to be let for the woollen business, and one very large building newly erected, intended for the spinning of woollen and worsted. During the nineteenth century the growth of the cotton industry in Lancashire drove out the woollen industry. A note was added to the Lancashire census of 1831, saying that the manufacture of woollen articles is comparatively unimportant, the number of men employed in worsted mills and as fullers, makers of baize, blankets and flan- nels being about 2,700, chiefly at Newchurch in Whalley parish, and in Rochdale and at Bury. In 1835, according to the returns of the inspector of factories, there were 106 woollen factories at work in Lancashire, employing 3,038 men and 2,028 women.‘ The most recent figures are those of the census returns of 1901. In that year 4,598 men and 3,852 women were employed in the wool and worsted industries of Lancashire. Of these 284 men and 299 women were em- ployed at Bury and 1,296 men and 1,884 women at Rochdale. THE LINEN INDUSTRY During the earliest period it is impossible to separate the linen industry from the woollen industry, so that it cannot be ascertained when linens were first made in Lancashire. Towards the end of the sixteenth century Lancashire is mentioned in Thorold Rogers’ History of Agri- culture and Prices in England as the source of the coarser kinds of linen.4° The earliest reference of this kind is in 1555,*® and this constitutes one of the first definite pieces of evidence of the existence of the linen industry in this county. The earliest is that contained in the statute of 1541 removing the privilege of sanctuary from Manchester on the ground that it was prejudicial to the woollen and linen manufactures of that town.” In 1592 the will of John Turnough, of Oldham, linen weaver, was proved,** which points to one seat of the industry. What is probably the most interesting reference of all to the Lan- ® Op. cit. 299. “ Quoted in Porter, Progress of the Nation (1836), i, 195. * Op. cit. iii, 106. 33 Hen. VIII, cap. 15. 8 Wills at Chester (Lanc. and Ches. Rec. Soc. il.) * Ibid. iv, 489. 378 INDUSTRIES cashire linen industry occurs in 1641 in Lewes Roberts’ Treasure of Traffike :* The towne of Manchester in Lancashire must be also herein remembered, and worthily, for their en- couragement commended, who buy the yarne of the Irish, in great quantity, and weaving it returne the same againe in Linen, into Ireland to sell. When one remembers the imperfections of trans- port facilities during the seventeenth century, the double carriage of yarn to Lancashire and linen to Ireland must be regarded as a very remarkable feat. A picture of a very different character is given in 1680 by the anonymous writer of Britannia Languens or a Discourse of Trade. ‘The writer desires to show that foreign imports have in- creased at the expense of home manufactures, to support which contention he brings forward several examples : I shall first instance in linnen, lately a consider- able manufacture in Cheshire, Lancashire and in the parts adjacent... . But all the manufacture of linnen in Cheshire, Lancashire and elsewhere, is now in a manner expired.™ It seems very doubtful whether this statement is correct, as J. R. McCulloch says in the intro- duction to the edition quoted from, ‘ It is certain, however, that the depressed condition of industry, for which the author endeavoured to account, was wholly imaginary.’*? Further, in 1694, we learn from Chamberlayne that ‘ Manchester is a town of very great trade for woollen and linen manufactures,’ 8 whilst in 1750, Pococke writes of Manchester, ‘there is a great manufacture here of linen and cotton.’** The latter writer also mentions that there is a manufacture of sail cloth at Warrington. A similar observation is made by Arthur Young in 1769: °° ¢ At War- rington the manufactures of sail cloth and sack- ing are very considerable.” From Aikin we learn that in the first part of the eighteenth century a great quantity of coarse linen and checks was made in Warrington and the neigh- bourhood ; but in later years the manufacture of sail cloth or poldavy was introduced, and rose to such a height that half of the heavy sail cloth used in the Navy was computed to have been manufactured here.” In 1836, at the time when * Political Economy Club, Coll. of Early Engl. Tracts on Commerce (London, 1856), 73. 5° Political Economy Club, Col. of Early Engl. Tracts on Commerce. ‘The author writes under the name of ‘Philanglus.” The treatise has been ascribed to William Petyt, but as McCulloch says in the intro- duction to this edition, this is very doubtful. 51 Op. cit. 416. bie Yee 53 Present State of Engl. (ed. 18), 1694. 4 Travels through Engl. i, 11. 5 Ibid. i, 9. 56 Tour in North of Engl. (ed. 2), ili, 163. 57 Aikin, Description of Manchester (1795), 302. Baines wrote, the industry no longer prevailed at Warrington to any considerable extent. Another seat of the linen industry appears to have been Kirkham. In 1795 Aikin writes : ‘The chief trade of Kirkham is coarse linens, especially sail cloth.’ © The industry must have continued well into the nineteenth century, as Baines refers in 1836 to the considerable manu- factures of sail cloth and cordage, and also of fine and coarse linens, The real death-blow to the Lancashire linen industry was the attraction of the pick of the operatives to the flourishing cotton industry. We should note also that after the invention of the water spinning-frame by Arkwright in 1769 cotton yarns could be spun sufficiently strong for use as warps; the need for linen and woollen yarns for warps in cotton goods was thereby dis- pensed with. Nevertheless the linen industry continued to exist in the county during the greater part of the nineteenth century. In 1835 the inspector of factories returned the number of flax factories in Lancashire as 18, employing 1,185 men and 1,839 women. Three years later, in 1838, there were 70 horse power engaged in flax spin- ning in Salford. In Preston there were in the same year six mills at work, employing 1,392 hands ; in Kirkham two mills with 542 hands ; in Wigan two mills with 400 hands ; in Bolton one mill with 261 hands, and in other parts of the county five mills employing in all 286 hands. @ In 1881, 610 men and 2,230 women in the county were employed in the manufacture of flax and linen; ten years later the figures had fallen to 400 and 1,530 respectively ; whilst in 1901 only 210 men and 781 women were occupied in this industry. THE COTTON INDUSTRY It is difficult to discover the beginning of an industry in any locality, because as a rule it will have started in a small way and, therefore, not have attracted the notice of contemporary re- corders, and may even have attached itself at first as a small adjunct to some existing industry. The earliest reference obtained by us is from the wills of Chester, one of which, proved in 1578, was the testament of James Billston of Man- chester, ‘Cotton manufacturer.’ ® From the expression ‘Cotton manufacturer’ we should judge that James Billston was a manufacturer of cotton proper, and not of the Manchester ‘cottons,’ which were coarse woollens, as other- 58 Hist. of Lanc. iii, 681. ®° Description of Manchester, 288. Hist. of Lane. iv, 392. * Porter, Progress of the Nation (1836), i, 272. A. J. Warden, The Linen Trade, 385. °§ Lanc. and Ches. Rec. Soc. ii. 379 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE wise ‘manufacturer of cottons’ would have been a more natural appellation. However, there is some doubt upon the point, and, at any rate, from the presence of one cotton manufacturer before 1578 much cannot be inferred. The reference next in order is a petitioner’s prayer to the earl of Salisbury, probably of the year 1610, for confirmation of a grant made to him for reformation of frauds daily committed in the manufacture of ‘bombazine cotton such as groweth in the land of Persia being no kind of wool.’ Of much greater value is another mention of the English cotton industry some eleven years later. It is in the form of a petition ‘as well of divers merchants and citizens of London that use buying and selling of fustians made in Eng- land, as of the makers of the same fustians’ to “the honourable knights, citizens and burgessess of the Commonshouse of Parliament.? From it the following important extract has been taken :— about twenty years past divers people in this king- dom, but chiefly in the county of Lancaster, have found out the trade of making of the fustians, made of a kind of bombast or down, being a fruit of the earth growing upon little shrubs or bushes, brought into this kingdom by the Turkey merchants, from Smyrna, Cyprus, Acra, and Sydon, but commonly called cotton wool; and also of linen yarn most part brought out of Scotland, and other some made in England, and no part of the same fustians of any wool at all, for which said bombast and yarn imported, his Majesty hath a great yearly sum of money for the custom and sub- sidy thereof. There is at least 40 thousand pieces of fustian of this kind yearly made in England, the sub- sidy to his Majesty of the materials for making of every piece coming to between 8d. and tod. the piece; and thousands of poor people set on working of these fustians. The right honourable Duke of Lennox in 11 of Jacobus, 1613, procured a patent from his Majesty, of alnager of new draperies for 60 years, upon pretence that wool was converted into other sorts of commodities to the loss of customs and sub- sidies for wool transported beyond seas ; and therein is inserted into his patent, searching and sealing ; and subsidy for 80 several stuffs; and amongst the rest these fustians or other stuffs of this kind of cotton wool, and subsidy and a fee for the same, and forfeiture of 20/- for putting any to sale unsealed, the moiety of the same forfeiture to the said duke, and power thereby given to the duke or his deputies, to enter any man’s house to search for any such stuffs, and seize them till the forfeiture be paid ; and if any resist such search, to forfeit 10o/, and power thereby given to the lord treasurer or chancellor of the Exchequer, to make new * Maurice Peeters to the earl of Salisbury ; S.P. Dom. lix, 5. Quoted from Myr. Price’s article in the Quarterly Fournal of Economics, vol. xx, No. 4. Mr. Price points out that the date could not have been later than 1612, when Salisbury died. § Tt has recently been unearthed by Mr. W. H. Price, who also discovered the reference just quoted. See the article mentioned in the previous note. ordinances or grant commissions for the aid oi tHe duke and his officers in execution of their office. The petitioners pray for relief from the opera- tion of the patent. There are many interesting points arising out of this petition or the circum- stances which occasioned it. The patent referred to was originally granted to the duke in 1594, but it did not then cover cottons. These, as the petition asserts, were added in 1613. Hence, presumably, cottons could not have been a very prominent manufacture in 1594. The petitioners, speaking of facts which must have been within the recollection of many living people, allege that the cotton manufacture first attracted attention ‘about twenty years past,’ from say 1621 ; much stress cannot be laid upon the expression ‘ found out.’ Again, we learn from this petition that the cotton industry suffered some kind of regula- tion. After the evidence already adduced it is almost needless for the purposes of this article to notice the isolated proposal made in 1625 that the poor should be employed in the spinning and weaving of cotton.” Although the oft-quoted passage from Lewes Roberts’ Treasure of Traffike (1641) no longer possesses the interest of being the earliest known reference to an extensive cotton industry in England, it still has consider- able significance. The passage runs :— The town of Manchester in Lancashire must be also herein remembered, and worthily for their en- couragement commended, who buy the yarne of the Irish in great quantity, and weaving it, returne the same again into Ireland to sell: neither doth their industry rest here, for they buy cotton wool in Lon- don that comes first from Cyprus and Smyrna, and at home worke the same, and perfect it into fustians, vermillions, dimities and other such stuffs, and then return it to London where the same is vented and sold, and not seldom sent into forrain parts. Evidently the cotton industry was of a moderate size before the middle of the seven- teenth century, and it is practically certain that it had attained to no noticeable dimen- sions before the seventeenth century, both from the direct evidence of the petition against the duke of Lennox’s patent and from the absence of any mention of it in contemporary records which might otherwise have been ex- pected. The Elizabethan Poor Law of 1601 (43 Eliz.), when empowering overseers to * London Guildhall Library, vol. Beta, Petitions and Parliamentary Matters, 1620-1, No. 16 (old No. 25). The spelling has been modernized. Quoted from Mr. Price’s article above referred to, wherein the question of the year of the petition, which is undated, is discussed. There can be no reasonable doubt that the date was not later than 1624, for neither the king nor the duke is referred to as ‘ the late,’ and the former died in 1625 and the latter in 1624. "J. Stort, BM. Add. MSS. 12496, fol. 236. Quoted from the last edition of Cunningham’s Growth of Engl. Industry and Commerce, vol. ii, pt. ii, p. 623. * Orig. ed. 32, 33. 380 INDUSTRIES purchase material to set the poor to work upon, makes no mention of cotton, and Camden, who wrote in 1590, has no word to say of the cotton industry, as Baines assures us, though Manchester is not missing from his description. Defoe, indeed, imagined for the manufacture of cottons English ancestry more remote even than that of the woollen industry; but he was obviously misled by the term ‘cottons,’ which had been applied to certain classes of woollen goods, or possibly to mixed linen and woollen goods, before the inhabitants of this country appear to have thought of fabricating the short- stapled cotton fibre. It is not improbable that these ‘ Manchester cottons” made of wool were designed to imitate and rival the coarse cottons bought from abroad: they were probably sham cotton made of wool, in the same sense that flannelettes are sham woollens made of cotton. The references to these earlier cottons, which are numerous, have been dealt with fully in the section on the woollen industry. The term ‘fustian,” we may note, which was applied to coarse cotton goods after the cotton manufacture became one of our leading industries, had been used to denote certain woollen or worsted goods made at Norwich and in Scotland in early days.® The correctness of Baines’ speculation that the cotton industry proper was introduced to this country by refugees out of the Netherlands from the persecutions and disturbances of the second half of the sixteenth century has never been disproved, but the petition concerning the duke of Lennox’s patent casts some doubt upon it. The new industry was probably fortunate in its choice of the non-corporate town of Manchester, where strangers were not sacrificed in the interests of freemen by the exclusive privilege accorded to the latter. Cotton wool was imported as early as the thirteenth century for candle wicks. Accord- ing to Dr. Whitaker’s note to an entry in the books of Bolton Priory relating to this use of cotton and dated 1298, cotton was at that time obtained from the Levant.” Hakluyt refers to the bringing of cotton wool from the Levant at the beginning of the sixteenth century, and notices in the same passage the exportation of our woollen ‘ cottons.’ 6 Baines quotes in illustration an Act passed in 1504 for regulating the Company of Shearmen of Norwich, and also from Blomefield’s Hist. of Norf. ii, 62,a passage relating to Norwich fustians in the reign of Edward III. 7 The extract from the books of Bolton Priory 1s quoted by Baines on p. 96: ‘In sapo et cotoun ad candelam, xvii, S. id’ Dr. Whitaker’s note is in Hist. of Craven (ed. 2, 1812), 384. 1 Hakluyt, Voyages, ii, 206. Quoted from Baines’ Hist. of the Cotton Manufacture, 96-7. Macpherson (Annals of Commerce) tells us that cotton was ob- tained from Antwerp in 1560: at that time the cotton industry was flourishing in the Netherlands. Despite Lewes Roberts’ complimentary reference of 1641 to the Manchester cotton and linen industries the manufacture of woollens con- tinued for some years thereafter to be the lead- ing trade of Lancashire.” But by 1727 Defoe could write of Manchester: ‘The grand manu- facture which has so much raised this town is that of cotton in all its varieties.’"* ‘There is a great manufacture here of linen and cotton,’ said Pococke of the same town in 1750. The growth of the cotton industry throughout the eighteenth century may be read from the official figures obtained by Baines from the Board of Trade, and for the first time published in his history.”* They are as follows :— British Cotton - Cotton Wool = goods exported, imported in (official values) in million Ibs. thousand fs 1697 . . . 1°98 5°92 I7Ol . 1°99 23°25 THQ 4 a “71 5°70 1720... 1°97 16°20 1730. -: ar 1°55 13°52 I174Io. . 1°65 17°91 175 ss 298 45°99 1764 . . . 3°87 200°35 Re-exportations of cotton wool are not men- tioned, and it is not plain, therefore, what the home consumption - exactly was, but from statistics furnished to a committee of the House Commons on the manufacture which are printed in Postlethwayt’s Dictionary under ‘Linen,’ it appears that the average re-exports did not ex- ceed 150,000 lb. between 1743 and1749.° By 1774 some 30,000 people in and about Man- chester were engaged in the cotton manufacture, if we are to credit a statement made to Govern- ment in a petition praying for the retention of the law throwing open to foreign vessels the ports of Jamaica and Dominica.” It was not, however, until the period 1770-88, according to Radcliffe, the author of the Origin of the New System of Manufacturing, published in 1827, that the cotton trade drove out its companion woollen industry in bulk from the cotton district proper. Radcliffe’s statement does not lack support, and the ejectment was satisfactorily explained in part by an eye-witness : The rapid progress of that business (cotton spinning) and the higher wages which it affords, have so far dis- tressed the makers of worsted goods in that county ™ See evidence already given in previous sections. Tour, iii, 219. Proof that he meant cotton goods proper will be found on p. 221 of the same volume. " Travels through England, i, 11. ”° Op. cit. 109-10. © The table is quoted in Baines’ History, 111. 7 Bryan Edwards’ History, Civil and Commercial, of the British Colonies in the West Indies. 381 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE (Lancashire), that they have found themselves obliged to offer their few remaining spinners larger premiums than the state of their trade would allow.” From that time until the present the centralizing process has advanced unimpeded ; Belfast and Scotland no longer hold the relative positions that they once occupied, and the widely-spread cotton industry of the north-west of England has been drawn into the contracting circle around Man- chester, which stands out as the unmistakable seat of the British cotton trade. The contrast beneath is significant :— DisrriguTion oF CoTron OPperaTIVES IN 1838 AND 1898-9 (FROM RETURNS OF Facrory Inspzcrors) 18387 1898-9 Cheshire 36,400 34,300 Cumberland . 2,000 700 Derbyshire 10,500 10,500 Lancashire 152,200 398,100 Nottinghamshire 1,500 1,600 Staffordshire 2,000 2,300 Yorkshire 12,400 35,200 England and Wales. 219,100 496,200 Scotland 35,600 29,000” Ireland . . . 4,600 800 United Kingdom 259,300 526,000 217,000 of the 219,100 operatives in Eng- land and Wales were employed in the counties enumerated. Of the 2,200 operatives whose location is not given about 1,000 worked in Flintshire. More important far than the exact date when the cotton industry was brought to us, and the precise spot on the globe from which it was imported, is the general type of its organization in its rudimentary state. This may be mentally constructed from the descriptions of contem- poraries and those who remembered the domestic system (Ogden, Guest, Aikin, Butterworth, Rowbottom, Bamford, Radcliffe, Kennedy, and others, and the witnesses who gave evidence to early committees of inquiry). We should expect to find a multiplicity of systems since diversity of arrangements characterized the woollen and linen trades. In the latter were to be found weavers engaged to make up in their own homes ® Account of Society for promotion of Industry in Lindsey (1789). (B.M. 103 L. 56.) Quoted from Cun- ningham’s Engi. Industry and Commerce (ed. 1892), ii, 452. Ogden too (author of 4 Description of Man- chester, €Sc., published in 1783), if Aikin’s ‘accurate and well-informed enquirer’ be Ogden, says that the period of rapid extension of the cotton industry began about 1770. ® The only other county with more than 1,000 was Gloucester with 1,500. * According to the last census there were only 15,000 cotton operatives in Scotland engaged in spinning, weaving and subsidiary processes and ‘ other processes or undefined.’ 38 materials supplied by undertakers ; self-employed weavers using their own materials, bought some- times on a system of long credit ; and journeymen working for men like Martin Brian (or Byrom) of Manchester, one of the three famous clothiers of the ‘ North Country,’ who about the year 1520 kept a greate number of servants at worke, Spinners, Car- ders, Weavers, Fullers, Dyers and Shearman, &c., to the great admiration of all that came into their houses to beehould them." The hand-loom weavers of cotton under the domestic system were of many grades. Some occupied themselves entirely with weaving, and of these there were journeymen working for small masters and also independent weavers. Others united with manufacturing agricultural work on small holdings, or farm work for larger farmers at certain seasons of the year. Though cotton weaving, no doubt, had never been wholly or mainly a by-employment of agriculture, that it was extensively connected with it (so that some agricultural work might have been regarded as a by-employment of weaving) the descriptions of eye-witnesses make plain. Thus Radcliffe, writing of the industrial conditions in 1770, says that the land in our township (Mellor) was occupied by be- tween 50 and 60 farmers . . and out of these 50 or 60 farmers there were only 6 or 7 who raised their rents directly from the produce of their farms ; all the rest got their rent partly in some branch of trade, such as spinning and weaving woollen, linen, or cotton. The cottagers were employed entirely in this manner, except for a few weeks in the harvest. Edwin Butterworth, a careful investigator, who, however, was not born till 1812, in speaking of the cotton linen fustian manufacture, asserted that in the parish of Oldham were a number of master manufacturers, as well as many weavers who worked for manufacturers, and at the same time were holders of land, or farmers, ... . The number of fustian farmers [he said] who were cottagers working for manufacturers without holding land, were few; but there were a considerable number of weavers who worked on their own account, and held at the same time small pieces of land.® Again, we may quote the following :— It appears that persons of this description (county weavers) for many years past have been occupiers of small farms of a few acres, which they have held at high rents ; and, combining the business of a hand- * Hollingsworth, Mancuniensis (ed. 18 39),28. The author died in 1656. ” Radcliffe, op. cit. 59. ® Butterworth, Hist. of Oldham, 101. On this custom see also French’s Life of Crompton, 4, 5, 9. 2 INDUSTRIES loom weaver with that of a working farmer, have assisted to raise the rent of their land from the profits of their loom.™ It was the improvements in machinery, by com- plicating it and allowing of the production of finer goods, which forced the weavers into in- creasing specialism, and slowly destroyed the direct connexion between agriculture and the cotton textile industry. Moreover specialism accentuated the economies of production in towns, where the parts of the industry dependent upon one another could be conducted side by side, where mechanics could be had for the building and repair of appliances, and where there was a market. Spinning in the primitive industry was the occupation of women and children. The most prominent functionary under’ do- mestic industrial arrangements, and a pivot of the system, was the Manchester merchant. He warehoused goods received from the weavers, and distributed them for export or consumption in the country. Until the vile English roads were repaired at the end of the eighteenth century the goods were marketed with the aid of strings of pack-horses, and were largely disposed of through the medium of fairs. Export appears at first to have been chiefly in the hands of London houses,® but as the Manchester merchants grew in wealth and enterprise they went abroad to arrange for foreign sales, or maintained agents or partners abroad. It is not astonishing that in proportion as they succeeded, their business as shippers was taken from them by foreign rivals who set them- selves up in Manchester and directed the export to the lands from which they had severally emigrated. The foreign house was naturally better acquainted with foreign demand, and was more likely to learn promptly of the changes in foreign taste to be provided for. So great was the number of these foreign merchants in Man- chester at the beginning of the nineteenth century that their presence caused marked jealousy, inter- mingled with not a little alarm, which excited some protest.® The other relationship of the merchant to be explained is that to the weavers. From some of these he simply bought cloth, the weavers having provided themselves with warps and cotton. To others he gave out warps and cotton, paying merely for workmanship. At first the weavers prepared the warp for the loom by the system of 5 Reports, &c. 1826-7, v, §. Statements of the existence of this state of affairs can be found in other parliamentary papers, e.g., Gardner’s evidence given before the Committee on MHand-loom Weavers in 1835. % See Lewes Roberts, The Treasure of Traffike, (original ed. 1641), 32-3 3 also Stukeley, [tinerarium Curiosum (1724), 55 ; and Odgen, op. cit. 79. 58 See e.g. the writings of Radcliffe and the demand for an export tax on cotton yarn, peg-warping which is illustrated in one of the plates to Guest’s History of the Cotton Manufacture, but after the invention of the warping-mill the merchants as a rule gave out warps ready prepared for insertion in the looms.®” As the weavers were scattered throughout the county many Manches- ter merchants put out their work through local agents. There were also local piece-masters, or fustian-masters, who were independent men of business and not merely agents for Manchester houses, and at some places, such as Bolton, Black- burn, and Stockport, local markets existed both for the provision of the material needed in manu- facture and for the disposal of goods. The merchants bought in the grey and arranged for the colouring and finishing of the goods according to the requirements of their customers. The greatest event in the whole history of Lancashire industrialism was the striking series of ingenious mechanical inventions which, in conjunction with the application of steam as motive power, constituted what is commonly known as the Industrial Revolution. The industrial revolution, however, must be regarded in part also as the culmination of a long-working reaction against the social and political ideas crystallized in the laws, regulations and customs with which earlier industrialism had been at first disciplined and then cramped. Among the contrivances which complicated the simple loom we must mention first the ‘draw-boy’ or ‘ draught- boy’ for raising warps in groups and thereby enabling figured goods to be produced. In 1687 a Joseph Mason patented an invention for avoid- ing the expense of an assistant to work it,® but there is no evidence to show that the invention was of practical value. Later, looms with ‘ draw- boys’ affixed, which could sometimes be worked by the weavers themselves, became common and were known as harness-looms. ‘They have since been supplanted by Jacquard looms. Of quite another order, as regards the magnitude of its influence on economic conditions, was John Kay’s epoch-making invention in 1738 of the fly-shuttle—a remarkably simple device—the general application of which to the cotton industry appears to have been retarded for some unknown reason for nearly a quarter of acentury.®® The fly-shuttle was succeeded by the drop-box in 1760, which enabled different coloured wefts to be rapidly interchanged. The idea of the drop-box originated with John Kay’s son Robert. There were also other and earlier inventions than the fly-shuttle and drop-box for adding to the productivity, or range of work, of the loom. Butterworth, Hist. Skerches of Oldham, 95. “Ibid. 121. The reference is from 2 393 the cotton industry there were many local markets where merchants bought the goods which were ultimately carried to the fairs, or about the country on pack-horses, or disposed of through the agency of ‘riders-out’ with patterns and agents abroad. The convenience of centralized dealing, taken in conjunction with cheap and rapid transportation by rail, forced the local markets into Manchester. The old Ex- change, built in 1729, was taken down in 1792 and a new Exchange on a contiguous site was opened in 1809, the first stone having been laid in 1806. The present building was erected in 1869. MAKING 1796. The principal hatting concerns in the latter year were those of Messrs. Henshaw & Co., Mr. Abraham Clegg, Mr. John Clegg, Mr. Thomas Clegg, Mr. Edmund Whitehead, and Mr. John Fletcher.’ By the early part of the nineteenth century the industry had increased still more and was regarded as the principal trade of the town,® but the introduction of silk hats finally led to its disappearance. Of the Rochdale hat industry very little evidence is forthcoming. Besides the early reference to David the hatter, at Facit, we have Aikin’s reference to it in 1795: ‘A very con- siderable hat manufacture is in an increasing state,’’ and a few mentions in the Index to Lancashire Wills at Chester ® :-— 1750 Robert Chadwick, of Rochdale, hatter 1763 Thomas Holt, of Blackwater in Rochdale, hat-maker 1765 James Oldham, of Rochdale, hatter 1767 John Galilee, of Rochdale, hatter In the case of Manchester also, the hat industry appears to have reached its most flourishing condition at the beginning of the nineteenth century. About the commencement of the industry nothing is known, but it cer- tainly existed prior to 1730, as may be gathered from the following passage :— The manufacture of hats has been as much improved at Manchester as any original branch of its trade. At first the felt makers only wrought the coarse sheep’s wool and it was not until about 60 years since [i.e. 1730] that they used the fine Spanish or goat’s wool from Germany. The manufacture of fine hats at Manchester is now [1795] inferior to none.’ ? ® Ibid. 141. * Editor’s additions in 1855 to a new edition of Butterworth, 247. " Aikin, Description of Manchester, 248. ® Lanc. and Ches. Rec. Soc. xxv, XXXVli, XXXViil. * Aikin, Description of Manchester, 161. 50 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Some of the early felt-makers to whom Aikin refers in the passage quoted above, are men- tioned in the Index to Wills :—" 1670 John Grimshaw, of Failsworth, parish of Manchester, feltmaker 1681 Humphrey Hulme, of Salford, feltmaker 1682 William Renshall, of Gorton, Manchester, feltmaker 1686 James Grimshaw, of Failsworth, Manchester, feltmaker 1692 Benjamin Cliffe, of Salford, feltmaker 1695 John Gallant, of Manchester, feltmaker 1699 John Bowker, of Bradford in Manchester, feltmaker 1717 Thomas Peacock, of Salford, feltmaker Arthur Young, writing in 1769, mentions the hat industry as one of the four principal branches of Manchester manufactories.! In this branch, he further informs us, the chief sub- THE SILK We have seen it stated that the silk industry came to Lancashire at the commencement of the nineteenth century,’ but this is not exactly correct, as by means of the Index to Wills at Chester we are able to trace the silk industry in Nlanchester and Salford from the first half of the seventeenth century. As we can find no other evidence to throw light on this early period, we quote the entries in full :? 1648 1670 1686 1689 1693 1697 Timothy Hulme, of Manchester, silkweaver John Cuthbert, of Salford, silkweaver William Mees, of Salford, silkweaver Edward Lilly, of Manchester, silkweaver Thomas Bayley, of Manchester, silkweaver Nathaniel Edgeley, of Manchester, silk- weaver Thomas Smith, of Manchester, silkweaver Richard Thorpe, of Salford, silkweaver Joshua Goring, of Manchester, silkweaver Richard Budworth, of Manchester, silk- weaver William Hill, of Manchester, silkweaver 1741 1769 1785 1788 1791 The next oldest seat of the Lancashire silk industry, after Manchester and Salford, appears to have been Middleton. Silk-weaving was introduced there about 1778 by a family of the name of Fallow. The business spread rapidly, but seems to have declined in prosperity in the "© Lanc. and Ches. Rec. Soc. xv, xvili, xx. " Arthur Young, Tour in the North of Engl. (ed. 2), - iti, 187. * Ibid. 191. * Scholes, Manchester and Salford Directory, 1794. “ Census Returns of 1831. ‘ Grindon, Lanc. Hist. and Descriptive Notes, 152. * Lanc. and Ches. Rec. Soc. iv, xv, Xvili, xxv, Xxxvili, and xliv. divisions are (1) preparers, (2) makers, (3) fini- shers, (4) liners, and (5) trimmers. ‘This industry employs men, women and children, whose average wages he indicates in some detail. Finally he mentions that this branch works chiefly for exportation.” During the last decade of the eighteenth century several firms described as hat manufac- turers existed in Manchester and Salford. Amongst others there were Josiah Banghan & Co., Carpenter’s Lane ; Borradailes & Atkin- son, Greengate, Salford; Henry Layland & Son, 3, St. Mary’s Gate ; Thomas Phillips & Co., 19, Bridge Street; and Daniel Robin- son & Sons, 2, Dale Street.’ In 1831, the manufacture of hats employed 550 men in the parish of Manchester.’* At the present time the industry has disappeared entirely from the district. INDUSTRY course of a few years, for Aikin remarked in 1795 that ‘the weaving of silk was originally more general than at present, but now gives way to the more profitable branches of muslin and nankeen.’ Early in the nineteenth century the silk trade revived and extended. Mr. Thomas Cope, examined before the silk committee of Parliament in 1832, stated that in the town of Middleton and the adjoining places there were 2,121 silk looms. In 1840 Butterworth esti- mated that in the township of Middleton about 1,000 females, 700 males, and 300 young persons, were engaged in silk-weaving. The goods chiefly manufactured were plain sar- cenets. In the Manchester district also the silk industry appears to have undergone con- siderable development during the first half of the nineteenth century. In 1819 there were in Manchester about 1,000 weavers of mixed silk and cotton, and 50 of pure silk goods,* and in 1820 five silk mills.6 In 1832 the number of silk mills in Manchester, Salford, and Newton had increased to sixteen,® and the whole number of looms devoted to the silk manufacture in Lancashire was 14,000, of which from 8,000 to 9,000 were employed in weaving silk alone, and from 5,000 to 6,000 in weaving mixed goods.’ In 1835, according * All the information about silk-weaving at Middle- ton is based on Edwin Butterworth, Hist. of Middleton (1840), 33, 34. * Edwin Butterworth, Hist. of Middleton, 33. * Porter, Progress of the Nation, i, 260. * Tables of Revenue, &c. pt. ii, 102, quoted in Baines, Hist. of the Cotton Industry, 422. "Quoted in Baines, Hist. of the Cotton Industry, 422, from Rep. of the Commons Com. on the Silk Trade in 1832. 394 INDUSTRIES to the returns of the inspectors of factories, there were twenty-three silk factories at work in Lancashire, employing 1,519 men and 3,459 women.® Another account of the growth of the silk industry in Lancashire is given in Wheeler’s History of Manchester :— The throwing mill of Mr. Vernon Royle erected in 1819-20 was the first to be completed and brought into operation here. It is a very extensive establish- ment, not less than 5,000 persons being dependent for subsistence upon the work which it supplies. The Messrs. Tootal commenced business in 1816, silk handkerchiefs and mixed goods being then almost the only articles fabricated.’ ° There are now [1836] in the county twenty-two throwing mills, Manchester being their principal locality, employing about 4,000 persons. "° The Lancashire silk industry was at the height of its prosperity about 1860. Since then it has steadily dwindled. What remains of the trade gathers chiefly about Leigh. In Igor only 840 men and 1,497 women were employed in the industry as against 1,823 men and 2,892 women in 1891, and 3,390 men and 6,852 women in 1881. CALICO PRINTING’ Although calico printing is a comparatively new industry, the usual doubt exists with regard to the circumstances attending its intro- duction into this county and its early develop- ment here. Almost all writers share the opinion that calico printing was introduced into Lanca- shire during the ‘sixties’ of the eighteenth century, but Charles Leigh, writing in 1700, refers to Manchester as follows :— As to the present state of the town it is vastly populous, of great trade, riches, and industry, par- ticularly for the fustian manufacture and the printing them. It is not certain, therefore, that the printing of textiles was entirely unpractised in Manchester half a century before it is supposed to have been introduced. The calico-printing industry previous to its settlement in Lancashire was established in London and Scotland. The reason for its coming to this county cannot be expressed better than in the words of a contemporary Manchester writer :— ® Social circumstances have concurred in fixing the printing branch here. A principal one was, that cotton greys and calicoes are manufactured in these parts, and the London printers were supplied from hence by land carriage. ‘The printing them here saves the expense. Besides this advantage the rent for bleaching ground is lower, and there is cheaper living for workmen in the country ; which brought down a succession of capital artists in this branch, who not only instructed others, but also added to their former experience, by printing upon grounds, which the dyers followed with other shades; and 8 Quoted in Porter, Progress of the Nation, i, 261. 9 Wheeler, op. cit. 219. ” Tbid. 222. 1 An account of the fiscal regulations relating to ‘prints’ is given in a note above on p. 388. ? Nat. Hist. of Lanc. bk. iii, 15. 3 James Ogden, 4 Description of Manchester, 1783 (W. E. A. Axon’s edition, 1887), 85. hence there was a communication of nostrums and chemical secrets between printers and dyers, to the advantage of both branches in the perfecting of grounds and giving a firmness, with a clearness to colours. These improvements soon left London with nothing to rival us with but the light airy patterns. Excepting Leigh, the writer who gives the earliest date for the introduction of calico print- ing into Lancashire is John Graham :—* According to the best information, printing was first introduced here [Bamber Bridge, near Preston] about the year 1760, next at Chadkirk near Stockport, Cheshire, and afterwards at various other places, mostly at ill-selected spots, never calculated to do a good business.° Printing was begun by Edward Clayton [at Bamber Bridge] in 1760 ; he was succeeded by his sons, John Clayton & Brothers. They were succeeded by Ralph Clayton, John Clayton, and Edward Clayton, who carried on until May, 1824, when they retired from business. The buildings are all taken down and the land laid out for gentlemen’s residences.® These works on commencing had been supplied with men from London. Baines shares the view of Graham, that the Claytons were the founders of the calico-printing industry in Lancashire, though he gives the date as 1764.” Espinasse is of the same opinion.® Others, however, take another view. Thus, for example, the Hon. George Peel, writing about ‘The Chemistry of Calico Printing from 1790 to 1835 and the Hist. of Printworks in the Manchester District from 1760 to 1846. By John Graham. MS. in the Manchester Library. The author, a brother of Thomas Graham, the famous chemist, was a partner, at the time of writing, in the May- field Printworks of Messrs. Thomas Hoyle & Son, Manchester. A short account of the work will be found in the Manchester Guardian, 2 Jan. 1904. * Graham, op. cit. 345. "Ibid. 346. ” Hist. of the Cotton Industry, 262. ® Lanc. Worthies (ser. 2), 65. 395 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Sir Robert Peel, the first baronet, in the Dic- tionary of Nutional Biography, says :—- His father, Robert Peel, had founded the fortunes of the family in 1764, when, having mortgaged his family estates, he established at Blackburn in con- junction with his brother-in-law, Mr. Haworth, and a neighbour named Yates, a calico printing firm, which may be considered the parent of the industry of Lancashire. Baines says the firm of Haworth, Peel & Yates followed the Claytons.? Espinasse thinks they probably started as manufacturers of Blackburn greys, and that they added cloth printing to their business afterwards.!° Graham informs us that printing at Blackburn was first begun by the Peel family about the year 1770, previous to their separating and going to Church Bank and Bury," which happened in 1772.” The next point to be considered is the de- velopment of processes in the calico-printing industry. In the early days, prior to those of which we have been speaking, the printing was performed exclusively by hand, with wooden blocks, upon which the designs were produced in relief by some portion of the wood being cut away. In the finer parts of the patterns, slips of sheet copper were beaten into the wood. Somewhere about 1750 a new method was introduced of pencilling into the goods that had been dyed other colours. This pencilling was usually done by women; probably it was first introduced at Aberdeen and then gradually spread over the kingdom. A great development in the calico-printing industry was occasioned by the invention of the flat printing press about the year 1760. It contained copper plates on which the pattern was cut out with the graver. The colour was put on the plate with a large brush and the superfluous colour removed by a thin steel scraper. The plate was then passed with the cloth through a press similar in principle to that of the common printer. This method was first successfully worked at Old Ford near London : Mr. John Stirling possesses a specimen printed at these works in 1761. It is 80 in. in length and 38in. in width without a repeat. This method was largely adopted in Scotland for the production of pocket handkerchiefs, and was also made use of by most Lancashire calico printers.! The great improvement in the art was the invention of cylinder or roller printing. This invention is generally associated with the name ° Hist. of the Cotton Industry, 262. © Espinasse, Lanc. Worthies (ser. 2), 66. " Graham, op. cit. 357. "Ibid. 360, 365. “John Stirling, ‘Hist. of Colour Printing in the United Kingdom,’ Journ. of the Soc. of Dyers and Colurists, Feb. 1903. “See Stirling’s paper. ‘Graham, op. cit. 345, quoted below. of Thomas Bell, a Scotsman in the employ of Livesey, Hargreaves & Co., of Mosney Works, near Preston. His share in this invention, how- ever, is not quite certain. Baines writes ee ‘This... invention is said to have been made . . . by Bell.” A somewhat different aspect of the case is given by Espinasse :—"” As early as 1704 we light upon traces of cylinder printing. In that year Thomas Fryer, ‘Thomas Greenhow, and John Newbery patented ‘a machine for printing, staining, and colouring of silks, stuffs, linen, cotton, leather, and paper by means of copper cylinders, which are put in motion by other plain cylinders . . . It was not till 1783 and 1784 that Thomas Bell took out two patents which made cylinder printing practicable . . . It was first suc- cessfully applied in Lancashire about 1785 at Mosney, near Preston, by Livesey, Hargreaves, Hall & Co. An entirely different account of the develop- ment of processes in the calico-printing industry is given by Graham :—"* Printing was at that time [1760] very slow in all its processes, chemistry not being understood as at present (1848]. Bleaching out of grey cloth required a great breadth of land. Cloth for printing was linen, linen and cotton, and strong velvet for the Russian market. After some few years the idea of printing from copper plates was taken from the copper-plate press printers, and the press was made use of by most of the calico printers in plates of different lengths from 5 inches to 36, and allowed to work by the block printers of those days, without much molestation, in patterns of one colour. In after times the masters began to think of other improvements. Mr. Robert Peel saw the style of work called Stormont pins, which he thought would have a good run. He ordered a large broom or besom of very fine twigs, with which he spurted the cloth after being printed with block. By this contrivance the spots were very irregular in size and quantity ; his man Christopher Roberts, a mechanic, contrived a circular brush of the same length as the piece was broad; it was made of bristles, the ends were allowed only to touch the colour, and then by a rule laid across the brush being turned by hand, the cloth at the same time being drawn across a common table, the rule spurted the colour from the ends of bristles on the cloth, forming the ground of what was then called a Stormont pin. Later, at Christopher Roberts’ suggestion, a wooden surface roller filled with pins was sub- stituted for the brush and successfully applied :-— They next saw it was quite possible to put regularly designed patterns on the surface roller, and cut them in the same way as the regular block, which was put into execution to great advantage ; machines were improved ; the idea of cylinder printing suggested itself. The block printers took alarm, and in 1790 made a general strike against all machinery. It lasted 13 weeks, and ended in the defeat of the block printers. * Hist. of the Cotton Industry, 265. " Lanc. Worthies (ser. 2), 70-72. * Op. cit. 345-6. 396 INDUSTRIES This account does not enable us to fix the date of the introduction of cylinder printing, but at another place '*Graham mentions that ‘Charles Taylor began printing at Broughton Grove, Man- chester, in 1786, with 8 tables and one cylinder machine, being the first set up in Manchester.’ If this date is correct the following words of an American refugee in England, written on 12 June, 1780, must refer to the flat printing press :—‘ We arrived safely at Manchester. Examined the ingenious machinery and opera- tions of calico printing.’ ” These varying accounts of the early develop- ment of processes in the calico-printing industry are not very easily reconciled. We suggest the following as a possible explanation: As in the case of so many mechanical inventions in the cotton industry, it seems likely that cylinder printing was invented at an early period, and then re-invented some twenty years later. Bell may, or may not, have been aware of the patent of Fryer, Greenhow and Newbery. The dis- covery of cylinder printing by Robert Peel and Christopher Roberts of Bury was probably entirely independent of Bell’s invention, or even of the earlier invention of Fryer, Green- how and Newbery. One is led to suppose this by the knowledge that various improved pro- cesses were tried at Bury, from which cylinder printing gradually evolved. The fact that Peel and Roberts did not patent their invention is no objection, because, as they were in the trade, it would pay them best to keep it secret and use it themselves. Whether Bell or Roberts invented cylinder printing first it is impossible to say. Whatever the exact part may have been which the Peels took in the introduction of the calico- printing industry into Lancashire and in its subse- quent development there, it is certain that before the end of the eighteenth century they were engaged in the business on a very large scale for those times. Besides their works at Brookside and Church, they had taken out licences to print calicoat Lower House, Foxhill Bank, Ramsbottom, Brinscall, and at Bury Ground. When the first Sir Robert Peel retired from business his wealth was estimated at two and a quarter million pounds. The various print works with which he and his family had been connected passed into other hands—those in Rossendale to Messrs. Grant, those at Church Bank to Messrs. Ford, and those at Lowerhouse to Messrs. Dugdale. Between 1788 and 1794 the Manchester warehouse of the various Peel firms, which had been situated 19 Op. cit. 357. 0G. A. Ward, Journ. and Letters of an American Refugee in Engl. from 1775 t 1784 (New York, 1842) ; quoted in Earwaker’s Local Gleanings, i, 259. in St. Ann’s Square and Cannon Street, were left for more commodious premises in Peel Street, where they occupied Nos. 5, 6,and 10, After the removal of Mr. Robert Peel, who was made a baronet in 1800, to Drayton Manor, his brother, Mr. Lawrence Peel, became the representative of the family in Manchester, and his attendances at the meetings of the Commercial Society are recorded in its minutes with fair regularity.” Other well-known names associated with the early commercial history of the trade, besides those of Clayton and Peel, are Cobden of Sab- den ; Simpson of Foxhill Bank ; Fort and Taylor of Broadoak; Hargreaves, Dugdale and Thomp- son of Primrose; Hoyle of Mayfield ; Steiner of Church ; and John Mercer of Openshaw Works. Regarding designs, there are some well-known traditions in the trade. In the first place there was the parsley-leaf pattern of Messrs. Peel, and the equally famous diamond pattern of Messrs. Simpson of Foxhill Bank. Another well-known pattern was the broom or brush pattern designed by Edmund Potter. In connexion with the development of the industry, it is noteworthy that the cylinder printing machine was being successfully used all over Lancashire before it was adopted in either London or Scotland. It was not until the begin- ning of the nineteenth century that there was a cylinder machine in London, and it was still later before there was one in use in Scotland. The year 1832 marks an important era in the history of calico printing, when one of the first acts of the reformed Parliament was to repeal the excise duty of 34d. per yard on calicoes. In that year there were seventy-eight calico printing works in England, sixty-two in Scotland, and two in Ireland. Twenty years later the numbers had increased to one hundred and twenty-two, eighty- one, and four respectively.” The two most important recent developments of the calico printing industry, the one technical and the other economic, have been the discovery of the coal-tar colours, and the organization of the Calico Printers’ Association in November, 1899. The association comprises, among others, all the principal calico printers of Lancashire, the chief exception being F. Steiner & Co., Ltd., of Church. It has a share capital of £6,000,000, and a 4 per cent. debenture issue amounting to £,3)200,000, but it was far from being successful, to judge from dividends, during the first six * years of its existence. ” Elijah Helm, Hist. of the Manchester Chamber of Commerce, 13. * The material for writing the last paragraphs has been taken from Stirling’s Hist. of Calico Printing in the United Kingdom, 397 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE BLEACHING, FINISHING AND DYEING For material relating to the early history of these processes we are obliged to rely almost entirely upon the Index to Wills at Chester, from which some information of considerable interest can be gathered. The following are the first mentions of ‘whitsters,’ which is the old name for bleachers :-— 1690 Robert Kenyon, of Gorton, whitster 1693 John Worthington, of Manchester, whitster 1694 John Dixon, of Prestwich, whitster 1699 John Gregory, of Crosslane, whitster Throughout the eighteenth century these refer- ences occur, and we find whitsters in many places in the neighbourhood of Manchester, but very seldom in the town itself. Thus, for example, whitsters lived at Prestwich, Gorton, Newton, Pendleton, Blackley, Openshaw, Failsworth, Collyhurst, Audenshaw, Cheetham, Kersal, Levenshulme, Droylsden, Broughton, Worsley, and Flixton, The finishing industry, on the contrary, was situated almost entirely within the borough of Manchester. The following are the earliest records, which may be quoted by way of example :— 1675 John Holt, of Manchester, Calenderer 1680 William Carrington, of Manchester, Calen- derer 1680 John Williamson, of Manchester, Calender- man 1681 George Gee, of Manchester, Calenderman 1688 Richard Brennan, of Salford, Calenderman 1690 John Millington, of Manchester, Calender- man 1692 Francis Marshall, of Manchester, Calender- man These references to the wills of calendermen of Manchester continue during the whole of the eighteenth century. Though it is impossible to be certain how the bleaching and finishing trades came to be esta- blished where they were, the following would seem the probable explanation. As the process of finishing developed with the growth of the cotton industry, it was only natural that it should concentrate itself at Manchester as the chief seat of the spinning and weaving industries. The bleachers would likewise be drawn to Manchester, but the nature of their trade, which involved the use of grass land, would hinder them from settling in the town itself. | Thus they were led to esta- blish themselves in the outskirts. The bleaching process as performed in the middle of the eigh- teenth century occupied from six to eight months. It consisted in steeping the cloth in alkaline leys 1 Lance. and Ches. Rec. Soc. Xv, Xvili, XX. for several days, washing it clean, and leaving it spread out upon the grass for some weeks. The growing grass decomposed the carbonic acid in the atmosphere, retained the carbon, and threw off the oxygen, which destroyed the colouring matters with which it came in contact. This process was repeated several times. Finally the cloth was treated with sour milk. The great change came with the application of chlorine to bleaching, according to Berthollet’s discovery in 1785. Several improvements in the process were made by Thomas Henry of Manchester, in par- ticular the use of lime, which deprived the chlorine of its smell without impairing its bleaching qualities. Whilst the Manchester neighbourhood was the home of the early whitsters, the first bleach works, properly speaking, were established in the Bolton district. Among the oldest bleach works still in active operation are those of Richard Ainsworth, Son & Co., Halliwell Bleach Works, Bolton, founded in 1760; G. & J. Slater, Dunscar, Bolton, founded in 1761; Eden & Thwaites, Ltd., Waters Meeting Bleach Works, Bolton, founded in 1770; and James Hardcastle & Co., Bradshaw Works, Bolton, founded in 1784. Other early works were established at Bury and at Tottington, near that town. The last important change in the bleaching industry occurred in 1900, when the Bleachers’ Association was formed by the amalgamation of fifty-three firms and companies engaged in the trade, most of which carried on business in Lancashire at Bolton, Chorley, Prestwich, Little Lever, Whitefield, Seedley, Adlington, Bury, Eccles, Radcliffe, Ramsbottom, Salford, Middle- ton, Higher Broughton, Heaton Mersey, Pendle- bury, Rawtenstall, Horwich, Royton, Leyland, and Tottington. The association has a share capital of £6,000,000, of which £4,500,000 is issued, and a first mortgage debenture stock of £, 2,250,000, The early evidence with regard to dyeing is exceedingly slight. This is probably due largely to the fact that dyeing was principally regarded as a subsidiary industry, so that some of the people described in old documents as yeomen were at times also dyers. The first references we can find take us as far back as the thirteenth century. In 1295 Henry de Ancoats gave to ‘Alexander le Tinctore [the dyer] de Mamecestre’ an acre of land in Ancoats.? In circa 1300, Robert son of Robert, son of Simon Tinctore de Mamecestre, gave to Alexander of Mame- > «Coll. relating to Manchester and its neighbour- hood, compiled, arranged, and edited by John Har- land.’ Chet. Soc. Remains, \xviii, 72. 398 INDUSTRIES cestre and heirs two selions of land in Ancoats.® If this Alexander is the same as the one men- tioned above, who received land from Henry of Ancotes, or even a contemporary of his, it is probable that Simon the Dyer carried on his trade in Manchester about the middle of the thirteenth century. The next dyer at Man- chester after Simon and Alexander, to whom we can find any reference, is Ellis Bradshaw, woollen dyer, whose will was proved in 1611.4 Two other early wills which interest us at this point are those of Richard Bradshaw, of Bolton, dyer, 1614, and Thomas Howse, of Rochdale, dyer, 1633.5 The first contemporary account of dyeing occurs in 1783.8 The practice of dressing caused a revolution in the whole system of bleaching and dyeing. Before this era, the lighter drabs and fancy colours might be said rather to hang on the surface, than to be fixed in the substance of the cotton goods ; and there was a neces- sity of varying the practice upon these articles, when they went through the ordeal process of dressing over glowing hot iron. This was kept a secret at first and chiefly employed on blacks or dark colours, for fear of a discovery which might prejudice the operator. Hence it was that the dyers soon found a necessity of accommodating their practice to the operation of dressing, and either dropped the use of such volatile drugs as they found would not stand it, or sent goods in half dye to be dressed, which they finished after- wards. But here they were obliged to drop or simplify the old processes and to invent new, employ- ing the more fixed drugs and other astringents with more powerful menstruums, to discharge the rustiness CHEMICAL It is surmised that small works for the making of hydrochloric acid and one or two other chemicals were carried on in connexion with apothecaries’ shops in Manchester and the surrounding district during the eighteenth cen- tury. It is also fairly certain that there were no chemicals made at St. Helens, at present one of the chief seats of the industry, prior to 1829." In Liverpool and Widnes also we can find no evidence of any early works, and it is in reference to Wigan that the first information is forth- coming. We cannot give the exact date of the estab- lishment of the Wigan Copperas Works. There is a casual reference to the Lancashire Copperas Works, which we take to be the same, in a letter dated 24 August, 1754, written by Robert 3 Chet, Soc. Remains, \xviii, 77. * Lanc. and Ches. Rec. Soc. it. 5 Tbid. ii, iv. ® James Ogden, 4 Description of Manchester, 1783 (W. E. A. Axon’s edition, 1887), 83-5. 1 See Josias Christopher Gamble, Chemical Trade Journ. 1890. contracted from the fire; in all which attempts they kept improving, till dressing in the grey took place and goods were brought to a considerable perfection by alternate dressings and bleachings before they were dyed. As in the bleaching industry, the most im- portant event in the dyeing industry of recent years has been the growth of the trust move- ment. Several large firms have remained inde- pendent, but most have joined one of the three dyeing ‘combines.’ The Bradford Dyers’ Association, Ltd., was formed in December 1898, with a capital of £3,000,000, and a de- benture issue of half that amount. Some eight Lancashire firms belong to this Association. The English Velvet and Cord Dyers’ Associa- tion, Ltd., was floated in April, 1899, with a capital and debenture issue of about £ 1,000,000. Of the eleven Lancashire companies belonging to this Association, the majority have their works in Salford and Pendleton. The last ‘combine’ is the British Cotton and Wool Dyers’ Association, Ltd., which was established in February, 1900, with a capital issue of £2,000,000 anda debenture issue of £ 1,750,000. To this Association some twelve or fifteen Lan- cashire firms belong. In 1881, 18,378 men and 3,495 women in the county were employed in bleaching, print- ing, and dyeing. In 1891 the figures were 20,903 and 4,263 respectively, and ten years later the figures had further increased to 26,975 men and 4,464 women. INDUSTRIES Nicholson, of Liverpool, merchant, to his brother and partner, James Nicholson. This letter refers to the ‘little obstruction in the Lanca- shire Copperas Works’ due to the high price of cannel ore. The first date on which the Wigan Copperas Works is mentioned in R. Nicholson’s private ledger is 20 May, 1755. Robert Nicholson had thena fifth share in the concern.” The last entry is on 4 May, 1776, when a divi- dend was paid (the second only in twenty-one years). R. Nicholson died in 1779, and of the later history of the concern we know nothing. The two Nicholsons and their cousins the Lightbodys were also proprietors of the Hurlet Copperas Works, and introduced into Scotland the manufacture of both copperas and alum. In 1765 a patent (No. 831) was granted to Holme, Cropper, and the two Nicholsons for the manufacture of alum. Experiments prior to this were made, principally by R. Nicholson, 7 Tt is not certain who the other partners were. Probably James Nicholson, the Fleetwoods, and the Lightbodys, would also be interested. 399 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE both at Wigan and Hurlet. Of the latter the Nicholson letters give full details, but those at Wigan are only casually alluded to. One of Robert Nicholson’s letters, headed ‘ Hurlett, 9 August, 1765,’ suggests a remedy for ‘the colour of our alum at Wigan not being good,’ which shows that alum had actually been made at Wigan. The family tradition is that whilst the works at Hurlet were very successful, those at Wigan were not.* With reference to the early chemical industries in the Manchester district, our information is far from complete. The two chief products appear to have been ‘vitriolic acid’ and ‘iron liquor.’ The former was probably used for the manufac- ture of other chemicals, the latter was required by calico printers. The earliest makers of whom we can find any mention are Benjamin Rawson & Co., of Water Street, who are described in the Manchester and Salford Directory of 1772 as vitriol manufacturers. In the same Direc- tory John White of MacDonald’s Lane figures as a liquor merchant, but it is not till 1794 that Andrew Patten of 18, Quay Street, Salford, and William White of 33, Water Street, are put down as iron-liquor manufacturers.4 At the beginning of the nineteenth century, the num- ber of vitriol makers and iron-liquor manufac- turers in the Manchester district had considerably increased. It is almost impossible to give an account of the modern chemical industries without enter- ing into a certain amount of technical detail. In the first place it is necessary to explain the difference between two great processes, the Le Blanc and the Ammonia Soda. Lancashire has always been closely associated with the former, and keen competition has led to its improvement and development, and in particular to the gradual use of the so-called waste products. The object of the Le Blanc process is to obtain soda from common salt. In the first place sulphuric acid is obtained by burning pyrites. The acid is mixed with salt, and sodium sulphate and hydrochloric acid gas are obtained. This solid sul- phate of soda, or ‘soda cake,’ is heated in re- volving furnaces with coal and limestone. In this manner carbonate of soda and sulphide of calcium or ‘alkali waste’ are produced, and the former is converted into caustic soda or soda ash, The two products originally wasted were ° We are greatly beholden to Mr. Francis Nichol- son, F.Z.S., of Windermere, a great-grandson of the Robert Nicholson mentioned above, and to Mr. Ernest Axon, for all the information concerning the Wigan Copperas Works. *We can only find one Manchester and Salford Directory between 1773 and 1794, viz. 1788, and as they are all three edited by different people, the omission of any name cannot be considered conclusive evidence that the individual or firm in question did not exist. hydrochloric acid and sulphide of calcium. About the middle of the nineteenth century, Le Blanc manufacturers began to use the former in the production of bleaching-powder, which is obtained by passing chlorine over slaked lime. The latter has been turned to useful purposes by a process suggested by Mr. A. M. Chance of Birmingham, by which sulphur, practically pure, and carbonate of lime, a substance used in the manufacture of cement, are obtained. The Ammonia-Soda process was first intro- duced on a commercial scale some forty years ago. It rests on the fact that when ammonia and carbonic acid gas are mixed with a strong solution of salt in water, bicarbonate of soda and ammonium chloride are obtained. The engineering and mechanical difficulties formed a stumbling-block for many years, but were finally removed by a Belgian engineer named Solvay, who has given his name to the lofty towers which form the most conspicuous feature of an ammonia soda works. Their object is to obtain the fall, or space, required to make the mixing of the liquid and the gas effective. As already mentioned, almost all the alkali manufactured in Lancashire is produced by the Le Blanc process. The only exception we are aware of is that of the Fleetwood Alkali Works, where the Ammonia-Soda process is employed.° The first large works for the manufacture of alkali by the Le Blanc process, after the abolition of the duty on salt in 1823, were erected in Liverpool by James Muspratt in that year. The process of manufacture consisted in the suc- cessive preparation of sulphuric acid, sodium sulphate, and sodium carbonate. At first the soap makers would not buy the new soda, and Muspratt had to give away large quantities to overcome the prejudice. For a time only black-ash was made, but when it was discovered that this lost strength by lying in the air, it became necessary to convert it into white soda-ash, by lixiviating it with water. For some six years Muspratt’s Works remained the only one in England, except a few small works on the Tyne. In 1829 Josias Christopher Gamble erected chemical works at St. Helens in partner- ship with James Muspratt, but the partnership lasted two years only. ‘These two pioneers of the alkali trade at St. Helens encountered bitter opposition from the agricultural interests, and to avoid legal proceedings Gamble was obliged to pay liberal compensation. In 1830 alum works were commenced at Gerards Bridge, St. Helens, but failed and were sold to Messrs. Gamble and Messrs. J. & J. Crossfield, soap boilers of Warring- ton. In 1836 Joseph and James Crossfield became partners of Gamble, and in 1837 Simon Cross- field, a younger brother, joined the firm. The ® One of the best-known works using this process is that of Messrs. Brunner, Mond & Co., Ltd., Northwich, Cheshire. 400 INDUSTRIES partnership was dissolved in 1846, when the St. Helens works passed into Gamble’s sole possession.® Since 1830 many similar works have been erected in the neighbourhood of St. Helens, among the first being those of James Clough and of A. G. Kurtz. As raw products, sulphur, nitre, salt, lime- stone, lime and slack were first employed. It was in Liverpool that the substitution of pyrites for sulphur, in the manufacture of sulphuric acid, was originally tried, Muspratt having em- ployed Welsh and Wicklow pyrites as early as 1839. In 1859 Spanish and Portuguese pyrites were burnt by the alkali makers on a large scale. The extraction of copper from the residues, by smelting, was introduced by William Gossage at Widnes. The condensation of hydrochloric acid gas in coke towers was first carried out by Gossage at Stoke Prior in 1836; in 1850 he removed his works to Widnes. It was in Lancashire that the closed roaster for the decomposition of salt by sulphuric acid came into use, an invention due to J. C. Gamble. Associated with this stage in the manufacture of alkali is the employ- ment of hydrochloric acid for the prepara- tion of bleach. It was in Gamble’s works at St. Helens that the well-known Weldon man- ganese recovery process was tried. Another use of hydrochloric acid was developed by Balmain and Parnell, at St. Helens, in 1847, and by Gamble in 1848, in the production of chlorine for the manufacture of potassium chlorate. This is now an important industry, and the electro- lytic preparation of potassium chlorate, and sub- sequently of sodium chlorate, followed in its wake. The Deacon chlorine process, in which the decomposition of hydrochloric acid is effected by the oxygen of the air, was worked out at Widnes. A great change was brought about by the substitution of revolving furnaces for handwork. The black-ash revolver was introduced by G. Elliot and W. Russell at the Patent Alkali Company’s Works at St. Helens in 1853. In the same year the manufacture of caustic soda on a large scale was carried on by William Gossage. An important alteration in the economic organization of the Lancashire chemical industry occurred in 1890, when the principal Lancashire alkali firms, together with many other British firms manufacturing alkali by the Le Blanc process, combined to form the United Alkali Co., Ltd., largely with a view to strengthening their position in the struggle with the Ammonia- Soda process. Another class of chemical goods made in Lancashire are aniline dyes. Two firms em- ployed in this branch of the chemical industry are The Clayton Aniline Dye Co., Ltd., and Messrs. Levinstein, Ltd., both of Manchester. The latter was established at Blackley in 1865 by Mr. Ivan Levinstein. Since 1889 the manu- facture of sulphuric acid and of naphthalene has been added to that of aniline colours. In 1891 the manufacture of naphthol and naphthylamine was commenced, and in 1892 that of naphthionic acid. It is chiefly in the colour-manufacturing sphere that Messrs. Levinstein are known ; their principal market is in Lancashire itself, but they engage also in an extensive export trade. A further product of the Manchester district is carbolic acid; the firm of F. C. Calvert & Co., Bradford, Manchester, was founded by the late Dr. F. Crace Calvert, F.R.S., in 1857 on a very small scale, with the object of extracting carbolic acid from coal tar. At the present time the firm employs 150 hands, and its chief pro- ducts are carbolic acid and preparations therefrom. In 1881, 5,074 men and 125 women were employed in the chemical industries of the county. Ten years later the numbers had in- creased to 7,885 and 134 respectively. The figures for 1901 show a slight falling off. In that year 7,466 men and 214 women were at work in these industries. INDIA-RUBBER A year or two before 1819 a Mr. Thomas Hancock of London succeeded in finding a solvent for india-rubber, which till then had only been used for erasing pencil: marks. As nothing practical came of this he turned his attention to its application in its elastic form, particularly to articles of wearing apparel. The chief difficulty was, that at a low temperature it became rigid, but the warmth of the body was thought sufficient to prevent this. On 29 April, 1820, he took out his first patent : ‘ For improve- ments in the application of a certain material to § Josias Christopher Gamble, Chemical Trade Fourn. 1890. various articles of dress, and other articles, that the same may be rendered more elastic.’ In 1819 Mr. Charles Macintosh, a chemist, entered into a contract with the proprietors of the Glasgow Gas Works to receive for a term of years the tar and ammoniacal water produced at their works, chiefly with the view to the production of ammonia to be employed in the manufacture of cudbear. Whilst making ammonia in this way, Mr. Macintosh discovered that one of the by-pro- ducts, naphtha, would dissolve india-rubber, which was thus converted into water-proof varnish. Macintosh obtained a patent for this process in 1823, and established a small factory in Glasgow. 2 401 51 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Wishing to extend his business, he looked out for some one with capital, and was introduced to Mr. Hugh Hornby Birley and his brother Mr. Joseph Birley, who were cotton spinners and manufacturers in Manchester. These three persons, together with Mr. R. W. Barton, formed the firm of Charles Macintosh & Co. in 1824, and for the purpose of carrying on the waterproof business erected a building known as the ‘Old Mill’ next to the Birley Cotton Mills in Lower Cambridge Street, Manchester. In 1825 Mr. Thomas Hancock obtained a licence to use Mr. Macintosh’s patent, and in 1826 an arrangement was made by which Mr. Hancock and Messrs. Chas. Macintosh & Co. should work in conjunction with each other, but as separate concerns. About 1842 Hancock became a partner in Chas. Macintosh & Co. On 21 November, 1843, Mr. Hancock took out his patent for ‘Vulcanization,’ by which india-rubber could be changed so as not to be stiffened by cold. This enabled such articles as washers, sheets, valves, printers’ blankets, and billiard cushions to be made of vulcanized rubber. A third important process of the india-rubber industry, viz., the ‘converting’ process, not di- rectly associated with Lancashire, was patented by Mr. Alexander Parkes in 1846. It is applied to waterproof cloths, thereby rendering them insusceptible to cold. Of these three fundamental processes of the india-rubber industry, the two principal ones, the waterproofing of cloth by means of india-rubber and the vulcanization of india-rubber, were dis- covered by members of the firm of Charles Macintosh & Co., who have given their name to the waterproof garment now universally known as a ‘ macintosh.’ In conclusion the dates may be given at which some of the principal rubber products were first made in Lancashire. Among the earliest articles made about 1825 were rubber tubes, which led to the manufacture of hose-piping made of rubber and cloth, air beds, pillows, and cushions. From 1839 onwards pontoons were made of water and air-proof cloth for the construction of military bridges. In 1847 over-shoes were produced here, the idea coming from America, In the previous year the manufacture of vulcan- ized-rubber wheel tires had been commenced, and two years later vulcanized-rubber thread began to be made, At present the principal firms in Lancashire for the manufacture of india-rubber goods are Messrs. Charles Macintosh & Co., Ltd., Man- chester, Messrs. David Moseley & Sons, Man- chester, and the Leyland and Birmingham Rubber Co., Ltd., whose rubber mills at Ley- land near Preston were founded over forty years ago. During the last twenty years of the nineteenth century the industry has largely expanded in this county. In 1881, 1,104 men and 421 women were employed as india-rubber and gutta-percha makers and as waterproof-goods makers. In 1891 the figures were 2,214 men and 1,355 women, whilst ten years later the numbers were 3,973 and 2,346 respectively. SOAP INDUSTRY It seems most probable that this industry grew up in the neighbourhood of Manchester alongside the bleaching industry, to which it is subsidiary. Hence it probably commenced towards the end of the seventeenth century. The entries in the Index to [ills do not contradict, even if they do not support, this supposition. 1709 James Morecroft, of Ormskirk, soap-boiler ' 1724 John Watson, of Manchester, soap-boiler 1751 James Chadwick, of Manchester, soap-boiler 1766 James Thompson, of Chorley, soap- boiler 1774 James Chorley, of Liverpool, chandler and soap boiler 1784 Thomas Fleetwood, of Liverpool, soap-boiler In 1773 there appear to have been five soap- boilers and chandlers in Manchester, viz. :— John Bagshaw, Shudehill and Long Millgate Thomas Boardman, 8, Cateaton Street Lane. and Ches. Rec. Soc. xx, xxii, xxv, XxXxvii, xxxviii, xliv. Thomas Crallen, 1, St. Mary’s Gate Samuel Goodier, 17, Hanging Ditch, and Richard Walker, Withy Grove? As was the case with some of the other chemical industries, a large part of the soap trade gradually passed from Manchester to Liverpool and the south-west of the county. According to the Commercial Directory of 1814-15 there were eleven soap-boilers in Liverpool at that time. During the year 1850, 25,354 tons of hard soap and 3,241 tons of soft soap were made in Liver- pool and its vicinity, which was nearly one-third of the total quantity produced in Great Britain. The following figures are taken from the census returns, In 1881 there were in the county 573 men and 167 women employed as soap-boilers and soap-makers. Ten years later the figures were 765 and 316 respectively, whilst In 1901 1,520 men and 819 women were so employed. * Scoles, Manchester and Salford Directory, 1773. * Baines, Hist. of Liverpool, 768. ne 402 1 INDUSTRIES One of the largest soap businesses in Lanca- shire is that of Messrs. Joseph Crossfield & Sons, Ltd., of Warrington and Liverpool. The earliest information concerning this firm is con- tained in the diary of George Crossfield, whose son Joseph was the founder of the business. Early in 1814 the father travelled to Warrington from Lancaster to view ‘some premises near Bank Quay suitable for a soapery, which busi- ness our son Joseph seems to have a strong inclination to.” From an entry in June, 1814, we learn that ‘son Joseph has concluded a bargain for the premises at Bankey.’? In 1815 the father inspected the soap works ‘which are very complete, but the trade isa losing one.’ Dur- ing 1817 and 1818 the trade improved, and in the following year Joseph Crossfield was married at the Friends’ Meeting House at Height. Originally the firm was largely concerned with the manufacture of farthing dips and of a few varieties of soap. The expansion of the latter trade came after the repeal of the excise duties on soap at the end of the ‘forties.’ In 1862 silicate of soda was first manufactured. In 1882 toilet soap, in 1885 crude glycerine, and in 1889 caustic soda were added to the products of the firm. In 1892 there was a large development in the manufacture of silicate of soda, better known as water-glass, in connexion with its new use for the preservation of eggs. In 1893 the firm began to produce chemically pure glycerine on a large scale. During the last ten years the manufacture of many other products has been undertaken, such as perfumery, tooth powder, water softeners, face powders, ‘carbosil ’ (a washing and bleaching soda), vegetable butter, paint and cement, and caustic in special forms, POTTERIES POTTERIES At the present time the extent of the Lan- cashire pottery industry is very slight and appears to have been limited a few years ago to the manufacture of sewage pipes, chimney pots, tiles and various other kinds of coarse earthenware in the neighbourhood of Darwen. In the past, however, much pottery was made in the south- west part of the county, particularly in Liverpool. The first reference is found amongst the Liver- pool municipal documents. On 16 October, 1643, Robert Lyon, clay-potter, was admitted as a free burgher of the town. Previous to this there are references to brick-making in the same documents. There is one in 1618 concerning the getting of marl on the common, by one Mossock of Toxteth Park. In 1693 an order occurs concerning brick-making :— That all persons allowed to get marl to make bricks from the common, shall dig to the bottom of the such as solid, liquid, stick, powdered, and detached. There is also a special department devoted to fuel economy. In this connexion it may be noted that the firm succeeds in burning large quantities of common bituminous coal without producing smoke. During recent years the firm has undergone a very large expansion. In 1885 there were about 200 employees, in 1895 600, and in 1905 about 2,000. In conclusion it may be mentioned that during the last few years Messrs. Joseph Cross- field 8& Sons, Ltd., have introduced various schemes for further improvement in the phy- sical, mental, and moral conditions of their workpeople.4 Another large soap-manufacturing business is that of Messrs. William Gossage & Sons, Ltd., of Widnes and Liverpool. In 1850 the late Mr. William Gossage founded mills at Widnes to crush limestone which was supplied to the various alkali works of the district. In 1854 he took out his first patent connected with the soap industry, and in 1855 he commenced the soap manufacturing business. It is noteworthy that it was at these works that the manufacture of sodium and potassium silicates was originated, and their use in the manufacture of soap worked out. In 1857 this firm introduced the manu- facture of mottled soap. Other products of the firm at the present time are glycerine, alkali, and silicate of soda. In 1897 the firm em- ployed some goo hands. The Liverpool esta- blishment formerly belonged to the firm of Taylor and Timmis, but in 1865 it was amalgamated with that of William Gossage & Sons. This latter firm became a limited liability company in 1894. AND GLASS clay and marl and make the ground level before they carry off their bricks. In the municipal records, under the date 4 March, 1699, is the following entry :-— Richard Mercer, a freeman of this town, being supposed to defraud it by countenancing and pro- tecting mugs and pipes of strangers, as if they were really his own, is to be inquired into and taken notice of at the next Qrtr. Sessions. In 1700 the wills of William Ainsdale of Liverpool, potter, and Robert Bruer of Liver- pool, potter, were proved. In 1701 Josiah Poole, of Liverpool, received permission from the corporation to make tiles, and pantiles, and bricks from local clay, and in 1714 Lord Street pot-house was leased to Alderman Jos. Poole. * The above details were kindly supplied by Messrs. Crossfield. ' Lance. and Ches. Rec. Soc. xviii. 403 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE In the municipal records and in the registers at St. Peter’s Church there are numerous references to the existence of regular clay-getting and pot works in Liverpool at the commence- ment of the eighteenth century. At the par- liamentary election, 1734, the list of persons who polled contains several described as potters. Amongst the corporation leases is one dated 2 May, 1753, from William Rowe to several merchants, described as partners, in which it is stipulated that they should have his mill for the use of their new pot-house in Dale Street. An interesting advertisement appeared in the Liverpool Advertiser on 18 June, 1756 :— The Proprietors of the Mould Works, near the Infirmary, Liverpool, acquaint the public that they continue to make all sorts of sugar moulds and drips, chimney moulds, large jars for water, black mugs of sizes, crucibles and melting pots for silver smiths, founders, &c., and sell them on the same terms as from Prescot, Sutton, and other places. With regard to the potteries outside Liverpool not very much is known. In the Index to Lancashire Wills at Chester? we find references to clay potters at Rainford in 1709, 1710, 1713, and 1734, at Bickerstaffe 1710, at Windle 1712, at Eccleston 1706, at Sutton 1727 and 1765, at Whiston 1738, and at Prescot 1734, 1742, 1745, 1762, 1767 and 1768. At the last place we learn from Baines, writing in 1835,° that for ages there have been there several manufactories of coarse earthenware, for which the clay of the neighbourhood is par- ticularly adapted. A plan of the town taken in the early part of the eighteenth century exhibits six of these factories. Aikin‘* also refers to Prescot having ‘several manufactories of coarse earthenware.’ An earlier reference to Prescot is that of Dr. Pococke in 1751 5 :— They have two or three houses for coarse earthen- ware and one for the whitestone and work it as they say higher with the fire than at Lambeth. They make it of a mixture of two sorts of clay which they find here. Other references to pottery outside Liverpool are those of Aikin to the making of sugar moulds and coarse earthenware at Sutton,® and Folkard to the pottery industry of Wigan, which is described as flourishing during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, and as ceasing to exist in the early part of the nineteenth.’ With regard to Liverpool, Arthur Young writes in 1769 ‘there is a manufacture of porce- * Lanc. and Ches. Rec. Soc. xviii, xx, XXV, XXXVIl. * Hist. of Lane. iii, 797. ‘ A Description of Manchester, 1795, p. 311. *Dr. Rich. Pococke, Travels through England (Camden Soc. 1888), ii, 208. * A Description of Manchester, 313. " Folkard, Industries of Wigan, 1a lain in this place, which employs many hands ; the men in it earn from seven to nine shillings.’ ® The industry at this time must have been very considerable, as the list of voters at the parlia- mentary election in 1761 contains the names of about 117 Liverpool potters. “Towards the end of the eighteenth century, however, the industry began to die out. About the last pottery to be established was the Herculaneum Pottery, founded in 1794. This lasted till 1841, when it was closed, the site being required for the Herculaneum Dock. Originally the principal pot works had lain towards the lower part of Dale Street, but the last potter on this celebrated site was Mr. Zachariah Barnes, who died in 1820. By the middle of the nineteenth century the pottery industry appears to have died out in south-west Lancashire, judging from the statement of Mr. Joseph Mayer in 1855 :— There is now a small manufactory at St. Helens, which may be considered the last relic of pottery in this neighbourhood, but that concern has not been occupied for some time.’ At the present time Messrs. Doulton have a branch of their tile and pottery works at St. Helens. Quite recently a tile and pottery manufactur- ing concern has been established in the neigh- bourhood of Manchester. The Pilkington Tile and Pottery Manufacturing Company, Ltd., was founded in 1892 with works at Clifton Junction. At the outset the firm undertook the manufac- ture of wall, floor and decorative tiles as its principal products. Later they began to make ceramic mosaics, being one of the first firms in this country todo so. The rest of their output consists of pottery. ‘The firm have throughout their existence paid particular attention to the colouring and glazing of their products. According to the census returns for the county, the pottery industry has been steadily growing in recent years. In 1881, 483 men and 52 women were employed in the manufacture of earthenware, china, and porcelain. In 1891 the figures were 496 and 117 respectively. Ten years later they were 1,317 and 303 re- spectively. GLASS The earliest seat of the glass industry in Lan- cashire appears to have been at Haughton, which lies on the Tame, between Hyde and Stockport. Here there was a collection of houses known as Glass House Fold. It is said to have derived * Arthur Young, Tour in the North of England (2nd ed.), iii, 169. * Hist. Soc. of Lanc. and Ches. vii, 207. Where no reference is given, the information concerning Liverpool potteries is taken from C. T, Gatty, The Liverpool Potteries, Hist. Soc. of Lane. and Ches. xxxiii, or T. Mayer, Hist. Soc. of Lanc. and Ches. xxiii. 404 INDUSTRIES its name from the fact that a company of Flemish glass blowers settled there nearly four hundred years ago. Of this there is no proof, but it is quite certain that the glass industry existed there in the seventeenth century. The register of the Stockport church for the beginning of the seventeenth century contains several references to the glass industry, though in some cases without any specification of the place. This certainly indicates the existence of the industry in the neighbourhood, though not neces- sarily in Lancashire. The earliest of these references is 1605, and is as follows :—‘ July 31, 1605, an infant of one Dionise, a glassman, buried.” Two references, however, point definitely to Haughton :— Dec. 7, 1636, Thomas, the son of Thomas Bagley, clerk of the glasshouse in Haughton, baptized. Sep. 15, 1644, Margaret, daughter of Robert Wilson, a glassman at ye glasshouse in Haughton, baptized. After 1644 there is no further mention of the glass-house in the registers.”® It was probably in the early eighteenth century that the glass industry became established in south- west Lancashire. ‘The first reference we can find is one in the Liverpool municipal records, that Mr. Josiah Poole undertook a glass-house at Liverpool in 1715." Thirty years later the will of James Taylor, of Liverpool, glass-grinder,”? was proved, and in 1755 that of William Roberts, of Liverpool, glass-grinder.’® ‘Two other wills of interest are those of Samuel Woods, of Liverpool, glassmaker, 1762. Nathan Banner, of Liverpool, glassmaker, 1780." Arthur Young, writing in 1769, mentions that there are two glass-houses at Liverpool, in which the earnings are nine or ten shillings a week.” The only reference we can find to the glass industry of Prescot is that in Pococke, who visited the place in 1751 : ‘ They had a manu- facture of green glass, but the house has been taken by one of Sturbridge in Worcestershire, in order to shut it up.’** Other sites of the glass industry are indicated by the Index to Wills :— 1721, Peter Wilcox, of Sutton, glassmaker 1752, Thomas Fenny, of Eccleston, nr. Knowsley, glassmaker © The account of glass-making at Haughton is from Middleton, Annals of Hyde, 296-300. 1 Quoted in C. T. Gatty, The Liverpool Potteries, Hist. Soc. of Lance. and Ches, xxxili, 127. "Index of Wills, Lanc. and Ches. Rec. Soc. xxv, XXXVil, XXXviii. 8 Thid. ™ Ibid. 3 Arthur Young, Tour in North of Engl. (2nd ed.), iii, 169. 1% Dr. Richard Pococke, Travels through Engl. (Camden Soc. 1888), ii, 208. Lance. and Ches. Rec. Soc. xxii, xxv, xxxvii, xliv. 1775, John Highton, of Eccleston, glass bottle founder 1788, Peter Seaman, of Warrington, glass manu- facturer Aikin mentions that the making of glass at Warrington has employed many hands, and that it is a flourishing branch of manufacture.” In 1835 Baines remarks that the glass trade of Warrington continues to flourish.!® As late as 1857, 162 men and 2 women” were em- ployed in this branch of manufacture, but the Warrington industry was already far surpassed by that of St. Helens, which is now the centre of the glass trade in Lancashire. The British Cast Plate Glass Manufactory was established in 1773 at Ravenhead, St. Helens. It is interesting to note that the company was incorporated by special Act of Parliament. This statute, 13 George III, cap. 38, is entitled :— An Act to incorporate certain persons therein named and their successors, with proper powers for the purpose of establishing one or more glass manu- factories within the Kingdom of Great Britain, and for more effectually supporting and conducting the same upon an approved plan, in a peculiar manner, calculated for the casting of large Plate Glass. The preamble mentions that the existing method of making plate glass is not brought to a state of perfection equal to that in foreign countries. Further, that the necessary manu- factory cannot be established without great risk and a very large expense. Several persons having already formed themselves into a society and having subscribed considerable sums and_pur- chased materials and engaged persons for the purpose of establishing and carrying on the said manufactory, they desired to be incorporated in order to carry on the undertaking more easily. In view of the statements made in the pre- amble, it seems very likely that foreigners were introduced into this country to assist in carrying on the works at Ravenhead. ‘This at least would explain the following entry in the Index to Wills :— 1788, Jean B. Bruyére, of Ravenhead, plate glass manufacturer We should naturally infer that Bruyére was a Frenchman. By Section I of this Act, the Rt. Hon. John Stuart, commonly called Lord Mountstuart, Hon. Major-General Charles Fitzroy, Herbert Mack- worth, Peregrine Cust, Thomas Dundas, Robert Palk, John Mackay, Philip Affleck, James Mow- bray, Robert Digby, Angus Mackay, Henry 4 Description of Manchester, 1795, 303. 19 Hist. of Lanc. iii, 681. *'T. A. Welton, Statistical Papers based on the Census of Engl. and Wales, 1851, 103. "1 Lanc. and Ches. Rec. Soc. xxiv. 405 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Dazze, Albany Wallis, Henry Hastings, Ranald MacDonald, Thomas Davenport, Asheton Cur- zen, John Dolben, Thomas Potter, Thomas Durell, Stephen Caesar Lemaistre, and Henry Errington were constituted one distinct body politic and corporate by the name and style of ©The Governor and Company of British Cast Plate Glass Manufacturers.” “The company was authorized to raise a joint stock, not exceeding the sum of £40,000,” to be divided into eighty £500 shares, the holding of no one person to exceed twelve shares.> The rest of the Act contains details with regard to the management of the company, the payment of dividends, annual meetinzs, disposal of shares, &c. Sec- tion 29 leads one to suppose that the company did not expect to be very well received in St. Helens. If any person or persons shall break into or enter into any place or building belonging to the manu- factory, with intent to steal, cut, break, or otherwise destroy any glass or plate glass, or any tools or imple- ments used in the making thereof, and shall steal, cut, break or otherwise destroy the same . . . every offender shall be transported for a term not exceeding seven years. From another source we learn that the prin- cipal man connected with the foundation of the Company at St. Helens was Admiral Affleck,” who was one of the proprietors mentioned in the Act. The undertaking was evidently on a fairly large scale, for at the beginning of the last decade of the eighteenth century it is described as occupying nearly ‘ 3o acres of land, enclosed by a wall.’ At this time between 300 and 400 men were constantly employed in the works. In 1789 asteam-engine was erected to grind and polish the plates of glass, which at the time was considered ‘a very curious piece of mechanism.’ * Heavy taxation led to the failure of the business, which was bought up in 1798 by the British Plate Glass Co.2® The latter firm has now been taken over by Messrs. Pilkington Brothers, Limited. The repeal of the glass duty in 1845 gave the glass trade a great impetus ; and works have since been established at Pocket Nook and at Sutton. In 1901 the census returns show that 4,426 men and 261 women were employed in the manufacture of sheet and plate glass at St. Helens. The manufacture of glass bottles and of sheet glass at St. Helens is of more recent origin. Messrs. Pilkington and Sons, wine and spirit merchants and rectifiers, erected a ‘cone’ for the manufacture of crown glass in 1827. Previous to Pilkington’s works there existed Mackey & West’s crown glass works at Eccleston, and Thomas West’s bottle works at Thatto Heath. The latter fell into disuse and was pulled down many years ago, and the former passed into the hands of the Pilkingtons in 1851. In 1841 Messrs. Pilkington began to manu- facture German sheet glass, being the first firm to do so in this country.” This firm still exists under the style of Pilkington Brothers, Limited. They are now the principal manufacturers of plate and sheet glass in the district. Quite recently they are reported to have purchased the extensive works at Sutton of the London and Manchester Plate Glass Company, which was originally established in 1836. At the present time the chief makers of glass bottles are Messrs. Cannington, Shaw & Co., and Messrs, Dixon & Nuttall. In 1901, 1,644 men and 104 women were engaged in this trade at St. Helens. The census returns for the whole county are as follows :—In 1881 5,205 men and 779 women were employed in the manufacture of glass. The figures for 1891 were 6,944 and 761, and for 1901 8,211 and 532 respectively THE SUGAR INDUSTRY The earliest reference to the Lancashire sugar industry is in the Moore Rental of 1667-8. In this document Sir Edward Moore, referring to a plot of land in Dale Street, Liverpool, writes as follows *® :— Sugar-House Close... . This croft fronts the Street for some twenty-seven yards and I call it the Sugar House Close, because one Mr. Smith, a great sugar-baker at London, a man, as report says, worth forty thousand pounds, came from London to treat with me. According to agreement he is to build all the front twenty-seven yards a stately house of good ™ Sec. 2. ® Sec. 3. * Brockbank, Hist. of St. Helens, 20. * Aikin, 4 Description of Manchester, 312. * Brockbank, Hist. of St. Helens, 20. hewn stone . . . and there on the back side, to erect a house for boiling and drying sugar, otherwise called a sugar-baker’s house. . . . If this be once done, it will bring a trade of at least forty thousand pounds a year from the Barbadoes, which formerly this town never knew. Whether a sugar-house really was erected in Liverpool during the last quarter of the seven- teenth century we have been unable to discover. Indications of a Liverpool sugar industry con- tained in the Index to Wills at Chester point to a somewhat later date,” * Ibid. 31. * Moore Rental (Chetham Soc. Remains, xii),76-78. és - a ; Lance. and Ches. Rec. Soc. vols. xxv, XXXVI, XXXVill, xliv, xlv. 106 INDUSTRIES 1754 Robert Lever, of Liverpool, sugar boiler 1758 Peter Whitfield, of Liverpool, sugar baker 1769 Charles Woods, of Liverpool, sugar baker 1770 John Herman Greves, of Liverpool, sugar baker 1770 Luke Olkers, of Liverpool, sugar boiler 1781 George Robinson, of Warrington, sugar baker 1793 William Skelhorne, of Liverpool, sugar baker 1797 George Robinson, of Warrington, sugar boiler 1799 Peter Pfeiffer, of Liverpool, sugar baker 1800 Stephen Waterworth, of Liverpool, sugar baker Two of these entries, it will be seen, refer to sugar works at Warrington. ‘The earliest men- tion of sugar at Warrington is in 1755, when Chamberlayne writes, ‘Warrington is much noted for a large smelting-house for copper as also a sugar house.’ *° Another seat of the sugar industry in Lanca- shire during the eighteenth century, of which the Index to Wills tells us nothing, was at Man- chester, From the Manchester and Salford Directory of 1773 we learn that Sam Norcot, of Water Street, was a sugar baker, and further that Thomas Rothwell was clerk at the Sugar House, Water Street. During the nineteenth century Liverpool has been the chief centre of the sugar refining indus- try in Lancashire. THE PAPER INDUSTRY The first paper mill established in Lancashire is said to have been the Cromptons’ at Farn- worth, near Bolton, and the date given is 1674.’ The first certain evidence we have is that con- tained in the Index to Wills at Chester? :— 1721 George Warburton, of Heap, near Hey- wood, paper maker 1737 Robert Crompton, of Farnworth, paper maker 1739 Adam Crompton, of Little Lever, paper maker 1760 Ellis Crompton, of Great Lever, paper maker 1767 James Grundy, of Little Lever, paper maker 1769 William Appleton, of Stretford, paper maker 1772 James Crompton, of Manchester, paper maker 1790 William Appleton, of Manchester, paper maker Information of a similar character can be obtained from the early Manchester Directories. Thus in 1773 Ellis Crompton, of Bolton, is described as a paper-maker. In 1788 no fewer than four Cromptons are entered as paper-makers, viz. James Crompton of Collyhurst, Adam Crompton of Botham in Lever, Robert Crompton of Lower Darley, and Ellis Crompton of Lever. In 1795 occurs one of the few contemporary references to the paper industry. Aikin, writing in that year, says ‘the making of paper at mills in *® Chamberlayne, Present State of Great Britain (ed. 38, 1755). 1 Leo. H. Grindon, Lanc. Hist. and Descriptive Notes, 155. We have no reason to believe this state- ment is anything but correct, but we have found it impossible to check it, as we were unable to obtain access to a certain MS. volume of Crompton Collec- tions, which apparently alone contains the informa- tion required. 2 Lanc. and Ghes. Rec. Soc. xx, xxii, xxv, xxxvii, and xliv. the vicinity of Manchester has been brought to great perfection, and now includes all kinds, from the strongest parcelling paper to the finest writing sorts, and that on which bankers’ bills are printed.’ ® One of the principal paper-makers of the first half of the nineteenth century was Thomas Bonsor Crompton, who owned paper mills at Farnworth and at Worthington. He was con- nected with a new method of drying and finish- ing paper by means of heated cylinders, and was also associated with the process of continuously sizing with rollers. He supplied paper for nearly all the northern and many of the London papers, and for a period of ten years the average annual sum he paid as duty on his paper amounted to £15,000. Before his death in September, 1858, he paid as much as £20,000 annually in paper duty, which represents a yearly output of 1,400,000 tons. The Crompton family is still associated with the paper industry, the present firm being Messrs. James R. Cromp- ton and Brothers, Ltd., Elton Paper Mills, Bury. During the nineteenth century Darwen became one of the chief centres of the Lanca- shire paper-making industry. Among the best- known firms was that of Messrs. C. & J. G. Potter, whose Belgrave Works were founded in 1841.6 The particular class of goods for which Darwen is best known is wall-papers, and when in 1900 a combine was formed under the name of the Wall Paper Manufacturers, Ltd., with a capital of £4,200,000, five Darwen firms, in- 3 A Description of Manchester, 176. * Report of the Commissioners of the Exhibition of 1851, p. 938, quoted in the Morning Post, 15 Sept. 1858. We have to thank the Ven. Archdeacon Fletcher and Mr. Sydney Douglas-Crompton for kindly supplying us with information. 5 Shaw, Hist. of Darwen, 160. 407 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE cluding C. & J. G. Potter, besides six other Lancashire firms from Pendleton, Heywood, Ramsbottom, and Middleton, joined the com- bine. , were In 1901, 4,354 men and 1,314 women employed in the Lancashire paper emai The figures for 1891 and 1881 were 3,305 an 1,597, and 2,670 and 1,487, respectively. ASBESTOS The modern asbestos industry, which to-day has one of its seats in Lancashire, is not quite thirty years old. In 1878 a valuable deposit of asbestos was discovered in the province of Quebec, which led to the revival of this ancient industry. The Egyptians had practised the art of weaving asbestos into cloth used to wrap up the bodies of their dead before cremation. For thousands of years the art was practically lost, chiefly owing to the fact that asbestos suit- able for manufacturing purposes was difficult to get. After the discovery of the asbestos deposits in Quebec, the pioneer work of adapting it to commercial purposes was performed by Mr. Samuel Turner of Rochdale. In 1870 he had taken out a patent for packing steam engines, to work which the firm of Turner Brothers was established. In 1878 he was among the first to recognize the importance of applying the heat- resisting mineral asbestos to packing. After numerous experiments, machinery was invented to spin asbestos into yarn and weave this into cloth. Asbestos-packing for the joints of steam engines and as a non-conducting covering for boilers, steam pipes, &c., is now an indispensable factor in modern engineering. Other uses to which asbestos fabrics may be put are filtering strong acids, fireproof curtains in theatres, fire- proof lining of rooms, &c. Messrs. Turner Brothers, Ltd., of Spotland, Rochdale, the pioneers of this industry, continue to be spinners, weavers, and manufacturers of asbestos in all its forms. For the first four or five years after 1879 they were able to supply almost the entire demand. Since then their productions have increased about tenfold, not- withstanding the keen competition in this and other countries. We believe that we are correct in stating that they are still by far the largest manufacturers of all those asbestos articles which now form the staple trade of the world. MISCELLANEOUS INDUSTRIES Under this heading we do not pretend to refer to all the other trades carried on in this county of which no mention has so far been made. We shall draw attention to the most noticeable of the industries with which it has been impossible to deal more fully. The earliest home of the brewing industry in the county appears to have been Liverpool, but at the present time there are various breweries in the neighbourhood of Manchester. Mineral-water manufacturers have settled in different parts of the county, one of the best- known firms to-day being Messrs. Jewsbury and Brown, of Ardwick Green, Manchester, who were established in 1825. There are several biscuit-makers in the county, especially in Man- chester and Liverpool. It is in the latter town that we find in the Index to Wills’ the first reference to biscuit-makers :— 1792. John Kelley, of Liverpool, biscuit maker 1800, William Rigby, of Liverpool, biscuit maker The product of these early makers was probably used for provisioning ships. Other industries which have their seats at Manchester and Liverpool are those relating to 1 Lanc. and Ches. Rec. Soc. xly. preserves and jams, and matches. Messrs. W. P. Hartley’s works at Aintree, Liverpool, produce the first-named articles, and Messrs. Bryant and May’s Diamond Match Works in the same town the last. Another industry of Liverpool tis the tobacco manufacture, the Ogden branch of the Imperial Tobacco Company of Great Britain and Ireland, Ltd., being situated there. In 1881 3,546 people were employed in this industry in the county ; the numbers for 1891 and IgOI were 5,269 and 5,553, respectively. Linoleum and oilcloth are made at Lancaster by Messrs. Storey Brothers & Co., Ltd., and by Messrs. James Williamson & Son. Belting is pro- duced by F. Reddaway & Co., Ltd., Pendleton. Printing is carried on in all parts of the county, particularly in the large towns. In 1881, 6,968 men and 492 women worked in the printing trade in the county; in 1891 the figures were 9,296 and 951, and in 1901, 10,479 and 1,955. Special mention may be made of Messrs. M‘Corquodale of N ewton, who produce stationery and account books for the British and Indian Governments and for the London and North- Western Railway Company. Billiard tables are made by Messrs. J. & J. Riley & Sons, Ltd., Accrington. Works for making furniture and preparing leather may be found in several places. 408 INDUSTRIES SEA-FISHERIES In speaking of the sea-fishing industry of Lancashire the geographical term must not be interpreted too literally. Most other industries are restricted to some particular part or parts of the county, but the fisherman does not as a rule con- fine his operations to any small area of sea or coast. Wefind that Lancashire fishing vessels, though they may be registered from county ports, pursue their calling anywhere within the British sea-area— from Iceland and the Farée Isles on the north to the coasts of Portugal on the south. But the consideration of these latter fishing-grounds hardly comes within the scope of the present article, and we may confine our attention to the portion of the sea lying within a line drawn from Great Orme’s Head to the Calf of Man, and bounded on the east by the coasts of Lanca- shire, Cheshire, Flintshire, and Denbighshire. Within this area the greater number of Lanca- shire fishing boats ply their occupation, though it is proper to observe that a very considerable proportion of the value of the fish landed in the county is derived from the sea lying without these Lancashire fishing-grounds properly so- called. Nearly every variety of sea-fishing is followed within this area. The principal exceptions are the drift-net fisheries for herring and other Clupeiod fishes and the crab and lobster fisheries. Both herrings and sprats are indeed caught in Lancashire waters, but the quantities are quite inconsiderable, and though both crabs and lobsters are also caught, these animals are not abundant enough to form the material for a flourishing fishery—as is the case on some parts of the coast of Wales. The characteristic fisheries of the area we are considering are :— 1. The steam-trawl fishery for flat and other fishes, carried on both here and all over the British sea-area ; 2. The trawl-fishery for similar fishes by smacks and second-class boats carried on within the restricted area ; 3. The fishery for shrimps and prawns carried on by second-class boats and by hand ; and 4. The fishery for mussels, cockles, and to a less extent for periwinkles, carried on along the shore and from rowing-boats. Metuops oF FIsHING Trawling.—It is quite unnecessary to describe this well-known method of fishing. Steam- trawling is carried on exclusively outside the territorial waters by steamers which have a length of about 130 ft., a gross tonnage of about 150 tons, and a horse-power of about 50. These vessels carry an otter-trawl with a spread of about 100 ft. The sailing trawlers are yawl- rigged vessels of about 60 ft. in length and of about 45 tons in gross tonnage; they carry a beam-trawl of about 50 ft. in spread. They fish both inside and outside the territorial waters. The second-class sailing boats usually fish inside the territorial waters; they are cutter-rigged boats of about 36 ft. in length and about 10 tons in burden; they carry a trawl-net of about 25 ft. in spread. Shrimp-trawling.—While fishing by means of the trawl-net presents no features peculiar to the locality, shrimp-trawling is in many ways a fishing industry characteristic of Lancashire. A large fleet of second-class boats is almost con- tinually engaged in this fishery, and there are in addition a number of fishermen engaged from time to time in fishing for shrimps from shore by means of other apparatus. Then there are a great number of people engaged in various in- dustries connected with the preparation of shrimps for the market—in ‘shelling’ and ‘potting’ and selling the crustaceans. Alto- gether it has been computed that the value of the shrimp to Lancashire fishermen cannot be much less than £50,000 per annum, as many as 100 second-class boats being engaged in fishing for shrimps from the Liverpool estuary alone. These vessels are small half-decked cutter-rigged boats, each with a crew of two men, or of one man anda boy. Two methods of fishing are practised, viz. trawl-fishing and ‘bow-netting.’ Trawl-fishing is practised by the Mersey fishermen, a small trawl of 25 ft. beam being employed, and a net which has a mesh of 4 in. from knot to knot. Each boat employs only one trawl-net and hauls it for about an hour and a half at a time. When the net is hauled the contents are sorted out as rapidly as possible, the shrimps being separated from the rest of the catch, which consists of a miscellaneous mass of small fish and various invertebrates, and put to one side. In cold weather the shrimps may be landed ‘alive,’ but in warm months they are usually put at once into a small cauldron which is carried on board the boat and immediately boiled. The shrimp boats from the Southport district employ what is known locally as the ‘ bow-net’ ; this is a net of the same general shape as the shrimp trawl, but its mouth is only about 10 ft. wide, and it is not carried on a beam, but is attached to a square frame of wood about 10 ft. wide and about 1ft. in width. The lower edge of this frame drags on the sea-bottom in the same way as the foot-rope of the trawl-net does: it is also known locally as a ‘shank-net.’ T'wo of these 2 409 52 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE nets may be dragged by the same boat at the same time, and the Southport boats may even employ four bow-nets, one being over each quarter, and one from each of two booms carried trom the bows. The Morecambe boats carry two of these bow-nets, and such a boat, carrying perhaps a mainsail, topsail, foresail, and jib, may ve managed by one man, who will work these sails, ‘shoot,’ and haul his two nets all unaided— a fact which speaks volumes for the skill of Lancashire fishermen. The shrimps on being landed may be sent fresh to the market or they may be hawked in the neighbourhood, or they may be sent to the ‘potters’ to be prepared for the market. In the latter case they are shelled by women—that is, the soft muscles of the tail are separated from the hard carapace—the shrimps having previously been boiled—and they are then cooked with butter, put up in shallow pots and sent to the market. This is the lexitimate way in which potted shrimps are prepared—it is the ordinary method in use at Morecambe, and to a much less extent at Southport— but the great bulk of ‘Southport- potted shrimps’ are prepared for the market by a more elaborate process. At the present time a considerable proportion of the shrimps landed at that port are at once ‘pickled’ in boracic acid brine until required for potting. There is also a large trade with Holland in boracic- preserved shrimps which come to Southport to be potted for the market, and in this case I have been assured that these animals may have been in boracic brine for—in some cases—nine months before being potted for the market. The great bulk of shrimps landed in Lan- cashire are caught either by the shrimp trawl or by the bow-net, but there is also a considerable proportion which is caught by ‘ hose-nets’ or by ‘power-nets.” Hose-nets are long cylindrical nets about one or two feet in diameter which are kept open by rings and are set on the sands at low water. The tide runs through these nets carrying the shrimps into the latter, and once in the nets the crustaceans are pre- vented from escaping by means of ‘pockets’ or valves of netting. The ‘power’ net is a purse-net which is stretched on a semicircular frame of wood, the radius of which is about 24 or 3 ft., and which forms the mouth of the net. A long handle is attached to this con- trivance, and the man working it wades in the water and scrapes the sea-bottom with the net, At intervals he empties its contents into a basket which he carries on his back. In all these forms of shrimp fishing a very considerable quantity of small edible fishes is of necessity destroyed. Wherever shrimps are found there are generally large quantities of small fishes, and the action of the fishing apparatus is such as to capture these fishes at the same time as the shrimp. The amount of these small fishes captured is sometimes very considerable. In one haul with a shrimp trawl which I saw myself, for instance, there were captured 20 quarts of shrimps, 896 dabs, 265 plaice, 257 soles, 285 whiting, 18 skates and rays, and a miscellaneous mass of invertebrates and inedible fishes. One cannot help being struck with the idea that an incredible amount of destruction must accompany shrimp fishing as it is carried on on the Lancashire coasts, but he must never- theless bear in mind that this destruction is not necessarily destructive of the supply of fish on the fishing grounds. Nothing can seem more consonant to reason, or more necessary @ priori than that the supply of any kind of fish should be permanently diminished by this great and constant destruction of breeding fish, or of their young fry ; and yet nothing is more certain that, in many cases, this apparent necessity does not exist." The whole question of the destruction of im- mature fish is an exceedingly complex one, and I cannot attempt its discussion here. Prawning. — ‘The true prawn (Palaemon) hardly exists along the Lancashire coasts, and the animal known locally by that name and the aliases ‘shank,’ ‘red shrimp,’ or ‘ Fleetwood prawn’ is the creature known properly by the scientific name of Pandalus annulicornis. It is fished for by second-class boats in the territorial waters off Fleetwood. These boats employ a trawl-net which is very like that used by the shrimp-trawlers, but since the prawn usually inhabits grounds which are rather ‘rough’ on account of the presence of stones, the foot-rope is much thicker than the corresponding rope in the proper shrimp-trawl—being wrapped round transversely with smaller rope so as to increase its diameter. The quantity of prawns landed in Lancashire is much less than that of shrimps. Cockling.—The cockle industry of Lancashire is of very great importance, the cockle beds in the territorial waters there being of greater extent than those in any other county sea-area in England. Practically the whole of the sands in Morecambe Bay form an area over the greater part of which cockle beds are distributed. Similar cockle-bearing sands are to be found off the estuary of the Ribble, on the sands along the Wallasey shore, and on the sands on the Lancashire shore from Crosby to Formby Point. Similar cockle-bearing sands occur in the estuary of the Dee, though the latter are not fished to the same extent as those of Lancashire. Altogether there are not much less than 100 square miles of sands off the coasts of Lancashire alone, over which cockle fishing is almost always going on. The fishing is rather irregular, being least during the months of June ‘Huxley in Rep. sear of Royal Com. on Sea Fisheries, 410 INDUSTRIES to September, and greatest during the months of October to February, the variation depending not so much on the quantity of cockles present on the beds as on the difficulties of transport of the shellfish during the warm summer months, and on the demand for other luxuries during that period. There is no ‘ potting’ industry in the case of cockles and mussels, and the absence of this—which is regrettable in many ways— causes the cockle industry to be less steady than if its products could be put on the market in a preserved form. Cockles are fished for in three ways. In Morecambe Bay they are chiefly taken by the ‘craam,’ which is a kind of long fork of three prongs which are bent down at right angles and are fixed to a stout shaft of wood. The cockler carries this instrument in his right hand and a basket in his left. The shellfish are scooped up out of the sand with the ‘craam’ and thrown into the basket, and when the latter is full the cockles are washed and riddled so as to reject all those under a certain size. A cockling party usually consists of several people, often members of one family—men, women and children—who go on the sands as soon as the tide ebbs sufficiently, accompanied whenever possible by a horse and cart. During one tide, that is while the sands are bare, each person may gather from one to three hundredweight of cockles, the amount depending on the abundance of the animals. The price obtained for the shellfish depends on the demand, &c., but 2s. will repre- sent an average earning per hundredweight, and this quantity of cockles when retailed will realize about 6s, On this area an instrument called the ‘Jumbo’ is often employed. The ‘Jumbo’ is a large frame of wood with a heavy sole which is rocked to and fro on the sands : the action of this apparatus is to force the cockles up out of the sand on to the surface, when they are gathered up. The ‘Jumbo’ is an illegal instrument during part of the year. Further south a rake is employed, and the cockler stands on the sands and rakes the animals up out of the surface layer and then gathers them up. Cockling on Lancashire sands is arduous work and great hardships are often experienced, as on account of the shifting of the cockle beds from place to place the fishermen often have to traverse great distances in order to reach the cockle beds, and work on the sands during the cold months of the year is—at the least—a very trying occupation. During the winter of 1895 great damage was done to the cockle beds by the frost, and in Morecambe Bay much difficulty was experienced in obtaining a liveli- hood.? In that year the total number of tons of 7 See Pall Mall Magazine for Sept. 1898. The article referred to gives an admirable account of the cockle fishery at Cark. cockles sent away from Cark was only 743— five years previously over 3,000 tons were sent away from the same station. ‘The frost and the gulls are the worst enemies of the cockle. The birds are said to be very destructive, but it is possible that the damage done in this way has been greatly exaggerated. Musselling—The mussel is nearly as im- portant to Lancashire fishermen as the cockle, though in the absence of reliable and definite statistics it is difficult to compare the exact value of the two shellfish to the county. Very extensive mussel beds exist in various parts of the county, notably at Morecambe and at Hey- sham; in this latter district there are many square miles of mussel beds which yield a rich harvest to Morecambe fishermen. Similar mussel beds exist all along the Lancashire coast, and at the present time the Wallasey mussel bed is yielding sometimes 200 cwt. per day. Mussels are fished for in various ways: usually they are simply gathered from the beds by hand, but when the latter are covered by the tide the shellfish are taken from the bottom by long rakes which are used from rowing boats. In some years from two to three thousand tons of these shellfish are sent away from Morecambe alone. During the last two or three years a remarkable development of the mussel industry has taken place at Morecambe, transplantation operations being now regularly carried on in this neighbourhood. Here as elsewhere the mussel beds are found along the foreshore forming ‘skears,” which extend from below low water-mark to near the high water- mark of ordinary tides. As a rule the higher up the beach the shellfish are found the smaller they are, so that in some localities the animals may be too small to be marketable. It oc- curred to the Morecambe fishermen some years ago that it might be possible to remove these permanently stunted shellfish to other localities where they can obtain more abundant food, and in this way increase their growth to a profitable size. This was first done some three years ago at the initiative of the Morecambe Fishermen’s Association, and, assisted by Mr. T. Baxter, the representative of Morecambe on the Sea Fisheries Committee, and Mr. R. A. Dawson, who was then Superintendent of Fisheries, a grant of money was obtained from the committee to pro- vide for the expenses of the transplantation operations, which consisted in removing the stunted mussels from the unfavourable locaii- ties and redepositing them in deep water. After a suitable time had elapsed the transplanted mussels were fished, when it was found that a remarkable growth had taken place. It has been calculated that during the years 1904-5 the value of these transplanted mussels amounted to about £2,000—that is the mussels in their original habitat were worth nothing, but by 4II A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE being transplanted they became marketable, and realized this sum. The money spent on the transplanting operations in this year was £75, and in paying this sum the Fisheries Committee conferred a double benefit on the mussel fisher- men, for it was spent just at the time when mussel-fishing came to an end in consequence of the onset of the ‘close’ season, and so gave employment at a time when this form of fishing was not otherwise permissible. Periwinkles—There is but little fishing for these molluscs on the Lancashire coasts, which do not as a rule afford a suitable habitat for them. Nevertheless small quantities are sent away from various localities. At Piel in the Barrow Channel there is a regular fishery for them, and a fair quantity is sent away from this station. Periwinkles are simply picked by hand from the foreshore. In two or three tides an active man may obtain 1 cwt., and for this quantity he may get 8s. Tue Fisuinc Ports The principal fishing ports in the Lancashire district are the following :— Barrow, Piel, and Roosebeck.x—None of these ports is of any particular interest, for the amount of fishing which is carried on in the neighbour- hood of the Barrow Channel is quite trifling. Mussels, periwinkles, trawling by a few small half-decked boats and stake-netting, are the only methods of fishing which are practised. Baycliff, Bardsea, and Ulverston.—Both at Baycliff and Bardsea there is a considerable amount of cockle fishing carried on as well as some stake-netting and mussel fishing. Salmon fishing is carried on in the estuary of the Leven and along the coast by fishermen who possess a salmon licence. There is also some shrimp fishing carried on in Ulverston Channel, but the boats engaged here usually come from the other side of the bay. Cark, Kent’s Bank, Flookborough, and Arnside. —Shellfish, cockles, and mussels are the only forms of fishing which are of any importance at these ports. The cockle is, however, of very great value to the fishermen of this part of Lancashire. Most people are surprised to learn that in some years over 3,000 tons of cockles may be sent away from Cark station alone. Bolton-le-Sands, Morecambe, Heysham.—The district comprised by these ports is of much greater importance than any we have yet con- sidered. Bolton-le-Sands is indeed of com- paratively little importance: there is some cockle fishing, and stake-netting and trawling by small boats is carried on. Morecambe is of very considerable importance as a fishing port, and a great variety of fishing is carried on in the adjacent waters from this port. The principal fishery at Morecambe is that for mussels, but there is also a fair amount of shrimp trawl- ing and trawling for flat fishes in the adjacent waters of Morecambe Bay, and stake-netting is carried on to a considerable extent. Heysham is in itself of very little importance as a fishing centre, but is exploited chiefly by Morecambe fishermen for the sake of the mussels which are found here in great abundance. The salmon fishery in the River Lune is actively prosecuted by Morecambe fishermen: this is one of the best salmon rivers in England, and yields a con- siderable revenue to the fishermen of Morecambe and Glasson Dock. This latter is only a small place: the fishermen there derive also a fair revenue from the mussel beds at the mouth of the Lune. Morecambe is one of the most progressive of the Lancashire fishing ports, and one who knows the fishing population there is impressed with the energy and ability of the men and with their keenness and intelligence. It is curious that there has been a considerable amount of intercourse between the fishermen of More- cambe and Annan, many Morecambe families having migrated from Annan and vice versa, and at the present time Morecambe fishermen often go up the Solway for the shrimp fishing. Fleetwood is the most important of the Lanca- shire fishing ports, and indeed one of the most important of the fishing centres of England, standing eleventh on the list of ports as far as the amount of fish landed is concerned, and being, with the exception of Milford, the largest fishing port on the west coast of England. Practically every kind of fishing is carried on from the port, but the principal forms of the industry are steam trawling and trawling by smacks, of which a great number make the port their head quarters. Fleetwood smacks fish prin- cipally in the northern part of the Irish Sea, but the steam trawlers may fish anywhere in the seas round the British Isles. In late years they have frequented the west coast of Ireland to a considerable. extent, fishing off the Blaskets on the coast of Kerry. There is also a very flourishing fishery for prawns by Fleetwood half-decked boats. Trawling by half-decked boats for sea fish, hand-lining, and mussel fish- ing are also carried on, though to a less extent than the other forms of fishing just mentioned. One must not omit to mention the oyster in- dustry of the port: this is not a fishery for the English or native oyster, but consists of the culture of American oysters which are imported and are then laid down and fattened for the market. The sea-fishing industry has of course brought in its train a number of other industries which have added to the prosperity of the port. Blackpool is the only port between the Wyre and the estuary of the Ribble, and it is much more important as a ‘pleasure city’ than asa fishing centre. Nevertheless there is a certain 412 INDUSTRIES amount of line-fishing carried on by Blackpool seafaring men in the intervals of catering for summer visitors, but the amount of fishing done is of little significance, St. Anne’s, Lytham, Southport, Marshside— These form a group of fishing ports of con- siderable importance. The staple industry is shrimp fishing, and the fleet of half-decked boats engaged in the fishery is one of the finest in the United Kingdom. Altogether there are about 200 fishermen engaged here in shrimping, and in addition to these there are a considerable number of people who find a livelihood in the subsidiary industries connected with the shrimp fisheries — boat-building, net-making, butter manufacturing, pot manufacturing, and printing. The fishermen’s wives and children find occupa- tion in shelling and potting the shrimps for the market. There are about thirty shrimp potters in Southport, and these are able to absorb all the shrimps caught by the local fishermen, and in addition a considerable number which are im- ported from Holland. The catching power of the Southport shrimping fleet is said to have increased tenfold during the last twenty-five years. The Liverpool District—Liverpool itself is not a fishing port of very great importance, but there are associated with it a number of smaller ports of great importance collectively. These are Crosby and Formby, Rock Ferry, New Ferry, Tranmere, Egremont, and New Brighton. There are a few steam trawlers which are regis- tered from Liverpool, and a considerable number of smacks land their catches at this port, but the greater number of vessels associated with the Mersey estuary are small half-decked boats engaged in shrimp fishing in the grounds in the vicinity of the Liverpool banks and channels, and to a certain extent in fishing for flat-fish on the same grounds. Along the shore from Formby Point to Waterloo there is a consider- able amount of fishing for cockles, and also for shrimps by means of ‘ hose’ nets, and stake nets are also used in the same neighbourhood. Along the Wallasey shore from New Brighton to Hoylake there is at times a considerable fishery for mussels on the Wallasey mussel beds, and there is nearly always a flourishing fishery for cockles on the sands along the Leasowe shore, where there is also a good deal of stake-netting. Altogether there is a fair amount of fishing carried on from the Liverpool district, though the characteristic fisheries are ‘longshore’ ones and those which can be carried on by compara- tively small boats. Hoylake is a port of some considerable impor- tance, and there is a fine fleet of smacks which make it their centre. ‘The Hoylake smacks fish all over the Irish Sea north of Holyhead and east of the Isle of Man, usually landing their catches at Liverpool. The estuary of the Dee is under the control of a separate Sea-fishery Committee, and is not included within the scope of the present article. The fisheries are purely local ones having for their object cockles, mussels, and flat-fish, which latter are caught by small boats and by stake-nets. Rhyl and Colwyn Bay.—This district was partly in the old Lancashire sea-fishery area. There are some mussel beds, and there is a certain amount of fishing for sea fish by means of the trawl, by lines, and by stake and draw- nets. The grounds off Colwyn Bay are fre- quented by Hoylake and other fishing boats, but the amount of purely local fishing which goes on is probably quite inconsiderable. Statistics oF Men anp Boats It is probably quite impossible at the present time to obtain anything like an accurate return of the exact numbers of fishing boats and men engaged in fishing along the coasts of the county, but the following return (prepared in 1903 by Mr. R. A. Dawson, the late superintendent of the Lancashire and Western Sea-Fisheries Dis- trict) gives what is probably a fairly approximate statement of the men and boats engaged in the local sea-fishing industries.’ Northern or Fleetwood Division :-— No. of No. of boats men Ist class sailing boats . . 48 240 2nd class sailing boats . 143 238 3rd class sailing boats. . 4 4 3rd (a) sailing boats 139 179 Steam trawlers . . . . 9 32 288 Shore fishermen . 2. 2.) — 329 Totals. 366 1,278 — ———S Southern or New Brighton Division :— 1st class sailing boats . 45 186 2nd class sailing boats . 148 296 3rd class sailing boats. . 30 . 36 3rd (a) sailing boats . . 36 36 Steam trawlers. . . . 17 136 Shore fishermen . 2. 20 — 254 Totals . 276 944 Notes :— Ist class sailing boats, 15 tons and over; 2nd class sail- ing boats, under 15 tons but with sufficient cabin and deck accommodation for the crew to live aboard ; 3rd class sailing boats, under 15 tons without living accommodation on board for the crew ; 3rd (a) class sailing boats, small open boats propelled by sails or oars ; ‘shore fishermen’ include boys and women. VALUE OF THE INDUSTRY Our information with regard to the value of the fishing industry of Lancashire (as of other 3 See Rep. of Superintendent Lancs. and West. Sea Fish. Foint Committee, Dec. 1904. 413 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE English counties) is extremely defective. Statis- tics of the amount of fish landed on the coasts of England and Wales have been collected by the Board of Trade prior to the year 1903, and since then by the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries (the department which is now respon- sible for the control of the fishing industry in England and Wales). These statistics are col- lected by officials who are stationed at the most important fishing ports in the country and are published annually in a Blue Book. For a long time it has been recognized by those who are conversant with the conditions of the fishing industry that the information thus collected leaves much to be desired, not only as regards its general accuracy, but also as regards numerous details of much importance. In the absence of any other information however I give here the official figures for the quarter of the year ending 30 June, 1905, contenting myself with the statement that the figures are most probably much less than those which would truly repre- sent the true state of the industry. The follow- ing table gives the value of the various fishes landed in the whole Lancashire and Western Sea Fisheries District. It must be remembered that the greater portion of these quantities of fish have been landed in the Lancashire portion of the district. Vatuz oF Fish Lanpep iN THE LancasHIRE AND Western Sea Fisheries Districr during the three months ending 30 June, 1905 1. Sea-Fish :— L Hake . Bo tn 29,561 Soles . 9,018 Cod‘... 8,222 Haddock. . 4,268 Skate and Ray 3,496 Plaice . 2,860 Whiting . 2743 Turbot 2,555) Gurnards . 1,848 Congers 1,234 Megrims . 1,222 Coalfish 1,043 Ling . 888 Bream ° 860 Brill 653 Witches 564 Pollak . . . . 562 Monks and Anglers 458 Lemon Soles. 358 Halibut 253 Dabs . 155 Mackerel . eg ge Mel ok 130 Dory? 4. ie ee oe 9 Mullet! cz. sce. do Se ae os 6 Dogfish 2 x: uk a ce Oe ae 4 All other kinds including Salmon —2,335 Total 75,265 * «Cod? include codling. * This is the sea-bream (Sparus centrodontus, de la Roche). 2. Shellfish :— i Oysters . bo Wa Je BA. 93098 Shrimps 2,296 Cockles . 1,085 Prawns . 973 Lobsters 127 Mussels . 119 Periwinkles aud acs 113 Grabs. Gi: Bole? Go ot 72 Crayfish. 2 2 6 4. es ws 6 Total . . 7,889 These quantities refer to the whole of the Lancashire and Western Sea Fisheries District, and include all the coasts of Wales. But it will be found that the greater proportion is landed in the older Lancashire sea fisheries district, and at any rate the tables will give the reader an idea of the relative proportions of the various kinds of fish which are landed on the coasts of Lanca- shire if he remembers that most of the crabs and lobsters are landed on the coasts of Wales. It must be remembered that these quantities are to be regarded as minimum ones, for it is practi- cally certain that whatever else the official figures may show, they certainly underestimate the values of fish landed on these coasts. It is necessary to remember also that these values represent the amounts paid to the fishermen ; the total prices paid by the consumer for the fish may be taken as about three times the values given in the tables. The above tables of the amount of fish landed in the Lancashire and Western Sea Fisheries District may be supplemented by the following one which gives the value of the fish landed at the various ports in the order of their import- ance :— VaLue oF THE FisH and SHELLFISH LanDED aT THE Lancasuire Ports, anp at Hoyzake during the three months ending 30 September, 1906. Fleetwood. . . . . . - 60,015 Liverpool (and Birkenhead) « 20,805 Southport . Se Go 357 Hoylake® . i a Om de. se Morecambe 3. « @ & e 2s 4 Lytham ee Ce Ulverston . 268 Lune Estuary 267 Cark 205 Barrow. 113 90,866 THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE INDUSTRY Previously to the year 1890 the sea-fishing industry of England and Wales was quite un- : The Hoylake smacks also land a considerable quantity of fish at Liverpool and Bangor. 414 INDUSTRIES regulated. In 1888, however, the Sea Fisheries Regulation Act was passed, and this empowered the county and borough councils of the country to form committees for the regulation of the local fisheries within certain defined areas. Lan- cashire is notable as being one of the first to take advantage of this enactment and to form a sea fishery authority in 1890, and at the present time the sea fishery committee so formed is not only the largest and wealthiest, but also the most progres- sive of the English sea-fishery authorities. The magnitude of the fisheries along the coast line, and the large rateable value of the contributory area have enabled the sea-fishery committee to attempt a real regulation of the industry within their jurisdiction. The committee was first of all a purely Lancashire one, but later on an amalgamation was effected with Cheshire, and in 1900 the joint committee so formed was amal- gamated with the Western Sea-Fisheries Com- mittee which had control over the fisheries of the coasts of Wales as far south as the extremity of Cardiganshire. At the present time the joint committee has jurisdiction over the fisheries of the coasts of Lancashire, Cheshire, Flint, Den- bigh, Anglesey, Merioneth, and Cardigan—an area of coast-line of about 441 statute miles in ex- tent. The authority is constituted as follows :— Four representatives from Liverpool and Man- chester, sixteen representatives from county boroughs in Lancashire and Cheshire, eight representatives from the Lancashire County Council, two representatives from the Cheshire County Council, ten representatives from Welsh County Councils, eleven representatives from the Boards of Conservators, and, finally, twenty-nine members appointed by the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries, making in all a committee of eighty members. For the purposes of adminis- tration this committee raises a rate by a precept issued on the contributing authorities of the various county and borough areas—a rate which, in the fiscal year 1903-4, amounted to only 3-64ths of a penny in the £,”’ but which was sufficient to raise a sum of £5,592. Of this amount Lancashire contributed £4,588 ; Che- shire, £522 ; and the Welsh counties only £482. The Lancashire and Welsh divisions of the joint area are indeed very unequal in almost every respect ; the rateable value of the Welsh counties is quite inadequate to meeting by itself the ex- penses of a proper administration of the Welsh area ; and the amount of fishing which is carried on in Wales is trifling when compared with that of Lancashire. The amalgamation of the two areas was, however, considered necessary in view of the amount of fishing which is carried on 7 A rate of 1-64th of a penny is levied on the Lancashire area for the expenses of scientific investi- gation. This raised £1,774. Cheshire and Wales do net contribute to the expenses of scientific work. in Welsh waters by Lancashire boats, and in order to secure uniformity in the system of regulations. The joint committee so constituted provides for the superintendence of the fisheries along the extensive coast-line under their control by the establishment of a number of ‘ bailiff’s’ stations, each of which is provided with a sailing cutter for patrolling the area of which the station is the centre. At each station there is a ‘bailiff’ in charge of the district, and from one to three under-bailiffs. Such stations have been established at Fleetwood, New Brighton, Carnarvon, Pwllheli, and New Quay. In addition to these stations there are a number of stations where an officer is situated who devotes only a portion of his time to fisheries superintendence, and who is paid only asmall salary. ‘The sailing boats are, of course, unable to go far to sea, and it is necessary to provide for patrol work out at sea and in weather when it would be impossible for the cutters to work, so that the committee have a steamer which supplements the work of the sail- ing boats, and exercises a general control over their work. The staff consists of a clerk, who is administrative head; a superintendent; the captain of the steamer, and eleven of a crew, who are also fishery officers ; eighteen bailiffs ; ‘hono- rary” bailiffs, and a clerical staff at the superin- tendent’s office, which isat Preston. Inaddition to this police staff there is a scientific staff, which consists of a scientist at Piel, in the Barrow Channel, where there is a marine laboratory, and a similar official at the university at Liverpool, where there is also a fishery laboratory. There is also an honorary director of scientific work who acts as scientific adviser to the committee. The duties of this staff of officers is as fol- lows :— (1) The administration of the regulations in force; (2) the collection of statistics of the amount of fish landed, the numbers of men and boats and other matters on which information is required ; and (3) the prosecution of scientific inquiries. The regulations in force at the present time are somewhat numerous and complicated. Trawl- ing is the subject of several—the principal restrictions being (1) the total prohibition of fish- ing by steam vessels within the territorial waters ; (2) the restriction of the dimensions of the trawl- net and the size of the mesh; and (3) some restriction on the places in which trawling may be carried on. Thus, an area of about 10 square miles off Blackpool is ‘closed entirely against trawling in every form,’ Throughout the greater part of the district a mesh of 1} in. from knot to knot may be used, but within certain lines drawn from headland to headland on various parts of the coast a mesh of 13 in. must be employed. These restrictions are, however, very compli- cated, the incidence of the various regulations 415 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE varying according to the season. ‘Their object is to minimize the capture of small fish as far as possible. Shrimp trawling is also restricted in that a mesh of }in. from knot to knot is obli- gatory. The meshes of other nets employed for capturing sea fishes are also restricted ; thus mackerel, herring, sparling, and garfish nets are also restricted to a diameter of 1 in. from knot to knot. Cockles and mussels are also the subject of numerous regulations. For a part of the year the fishery for the latter is ‘closed,’ the ‘close season’ being designed to cover the period during which the animals are spawning. There is, however, no close season for cockles. Minimum size limits exist for both these molluscs, that for the mussel being 2 in. in total length, and that for the cockle being 43ths of an inch in breadth. In each case there are also regulations in force which govern the sizes of the instru- ments which may be used for the capture of these animals. ‘There is also a size limit of 24 in. in diameter for oysters. Crabs and lobsters must not be taken if they are ‘ berried,’ that is, if they are females carrying spawn ; and crabs must not be taken if they are less than § in. in breadth, nor lobsters if they are less than g in. in total length. Stake-nets are nets which are set on the shore at low water and which are supported on stakes driven vertically into the sands. These must have meshes of not less than 14 in. from knot to knot, and they must not be more than 300 yds. in total length. The committee have power to prevent the deposit of sewage and other noxious matters in the sea or on the foreshore. But in consequence of the saving clauses in the Public Health and the Sea-Fisheries Acts this provision is of little practical use. This is a matter on which legislation has frequently been sought by the sea- fisheries committees, but without any success so far. Meanwhile the question of the pollution of the fisheries is becoming a serious one, not only from the point of view of the public health but also from the standpoint of the fisherman, for it is probably the case that the growing pollution of the shellfish beds is having a prejudicial effect on the sale of this class of fish. Some curious questions arise in consequence of the shrimping by-laws. At presenta fisherman is not allowed to take whatever he catches in his shrimp net. If he can prove that he is bona-fide fishing for shrimps he may take soles and plaice (and other flat-fish which he may catch in his net) provided they are over 8in. in length. By ‘bona-fide” fishing is meant the capture of a ‘reasonable quantity of shrimps such as to justify the employment of the shrimp net. The by- law in question is designed to prevent the employment of the narrow-meshed shrimp net for the capture of small fish—such use of the shrimp-net being calculated to destroy a great number of small fish which are much too small to yield a reasonable profit to the fisherman, and which nevertheless being destroyed do much harm to the fish supply of the grounds. These by-laws only operate in the case of commercial fishing. In the case of fishing for scientific investigation the restrictions I have mentioned do not apply; but such use of apparatus which would in other circumstances be illegal must be authorized by the clerk of the committee. Another aspect of the work of the Lancashire Sea-Fisheries Committee deserves some mention, viz., the instruction of fishermen in the rudi- ments of natural history so far as this relates to the life-histories of the common animals which they catch in the course of their employment. For the last five years the committee have carried on courses of lessons at their marine laboratory at Piel, in the Barrow Channel, for the benefit of the fishermen of Lancashire. The inception of this eminently useful scheme of work was due to Mr. John Fell, who was the first chairman of the committee, and to the late Mr. R. A. Daw- son, who was for fourteen years superintendent. The committee have no funds with which to carry on this work, and the fishermen’s classes which are now being carried on are only made possible by the co-operation of the education committee of the Lancashire County Council. Every year asum of £250 is granted by this body, and the greater portion of this sum is spent on providing ‘Fishery Exhibitions’ of the value of £5 each, a certain number of which are awarded to the various fishing centres in the administrative county of Lancaster. From each port or centre a number of fishermen are selected and are given £5 each. The men are selected in various ways, chiefly by the local associations of fishermen or by the local representatives of the centres on the committee. These men are then made up into classes of fifteen each, and attend at the Laboratory at Piel for a fortnight, the grant of money being designed to pay their expenses and to re-imburse them for the loss of their employment. The course of lessons is a purely scientific one, no attempt being made to deal with what may be called ‘technical educa- tion’ in the strict sense of the word. The Piel Laboratory has been fitted up with all that is necessary for the study of the life-history of the common marine organisms— tanks, aquaria, working benches, microscopes, and other scientific apparatus ; and the material necessary for study is obtained by the committee’s steamer. The course of study embraces the life-history of the mussel, cockle, oyster, haddock, plaice, skate, and other marine animals which are familiar to the fishermen of the district. Attention is also paid to the facts of chemistry, physics, and oceano- graphy, which are necessary to a proper under- standing of the problems of life in the sea. The 416 INDUSTRIES fishermen selected lodge on Roa Island during their fortnight’s course of study, which includes twenty lessons of two hours each. In every respect the classes have been a decided success; and while at first there was some difficulty in filling the places, quite the opposite is now the case, and every year there are many more applications than there are places. While the principal object aimed at was the simple diffusion of knowledge concerning the natural history of common edible animals, the men have gradually been brought to see that there are general principles underlying the by- laws which they are expected to obey ;_ the old, bitter feeling against the restrictions in force, while it is far from having disappeared, is now much less violent than was formerly the case ; and this good result is owing in large measure to the effects of the instruction given by the scientific staff of the sea-fisheries committee. REFERENCES 1. Proceedings of the Committee; may be con- sulted at the Clerk’s Office, County Offices, Preston. 2. Quarterly Reports of the Superintendent ; published at the Superintendent’s Office, 16, Walton’s Parade, Preston. 3. Annual Reports of the Lancashire Sea- Fisheries Laboratory at the University of Liverpool and of the Sea-Fish Hatchery at Piel; published for the Sea-Fisheries Committee by C. Tinling & Co. Liverpool. 4. Statistical Tables and Memorandum relating to the Sea-Fisheries of the United Kingdom, 1889 to 19023 published by the Board of Trade. Later information relating to the statistics of the Lancashire Sea-Fisheries is contained in the Reports of Proceedings under Acts relating to Sea- Fisheries (England and Wales); published by the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries. 5. Sea-Fisheries, England and Wales ; Annual Reports of the Inspectors of Fisheries, 1888 to 1902; published by the Board of Trade prior to 1902, and by the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries since that year. 6. Herdman and Dawson ; Fishes and Fisheries of the Irish Sea and especially of the Lancashire and Western Sea-Fisheries District; 1902, London and Liverpool, G. Philip & Son. 7. British Association Handbooks; Liverpool meeting 1896, and Southport meeting 1903. 8. Aflalo; The Sea-Fishing Industry of England and Wales; London, 1904, Stanford. g. Johnstone ; British Fisheries ; Williams & Norgate, 1905. London, 2 417 53 AGRICULTURE NE-half of Lancashire cannot be considered as possessing any great natural capabilities as an agricultural county, and probably no county in England shows a greater diversity of soils, climate and cultivation. It may be conveniently divided into the northern and southern districts, the latter comprising all the country south of Preston and the Ribble, the former the rest of the county to the north of the river. The southern includes nearly two-thirds of the county, and contains the great manufacturing towns. On the east a range of hills divides it from Yorkshire, composed of Millstone Grit, on which the soil is generally thin and poor. The southern and western sides extending along the Mersey, and thence by Ormskirk to Preston, rest on the New Red Sandstone, while the Coal Measures occupy the whole central space. The aspect of this part of the county is not picturesque. On the west, next the sea, are great flats of sand over which the gales from the Irish Channel sweep unchecked, The difference between the southern division and the northern in its geology, the nature of its soil, and the character and habits of its people is most striking, and exercises a very important influence on the farming of the whole county. Speaking generally, two-thirds of the soil of South Lancashire is a strong clayey loam, upon a subsoil of clay, the clay requiring underdraining before it can be properly cultivated. North of the Ribble the county differs in many respects from that to the south, being an agricultural instead of a manufacturing district, and the ruddy looks and strong limbs of the inhabi- tants show that they are not sharing in the physical decadence caused by modern industrial conditions. With the exception of the Fylde the county narrows into a strip a few miles in breadth reaching from the sea to the mountainous district that divides it from Yorkshire. The soil on the eastern parts and mountainous slopes is thin and of a black moorish nature, at the foot of the hills of a stronger quality, in many parts amounting to a stiff clayey loam. In the Fylde almost every kind of soil is found, from stiff clay to sand or bog. Further to the north, separated from the rest of the county by Morecambe Bay, lies the rich district of Furness. Red Sandstone, Millstone Grit, Mountain Limestone, and clay slate, form the chief geological features of the district. Near the coast the land shows alternate husbandry, as it begins to rise towards the hills it is principally in grass; the hills are, of course, stocked with sheep. Valuable information concerning Lancashire agriculture at the end of the thirteenth and beginning of the fourteenth centuries is contained in the accounts for the years 1295-6 and 1304-5 of the stewards, farm bailiffs and cowherds of the towns or granges in the honour of Clitheroe and barony of Halton,! belonging to Henry de Lacy, earl of Lincoln. The vaccaries or breeding farms established in the chases formed a chief source of the earl’s revenue, producing £3 a year each, the average price of an ox being then about gs., of a cow or heifer, 75., oxen being then and for cen- turies after the most valuable, as they were used for draught purposes. ‘The cattle suffered from the ravages of wolves. Cart-horses were worth from {2 to £3, one being bought at Cocker- mouth in 1282 for £2 135. 4d. by Merton College, Oxford. According to these records the cost of haymaking 3 acres of meadow was 2s. 44d.; 4 qrs. of oats were sold for gs.; mowing 604 acres 17s. 73d.; reaping, gathering and binding 16 acres of oats 6s. 103d. ; seventeen ash trees fetched 10s.; 80 wild boars £3 65. 1d.? The food and wages of ‘one harrowing for thirteen weeks’ amounted to §s. 4d.; threshing and winnowing 414 qrs. of oats cost 3s. 1d. The wages of a labourer were 14d. a day, of a mason 3d., of a carpenter, 4d. The rent of John de Blakeburn ‘for 284 acres in Berdeswurthgrave’ was 145. 3d.; 40 acres at Penwortham were let for £1; the loss of the rent of 6 acres of land at Burnley was estimated at 2s. and of 4 acres at Little Marsden at 1s. 4d. Where there were forests or chases, as in Wyresdale, ' Two ‘Compoti’ of the Lanc. and Ches. manors of H. de Lacy, earl of Lincoln, translated by the Rey. P. A. Lyons (Chet. Soc.). * These sums have to be multiplied by at least twenty to represent the present value of money. 419 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Bleasdale, Pendle, Rossendale, &c., a great impetus to agriculture, mostly stock raising, was brought about by the letting of the booths or vaccaries for terms of years under which a class of tenants gradually grew up; those in Wyresdale and Bleasdale having secured some certainty of tenure by the time of Elizabeth, under the custom called ‘tenant-right’ ; whilst those in Pendle and Rossendale became copyhold tenants of the honour of Clitheroe. In the latter districts there are a few instances of estates still held by the descendants of the original takers.® We obtain a glimpse of sixteenth-century agriculture in Lancashire from the quarter sessions assessments for the county made in 1595. ‘This was carried out in pursuance of the famous Act of Elizabeth, passed in 1562, by which the magistrates in quarter sessions were empowered to fix the rate of wages for husbandmen and artificers, and enforce their assessment by fine and imprisonment. The assessors defined the hours of work, and 1d. per hour was deducted for absence, those who had the temerity to strike work being liable to a month’s imprisonment and a fine of £5. If an employer gave higher wages than those fixed, he was imprisoned for ten days and fined £5, while the receiver got twenty-one days in prison, but no fine. For harvest work migration was per- mitted the labourer, from one county to another. Women, if between twelve and forty years of age and single, were compellable to work by the year, week or day. The north of England being then very much behind the rest of the country in general civilization, wages were fixed at lower rates than in the south. It must be remembered, however, that in spite of the numerous inclosures of the sixteenth century, working for money wages was then largely a bye-industry, most peasants had their plots of ground and considerable rights of common pasture, and were chiefly occupied about their own little holdings. An Act was passed in 1589 by which no new cottage was to be built unless 4 acres of land were annexed to it; an excellent statute from the labourers’ point of view, and surprising at that date, but the cultivation of 4 acres could not have left him much time to work for the farmer. By the Lancashire assessment the year was divided into two portions, a higher wages period of five months from 1 May to 1 October, and a lower wages period for the other seven months. The highest rate allowed the agricultural labourer during the five best months was 6d. a day, and during the seven worst months 5d., both without meat or drink; if they were supplied with meat and drink it was considered equivalent to 3d. a day, or 4d. a day in harvest time. In harvest time mowers of hay or corn received 8d. a day and their ‘attendants’ 4d. ‘These harvest wages were the same as those paid to superior artisans, masons, and carpenters. On Saturdays and the eves of holy days the labourer had half a day off, which no doubt largely helped to make him content with his lot. The price of wheat in Lancashire in 1595 was very high owing to bad harvests,‘ being 40s. a quarter, malt was 215. 4d. and oatmeal 38s. 8d. Yet corn was, especially in dear years, a little lower in price in the north of England than in the south, and the necessaries of life cheaper, probably owing to the simpler habits of a more primitive people. _In spite of this, at the above rate of wages (which are the lowest registered) and prices, it would have taken in the year 1595 two days’ work to buy one day’s food, so that it is difficult to see how the agricultural labourer lived without a great deal of charitable help.® In 1600 Camden, journeying through the northern counties, found in Lancashire * ‘the cham- pain part of the county’ producing ‘considerable quantities of wheat and barley, at the bottom of the hills plenty of oats.’ ‘ The soil,’ he said, is in general good except in certain swampy unhealthy places called mosses, which, however, make ample amends for these disadvantages by greater advantages. For upon taking off the surface they find a fat turf fit for firing, and sometimes subterraneous trees. Lower down they yield plenty of marl’ for manure, which according to the received opinion makes the worst land so good that one would think the indolence of mankind was antiently more in fault than the badness of the earth. You may determine the goodness of the country by the temperament of the inhabitants who are extremely comely, and also from the cattle, the beasts here with long horns and tight-moulded carcases having all the requisites insisted on by Mago the Carthaginian. The part of the country near Preston between the Rivers Ribell and Cocar yields plenty of oats, but will not bear barley. It has rich pastures especially on the sea side, which is partly champain, whence great part of it seems to be called the File q.d. the Field. : 3 From information of Mr. W. Farrer. ‘ In the compositions in lieu of purveyance of 1593 quoted by Eden in his State of the Poor, Lancashire was assessed at 40 lean oxen at 535. 4d. each, or £106 135. 4¢., Northampton at £458, Yorkshire at £348 6s. 8d., Cheshire at £56 13s. 4¢. The price for lean oxen was below the market price, asin 1595 they were {4 6s. 8d. 5 Thorold Rogers, Hist. of Agric. and Prices, v, 617-21 ; vi, 6go. 5 Brit. (ed. 1806), iii, 375. 7 Fitzherbert, writing about 1520, says the process of marling had doubled the value of land in Lancashire. 420 AGRICULTURE Gervase Markham, who lived from 1570 to 1655, gives the following picture of the working hours of a farmer or ploughman of his day, which is as applicable to Lancashire as to any part of England. Heis to rise at four in the morning and feed his cattle and clean his stable. While they are feeding he is to get his harness ready, which will take him two hours. ‘Then he is to have his breakfast, for which half an hour is allowed. Getting the harness on his horses or cattle he is to start by seven to his work and keep at it till between two and three in the afternoon. He is then to bring his team home, clean them and give them their food, dine, and at four go back to his cattle and give them more fodder, and getting into his barn make ready their food for next day, not for- getting to see them again before going to his own supper at six. After supper he is ‘to mend his shoes by the fireside for himself and his family, or beat and knock hemp and flax, or pitch and stamp apples or crabs for cider or verjuice, or else grind malt, pick candle rushes, or do some husbandry office within doors till it be full eight o’clock.” Then he shall take his lantern, visit his cattle once more and go with all his household to rest. Markham says that Lancashire was one of the most barren counties in England, a country more backward agriculturally than most of the countries of Europe, and it was for the improvement of these barren counties that his book was written. Simon Hartlib,§ a Dutchman by birth and a friend of Milton, writing about 1650, says ‘gardening and hoeing even now is scarcely known in the north and west of England, in which places a few gardeners might have saved the lives of many poor people who starved these dear years.” Probably many of these ‘poor people’ were labourers for wages under the assessed rate, which did not, as we have seen, suffice to buy food in dear years, and very dear the years from 1646 to 1650 were, the average price of wheat being 58s. 7%d. a quarter, a price which, reckoned according to the purchasing power of money at that time, seems prohibitive to any but the rich.? Landowners at that date imagined that the use of the spade would spoil the ground. The value of land in Lancashire during the seventeenth century may be gauged from the assessments to ship-money and to other objects made during the century. In the ship-money valua- tion of 1636 the county was assessed at £1,000, or at the rate of 1,219 acres tothe £, by far the lowest assessment in England in proportion to its area except Cumberland, where 1,251 acres were needed forthe £. Devonshire was assessed at £9,000, or 184 acres to the £, and Wiltshire at £7,000, or 123 acres to the £. In various other assessments of the counties of England made from 1641 to 1693 Lancashire, in all of them, is rated lower than any except the four counties of Northumber- land, Westmorland, Cumberland and Durham, although the population was greater than that of most counties in England.’° In 1660 liming land near Wigan cost £8 per acre, the price of each horse load being 15. 6d., and it yielded very good corn for twelve years after, ‘and is like to continue,’ while it is asserted that marled land in the neighbourhood had produced 140 bushels of barley per acre." The rotation of crops in the same district at that date was—(1) wheat ; (2) barley ; (3) fallow ; the three-course system on which the arable land of England had been cultivated for four centuries,” and inevitably since the farmer had no winter roots or artificial grasses to vary the system. They had both been introduced from Holland early in the seventeenth century, but it was long before they were in general use. Mr. Blundell of Crosby, writing at this time, gives a quaint recipe for improving the flavour of fruit. ‘Bare the roots of your tree and make a hole ina principal root, and then put in a pretty quantity of powder, made of such things as you desire your apple should taste of ; as of cloves, mace, nutmeg and the like.’ At Ormskirk in 1664 stirks and twinters were sold at from £1 95. 4d. to £1 145. 10d. each, Sheep were fed in the house with beans, ground round, and bran (‘with some oats if you will’). Plenty of water and hay was given them, and they were kept warm and became exceedingly fat in fourteen days. The winter of 1683 was exceptionally severe, and in Lancashire killed many sheep and cattle as well as human beings, all rivers and pools being frozen hard. In 1707 apples were selling at Liverpool at 2s. 6d. a bushel, a very good price considering the relative value of money." In 1710, after a ‘ very droughty’ summer, when Lancashire people had to buy water for their cattle,# oats were as dear as wheat, 4s. 6d. a bushel. In 1727 after a wet spring and cold summer, corn was dear ; wheat 205., barley 105., oats 75., ® In Hartlib’s time an average crop of wheat was from twelve to sixteen bushels. ° Thorold Rogers, Hist. of Agric. and Prices, v, 205. ” Ibid. v, 104 ; Eden, Strate of the Poor, 1, 230. " Notes and Observations of William Blundell of Crosby (ed. Rev. T. G. Gibson), 87. ® Thorold Rogers, Six Centuries of Work and Wages, chap. 16. 8 Blundell’s Diary, 55. “ Autobiography of Wm. Stout (edited from original MS. by J. Harland), 95. 421 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE beans 135., and oatmeal 145. a windle of 220 Ib., the latter being ‘ so ordinary that wheat bread is most used.’ Three years afterwards a great crop of corn brought the prices down to 10s. per windle for wheat, 4s. 6d. for barley, and 3s. 4d. for oats, while potatoes were 25. 64. a load. The crop was so great that 33,000 windles of imported corn in Liverpool were unsaleable. In 1732, after a long drought, farmers dreading to winter their cattle with short food supplies were killing them to avoid the risk, so that beef was selling in Lancashire at 14d. per Ib. for the best joints.’ . ; In 1740 occurred the great frost that was felt all over Europe ; in Lancashire much of the wheat was killed in the ground, and the coldness of the spring made the oats and barley fail, so that prices advanced : wheat to 205., barley to 125., oats to 7s. and beans to 16s. a windle. Hay and straw were scarce, hay 6d. a stone, wheat straw 104., oat straw 10d., and beef was again 13d. per lb. ; cheese 305. a cwt., butter 64. a Ib. In 1725 we have another record of wages paid in the county, the magistrates meeting at Manchester when ‘certain discreet and grave men of the county’ determined on the rates of wages and issued them. ‘They show a considerable increase on those of 130 years before, and are interesting, as the great industrial development of the eighteenth century had not yet come to pass. The best husbandry labourer }® was to receive from March to September 1s. a day, ordinary ones 10d.,and during the other six months the payment was to be rod. and gd. Haymakers were only to receive the same as the ordinary labourer, 10d., mowers had 15s. 3d. and reapers 15., the last named sum being the maximum wage of artisans. The maintenance of labourers was put at 35. a week. For making a ditch 4 ft. wide at the top, 18 in. wide at the bottom and 3 ft. deep, double set with quicks, setting a hedge upon it, 1s. arood of 8 yards, and 10d. a rood if without quick, was the price. For threshing and winnowing oats by piece work Is. a quarter was the rate, for barley, beans, and peas 15. 6d., for wheat and rye 2s. The magistrates in their proclamation remarked on the plenty of the times, and were afraid the wages were a little too liberal for the northern part of the county, but the labourer can hardly have shared this complacent optimism, since wheat was higher than it had been for thirteen years, 46s. 1d. per quarter, malt was 245. and oatmeal 54s.; and considering these prices with the wages, a labourer by twelve months’ work in 1725 could not have earned as much as he did by fifteen weeks work in 1495.1” This rate of payment was not to be exceeded in the county, and was to be proclaimed in every market town by the sheriff; it was enforced by penalties laid down by previous statutes going back to 2 and 3 Edward VI, cap. 15, by which a combination of workmen, which the magistrates seem to have feared, was punished by various penalties rising at the third offence to a fine of £40,” the pillory, loss of one ear, and ‘judicial infamy.’ Arthur Young made his northern tour of England in 1770,!* and gives an exhaustive and interesting account of agriculture at that date in various parts of Lancashire. ‘Around Garstang,’ he says, ‘the soils are clay, black moory, on clay and light loam, let on an average at 17s. an acre.” Farm rents were from {10 to £150 a year, and the course of cropping most usual was (1) fallow ; (2) wheat; (3) beans; (4) barley; (5) oats. They ploughed thrice for wheat, sowing three bushels a fortnight before Michaelmas, the average crop being the excellent one of thirty-five bushels per acre. For barley ‘they stir from one to four times,’ sowing three bushels per acre towards the end of April, and the return was thirty bushels per acre. For oats they ploughed ‘ but once,’ sowing seven bushels an acre in March, and getting a crop of fifty-five bushels on an average. For beans they ‘stir but once,’ sowing four and a half bushels broadcast, and never hoeing them, with a resulting crop of thirty bushels per acre. In this district neither pease nor rye were grown, and ‘scarce any turneps.’ Clover was sown with barley and oats, and generally mown for hay. For potatoes they dug all the land g in. deep and then manured it well with dung, and dibbled in the setts g in. apart, a peck setting a perch of 21 ft. They were hand weeded, and produced on an average 450 bushels per acre, corn of all sorts being sown after them and producing great crops. ‘The principal manure used was marl, at an average expense of {4 per acre. Lime was also in use, spread at the rate of from fifty to a hundred ‘ windles’ per acre, at a cost of 1s. 4d. per windle, and this dressing lasted four or five years ‘in great heart,’ though with very good management it would last as long as twenty years. Both marl and lime were used for the pastures, which let at from 30s. to 355. per acre ; an acre and a quarter was reckoned as the summer keep of a cow, and four sheep were run to the acre. The © Autobiography of Wm. Stout (edited from original MS. by J. Harland), rar. © In 1704 a cowman hired from 7 Feb. to Christmas was to have 525, 6¢. (Blundell’s Diary, 19.) ” Thorold Rogers, Six Centuries of Work and Wages, 398 ; Eden, State of the Poor, iii, p- cvii. * How was the labourer at 10d. or 15. a day to pay a fine of £40? ® Young, Northern Tour (2nd ed.), ili, 157 et seq. * The average rent of land in England about this time Young puts at ros. an acre. 422 AGRICULTURE long-horned cattle were the breed of the district, Lancashire being then famous for them, cows got by thoroughbred bulls of that sort selling at from £20 to £30 per head, and the bulls somietneee as high as £100 and even £200. The food of the cows in winter time was not very liberal, consisting of straw and hay only. Flocks of sheep of from twenty to two hundred were kept, the profit from them being calculated at 4s. or 5s. per head, the average weight of the fleece being 3 lb. For the cultivation of one hundred acres of arable land twelve or thirteen horses were considered necessary, the usual plough-team being four, who could plough an acre per day, cutting a furrow 6in. deep. The simple art of chopping straw for chaff was utterly unknown. To stock a grazing farm rented at £150 a year a sum of £500 was considered necessary, but for the ordinary farm of £100 a year, £200 was sufficient. Land then sold at from thirty to forty years’ purchase, and there were few small estates. Poor rates in Garstang were 5d. in the pound, and in the villages as low as 2d. Many of the leases were for three lives, a custom long prevalent in Lancashire ; some on terms of years. On a 200 acre farm of which 70 were arable and 130 grass, let at £180, the following live stock were kept : 12 horses, 10 cows, 8 fatting beasts, 25 young cattle, 50 sheep; and the staff to work it consisted of two men, two boys, two maids, and two labourers. As to the distinction between ‘men’ and ‘labourers’ we are not enlightened. Wages were as follows :—In harvest 15. a day and board, in haytime rod. a day and board, in winter 6d. a day and board for men; women getting 6d., 5d., and 4d. with board for the same periods. There were hardly any waggons in the district, though some were coming slowly into use. le cost £12, ploughs £1, rollers were unknown, harrows 10s., spades and scythes 35. and 35. 6d. Bread which was made from oats sold at $d. to 1d. per Ib, cheese at 3d., butter 7d., beef, mutton and pork 3d., and cottage rents were low, running from 1535. to £2 per annum. The price of timber was high, oak selling at from 1s. 6d. to 3s. per cubic foot, ash and elm at Is. 4d. On his journey from Garstang to Wigan Young found the land letting at from 155. to £3 an acre, averaging 25s.; from Wigan to Warrington rents were from 15s. to as high as £3 10s. per acre, the farms being generally small. Here the bread was of oats and barley mixed, and he found milk selling at 1d. a pint, bacon at 6d. a lb. and potatoes at 34d. a peck. Turning westwards Young journeyed to Prescot, passing clay and rich loam soils let at from 10s. to 25s. an acre, and here, too, nearly all the farms were small, as they are to-day, few being over 100 acres in extent. Their course of cropping was either a three course one, (1) fallow ; (2) wheat ; (3) oats ; or (1) fallow; (2) wheat ; (3) oats; (4) clover. Crops were poor, wheat producing fifteen bushels per acre, oats twenty-five, and beans sixteen. As in the northern part of the county, marl and lime were much used. A typical farm of the neighbourhood was one of 65 acres, 20 being arable and 45 grass, the rent £58. On it were kept four horses, six cows, six young cattle, and twenty sheep. Within five miles of Liverpool, then a town of about 40,000 inhabitants, land let at an average of 315. 6d. per acre, but to the north of the town, round Ormskirk, the sandy loam did not as a rule fetch more than 15s. Farms in this neighbourhood also were quite small, chiefly fifty or sixty acres, and cultivated on a very unusual rotation, i.e. (1) oats ; (2) barley ; (3) wheat ; (4) oats; (5) vetches; (6) barley ; (7) clover for three or four years, ‘and then it comes to grass of itself, and very fine grass it must be.” The locality was famous for clover, it being reckoned much more profitable than corn. Until recently the farmers had always dug the soil for potatoes, but ploughing was coming in ; a good acre of them was worth f10. The good grass land of this part, let at 30s. an acre, was used for fattening, dairying, and breeding, but it must have soon deteriorated in quality if Young is right in saying that it was never manured.”4 The cows were housed all the winter, and fed, as near Garstang, on hay and straw only. Sheep were more profitable here, producing 10s. per head nett, though the average weight of the fleece was only 2 |b. On light soils six horses were deemed necessary for 100 acres of arable land, two or three in the plough doing an acre a day, 6in. deep. A cart, three horses, and a driver could be hired for 5s. a day ; poor rates were 6d. in the pound. "| The average wage, without board, of the ordinary agricultural labourer in England at this time is stated by Young at 7s. 1d. and by T. Rogers at 7s. 6d. per week. *™ In 1907 the top price for oak and ash is about 15. gd. ; oak sometimes fetching 2s. elm is from 6d. to Is. 2d. per cubic foot. 3 To-day, on the Lathom House estate, near Ormskirk, the farms average 60 statute acres. * On the Lathom House estate, at the present time, there is practically no pasture. 423 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Leases were general in the Ormskirk district, for seven, fourteen, and twenty-one years; and there were only a few lifeholds. ; The wazes in South Lancashire differed somewhat from those in the north ; in hay-time a man earned 8d. a day instead of 1od., and in winter he received 10d. a day instead of 6d., ‘because the work is so much harder.’ A head man, if taken by the year, was paid £7 instead of £10." Boys and dairymaids also received less. In the south, as in the north of the county, no waggons or rollers were used. When Young visited the county the reclamation of Halsall Moss had just been effected, a piece of bog about 1,000 acres in extent, not worth, on an average, more than Id. per acre. This had been done very gradually by dividing the moss into fields of about two acres each, by ditches 3 ft. deep, 5 ft. wide at the top and 3 ft. wide at the bottom. These, which were half filled up in a year, were cleaned out again and left for another year, by which time the land was consolidated sufficiently to bear men for paring and burning it, which was done in the winter, 2in. deep, at a cost of 8s. 6d. per acre. After this it was ploughed with one horse in boots, shod with boards of an oval shape 18 in. wide, the turves raised by this ploughing being also burnt and the ashes ploughed in at once, quite hot. Upon this, without harrowing, was sown, at the beginning of September, a bushel of rye to the acre, which produced in return about 25 bushels. When this crop of rye was off the land was burnt again, then ploughed and sown with rye as before. With the second crop of rye came up a good growth of natural grass, which was left to itself for three years, but pastured by cattle, and became a good turf. At the end of the three years it was ploughed in April and the furrows burnt, then stirred a second time and sown with oats, four bushels to the acre, which pro- duced nearly 30 bushels. When the oats were off it was burnt again, and another crop of oats sown, with which natural grass again came, which was grazed for four years. By this system of taking two crops of rye or oats, and then letting the land lie in grass for three or four years, and always burning it when broken up, the land was made worth from 7s. 6d. to 15s. an acre.”® From the report to the Board of Agriculture made by Holt in 1794, and reviewed by William Marshall, we have an account of Lancashire agriculture at the end of the eighteenth century.”” Since the introduction of manufactures property had become more minutely divided, but there still remained very extensive estates. Among the methods of improving land then usual, that of Mr. Bayley of Hope is noticeable :— Whenever a tenant wishes for the whole of his farm, or any particular field, to be improved by draining, marling, liming, dunging, or laying down to grass in a superior manner, the landlord takes the (farm) or field into his own possession during the process, and when completed returns it again to the tenant with an advanced rent of ten per cent. upon the improvements, by which steps the rental of the estate had been advanced very considerably and the tenants were thriving. The covenants of leases usual at this time were: The landlord to repair buildings, the tenant carting the materials. The tenant to discharze all taxes, ‘serve all offices and all the duties charged upon the farm.’ ‘Tenants were restrained as to the quantity they were allowed to plough, sometimes to one-third, sometimes to one-fourth of the whole ; also, of late years to the number of crops to be taken at one breaking-up of the ground, sometimes four, sometimes three, being allowed. ‘Tenants were restrained from sowing wheat upon bean stubble or any other stubble from which a crop had been taken the same year, also from paring or burning except moss lands. Hay or straw was some- times forbidden to be sold, and the tenant was always bound to consume them on the premises. Tenants were allowed to take off three-fourths of the wheat growing upon the premises at the expiration of the lease, the incoming tenant to have the remaining fourth. The usual time of entering upon the lands was, as in the present day, Candlemas, 2 February, and on the buildings May Day ; the incoming tenant having permission, however, immediately after Candlemas to occupy certain portions of the out-buildings. In some leases there were covenants to pay the rent the day the tenant entered upon the premises, but it was not enforced except in emergencies. The rent of land at this time varied from los. to £4 per large acre (equal to a little more than two acres and one-tenth of a statute acre), and for accommodation land near towns as much as £10 per large acre was paid.?8 There were no natural woods of any consequence, but many plantations planted for gam: coverts, or shelters from the strong winds. * Young, Northern Tour, iii, 174. * Young, N ili 2 yl, 8, Northern Tour (and ed.), iii, 178. 7 W. Marshall, 4 Rev. of Rep. to Ba. of Agric. (Lond. 1808). Marshall criticises many of Hele’: state- ments severely. * Eden states the average rent of land in the township of Bury at 325. per statute acre of Lancaster from £2 to £6 per statute acre; of Preston £2 to £4. 424 ; in the townships and the exaction of tithes in kind. AGRICULTURE Holt gives a curious recipe for preventing cattle browsing on young trees and hedges, namely to lay the hair from a raw hide with all the impurities adhering in small quantities near the trees or hedges, which will effectually keep the cattle off. The general size of farms at the end of the eighteenth century was from 20 to 50 acres, though here and there were some of from 200 to 600 acres, and it was a distinguishing feature of Lancashire farms that their homesteads were very large. The yeomanry had greatly diminished of late, the great wealth which had in many cases been so rapidly acquired by some of their neighbours having tempted them to venture their property in trade, and they were to still further diminish all over England during the Napoleonic War as the high prices caused many of them to sell their land, or over-mortgage it so that they were ruined when the reaction came with the peace. Very few of the yeomanry or tenant farmers brought up their children to farming, the attrac- ‘tion of a manufacturing career was too strong, yet most of the farmers in the county had sprung from the labouring class, and been enabled to take farms, small at first, by their hard-won savings. Some alarm was felt at the diminution of arable land and its conversion into grass, among the chief causes of which were the ‘enormous’ wages paid in the manufactories, the increase of the poor rates, the transfer of capital from farming to trade, the absurd rotation of crops in the county, The price of labour varied greatly, in proportion to its distance from manufacturing towns, a striking commentary on the means of communication ; for instance, at Chorley a common labourer got 3s. a day and ale, at Euxton 2s. or 2s. 6d., at Eccleston 15. 6d. or 2s., at Mawdesley only 15. 2d. to Is. 4d., even in harvest time. The following is a comparison between wages in 1761 and thirty years later, during which the effect of the great industrial revolution was fully felt :— Head man-servant per annum . Maid-servant : : Masons and carpenters per day Labourers. : : . Mowing, per acre . ; . Thatching, per day : . Threshing an acre of oats . The use of oxen for draught work was becoming rare, horses A new implement called the ‘miner’ had been lately 1761 1791 Se = X al ~ o eCoOdOOONWAN mew onood = aooo00noo coo0oOofe Wh = RHMUs rR ONO NOoOowmnoo X being universally preferred. introduced, which was a ploughshare fixed in a strong beam, without mould boards, drawn by four or more horses, to follow in the furrow just cut. This, without turning up the substratum, loosened it from 8 to 12 in. deeper than the . plough had done. The threshing machine had just been introduced into Lancashire, and was an 5 . . . ‘ object of curiosity. The practice of keeping cows in the large towns was prevalent as in England generally, and ‘no idea of the insanitary nature of it was entertained ; not long before the night soil of Liverpool was thrown into the Mersey. Marling the land is described ‘ was about £8 per acre. as the foundation of all improvements in the agriculture of this county,’ and the farms of Lancashire and Cheshire are held up as affording thereby a useful lesson to the rest of the kingdom, though marling was zealously practised in other parts of England. The general practice was to begin marling about May or June, continuing as opportunity served throughout the summer ; the enormous dressing of 300 cart-loads being sometimes given to the acre,® so that grass fields occasionally looked like fresh-ploughed fallows. On the arable lands it was the custom to expose the marl to one summer’s sun and one winter’s frost before ploughing it in, after being well harrowed; and the cost of this tremendous dressing “Sea slutch’ from the Ribble and Wyre was used on adjacent lands as a substitute for marl, and was frequently used as a substratum for fruit trees, a load being put to each tree, the effects of which are described as wonderful. For grass-land, however, lime had nearly superseded marl as manure, the customary quantity then being 200 bushels to a statute acre applied in May and June. Lancashire, as became the first county in which the potato was grown, boasted in 1794 a superior cultivation in that important article, the average crops being 200 to 300 bushels (of go lb. % Eden, State of the Poor, ii, 294 ; between the same dates the price of a good cart-horse had risen from £10 to £25 and of a set of horseshoes from 1s. to 15. 84. °° In Norfolk at this time 25 loads per acre was the average. 2 425 54 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE uncleaned) per acre, though one acre of ‘indifferent land’ at Knowsley, belonging to Lord Derby, produced in 1793 700 bushels of ‘pinkeye’ potatoes, and next year 92 bushels of wheat which sold at 7s. 6d. per bushel. ; There was a ‘general strife between the Kirkdale and Wallasey gardeners, _as to who could produce the first early potato for the Liverpool market, a profitable rivalry seeing that potatoes brought to Liverpool early in May fetched 2s. 6d. per 1b.*! The breed of horses had within the last thirty years improved considerably owing to advancing prices, but sufficient attention was not yet paid to the choice of brood mares and stallions. The Lancashire long-horned cattle, ‘known all over the kingdom,’ were found in almost every part of the county, the best of them being found in the Fylde, whither purchasers from all parts resorted, though not with such frequency as formerly, for fattening qualities had been neglected for the milk pail. Further, Lancashire breeders had allowed those of the Midlands some years before to choose and purchase the best stock upon which they had made improvements on the ‘ new principles laid down by Mr. Bakewell,’ so that the northern counties were losing their supremacy. The dairy, as one would expect from the nearness of so many towns which afforded a splendid market for butter and milk, was the main object of Lancashire husbandry, and the lactometer was just coming into use, ‘an ingenious instrument which was yet in its infancy.” Much cheese was made in the county of excellent quality, in some cases superior to that of Cheshire ; that made in the vicinity of Leigh and Newborough, for its mildness and rich flavour, always getting a high price in the market. Few pigs were bred in the county, the few that were kept being bought from itinerant drovers from Shropshire, Yorkshire, Cheshire, and the neighbouring shires, pork not being a favourite food with the Lancastrian. Sheep were also few in numbers, even those upon the mountains being half-starved creatures, and there was not a single shepherd properly so called in the whole county. Those that were kept on the feeding districts were bred in Scotland, purchased thence by the Westmorland farmer at a year old, and by the Lancashire grazier at four years old ! The Warton or Silverdale Crag sheep which was said to be native to the Milnthorpe district in Westmorland was much esteemed for the fine flavour of its flesh, fineness of wool, and tendency to fatten. These sheep, now known as ‘crag sheep,’ large, white-faced, and horned, are still bred on Clawthorpe Fell, and from an annual exhibition of them held at Burton in Kendal originated the mectings of the Milnthorpe, Burton, and Carnforth Agricultural Society. At this period, the end of the eighteenth century, there were in Lancashire 26,500 acres of moss and fen-land, and 82,000 in moors, marshes, and commons; but few of the old open or common fields, which as late as 1760 formed the cultivation of half England, remained. The growth of manufactures which was so striking a feature of the last half of the century had brought gains and losses to the farmer. It is amusing to-day to read that the importation of foreign grain and flour to feed the towns was ‘almost incredible’ ; wages, as we have seen, had increased, so had rates, the water was damaged by factories, while the people of the county were already suffering physically from the debilitating effect of modern industrial conditions. On the other hand the value of the land and its products, especially cheese, butter, milk, and fat cattle, had gone up.®? Great exertions had been made of late years to improve the roads,** and complaints were rife that the public did not contribute as much as they ought to their maintenance in comparison with the farmer, a complaint that is not unheard to-day. Yet in spite of these efforts the vast increase of carriages, and the ‘general use of waggons, carts, etc.,’ with excessive weights, had made it almost impossible ‘by any means, at any expense,’ - support the public roads, the only durable material being paving stones imported from Wales at 5. per ton. The prices of provisions in 1796 in the township of Bury were, beef 34d. to 5d. per |b., mutton 5d., veal 5d. to 6d., pork 5d., bacon 84d., fresh butter 15., salt butter 8d. to 10d., potatoes 6s. 6d. for 253 1b., skim milk 14d. per quart, and new milk 3d, The close of the great war with Napoleon brought on British agriculture twenty years of almost unexampled adversity. The unnatural inflation of prices caused by the war was succeeded with astonishing suddenness by extreme depression. So rapidly had the reaction set in that the Board of Agriculture at the commencement of 1816 sent circular letters to almost every part of England ask- — ing S information about the prevalent distress, the replies to which revealed the deplorable state of agriculture. *' Marshall, Rev. of Rep. to Bd. of Agric. northern depart. 301. * Thid. 257, a nee ae : Young's criticism of the road from Preston to Wigan is well known, ‘ruts four feet deep and floating in mud only from a wet summer.’ * Eden, op. cit. ii, 294. 426 AGRICULTURE Many farmers had already become parish paupers ; tithes and rates went unpaid, as did trades- men’s bills ; live stock diminished in number, and ‘alarming gangs of poachers and other depredators’ infested the country. The answers from Lancashire to the queries of the Board may be tabulated as follows :— ParisH as a ee aut ea ei et State of Labourers Per cent. Claughton . . - ws Not many Some 20 to 33 Great want of work Yeland. . . . .. One Some 33 No want of work Lancaster . 6. 2 e+ se None Many 20 to 30 Travelling in vain in search of work Liverpool . . . . « . None Two 20 to 25 Stationary Ashworth . . .... None None None Considerably better than in 1812 The exceptional state of affairs at Ashworth, near Bury, is remarkable, and equally remarkable are the large reductions of rent in so short a time in the other cases. One of the chief causes of distress was the enormous taxes brought about by the war ; on one farm near Garstang, rented at £400, the taxes were nearly £140, and on another occupied by the owner, of which the rent was £178, the taxes were £89, exclusive of house and window tax. The high rate of interest on money was also complained of. Near Lancaster the distress of the farmers was denoted by their inability to procure even the necessaries of life, to purchase lime or manure, or bestow labour upon their farms. "Those who possessed flocks of long-woolled sheep did not suffer equally with others, as wool of that description sold high. Great numbers of the labouring poor in this district were tramping the country for work, and the farmers, though anxious to employ them, could not afford to do so. One of the remedies proposed for the alleviation of the distress was the removal of the tax on malt, which would raise the price of barley; the then high duty on malt putting malt beer quite out of reach of the labouring classes, and even of the farmers, and it occasioned the use of substi- tutes. From Loudon’s account of Lancashire, written in 1825, it appears there were a considerable number of yeomanry in the county, in spite of the attractions of trade and the ruin of the long wars, whose holdings were worth from £10 to £700 per annum. Farm buildings at this date were being improved, and the cottages were in many places com- fortable, with good gardens, though there were many of wattled studd work plastered with tempered clay and straw, locally called ‘clat and clay,’ and answering to the ‘ wattle and dab’ of the Midlands. Farms, generally speaking, were small, and the education and knowledge of most of the small occupiers very limited, though the large farmers were more enlightened, and having more capital, were improving their farms. Little improvement too was visible in the implements, but the ‘ Northumberland plough ’ and Meikle’s threshing machines were beginning to be used.*° More of the land was in grass than under the plough; but in the latter great attention was paid to the cultivation of potatoes; the planting of early ones especially being carried to a high degree of perfection. The most approved method was to cut the sets, and put them ona room floor, where a strong current of air could be introduced, two layers deep, covered with chaff or sawdust about two inches thick, which screened them from the winter frosts and kept them moderately warm, causing them to vegetate. Plenty of air was introduced to strengthen them and harden their shoots. When the shoots were sprung about an inch and a half or two inches, half of the covering was removed care- fully so as not to break them. In this manner they were allowed to remain till the planting season, being given all the air and light possible. The grass lands of the county in 1825 were chiefly used for dairying, but not much cheese was made except on the Cheshire side. There were excellent market gardens near most of the large towns, especially near Liverpool, where great quantities of cabbages and onions were used by the shipping of the port. Some of the land north of Liverpool was famous for its asparagus. 3 Agric. State of the Kingdom, Feb. to April, 1816, p. 142. ; 86 As we have seen they were introduced in 1794; their adoption was not very rapid. 427 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Orchards, except in sheltered places, were very scarce, but a good deal of timber planting was going on, old timber being limited in quantity. Moss bogs and marshes were of great extent, though a great deal of draining, paring, burning, and liming had been carried on, notably by the celebrated Roscoe, who in 1820 had begun to improve Trafford moss, and was encouraged by his success to proceed with Chatmoss. : The following is his own account of his methods, which it is interesting to compare with those of Young :—*” ‘A main road was carried from east to west through the whole extent of my portion of the moss, about three miles long and thirty-six feet wide. It is bounded on each side by a main drain, seven feet wide and six feet deep, from which the water is conveyed by a considerable fall to the river. From these two main drains, other drains diverge at fifty yards distance from each other, and extend from each side of the road to the utmost limits of the moss. These field drains are four feet wide at the top, one foot at the bottom, and four and a-half feet deep, and are kept carefully open. The cultivation of the moss then proceeded in the following manner :— After setting fire to the heath and herbage on the moss, and burning it down as far as practicable, I plough a thin sod or furrow, with a very sharp horse-plough, which I burn in small heaps and dissi- pate. The moss being thus brought to a tolerable dry and level surface, I then plough a regular furrow six inches deep, and as soon as possible after it is turned up, I set upon it the necessary quantity of marl, not less than 200 cubic yards to the acre. As the marl begins to crumble and fall with the sun and frost it is spread over the land, after which I put in a crop as early as possible, adding for the first crop a quantity of manure, about twenty tons per acre. Moss land thus treated may not only be advantageously cropped the first year with green crops, but with any kind of grain, and as wheat has of late paid better than any other I have hitherto chiefly relied on it. The cost of the several ploughings, with the burning, sowing, and harrowing, and of the marl and manure, but exclusive of the seed and the previous drainage, was £18 55. an acre, and in 1812 on one piece of land thus improved Roscoe grew twenty bushels of wheat per acre, then worth a guinea a bushel, but the crops in the moss were not generally as good as this. The cattle at the end of the first quarter of the nineteenth century were chiefly the longhorned breed, though a good many shorthorns were used for the dairy. The larger ‘grass farms near the popular towns furnish milk, the smaller ones butter, and the remote farms cheese, which resembles that of Cheshire, and is made chiefly from the longhorned or native breed.’ Sheep were not very common, but horses were generally bred of the ‘strong team kind,’ also stout compact saddle horses, and those of middling size and bone for the stage and mail coaches. Roads were still bad in most places owing to want of good materials and the moist climate. An ingenious road-maker near Warrington, tired of the convex form, had adopted that of one inclined plane, but it was found though the water ran off well, that heavy laden waggons were liable to be overturned, a fact that might have been perceived before the roads were made. In the middle of the nineteenth century agriculture in South Lancashire was very backward and nezlected,*® manufactures seem to have pushed it on one side. Though possessed of excellent markets close at hand, with an inexhaustible supply of manure from towns and villages, many causes are stated to have been against good farming, excessive rainfall,*” the nature of the soil in many parts, i.e. a strong clay expensive to improve and cultivate, the number of small farmers who, though industrious, had little intelligence or capital, life leases and yearly agreements affording little perma- nent interest in the land, and the fact that the landlords were too content with the mineral wealth under the surface to pay much attention to the crops on it.“ Moved by the bad times, shared by Lancashire with the rest of England, that they were then undergoing, landowners were reducing rents, removing useless hedgerows hitherto held sacred, executing drainage, improving farm buildings, and what sounds strange in the twentieth century, giving leave for the breaking up of grass-land. On Lord Derby’s and Lord Sefton’s estates especially, many valuable improvements were being carried out ; on the former a regular drainage corps of from seventy to a hundred men was con- stantly employed. According to Caird, the farming of the undrained lands, then comprising the greater part of South Lancashire, had improved little since the time of Arthur Young. Land intended for summer * Loudon, Enc. of Agric. (ed. 1825), 678. * The writer of a prize essay on Lancashire Agriculture in Roy. Agric. Soc. Engl. Fourn. 1849 says ‘we are sadly behind the rest of the world in agricultural attainments,’ but ‘the northern part is decidedly better than the southern.’ 4 *° The average rainfall in Lancashire is double that of Middlesex. In 1851 wheat had dropped to 38s. 6d. per quarter, in 1847 it was 69s. 9d. 428 AGRICULTURE fallow was seldom ploughed till April or May, and then the ploughing was done at such times as suited the farmer, without much reference to what suited the soil, so that fallows were badly executed, frequently in moist weather, and the seed sown under unfavourable circumstances. Wheat followed the summer fallows or green crop, then oats, which were sown with clover and grass seeds, and then mown for hay the two following years. Many farmers ‘are never troubled with fat stock or overflowed with milk and butter.’*! The produce of crops under such management was necessarily scanty and the returns from dairy stock fed on such miserable pastures were unremunerative. Low prices then prevailing were compelling the smaller farmers to part with many of their dairy cows, the only available capital they possessed, and their prospects were gloomy in the extreme. However, there were better farms, such as that of Mr. W. Longton at Rainhill near Prescot, 160 acres in extent, of which two-thirds was held on a yearly tenancy, and the whole had been drained at the tenant’s expense. ‘The main drains were laid with tiles and slate soles, the others were made at intervals of 21 ft. apart, and from 32in. to 3ft. in depth, filled 1 ft. deep with cinders. The cropping on a soil partly a strong loam with clay subsoil and partly a sandy loam on a porous subsoil was (1) green crop after grass ; (2) wheat ; (3) barley ; (4) seeds ; (5) grass mown for hay ; (6) grass again cut for hay, or pasture, according to circumstances. ‘The returns from which were in the year 1850; potatoes, 220 measures of go lbs. each per acre selling at 2s. 6d. per measure ; wheat, 40 bushels of 7olbs. per acre, with 2 tons of straw worth then £2 a ton; barley, 60 bushels per acre ; seeds, first cut 2 tons of hay per acre, second cut 14 tons, selling at £5 per ton; grass yielded 14 tons of hay per acre. To obtain these returns 800 tons of manure were purchased annually at a cost of 5s. per ton, and roadside scrapings, old banks, &c., were made good use of. There were many farms in South Lancashire equally or more productive than this, the inex- haustible supplies of manure from the manufacturing towns being wisely taken full advantage of ; Rothwell in his Agricultural Report of Lancashire mentioning a farm of 156 acres within six miles of Manchester for which 2,000 tons of manure were purchased in a single year. On a large dairy farm near Halewood the cows were house-fed winter and summer, in winter receiving a mixture of steamed straw, ground turnips, and 1 1b. per head of boiled Egyptian bean meal poured over the mixture. In addition they received a good supply of turnips and fodder, and 2 1b. of oil cake daily. The higher portion of the county along its eastern boundary was nearly all in grass, and used for dairying, the land fetching as much as £2 and £3 per acre, chiefly owing to its nearness to good markets. The rotation of crops in South Lancashire in the middle of the nineteenth century was not orthodox, two white crops following one another, then two green crops, with successful results. The rent of land within six miles of Liverpool and Manchester in 1850 was from 40s. to £4 per statute acre. Beyond that distance, unimproved farms fetched 205. to 30s. per acre, and improved farms, 30s. to 40s., but in addition to this the tenants paid all the rates, tithe and land tax, amounting to 10s. or 12s. 6d. per acre more. On the cold clay soils, however, the rents were much lower. From 1830 to 1850 rents as a rule had varied little, though there were instances of large increases, the competition for small farms being very keen and forcing up the rents, the great majority of holdings being under 100 acres. In 1850 there was no custom in the county securing to the tenant any compensation for unexhausted improvements, but if he left the farm at Candlemas he was allowed to return and reap the crop at his own expense, being allowed half of it for his trouble, and he was allowed the price of his clover seeds sown with the last crop.” At this date thousands of acres of the peat mosses of the county were unreclaimed, two-thirds of Chatmoss lying waste and unproductive, in spite of the efforts of Lord Ellesmere, Colonel Ross, - Messrs. Baines, Reed, and others. If left to the native farmers, the reclamation will be slow, for as a class they are individually possessed of little capital and of no great enterprize, and when allotments are made to them they show no readiness to improve them.” Turning to North Lancashire, it is worthy of note that as late as 1830 many parts of the Fylde district were almost inaccessible, and even twenty years later some parts of it were difficult to traverse. Farms in the Fylde then ranged from 40 to 160 acres, the fields were small, and the | Caird, Engl. Agric. in 1850-1, p. 267, and Rothwell, Agric. Rep. of Lancs. 1850. ” Caird, Engl. Agric. in 1850, p. 273, but in “eases compensation clauses for unexhausted improvements were customary. See Roy. Agric. Soc. Engl. Fourn. (1 849), 37° Caird, op. cit. 277. It is satisfactory to be able to state in 1907 that the greater part of the peat mosses are now under cultivation. 429 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE fences most irregular. In almost every field there was a marl-pit, but the use of marl was growing less common. ; A common and pernicious custom was that the tenant should deposit all the dung of the farm on the meadow land, so that the arable was much neglected, the meadow-land being considered a sort of gold mine which was never to be touched.“ Draining in the Fylde was limited and primitive, dried peat being used as a wedge to form the water-course, but even this effected a large increase in the value of the land. After a clean fallow wheat produced from 24 to 28 bushels per acre, beans from 36 to 40. Two-thirds of the whole of the Fylde district were still undrained and unimproved. To the east of the railway between Lancaster and Preston the country was chiefly under grass and used for dairying, the farms averaging 80 acres, generally held on seven years leases. The competition for these small farms, largely fed by men who had made money in the numerous railway schemes of the day, was very keen, and taken advantage of by landowners who often let at high rents to ignorant men with disastrous results to landlord and tenant. ; The following short statement of the prices of land, produce, labour, &c., in 1770 and 1850 in South Lancashire is instructive :— 1770 1 850 Rent, 215. per acre Rent, 415. per acre Rates, 3¢. in the £ Rates, 3s. gd. in the £ Farm four-sevenths grass Four-fifths grass Three-sevenths arable One-fifth arable Annual produce of a cow, £4 Six horses to a plough do an acre a day Two or three horses in a plough First man’s wages, £9 a year and board Lig to £16 a year and board Second man, £5 a year and board £10 a year and board Dairymaid, £3 and board £7 tos. and board Bread, oat, 11 1b. for 15. Bread wheat, Sd. for best 4 lb. loaf Cheese, 3¢. per Ib. Sd. per lb. Butter, 8¢. per Ib. 11d. to 15. per |b. Beef, 24¢. per lb. §¢. to 6d. per lb. Mutton, 24d. per |b. 6d. per Ib. Labourer’s cottage rents 205. 50s. to 1005. From these figures it appears that the farmer was not so well off in the latter period, rent and wages had doubled as well as the prices of most of his produce, but butter had only increased one- third, and wheat fetched less in 1850 than in 1770, while the increase in the rates is enormous. It must be remembered, however, that 1850 was an exceptionally bad year for agriculture. The wages of agricultural labourers in the county in the middle of the nineteenth century were high as compared with southern counties. In South Lancashire Englishmen obtained 12s. to 155. a week, Irishmen gs., the latter being indispensable owing to the scarcity of the former. In the Fylde labourers were only paid gs. and 10s. a week, and to the north and east of that district 12s, and 14s. Fuel was cheap, and they were probably better housed, better fed, better warmed, and better paid than in most parts of England.*® The average rent of cultivated land in Lancashire in 1770 was 225. 6d. per acre, and in England, according to Young, about ros. In 1850 the average rent of the same in Lancashire was about 42s., in England about 273. 7d. In 1770 the average wages paid in England were 7s. 1d. according to Young and 7s. 6d. according to Thorold Rogers, which were about the same as those paid in Lancashire. . In 1850 the average wages in England were about 10s. 6d. per week, in Lancashire 13s. 6d., a striking proof of the effect of the growth of manufactures. Yet Sir Robert Peel, writing shortly before his death, said there were immense tracts in Lancashire as in other counties, with good roads, good markets, and favourable climate, that were pretty nearly in a state of nature, undrained "badly fenced, and wretchedly farmed ; this apathy and neglect having been largely fostered by a reliance on protective duties. Rothwell writing in 1850 considered the farmers of the county more deficient in the management of grass land than in corn or root crops. In many districts land was seldom laid down to grass until it was ‘much run’ and full of weeds, under which circum- stances it made poor grass land. And when laid down nothing but red clover and rye grass, or seeds from the hay loft, were sown, and cut twice the first year, then left for pasture, ‘and a “Rothwell, Agric. Rep. of Lancs. 59. “ Oat bread was still the food of some agricultural labourers in 1850. * Roy. Agric. Soc. Engl. Fourn. x, 49. 430 AGRICULTURE wretched one it makes.’ When the land was in pasture the farmers paid little attention to it, weeds were allowed to grow, drain mouths and ditches were trodden in by the cattle, and their droppings left unspread. In ploughing there had recently been great improvement, brought about in great measure by the annual ploughing matches of the different agricultural societies, the Scotch ploughs drawn by horses abreast having made good progress. Yet there was a considerable extent of country where the old wooden ploughs were used with three or four horses in single file.‘ Rothwell was of the opinion that the land of Lancashire ‘will not do what it is capable of doing,’ without an occasional dressing of lime, with plenty of other manure in addition. In 1850 the longhorned cattle had almost disappeared from the county, and the general stock was shorthorns, often crossed with ‘Holderness or Yorkshire,’ and the Ayrshire, a few farmers keeping Kerrys for dairy purposes. In the south and west of the county the heavy breed of cart-horses was most used, but in the eastern and more hilly parts of South Lancashire a slightly lighter horse was popular, and in North Lancashire the farmers kept and bred half-bred blood horses for the work of the farm. In the Fylde district high prices were obtained by farmers for hunters, roadsters, and coach-horses. In South Lancashire the favourite sheep was the Cheviot, some Leicesters, black-faced Highland, and Southdowns being kept ; in the northern part of the county the Leicester was most common. The county was famous for pigs, which were mostly a cross between ‘the Chinese’ and Berkshire, Salford being particularly noted for its breed of pigs, which sometimes attained an enormous size. At this date the labouring classes in the manufacturing districts, though not so thrifty as their fathers, had much improved in morals and intelligence. Oatmeal, potatoes, milk, with bacon at dinner, and sometimes beef or mutton formed the principal food of all the industrious and frugal part of the labouring classes in most parts of the county, though in the poorer districts, oatmeal, milk and potatoes were the chief diet. Cottage accommodation was deficient both in comfort and decency ; often plenty of room but ill-planned, inconvenient, and too low overhead. Comfort was little studied, windows were small and not able to be opened, doors misplaced and ventilation bad ; frequently there was only one bedroom. In the Fylde many cottages had clay walls and floors, with the bedrooms on the ground floor, more like an Irish cabin than what an English cottage should be. The farm buildings were very defective, the inconvenient ill-arranged hovels, the rickety wood and thatch barns, and sheds devoid of every known improvement for economizing labour, food, and manure are a reproach to the landlords. One can hardly believe that such a state of matters is permitted in an old and wealthy country * It should be borne in mind that this account was written at the close of the protective period. Léonce de Lavergne, who visited Lancashire in the middle of the nineteenth century, does not paint a very attractive picture. ‘Let any one fancy,’ [he says,] an immense morass shut in between thesea on one side and mountains on the other ; stiff clay land with an impervious subsoil everywhere hostile to farming ; add to this a most gloomy climate, continual rain, a constant cold sea wind, besides a thick smoke, shutting out what little light penetrates the foggy atmosphere, and lastly the ground, the inhabitants, and their dwellings completely covered with a coating of black dust, . . . such, however, is the influence on production of an inexhaustible outlet that these fields so gloomy and forsaken, are rented at an average of 30s., and near Liverpool and Manchester arable land lets as high as £4 an acre.® ‘There are not many soils in the most sun-favoured lands which can boast such rents. He remarks that Lord Derby had averted a reduction of rents by ‘using the great antidote, drainage.’ Lavergne does not seem to have inspected the northern part of the county very closely ; and an English writer of the same date says Furness was the redeeming feature in Lancashire farming. In the soil, the class of farmers, and their general management, this district would not suffer by comparison with other more favourable and accessible parts of England. It is difficult to conceive two districts more distinct in every respect that can interest a farmer than that on the eastern side of the southern, and this on the western part of the northern division of the same county. The one was cold and wet growing a bad herbage and rushes, and divided into small holdings, with a manufacturing population who occupied the land without farming it, the other for the most part naturally drained, in the occupation of men who pay in some instances as muchas £600 a year rent, producing fine crops of wheat, oats, barley, turnips and seeds. At this time many of the old houses ” Rothwell, op. cit. 75. ® Caird, op. cit. 490. *’ Lavergne, Rural Econ. of Engl, 261-2. © Roy. Agric, Soc. Engl. Fourn. (1849), 35. 431 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE and cottazes built of clat and clay still existed, but the type was rapidly disappearing. In the hilly districts, as now, dry stone walls were the most common fences, while in the lower parts quick, or what was supposed to be quick, hedges were most common but they were generally much neglected and required thorough renovation, the greater part straggling over four or five yards of ground with a ditch on both sides. Between 1835 and 1850 numerous agricultural societies were established, almost every town having one, especially in the north ; but the smaller ones soon tended to amalgamate with the larger. It was a greatera of drainage, Peel in 1848 introduced government drainage loans, and many tileries sprang up in various parts of the county. The use of guano, bones, and superphosphate was becoming common, and nitrate of soda was being introduced. Threshing machines, worked by horses, which, as we have seen, were at first very unpopular, were being extensively used, ‘ thirty or forty being set up’ in the neighbourhood of Manchester, ‘ brought from Scotland,’ and costing £ 40 apiece. Other new implements were Finlayson’s cultivator, a turnip drill for sowing two drills at once, the Norwegian harrow, Croskil’s clod crusher, Ducies’ drag. After many years of expectation and disappointment agriculturists were at last in 1867 fur- nished with returns sufficiently reliable for many practical purposes, but appearing somewhat scanty in 1907. To those who know them it is not surprising to find that the farmers themselves were often the chief obstacle to the compilation of the returns, Those for Lancashire are as under :— Total Area Acreage not Total Area Arable Pasture accounted for cultivated 1866.... 0 — 510,394 708,827 234,374 4745453 1867... . 1,219,221 489,329 729,892 230,490 499,402 Live Stock Total Cattle Sheep Pigs 1866 . . . . 470,542 202,552 217,615 50,375 1867 . . . . 588,549 201,363 337,495 49,691 There are several criticisms, however, to be made on these returns. From ‘ pasture’ all heath and mountain land is excluded, a very large omission in Lancashire. Under ‘arable ’ are included all corn and green crops, clover, artificial grasses, and bare fallow. The live stock census in 1866 was taken on 5 March, in 1867 on 25 June. In 1866all occupiers of under five acres of land were excluded. In 1877 one of the last of the ‘ good years,’ labourers in the Liverpool and Manchester districts were getting on an average 215. a week, for which they worked hard and honestly, the worst farming being observed where the wages were lowest.*! In the same district the horses used were mostly shire, and the cattle shorthorn ; the fences were trim and neat, and gates all substantial and well hung. There was also complete confidence between landlord and tenant, so that yearly agreements were the rule, under which tenants had occupied farms for generations and confidently carried out improvements. On one of the best farms in the county, near Aintree, with a soil described as ‘ black soil on sand and peaty loam,’ most of the subsoil being sandy, the following was the cropping in 1877 :— Acres Barley, Chevalier : * i ‘ ‘ s F - ‘ : . : 42 Oats, Yellow Poland . ‘ ‘ F 5 5 ‘ : ‘ 2 é - 26 Wheat, Hunter White : ; é . ‘ F . : . ‘ sv. 38 Turnips . i 7 % : 3 . . . : . : . 7 3 Potatoes. ‘ . . ‘ ‘ . ‘ : : ‘ : : a BO Hay. : és : . . : F i : . : : . - 62 Pasture. : : 7 ‘ . - ; ‘ . " . : . 12 Irrigated Meadow 29 242 The crop of oats was estimated at 80 bushels to the acre. The stock on the farm consisted of : 8 working horses 1 boar, very well bred 2 two-year old horses 4 milking cows 2 yearling horses 2 two-year old heifers 1 foal ‘ 8 yearling heifers 15 store pigs 3 calves 3 breeding sows 1 shorthorn bull The amount expended on labour was from £800 to £1,000 a year. " Roy. Agric. Soc. Engl. Fourn. (1877), 465. 432 AGRICULTURE The rotation of cropping was (1) roots; (2) wheat or barley ; (3) barley or oats; (4) seeds, which lay two years and sometimes three; 1,000 tons of manure were used annually in addition to eight tons of nitrate of soda and one ton of phospho-guano, No less than thirty lineal miles of drains had been laid down on the farm during the occupancy of the tenant, the landlord paying half the cost of the materials. Another farm of 166 acres, all arable except 26 acres of meadow, near Prescot, mostly heavy soil, was worked by seven horses, and the following is an interesting list of the implements used : two waggons, two large and five small carts, three combined mowers and reapers, reaper, two grubbers, two scarifiers, two double rest, two double furrow, five swing ploughs, three pairs of two- horse harrows, two pairs of clover and seed harrows, two pairs of bow harrows, two drill harrows, two heavy land rollers, also turnip and seed rollers, two horse hay rakes, two hay rowers, winnow- ing machine, weighing machine, turnip cutter, potato crusher and sundry small articles. On a farm of 44 acres, eight miles from Liverpool in the parish of Halewood, the rotation was (1) roots ; (2) wheat ; (3) oats; (4) seeds ; for three or four years, and in 1877 it was cropped with five acres of wheat, five of oats, one and a half of potatoes, mangolds and turnips, five acres of clover hay, five acres of two-year-old hay, the same of seven-year-old hay, with eight acres of meadow and pasture.” In this district a very large quantity of hay and straw was sold off the farms to the big towns at a high price, and in return quantities of manure were brought back, probably double the amount that could have been obtained if the hay and straw had been consumed at home, but the circumstances were and are exceptional. Rents varied from 45s. to 60s. per acre, the buildings were excellent on most farms, though there was some lack of cottages for labourers, who certainly deserved good houses as they are described as working with energy and good will, following the example of the farmers. In spite of the wages of labour being exceptionally high the wages bill on many farms was quite small, owing to the fact that most of the work was done by the farmer and his family. On a dairy and stock farm of 310 acres near Ulverston at the same date the stock included 21 large shorthorn cows in milk, 15 two-year-olds, 25 yearlings, and 14 calves ; the cows producing 2,000 to 3,000 gallons of milk annually at 1od. per gallon, in addition to a considerable amount of butter, there were also 15 fat beasts, and 100 to 200 fat sheep were sold every year. A large number of farmers had given up making cheese and turned their attention to the sale of milk and the feeding of stock, while the cheese that was made was not so good as formerly, owing to the factories turning out an article inferior to that made by the skilful daughter or wife. Lancashire has been the scene of many Royal Agricultural Shows. In 1841 the third show of the Society was held at Liverpool, the two previous ones having been at Oxford and Cambridge. The chief improvement at Liverpool was in the exhibit of implements, which hitherto had not even had special shedding allotted to them, but here they attained the dignity of two whole rows. Cattle were divided into four classes only, Shorthorns, Herefords, Devons, and any other breed or cross ; sheep into three classes only, Leicesters, Southdowns or other short-woolled sheep, and long- woolled sheep not qualified to compete as Leicesters ; while horses and pigs had to be content with one class each. ‘There were also two prizes for ‘extra stock.’ * In 1869 the scene of action was Manchester, where the show of shorthorn bulls was perhaps the best hitherto seen, but horse-breeding was suffering from the fact that many of our best brood mares had been exported. It was stated that ‘as the flail has of late disappeared and been replaced by machinery, so after this exhibition will the scythe and the sickle gradually cease to be used in our fields,’ one of the features of the show being the large exhibit and severe trial of reaping and mowing machines. In 1877 Liverpool was again visited and the show occupied 75 acres of ground, whereas in 1841 about 10 were sufficient, and at Preston in 1885 a poultry exhibition was added to the other items of the Royal Show for the first time. In 1897 Manchester received the show for the second time, and the area required had now grown to 114 acres, the number of entries of live stock having increased from 324 at the first show in Liverpool to 2,688. The most noticeable exhibition was that of horses, amounting to nearly 1,000, or nearly three times as many as were shown in 1869. The era of agricultural prosperity which commenced just before the Crimean War continued until 1874, when the decline set in, which has continued almost to the present day, though prices held up fairly well until 1885. The total area of the county in 1878 was returned as 1,207,926 acres, a decrease of over * These items as given in Roy. Agric. Soc. Engl. Fourn. (New Ser.), xiii, 494, are short of the total of 44 acres by g4 acres. Even deducting the area occupied by farm buildings, roads, &c., there is a large discrepancy. * Roy. Agric. Soc. Engl Fourn. (1841), xcvil. 2 433 55 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE 11,000 acres since 1867, but the area cultivated had increased considerably, from 729,892 acres to 771,507 acres. This was cultivated as under :— Corn Crops. Wheat Barley Oats Rye Beans Peas Acres . . « 26,963 10,197 57,136 1,254 45717 368 GREBN CROPS Vetches and other Cabbage, Green Crops, Turnips Kohl Rabi, — except Clover Potatoes and Swede Mangolds Carrots and Rape or Grass Actes 3 4. x 335247 10,890 1,502 392 1,734 2,380 Clover, sainfoin and grasses under rotation 75,027 acres, flax 10 acres, bare fallow or uncropped arable land 3,297 acres. Total arable, 229,129 acres, while the number of acres under permanent pasture, exclusive of mountain and heath land, was 542,378. Of orchards there were 2,169 acres, market gardens 1,176 acres, nursery grounds 409 acres, woods 34,516 acres. The number of live stock was :— Horses Cattle Sheep Pigs 38,763 220,012 329,420 42,973 the census being taken on 4 June. The disinclination of farmers to supply information had con- siderably abated, and those who failed to make returns were much less numerous in the north of England than in the south and midlands. In 1880 the corn crops showed very little alteration from those of 1878, except that beans had diminished by 1,436 acres, while in the green crops potatoes increased by 6,162 acres. Clover and grasses under rotation were less by about 12,000 acres, but permanent pasture had increased by more than 17,000 acres. There were substantially the same number of live stock in 1880 as in 1878, sheep showing a small decline, though in England as a whole they had declined by more than a million and a half, owing to the excessive rainfall. The following table shows the number of holdings of various sizes in Lancashire for the years 1875 and 1880 :— 50 acres From 50 From 100 From 300 From 500 and under to 100 acres to 300 acres to 500 acres to 1,000 acres 1875 & @ dow TB RTO 2,873 1,468 74 12 T880° 4. We ee (17,823 3,077 1,552 104 13 These figures show a distinct tendency towards larger holdings, which was noticeable also all over England. It should be mentioned that there was one holding of over 1,000 acres at both dates. By 1905 holdings under 50 acres had further dimininished to 14,751, of which 3,022 were between one and five acres : and those between 50 and 300 acres had increased from 4,629 in 1880 to 5,176. There is no doubt that the diminution of petty holdings is largely due to the absorption for other than agricultural purposes of land lying immediately round large towns; yet at the same time the increase of farms between 50 and 300 acres must be chiefly from the amalzamation of smaller holdings, while the decrease in the number of still larger farms above 300 acres, to 86 in 1905, accounts for a part of the increase. The tendencies proved by the above figures as occurring in Lancashire are the same as those noticed in England as a whole.*! The average size of holdings in the county in 1905 was 40°8 acres, against 66°1 acres for England, but in these figures are included much land occupied for pleasure rather than for profit. Tn the same year the acreage of land occupied by tenants was 756,370, and that occupied by owners 59,744. In spite of bad times the total acreage under crops and grass had increased in 1905 to 816,114 acres, cultivated as follows :— Corn Crops Wheat Barley Oats Rye Beans Peas Acres. . . 18,396 45713 76,857 1,702 476 827 Total, 102,971 acres. “ Rep. on. Agric. Returns (1905), xvi. 434 AGRICULTURE GREEN Crops Turnips Cabbage, Kohl-Rabi Vetches Other Potatoes and Swedes Mangolds and Rape or Tares crops Acres. . . 47,697 7,165 1,861 2,811 550 2,413 Total, 62,497 acres. Clover and grass under rotation, 77,514 acres, flax g acres, small fruit 1,820, and bare fallow 1,233 acres. The total arable land was thus 246,044 acres, and permanent pasture occupied 570,070 acre The most notable feature about these figures, compared with the earlier ones, is that the pro- portions of arable and permanent pasture are, unlike most parts of England, not much altered. Wheat, barley, and beans all show considerable decreases, as would be expected, and potatoes and oats a large increase. 5,55 The number of live stock in the county in 1905 was :— Horses Cattle Sheep Pigs 45,629 2405749 324,541 70,364. The increase in the number of horses, cattle, and pigs since 1878 is very noticeable ; the number of sheep on the other hand varies little in the years we have considered. The average crops per acre for the years 1895-1904, of the county as compared with those for all England were, in bushels :— Wheat Barley Oats Beans Peas Lancs.© . . . 32°81 36°14 42°74 27°55 25°39 England. . . 30°53 32°58 40°71 27°39 26°36 Turnips Potatoes and Swedes Mangolds Lancs. . . . «©» « « 6°76 tons 17°42 tons 18-81 tons England. . . 2. « + 5°84 55 II‘gl_ ,, 18°39 ,, In 1905 Lancashire produced 413,871 tons of potatoes; considerably more than any other county except Lincolnshire, which ran her pretty close with 394,026 tons, and Yorkshire, no other county producing half this amount. In turnips and swedes Lancashire had the highest average crop for the ten years quoted of all the English counties. ‘The average hay crop per acre for the same ten-year period was 42°77 cwt. of clover, sainfoin, and grasses under rotation, and 36°73 cwt. of hay from permanent pasture; in 1905 there were in the county 268,206 acres devoted to hay of all kinds, producing 481,846 tons, a much larger crop than any other county in Great Britain except Yorkshire. The average crops of hay just mentioned were the best in England, both from grasses in rotation and permanent pasture, the average crop in England being 28-79 cwt. and 23°61 cwt. per acre respectively. By 1905 the acreage under orchards had increased to 3,312. The farmer of the present day ought not to fail for want of instruction in his calling, for he has advantages such as his forefathers never had. The Lancashire County Council has a farm of 157% acres situated at Hutton near Preston, with permanent dairy and poultry schools, and pro- vision for the residence of pupils during their course of study. In 1905, 6,033 lb. of butter, and 31,564 lb. of cheese were sold by the farm, the live stock consisting of 100 head of dairy cattle, shorthorns, and Jerseys, and from 80 to 100 pigs; from 800 to 1,000 head of poultry are also kept. A number of manurial, feeding, and other experiments are conducted on the farm and else- where in the county, so that the practical and scientific principles of agriculture may both be taught. Practice with science is also the object of the County Council Agricultural School at Preston, the Lancashire Education Committee giving free studentships, certificates, and diplomas, and agri- cultural exhibitions and scholarships. “The Education Committee also give lectures on agriculture in various parts of the county, admission to which is free. It forms altogether a scheme of education which would have rejoiced the hearts of Tull, Townshend, Arthur Young, Coke of Holkham, and the other pioneer educators in what is still the greatest business in the country. Rents have not been reduced in Lancashire to the extent they have in most of the counties of England; in many districts they have not fallen at all since 1878, in others only very slightly, the 55 The permanent pasture does not include mountain and heath land. 86 The average price in England for seven years ending Christmas, 1905, of a bushel of wheat was 35. 5d., barley 35. ofd., oats 25, 2$2. 435 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE poorer soils of course suffering most. In the north of the county, as in the Hawkshead district, however, some rents have fallen 40 per cent, but even there the fall has been checked in the last few years, and, generally, there is if anything an upward tendency. Owing to the losses of capital consequent on bad times the farms in several parts are much ‘run down,’ farmers not being able to afford sufficient labour to cultivate them well. _ Nearly everywhere the farms are taken from 2 February, the outgoing tenant retaining possession of the dwelling-house, buildings, and part of the land until 1 May ; in Lonsdale, land till 14 February, buildings till 12 May ; and yearly agreements are almost universal. Rates have increased in some districts enormously of late years, and there is little sign of any alteration of this growing burden. ; In the country round Ormskirk and between Preston and Southport, rents for tillage and pasture to-day, in the year 1907, average {2 per statute acre. Near Padiham they vary from 155. to as much as {2 10s. per acre; near Prescot arable land fetches 30s. and permanent pasture 605. peracre ; near Kirkham 30s. an acre is the average for both; near Hale 45s. an acre for both, about Lancaster, arable 30s. to 355. pasture 25s. Accommodation land near towns of course brings much higher prices than these. Farm buildings are generally good, though in North and South Lancashire many are old-fashioned and some exceedingly bad ; but there is a great improvement since the days of Caird, and it should be remembered that this improvement has taken place when agriculture has been depressed and under free trade. Lancashire still maintains the reputation for paying high agricultural wages which it has enjoyed since the development of manufactures; carters, waggoners, and shepherds earn from 20s, to 22s. a week, ordinary labourers 175. to 19s., and they all earn extra money in harvest time. Irish itinerants are still extensively employed, especially in harvest time and potato-getting ; but women, fortunately, have almost ceased working in the fields, except perhaps at getting potatoes. The supply of labour, with some exceptions, is generally sufficient, except in harvest, but the quality has everywhere deteriorated, good all-round men who can ditch, thatch, lay a hedge, and who understand stock are becoming rarer and rarer, and the result of education is universally described to be that the young men flock to the towns, a tendency which must have the most serious consequences on the country. The northern portion of the county appears to be worst off for labourers’ cottages, elsewhere the supply is good ; but in many of them the accommodation stands in decided need of improvement. The rents are very high, running from 2s. to as much as 5s. a week, or more than double what they are in many parts of England, a fact that must be considered in relation to the high wages. Allotments, in the usual sense of the word, are rare, many of the labourers’ cottages having gardens, which are far better liked than allotments. The ‘statesman’ class has unfortunately been disappearing with increasing rapidity, and in districts where there were many they are to-day practically extinct, the survivors being most numerous in the northern and north-western parts of the county. ‘The gradual extinction of this hard-working, frugal, and sterling class is much to be regretted. 436 FORESTRY HE mediaeval forests of Lancashire were of moderate extent, covering about forty-seven thousand acres, but the lands included ‘within the metes of the forest’ embraced the fourth part of the whole county, including all Lonsdale south of the little River Keer —except the lordships of Hornby and Whittington—and the whole of Amounderness. In south-west Lancashire the townships which lay to the south-west of a line drawn from Halsall to Warrington were reckoned within the metes of the forest. It seems probable that Roger of Poitou, when he received his northern fief, put into the forest the townships which belonged to his demesne and added those near adjoining, which he afterwards gave to his barons. The region to the north of the Ribble had been devastated immediately before and after the Conquest, and this naturally led to its reservation for the chase. Evidence is not wanting to show that the formation of the forest in the strict meaning of the term was in process for a hundred years after the Conquest. Thus the township of Hoton is named in Domesday as one of the manors then (1086) dependent upon the chief manor of Halton!; it appears no more as manor or vill, but later evidence shows that it was thrown into Quernmore Forest. Again, when Count Roger was forming his South Lancashire forest he arranged an exchange of Jands with the ancestor of Molyneux of Sefton, giving half of Down Litherland in exchange? for Molyneux’s half of Toxteth. Henry II added part of his demesne lands in Hale, and in defiance of right put Croxteth and Simonswood in defense, ousting the rightful owners; whilst his grandson retained them as forest in spite of the verdict of the perambulators in 1228.3 Last of all King John took Smithdown, or Smeedon, and laid it to his forest of Toxteth, giving Thingwall to the former possessor in exchange.4 The dealings of the early lords of the county with their forest lands are illustrated by various grants to religious houses. In 1094 Roger of Poitou gave to St. Martin of Sées tithe of venison, and of the pannage of all his underwoods, and of the produce of his demesne lands. By virtue of this gift we read of the assignment to the vicar of Lancaster, upon the endowment of a vicarage there in 1430, among other profits, of tithes of the agricultural produce of those dwelling in Wyresdale and Bleasdale, tithes of agistment rents in Toxteth, Croxteth, and Simonswood, and of certain Lenten fines of Fulwood, Cadley, and High Park.’ Stephen, when count of Boulogne, gave his forest of Furness and all the venison therein as part of the endowment of the monks whom he established there. This wild region adjoined on the east the even wilder forest region of Kendal, without any fixed boundary intervening. But the year 1163 saw a sworn inquest summoned by the king’s precept and a boundary established which for all time threw Windermere, then a several fishery of the barons of Kendal, into the county of Westmorland.6 A_ few years earlier William earl of Warenne gave the monks of Furness liberty to take timber from his forest of Lancaster for the repair of their fishery in Lune at Lancaster bridge, for which privilege they were frequently called in after years to produce their warrant.’ In 1325 the prescriptive right of the monks to take timber for their buildings at Beaumont, for fuel, and for making and repairing wains, carts, ploughs, harrows, ox-yokes, and hedges was certified by a sworn jury. John, when count of Mortain, granted many privileges within the forests. To his burgesses of Lancaster the right of pasturage in the forest for their cattle to be led out at daybreak and driven home at even, with as much wind-fallen wood for burning and timber for building as they required.® _A similar privilege was accorded to the burgesses of Preston in the forest of Fulwood,’ and to the men of Everton, as regards building material, in the woods of West Derby.'' To the time of Henry II belongs the 1V.C.H. Lancs. i, 2880. ? Lanes. Ing, (Rec. Soc. xviii), 14. 3 Whalley Coucher (Chet. Soc. xi), 372. Halewood was disafforested by Henry III, having been granted to Richard de Meath. 4 Lancs. Ing. (Rec. Soc. xlvili), 21 ; Cal. Close, 1227-31, p. 101. 5 Reg. of Lanc. Priory (Chet. Soc.), 9, 577. § Farrer, Lancs. Pipe R. 310. 7 Ibid. 309 ; Rot. Litt. Claus. (Rec. Com.), i, 2254. ® Reg. of Furness, Add. MSS. 33244, 71. ° Lancs. Pipe R. 416 ; confirmed by the king in 1199 ; Rot. Chart. (Rec. Com.), 26. Plac. de Quo Warr. (Rec. Com.), 3848. " Rot. Litt. Claus, (Rec. Com.), ii, 64. 437 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE royal grant to the leper brethren of St. Leonard’s Hospital in Lancaster of the same privileges of pasturage for cattle in the forest of Lonsdale and of taking timber and wind-fallen wood. By far the most notable concession, and one that conduced to the development of the regions lying adjacent to the forests, was the grant by John, when count of Mortain, to the knights, thegns, and freeholders dwelling in the forest of the honour of Lancaster, i.e. within the metes of the forest, in consideration of £500, of the right to assart and reduce to cultivation their underwoods, to alienate them by gift orsale, and in fact to treat them as part of their fee simple. This was accompanied by a grant of perpetual respite from the forest regard and liberty to keep harriers, foxhounds, and dogs for hunting all manner of beasts except hart and hind, wild boar and sow, and roe deer throughout the forest outside the demesne inclosures or parks."* A glance at the accompanying map will show how large an area of the county and of the best agricultural tracts in it was benefited by this liberal measure. Sufficient knowledge of the forest laws is assumed on the part of the reader to dispense with the necessity of describing the restricted conditions of life and agriculture within the forests before this concession. On 16 February, 1225, Robert Grelley and Richard de Copeland were assigned as justices to make the perambulation of the forest in this county with the aid of twelve liege knights in accordance with the tenor of the king’s charter, whereby he had granted that all woodlands were to be disafforested—except his own demesne woodlands—which had been afforested by Kings Henry II, Richard, and John. A few months later, notwithstanding the clause in the royal charter requiring the magnates of the realm to act towards their dependants in this respect as the king was acting towards his, it became necessary for Henry to sharply remind several magnates of the county of this provision in response to the complaint of certain under-tenants in South Lancashire that their superior lords were retaining moorlands and woodlands as forest which had been afforested within the restricted period.™ Three years later a new perambulation was ordered to be made, the persons who had taken part in the former proceedings having made representation that their first perambulation had been irregular and unfair to the crown; but having declared that the error had been committed in ignorance, the trespass was excused.’® By the new perambulation the forest area was reduced to the following localities :— QuERNMORE, with an area of 6,789 acres, extending north and south from Lune to the summit of Clougha, and east and west from Escow Brook and Hawksdean to the Earl’s-gate, the ancient highway which led from the south-east through the Trough of Bowland to the town of Lancaster. Before the time of John count of Mortain this forest probably included Littledale, lying to the east below the summit of Clougha and High Stephen’s Head, formerly Stevenseat, and part of Roeburndale as far down as Outhwaite. The area of these would be not less than 9,000 acres. BLEasDALE, extending from Grizedale to Parlick Pike and from Calder Head and Ulfsty (on Fair Snape Fell) against the forest of Bowland, to Senesty, an ancient track which led from Chipping to Galloway-gate, now Galgate. This region contains 7,298 acres. Futwoop (2,117 acres) lying in the valley of the River Savok, and extending from Cowford bridge on the west to Grimsargh on the east, almost wholly on the north side of the Roman road, the Ughtred’s-gate apparently of the perambulation. ToxtetH, of about 3,600 acres, extending along the northern bank of the Mersey from Otterspool down to the Haskell’s Brook of the perambulation, a stream long lost amid the blocks and docks of Liverpool city, and inland up to Smithdown Road. To these were added the underwoods of West Derby, all of which save Croxteth (960 acres) were soon disafforested ; and Burtonwood (4,193 acres), which became at a later period a highly valued adjunct of the Botilers’ demesne of Warrington. Upper WyrESDALE was not included in the perambulation because it was given on 17 July, 1228, to Hubert de Burgh earl of Kent. He only enjoyed a brief possession of it, and falling into In 1220 the brethren complained bitterly of Roger Gernet’s harshness and wrongdoing to them as chief forester in not permitting them to enjoy their liberties in the forest and in exacting from them an ox for winter and a cow for summer pasturage. In response to their petition the king promptly ordered the restoration of their full liberties; Rot. Litt, Claus. (Rec. Com.), i, 4144, ii, 1316; Cal. Close, 1227-31, pp. 182, 195. 'S Lancs, Pipe R. 418. A further £200 was paid with all arrears for a confirmation of this grant in 1199. “ Cal. Pat. 1216-25, p. 570. John de Lamare was offending in this respect against Adam de Bury in regard to the wood and moor of Shuttleworth, near Bury ; John constable of Chester against Adam de Radcliffe in regard to the wood and moor of Oswaldtwistle ; and Robert Grelley against Henry de Bolton and Thomas de Burnhull in regard respectively to the woods and moors of Heaton under Horwich and Anderton ; ibid. 576. * Ibid. 1225-32, p. 184. In 1226 Roger Gernet the chief forester and Vivian his brother were appealed by certain persons for the death of Hugh de Wyresdale, in malice so they averred, because Roger had declared that the perambulation in those parts had not been rightly made; Ror. Litt. Claus. (Rec. Com.), ii, 163. 438 FORESTRY disgrace in 1232 did not recover it when two years later he obtained again the lordship of Hornby which he had also temporarily lost. From that date Upper Wyresdale continued to form part of the royal forest. It has an area of 17,319 acres. MyerscoucH had belonged to the demesne of the hundred of Amounderness which John count of Mortain gave to Theobald Walter before 1194, when King Richard regranted it to Theobald with the forest of Amounderness, the venison and all pleas of the forest, except pleas of the crown.” It is not clear when it was incorporated in the royal forest, but evidently before 1249, when accounts of the issues of the forests of Wyresdale, Lonsdale, and Amounderness were rendered.’® It extends to 2,707 acres. This petambulation of the forest ® remained unchallenged down to 1277, when it was renewed. In 1298 it was again renewed.” Early forest proceedings in the county are illustrated in the Pipe Rolls. In 1170 the county proffered 200 marks for respite from the regard of the forest.22_ In 1175, as the result of the eyre of the forest justices, the county owed £93 135. 4d. for waste of the forest, riddings made therein and other pleas. In 1178 amercements of one mark or less were due from thirteen persons, mostly clergy, for trespass against the forest, and two years later the archdeacon of Chester owed £5 under the same heading.?? In 1180 the county proffered £78 135. 4d. and again in 1185 fifty marks to have respite from pleas of the forest.* In 1186 the men of Lancaster, that is of the county, who dwelt within the forest, gave fifty marks for respite from the forest regard,” whilst persons were amerced for keeping dogs contrary to the assize of the forest, for having cows in the forest, and for offences against the vert.*® Two years later Stephen de Walton, parson of Walton on the Hill, was amerced one mark for making a lodge in the forest.” In 1219 a forest eyre was made in twenty-two counties and places. In Lancashire William Butler of Warrington, Alan de Pennington, Michael le Fleming of Furness, Henry de Redman of Levens, and William de Thornton, clerk, were commissioned to make inquiry at Lancaster from the octave to the quindene of Peter and Paul the Apostles, by the oath of the verderers and foresters of fee what riddings (essarta) had been made and sown with corn in the county since the king’s coronation without permit, by whom, by whose authority, and by whom held; the number of acres, by whom sown, and the value of each sowing. And the same inquiry was to be made of riddings not yet sown, and whether they formerly bore heavy wood or coppice wood; and also as to riddings made in the woods of the crown demesne and in the woods of other persons. The commissioners were further directed to take all such riddings into the king’s hand and put to sureties those who had assarted them, for their appearance before the chief justice of the forest on the morrow of the Assumption. Mandates were also sent to the verderers and foresters to assist in the proceedings. In December, 1222, a great storm burst over England which caused enormous destruction in the forests. On 26 December mandates were sent to the verderers and foresters of forty-five forests throughout England, including that of Lancaster, to view the wind-fallen timber, to appraise it, and to stay removal of the same and of all fallen limbs until the receipt of further instructions. Early in 1224 letters close were sent to the sheriff to summon all foresters and regarders for the election of new officers to complete their number, and to elect twelve knights to view trespasses done in the forest, preparatory to the advent of the forest justice to those parts.*° In 1228 Roger Gernet, forester in fee of the king’s forest in the county, obtained a confirmation of the custody of the forest without interference of the sheriff for a yearly farm of £12, for which he and his ancestors had formerly paid £10 ;* and the year following the inhabitants of the forest were confirmed in the possession of the liberties granted to them by John count of Mortain, and confirmed in 1199.” In preparation for a forest eyre in 1231 the sheriff of Lancaster was directed on 20 April to summon the lords spiritual and temporal, the abbots, priors, knights and free tenants dwelling within the metes of the forest to appear at Lancaster upon a day to be assigned by the justices of the forest to come to pleas of the forest ; and from each vill within the metes of the forest to summon four men with the reeve and the foresters of those vills ; and also all men dwelling outside the forest who sued pleas of the forest and those 6 Cal. Chse, 1227-31, p. 68 ; Cal. Pat. 1232-47, p. 73. In Cal. of Chart. R. 1226-57, p. 79, the grant to the earl is incorrectly calendared as a ‘charter disafforesting the valley of Wyresdale.’ ” Y.C.H. Lancs. i, 3523; Farrer, Lancs. Pipe R. 81. ® Lancs. Ing. (Rec. Soc. xlvili), 170. 19 Lancs. Pipe R. 4203; Cal Close, 1227-31, p. 103. Cal, Pat. 1272-81, p. 237 3 Cah Close, 1296-1302, p. 191. " Lancs. Pipe R. 16. 2 Tbid. 27. * Ibid. 38, 41. * Ibid. 42, 55. % Ibid. 60, 67. *6 Thid. 60. *” Ibid. 68. °8 Cal. Pat. 1216-25, pp. 211-18. Lands reclaimed by the knights and freemen of the county within their own demesne woods were to be left in their possession in accordance with John’s carta de foresta. 9? Ibid. 360-2. *® Ibid. 482. 31 Cal. Chart. R. i, 68. ® Ibid. 93. 439 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE who had been attached for the forest ; also all the foresters and verderers of his bailiwick, that they should have there all their attachments both of vert and of venison which had arisen since the last pleas of the forest and were not yet ended, and also the regarders of his bailiwick that they should have there all their regards (or reviews) sealed with their seals, and the agisters, that they should be there with their agistment rolls. In 1237 Roger Gernet was directed to deliver 100 oak trees in his bailiwick near Lancaster to William de Lancaster for the work then in progress upon Lancaster Castle.*4 The year follow- ing the king found it necessary to address letters to the sheriff directing attention to the abuse of the royal charter permitting earls and barons to take one beast of the chase in the royal forests when going to the king at the royal summons, in that they were taking beasts of the chase when not summoned by the king and sometimes lingering three and four days hunting in the royal forests. Instructions were therefore given to make proclamation in boroughs and markets prohibiting this abuse of the royal favour.*® Deer seem to have been plentiful at this time, before the con- version of the forests to stock-breeding uses. In 1244 the chief forester had a mandate to permit William de Lancaster to take thirty harts in Wyresdale for the king’s use.*® In 1245 representation was made by Roger Gernet that having of his own will resigned to the king the herbage and pannage of the forest of Wyresdale in the same state as Hubert de Burgh had held it in order that vaccaries might be made there, also honey, nuts, and half the eyries of hawks there, retaining the other moiety, so that he and his heirs should keep the eyries for the king’s use, and also retaining the attachments of the forest and the issues, dead wood, cablish, pasturage of the herbage, and common of mast-fall for his own cattle and swine and those of his men dwelling near the forest, the rent of £12 was still exacted from him contrary to the king’s intention. The sheriff was therefore directed to summon twelve knights to ascertain the value of the profits which Roger retained, and to certify the barons of the Exchequer in that behalf. The return has not been pre- served, but the following issues were returned in 1248 for the preceding eighteen months :— nd. Of herbage, pannage, cock-glades, and smithies in Wyresdale, Lonsdale, and Amounderness . : , , F : . : é : » 13:15 6 Of pleas and perquisites of the same forests. ; : . fi : - 417 8 Of 8 vaccaries put to farm for one whole year : : . : B - 28 6 8 Of the milk of cows. 3 : : - ‘ - é a - eo. “Zag 6 Of 87 oxen of four years old sold : : i : : : é - 34 16 0 Of 45 poor cows sold . ‘ Io 5 6 Of bulls sold 30s. ; hides of 6 cows, I bullocks, 4 heifers ‘and 13 stirks, aus. 24d. 211 2b showing that the forests were now being dealt with for profit and not for the pleasures of the chase alone.” In 1252 the stock-keepers were reported to be very poor and inefficient, their places being taken by more competent men.** This year the king granted permission to the burgesses of Preston to plough within a purpresture, ascertained by inquest to contain 324 acres, which the burgesses had made beneath the covert of Fulwood by the stream of Eavesbrook at Ribbleton Scales to where that stream falls into the water of Savock and thence to the old ditch which formed the boundary between Preston and Tulketh.*® In 1251 the knights and free tenants of the county holding lands within the metes of the forest gave {100 to be heard before the king touching certain articles, whereof they claimed liberties by charters of the king’s predecessors.*° This fine was probably connected with the issue of instruc- tions in March, 1250, addressed to the sheriffs with reference to the taking of the regard of the forest. Inquiries were directed to be made of all riddings (essarta) made after the commencement of the second year of the king’s first coronation ; of purprestures made in the woods, or outside, in launds, heathy grounds, marshes, turbaries, pools, vivaries, fences, ditches, and glebes ; of purprestures of arable land ; of houses and buildings and inclosures ; of all waste of the woods 3; of all stumps of oak and beech trees in the king’s demesne woods, and of the deterioration of those woods ; of the strict keeping of the king’s demesne hays, where no one was allowed to have common right 3 of eyries of goshawks, sparrow-hawks, and falcons; of forges and mines; of the seaports where vessel ply for the carriage of timber; of honey ; of those having bows, arrows, crossbows, brachets or harriers or any other engine for ill-doing in the king’s forests, and of the vills which came or came not at the call of the foresters, when they proclaimed malefactors in the king’s forests.41. The regard of 12 51 was 8 Cal. Close, 1227-31, p. 585. a * Ibid. 22 Hen. tir a jee 12d, 2 ae iy ara weed “ K.R. Memo. R. 29 Hen. III, m. 3¢. ; Lancs. Ing. (Rec. Soc. xlviii), 170. eee ** Close, 36 Hen. III, m. 26. * Duchy of Lanc. Forest Proc. bdle. 1, No. 17, m. 2d. Sa. © Pipe R. 35 Hen. III, m. 16. " Close, 34 Hen. III, No. 64, m. 144. 440 FORESTRY probably followed by forest pleas held in 1255,‘ the only reference to which as regards Lancashire is the mention of a few amercements of men and vills imposed by John de Lexington in the Pipe Roll of 41 Henry III (1257). In the sheriff’s accounts of that year is the record of a charge of one mark for the cost of salting and conveying twenty hinds and ten harts taken in the forest of Lancaster to the king at Chester. In 1251, whilst William de Ferrers, earl of Derby, held the land between Ribble and Mersey, he applied for leave to hold pleas of the forest in his forest there.“* In response the king directed Geoffrey de Langley, the justice of the forest, to inquire whether the earl possessed such liberty, or whether the men of that forest ought to sue pleas of the forest at Lancaster, and if it was ascertained that the earl had this liberty, to hold pleas of the forest, so that they should not be prejudicial to the king.“® There is no record, so far as is known, of the inquiry into this matter, but on 25 July, in the same year, pleas of the forest were summoned before Langley at Lancaster, upon a day to be by him appointed.4”7 On 3 December following, the sheriff was instructed to levy 300 marks from the eyre of the justices who had been recently holding pleas of the forest in his county, and to deliver 200 marks of this sum to those in charge of the works at Freemantle in Hampshire, and 100 marks to the king’s wardrobe.*® The rolls contain other evidence of the activity at this time of the justices of the forest in the record of a fine of 20 marks paid by Thomas de Copemanwray for recovery of his bailiwick in the forest of Lancaster.4? In July, 1252, Langley was instructed to find in a com- petent place in the forest of Lancaster for those in charge of the work at Lancaster old stunted trees not fit for timber (rebora) to make a pile of wood (regus), and oak trees to make the timber needful for joists and for the repair of four small towers in Lancaster castle, an account to be kept by tally of the number of oak trees taken between those in charge of the work and the verderers and for- esters.°° About the same time Langley was directed to supply 30 oak trees for the repair of Lan- caster bridge, and 20 more fallen trees, if he could find so many suitable ones in the forest. A similar order was given in 1260 for delivery of 50 oak trees, suitable for timber, to the Preaching Friars at Lancaster for the erection of their buildings there ; °? and of 5 oak trees in Sydwode in the king’s forest of Lancaster to the Friars Minor of Preston for the construction of their buildings there. The following year orders were given to the justice of the forest beyond Trent for delivery of as much timber from the forest of Lancaster as might be needful for the repair of the keep of Lancaster, which was then greatly in need of repair.*4 For the two years 1256 to 1258, pannage and herbage of the forests of Wyresdale, Lonsdale, and Amounderness yielded £14 12s. 1}d., pleas and perquisites £8 18s. 2d.; a smithy in Wyres- dale for the last half of 1257 yielded 125. 134. ; 8} vaccaries for the 3 years ending at Michaelmas, 1258 yielded £85 ; and the sale of 3 bulls, 252 oxen, 73 cows, and the hides of 11 oxen, 33 cows, 13 bullocks and heifers yielded £94 55. 2d.° In November, 1258, the sheriff was commanded to draft 6 score of the young oxen and cows from the vaccaries which William de Bussay had caused to be established in Wyresdale, or from the vaccaries of William de Valence, for delivery to the royal larder at Westminster before the feast of St. Nicholas (6 December).*° In June, 1266, the king granted to his second son Edmund, commonly called Crouchback, the Lancashire possessions of Robert de Ferrers, earl of Derby, including the earl’s forest between Ribble and Mersey,” and in June of the following year conferred the county and honour of Lancaster upon his son, and all his demesnes in the county, including the vaccaries and forests of Wyresdale and Lonsdale.® By these grants the royal forests of Lancashire became vested in a *? Select Pleas of the Forest (Selden Soc. xiii), p. 1. ® Pip: R. 41 Hen. III, m. 18. “In Selden Soc. xiii, p. cxii earl Robert de Ferrers is erroneously said to have applied for this permission. © Close, 35 Hen. III, No. 65, m. 7 2. 46 A writ of praecipe directed to William de Ferrers early in 1253 directing him to restore to Benedict Gernet the office of forester (/orestaria) of the earl’s forest between Ribble and Mersey, of which Roger Gerent his father was seised at his death, or to appear before the justices at Westminster, to answer for his default, suggests that the earl was not in possession of the liberty which he desired. Close R. 37 Hen. III, No. 67, m. 20d. This view is strengthened by the occurrence in the roll of pleas held before the justices in eyre in 1263 of two complaints brought by Robert de Ferrers against a number of persons for entering his forest between Ribble and Mersey and taking his game, and against a lady for receiving two of the suspected trespassers. Lancs. Assize R. (Rec. Soc. xlvii), 122. 7 Close, 35 Hen. III, No. 65, m. 8 2. “Tbid. 36 Hen. III, No. 66, m. 29. “Tbid. m. 15. ®° Tbid. m. 8. 51 Thid. Tbid. 44 Hen. III, No. 79, m. 3. ® Ibid. m. 1, 54 Tbid. 45 Hen. IIL No. 81, m. 9. > Lancs. Ing. (Rec. Soc. xlviii), 221. 58 Close, 43 Hen. III, m. 15. 57 Chart. R. 51 Hen. III, No. 78, m. 4. 538 Ibid. 51 Hen. III, No. 78, m. 4. From presentments made in 1286 it appears that when the county passed from the crown to Edmund of Lancaster, William de Valence had held 3 vaccaries in Bleasdale for 5 years, worth {10a year, and William le Latimer, the elder, had received yearly for the same period from 8 vaccaries. 2 441 56 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE subject of the king, thereby ceasing to be under the jurisdiction of the forest laws and becoming merely free chases.*? This is clearly seen in the records of the forest eyre in 15 Edward I, 1286, held at Lancaster by three justices who had been recently appointed to hold pleas of the forest beyond Trent.” The roll of this eyre only contains reference to those offences which had been committed since the eyre of 1263, and previous to the grants of 1266 and 1267.91 The justices had no concern with offences committed within the forest since it had passed out of the king’s hand. Many persons were indicted for killing the deer and other game. Some had died since the commission of the offence, some could not be found, those who appeared were usually amerced a mark or 20s. The knights and free tenants dwelling in the forest precincts gave £100 for confirmation of their charter of liberties, but the justices were not fully assured as to the continued effect of the charter of John, count of Mortain, because the knights and free tenants having lands within the metes of the forest had been called to account at the last eyre of the forest, before Robert de Nevill and his fellows, touching hays raised within the metes of the forest, and for the possession of bows and arrows in their houses and for carrying them outside the king’s demesne hays and for not having elected regarders, nor having caused them to be elected, and for taking buck and doe and claiming to take the same in the forest outside the king’s demesne hays. Consequently they directed that a sworn verdict should be obtained from a jury of twenty-four men of the county. ‘The verdict was to the effect that since the grant of the charter of liberties the knights and free tenants dwelling within the metes of the forest, when called in question touching the privileges claimed, had always departed without redemption, that is, had been acquitted. Although the proceedings recorded in the roll relate to matters arising before the grant to Edmund, earl of Lancaster, a regard of the earl’s forest was also ordered by the king’s letters close, this being immediately followed by a writ of summons of an eyre for pleas of the forest in a month after Easter, 1287, and by the appointment of two justices in eyre of the forest of Lancashire for the period since the grant of the honour and county to Earl Edmund. ‘The permission to have justices to hold pleas of the forest, according to the assize of the forest, in the forest which had passed to a subject by the grant of Henry III, was contained in the king’s letters patent to Edmund, his brother, dated 25 May, 1285. Thus by the stroke of a pen the whole body of forest laws was enforced over a forest in the hands of a subject of the crown.” In 1271 the earl gave to Lancaster Priory liberty to take wind-fallen wood for fuel daily from the forest of Lancaster, except in Wyresdale, with two carts and four horses. Four years later the king sent Roger Lestrange to take venison in his brother Earl Edmund’s chase of Liverpool, that is in Toxteth, and the sheriff was directed to aid Roger in taking ten harts there and to deliver them salted at Westminster within a week after Michaelmas. By agreement with those having pasturage and estovers in the forest of Quernmore, the earl in 1278 inclosed a park five leagues in circuit in a place called Hoton, clearly the place named in Domesday, and brought to cultivation forty acres of land ina place called Starkethwaite, probably the modern Scarthwaite, near Caton. Ascompensation for the loss of pasturage the earl granted to the burgesses of Lancaster right of way through Scarthwaite toa place called Strehokes and Le Lythe with their carts and cattle, and liberty to pasture their cattle in the forest day and night without any payment for agistment, and if their cattle by chance entered the park for lack of pasture they were not to be impounded. ‘The year following William de Catherton pledged himself to the earl that he would commit no trespass against the earl’s venison, nor countenance such, under pain to forfeit £20 for each offence, and John de Caton gave a in Wyresdale 5 marks a year from each, 60s. a year from the pastores holding vaccaries for the pasturage of their cattle, 1005. a year for inferior beasts drafted from the stock, 20s. a year for the escape of cattle belonging to the pastores, {20 a year for oxen sold from the stock, a mark yearly for hides of cattle which died of murrain, and Sos. a year for aged cows which calved late ; or a totalsum of £311. 15. 8d., for which William le Latimer the younger ought to answer ; Duchy of Lanc. Forest Proc. 1-7, m. 2. * At Christmas, 1280, Robert Banastre and Ranulf de Dacre were pardoned by the king for trespasses committed in the Lancashire forest of Edmund the king’s brother ; Cal. Pat. 1272-81, p. 406. © Cal. Close, 1279-88, p. 436; Cal. Pat. 1281-92, p. 252. * Duchy of Lanc. Forest Proc. bdle. i, No. 7, heading. * Ibid. m. 2. § Cal. Chose, 1279-88, Pp. 472. Roger Brabazon and William Wyther were appointed at the request of Edmund, the king’s brother, justices in eyre of the forest in the co. of Lanc. for the period since the said Edmund had held the said forest by the grant of Henry III. Ca/. Pat. 1281-92, p. 263. Cal. Pat. 1281-92, p. 167. The grant provides that he and his heirs should upon request made in the Chancery have justices to hear and determine pleas of the forest as often as trespasses in his chases and baie make it requisite ; and that the redemptions, fines, and amercements shall go to the said Edmund and 1s heirs. _ _ Select Pleas of the Forest (Selden Soc. xiii,), cxi. There is in the P.R.O. a roll of trespasses of venison in the forest of Lancaster, 20 to 24 Edw. I, Forest Proc. Exch. T.R. Lancs. No. 48. “© Reg. of Lanc. Priory (Chetham Soc.), 30. " Cal. Close, 12 ® Reg. of Furness, Add. MSS. 33244, fol. 836. es 442 FORESTRY similar pledge. In 1297, after the earl’s death, four persons were appointed to assemble the foresters and verderers of the forest in the county and to supervise the perambulation of the forest as it was made in the time of Henry III. The attachments of the forest made from the 18th to the 35th year of Edward I, 1290 to 1307, are recorded in a roll preserved in the Public Record Office.” "They relate to offences against vert and venison. About Christmas time, 13155 John de Hornby the younger entered Quernmore forest and was found by the earl’s forester in the thickness of the wood half a mile from the highway ready to shoot at the deer where they were wont to disport themselves. On his refusal to surrender, either shot at the other, but finally the forester took Hornby and lodged him in Lancaster Castle, where he was detained until he satisfied Earl Thomas for the trespass by a fine of 100s.” In 1320 Thomas of Lancaster gave the keepership of the forests to Robert de Holand.” A few months after the earl’s attainder and death, the king’s huntsman, lardener, two berners, four veutrers, and a page with twenty greyhounds and forty staghounds were sent to hunt in the late earl’s forests, parks, and chases in Lancashire to take fat venison, which was to be put into barrels and salted ready for the king’s use.’ Apart from the requirements of the royal household this order seems to have been given in view of the recent Scottish raid and the unsettled state of the northern shires. For some time after the earl’s execution there appears to have been much trespassing in the forests and chases and destruction of game, timber, and fish. Several commissions to try offenders were issued during the year 1323,’ and again in 1328, when the executors of the late earl complained that many hundreds of head of horses, cattle, and sheep had been driven away by malefactors (mainly in fact by the Scots, under Bruce) from the vaccaries and demesne lands in north-east Lancashire—Bleasdale, Wyresdale, and Lonsdale.” After the forfeiture of 1322 the men of the county petitioned the king in Parliament for a confirmation of their liberties in the forest.” In Earl Edmund’s time there were two parks in Quernmore Forest where twelve mares and their issue of three years could be sustained in addition to the deer, agistment was worth 303s. sale of wood Ios., and fines for cattle that strayed into the forest 20s. In Wyresdale there were twenty-one vaccaries, where 360 cows could be kept and 720 cattle agisted, yielding £18 for such agistment.”® In 1314 fifteen vaccaries had been put to farm at rents amounting to over £20, whilst nine vaccaries held stock numbering seven bulls, 288 cows, and 311 young cattle.” After the incur- sion of the Scots at Midsummer, 1322, when the earl’s stock was driven away, the whole of the vaccaries were put to farm for a term of seven years as follows :—In Wyresdale the vaccaries of Swanshead 26s. 84., Catshaw 20s., Grobroke (? Greavebrook) 15s., Hawthornthwaite 15s., Hindshaw 20s., Marshaw 20s., Little Gilbertholme 15s., Over Gilbertholme (Gilberton) 16s. Dunnokshagh (Dunkinshaw) 65. 8¢., Mikel-legh 205., Litel-ley 15s., Emodes (Emmetts) 155., the abbey (Abbeystead) 215., Whiteriding 20s., Lentworth 15;., Calvelegh (Caw) 145., Overtonhargh (Ortner) 15s., Greenbank 26s. 8d., Harapultre (Appletree) 30s., Routandbrok (Rowton Brook) 145., Ternebrok (Tarn Brook) 13s. 4d. Sum £18 16s. 4d. In Bleasdale, the vaccaries of Blindhurst 12s., Haselheued 30s., Fairsnape 165., the Brokes 8s., the pasture between Kaldir and Grizedale ros. Sum 76s.%° In 1314 strict account was kept of the oaks taken during the year from Quernmore Forest where thirty-two were felled between Lune and the new park, one in the old park, and six in Fulwood. Of these five were for repairing Lune Mill, four for the repair of the fish weir in Lune belonging to Furness, nine for the repair of the palings of the old and new parks of Quernmore, and thirteen were delivered to Robert de Holand, knt., for his new house in course of erection in Lancaster. During the year nine harts, two hinds, seven bucks of grease, four does, and one roe-deer were taken by the master forester, William de Hornby, for the use of the earl and for delivery to his friends.®! In 1323 a report was made by William de Tatham, keeper of the forfeited lands of Thomas of Lancaster, of the timber trees which might be felled and sold in the woods under his charge without making destruction. In Hale, oaks to the value of 100s. standing in arable ® Duchy of Lanc. Great Coucher, i, fol. 75. ” Cal. Pat. 1292-1301, pp. 312, 323. ” Duchy of Lanc. Forest Proc. bdle, 1. No. 12 ™ Coram Rege R. 254, Rex, m. 36. ® Cal. Pat. 1317-21, p. 431. ™ Cal. Close, 1310-23, p. 576. ” Cal. Pat. 1321-4, pp. $4, 160, 374. There isin the P.R.O. a roll of pleas of the forest of Amounderness, and an inquest at Kirkham, 12-19 Edw. II. Forest Proc. Exch. T. R. No. 49. ® Cal. Pat. 1327-30, p. 283; 1330-4, pp. 284, 573; 1334-8, p. 452. It wasalleged that 300 horses, 300 mares, 300 foals, 200 cows, and 1,000 sheep, worth £1,500, had been driven away. 7 Parl. R. 18 Edw. I, i, 4214. ® Lancs. Ing. (Rec. Soc. xlviii), 290. ® Tbid. liv, 26, 30. ®° Thid. 5% Tbid. 29. 443 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE ground and bearing neither fruit nor leaves might be sold; in Croxteth and Simonswood of ten marks ; in Toxteth dead wood to the value of 40s.; in Fulwood of five marks and more if the king willed it; in the forest and park of Quernmore of ten marks or more, but if so in part destruction of the forest; in the park of Myerscough and outside to the value of 405. At the rate of one shilling apiece for fair timber trees the number which might be felled over some 15,000 acres without causing waste amounted to about 500, a very insignificant number, pointing to exhaustion of the supply of timber. During the Scottish war between David and Balliol in 1333, and again before the expected invasion in the autumn of 1345, the Lancashire forests and wastes afforded a place of refuge for some of the people of Northumberland with their flocks and herds.* On 12 June, 1334, the king appointed justices in eyre to hold pleas of the forest of Henry, earl of Lancaster, in that county, from the time when Edmund, late earl of Lancaster, last held pleas there by virtue of the grant of Edward I. ‘The proceedings, which extended over two years, are recorded in a roll preserved in the Public Record Office. Claims to have free parks were put in by Thomas de Lathom, for his park in Lathom ; and for two parks in Tarbock, in the latter cases as guardian of the daughters and heirs of Richard de Tarbock; John de Harington for his park in Thurnham and Cockerham; and Ralph de Dacre for his park without a deer-leap in Over Kellet. The prior of Lancaster claimed the right to take two cart-loads of dead fallen wood for fuel daily throughout the year in the forest of Lancaster, except in Wyresdale, tithe of venison and of pannage of the earl’s underwoods. The burgesses of Preston claimed to have in the forest wood for burning and for building by the view of the foresters, and common of pasture for their cattle without payment of agistment nor imparkment of the cattle if they strayed even into Quernmore Park.*® The abbot of Furness claimed timber in the forest for nine houses in his manor of Beaumont, and for his fishery at Lancaster.’ The knights, thegns, and free tenants living in the forest gave 200 marks that their charter might be in no wise diminished, but they disclaimed all right of hunting buck and doe. Various other claims to pasturage, pannage, estovers, and similar privileges were claimed and apparently substantiated by several individuals, There is a long list of presentments by the jurors of persons who had entered the forest at various dates between 1288 and 1334, and had taken game ; many of them could not be found, others had been mainprised, but their amercements are not recorded. During the first half of the reign of Edward III there was great activity in keeping the forests, and in the presentment of offences against vert and venison.®* In the forest eyre of 1336, before William Basset and Robert de Hungerford, Robert de Holand, knt., claimed to be forester of fee in the forest of Lancaster between Keer and Mersey. The following year Thurstan de Holand, parson of Preston, was presented for having had forty wether sheep pasturing in Fulwood for two years ; he escaped with the payment of a fine of half a mark.” At ne death of Henry, earl of Lancaster, in 1346, the issues of the forests were returned as under: — a The herbage of Quernmore Park . The herbage of outlying woods Turbary . . ; f Mill-stones : : ‘ Dead and wind-fallen wood . Iron mines in Wyresdale_. . : : s ‘ 3 Perquisites of Woodmotes there and in Myerscough and Fulwood Honey and wax . . ‘ : : 3 : Pannage of swine uncertain. o00OO ON Aw emoowmododocoanh NOW nD= OO DS * Duchy of Lanc. Misc. 10-15. * Cal. Close, 1333-7, p. 101 ; 1343-6, p. 661. “ Thid, 1333-7, p- 237 3 Cal. Pat. 1334-8, pp. 4, 261. pwr oe * Duchy of Lanc. Forest Proc. bdle. 1, No. 17. * The estovers and common of pasture are elsewhere stated to have been in Fulwood. Ibid. m. 2d. *’ By the grant of William de Warenne, count of Boulogne. Cal. Chart. R. i, 374. * Amongst the rolls of Forest Proc. Exch. T. R., the following may be noted :—Inquest and attachments 2-12 Edw. III (No. 50) ; Inquests of the forests, g Edw. III (No. 51) ; Pleas of the forest and claims to liberties therein, 10 Edw. II (No. 52); Pleas of the forest in Lonsdale, Amounderness, and [West] Derbyshire, 12-5 Edw. III (No. 53) ; and 16-17 Edw. III (No 54) ; attachments of the forest of Derby- shire, 17-28 Edw. III (No. 55), and 6 other rolls (Nos. 56--61). Amongst original inquisitions is that for Lancs. in 11 Edw. III (No. 304) ; and amongst Forest Proc. Exch. K. R., there are rolls of proceedings at the Court of Justice Seat for Lancs. 8-9 Edw. III (bdle. 1, No. 47); of the eyre of 10 Edw. III (No. 48) ; and of the perambulation of Amounderness, 11 Edw. III (No. 49). nye * Duchy of Lanc. Great Coucher, i, 117. © Ibid. 125. i Add. MSS. 32103, fol. 148. 444 FORESTRY La a Twelve persons held tenements nigh Myrescough and Fulwood, subject to the usual restrictions against cultivation and high fences, with liberty to take timber for building and making low hedges, paying rents amounting to over £30 and worth much more; one tenant had to find a parker at 1¢. a day and to maintain the pales of Myerscough Park, another had licence to take ‘ wodekoks.’ The herbage of Myerscough 8 0 Oo The herbage of Hornby a 4.0 0 Wind-fallen wood o 4 0 In Wyresdale and Bleasdale twenty- -six vaccaries ies yielded rents aneantine to C 100, and there were also ten messuages containing 180 acres let by agreement for £18 and worth {21. Toxteth park, having a circuit of 5 leagues, was worth in herbage. 17 0 0 Mast-fall and wind-fallen wood and branches felled for the sustenance of the deer there were not valued. The pasture of Smithdown was put to farm for. : Oo FO Croxteth Park, said to have a circuit of 4 leagues, was worth in “herbage . « § 6 8 In March, 1359, an eyre of the forest of Henry, duke of Lancaster, was made,” and many presentments of trespasses against vert and venison committed between 1342 and 1358 are recorded on the roll of proceedings preserved in the Public Record Office.* There are numerous present- ments against persons for keeping sheep and goats in the forest, animals which were not com- monable there at any time, and for keeping swine at other than pannage time. ‘Taking venison with greyhounds was becoming an offence of more frequent occurrence. Several persons were presented for taking oaks, crab trees, and ‘holyn’ in Croxteth Park and Simonswood, but there are few references to offences against the vert elsewhere. No amercements are recorded, but eight persons of importance in the county were pardoned during 1359 for trespasses done in the forest,” and the freeholders dwelling within the forest paid a fine of £1,000 for trespass against the assize of the forest, of which sum the men and freeholders of Quernmore Forest, and the natives of Lonsdale contributed 520 marks for their portion.® Again in 1368 a commission was directed to John Knyvet and four others appointing them justices in eyre to hold pleas of the forest in this county.® In 1372 Walter de Urswick, then chief forester of Bowland, was appointed warden of Roeburndale, ‘a place of wood and pasture’ which lay midway between the Duke of Lancaster’s forests of Quernmore and Bowland. Advantage was being taken of the situation of this valley by people of the country to hunt the duke’s deer as soon as they entered the valley from the adjoining forests, so much so that the duke’s ‘savagin ’ was like to be utterly destroyed.” The same year the forester was ordered to repair the pales of Quernmore Park, to deliver a couple of bucks of grease to Ralph D’Ipres, seneschal of Lonsdale and Amounderness, John Botiler, knt., and others, and six oaks from Myerscough which the duke was willing to sell for timber to William de Hornby, clerk, whose house had been recently burnt down; and the next year to deliver to Mr. Ralph de Ergham, the duke’s chancellor, four oak trees from Fulwood with bark and branches to make pales around his chapel of ‘Sainte Marie Magdaleyne of Preston in Amondrenesse.’ ** In 1374 the prior of Lytham had three oak trees from Myerscough Park, and Ralph D’Ipres, parker of Quernmore, was ordered to take there six bucks (deymes) of grease for distribution among the people of the country ‘according as may seem to him best for the honour and advantage of our lord.’*° A similar order was given to Walter de Urswick, forester of Bowland, to take there as many deer as seemed to him profitable for distribution among the people of that country. The previous year six score oak trees were sold to John Ermyte of Singleton for the eonsteucHen of the bridge over Lune in the town of Lancaster, to be taken in the duke’s woods of Wyresdale. Good timber appears to have been abundant in Lonsdale at this time, for in 1377 the keeper of Quernmore had instructions to fell 260 oaks within the foreign or outlying woods there, for the repair of Lancaster castle. In 1379 additional verderers were appointed for the hundreds of West Derby, Amounderness, and Lonsdale ; in 1387 for Quernmore and Wyresdale, and again in 1401 for Quernmore.) % The justices were appointed by the duke on 24 January, 1359; Dep. Keeper’s Rep. xxxii, App. 338. % Duchy of Lanc. Forest Proc. bdle. 1, No. 20. 4 Dep. Keeper's Rep. xxxii, App. 338-45. ® Ibid. 347. % Pat. 42 Edw. III, pt. 1, m. 9 4. % Duchy of Lanc. Misc. Bks. xl, 734. Adam de Hoghton, chief forester of Quernmore, and the sheriff were ordered to arrest all ‘ill doers and sons of iniquity’ hunting without licence ; ibid. 150. 8 Ibid. 153, 1634, 194. ® Ibid. 209, 2114. © Thid. 190. 11 Dep. Keeper's Rep. xxxii, App. 349. 1 Thid. 352, 360; xxxiil, 2. 445 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE A considerable revenue was now received from the letting of pasturage. In 1413 the herbage of the woods and parks of Myerscough, and the pasturage of Bleasdale, Calder, Grizedale, and Little Cadley in Fulwood were leased to Robert de Urswick, knt., for 52 marks per annum.'3 ‘The very considerable number of salaried officers appointed to keep the forests, parks, underwoods, and pastures testifies to the attention bestowed upon the management of the deer parks, woods, and pastures. The same year (1413) Robert Urswick, the master forester, was directed to deliver a sufficient amount of timber and stone to the masons and carpenters working at Lancaster castle; and the following year William Harington, master forester of Quernmore, had orders to deliver from time to time to the receiver as much fuel, probably charcoal, from the park as might be required to smelt the lead required by the workmen at the castle. In 1416 the warden of Croxteth Park delivered six oaks to Gilbert Haydock, knt.% In 1421 the herbage and pasturage of Myerscough and Fulwood, thirteen vaccaries in Wyresdale and seven in Bleasdale were let to farm to Thomas Urs- wick, esq., for ten years at a yearly rent of £71 8s. 4d., which Robert Urswick, knt., had previously paid, and an increment of 20 marks. In 1442 the lease was renewed to Urswick for a term of twenty years at the same rent, £84 155.) Under the system of leasing for profit portions of the forest to private individuals, which had commenced in the latter part of the fourteenth, and rapidly extended in the succeeding century, the character of the forest gradually changed ; the deer were reduced in numbers and confined to closer limits in parks, the area under timber became much reduced, and inclosure, cultivation, and settle- ment by husbandmen changed the aspect of the whole forest region, After the disafforestation by Henry VII early in the sixteenth century, it is probable that the deer were confined to small portions of ground in Bleasdale and Wyresdale, and to the deer parks at Quernmore, Myerscough, Leagram, and Toxteth.!” When Croxteth Park was demised to Thomas Molyneux, esq., in 1473, it was described as ruinous and destitute of wood in or near for the repair of the pale and inclosure thereof, but the grantee undertook to dike and set quick wood about the park, sustain the pales and keep the deer within it. In 1507 Simonswood was said to be in part overgrown with wood of little or no value and in part Consisting of a watery, moorish, and mossy ground with little or no grass growing thereon." Leland, writing of the woodlands in Lancashire in his time (1534-1543), says— Up toward the hilles by Grenehaugh be iii forests of redde deere, Wyredale, Bouland and Blestale. They be partly woody, partly hethye. The ground bytwixt Morle [Morleys in Astley] and Preston [is] enclosed for pasture and corne, but where the vast mores and mosses be, wherby as in hegges rowes by side grovettes ther is reasonable woodde for building, and sum for fier, yet al the people ther for the most part burne turfes . . . Al Aundernesse (Amounderness hundred) for the most parte in time past hath beene ful of wood and many of the moores replenished with hy fyrre trees. But now such part of Aundernesse as is toward the se is sore destitute of woodde.'” In a report of the state of the lands late belonging to Furness Abbey, made about 1537, it was noted that ‘the woodes in Furness Fells had need to be well looked as ther is iii smydis survaid to £20 (a year) that they tak no woods but siche as hathe byn accustomed, as byrche, aller or other fallin woods, and that evare bayle (bailiff) suffer not the woods to be inclosed.’ !” At this time the officers of the forest found the task of preserving the king’s deer one of increas- ing difficulty. There are various complaints of the keepers of Quernmore and Myerscough on record at this time of the trespasses committed by the gentry of Lonsdale and Amounderness,!!! In 1556 the state of the woods and underwoods in Leagram Park was surveyed by com- missioners, who found no ‘Sapleyn’ timber but only some 60 hollow oaks, good neither for ‘house boote nor pale boote,’ and of underwood only a few old ‘ hollins and hasilles’ of no profit ifsold, and fit only for ‘Tynsell and fire boote’ for the queen’s farmers there. They found no deer abiding or bred within the park, nor had there been any for many years past.? In 1584 John Rigmayden was removed from the office of master forester of Wyresdale and Quernmore for permitting the wholesale destruction of deer both in and out of season. From the queen’s accession in 1 558 to the date of his removal from office 320 deer had been taken within these forests, and of this number 70 head out of 193 had been taken since 1569 out of season.8 , ®$ Duchy of Lanc. Misc. Bks. xvii, 34. Thid. 7, 208. ‘5 Thid 18 Towneley’s MSS. Chetham Lib. C,, 13,”. 530; Dep. Keeper's Rep. xl. App. 536. ve “7 Baines, Hist. of Lancs. (ed. 1836), i, 178. Croxteth D, F. 1-2 ® Leland, Jtin. (3rd ed. Hearne), iii, 98. "° Rentals and Surv. 9-73 fol. 25 ™ Lancs. Plead. (Rec. Soc.), xxxii, 115, 229; xxxv, 28. ™ Tbid. xl, 215. Mr. William Harrison has collected many i i i i i i y interesting particulars relative to the ‘Ancient F h seein d : : oe ss oy and Deer Parks in Lancashire,’ which were published in the Trans. of the Lancs. and Chesh. Antig. "8 Duchy of Lanc. Sp. Com. 381. 446 FORESTRY In 1635, Lord Morley, master forester of Wyresdale and Quernmore, entered a bill of complaint in the Duchy chamber against several inhabitants of Lancaster for entering the forest, depasturing horses, oxen, and cattle without right, to the injury of those having right of common, breaking into pinfolds and driving away cattle impounded there and strays belonging of right to His Majesty, and taking away many hundred cart-loads of coal, freestone, slate, &c., and spoiling the ground by digging great holes and pits.’ In 1697 William III took steps to ascertain yearly the number of deer within his forests, chases, and parks in the county, and at the close of every season the number which had been killed, ‘ that all abuses and ill practices may be remedied and our deer better preserved for the future.’ Perhaps this is the last occasion on record of the sovereign displaying solicitude for the preservation of deer in this county,!6 In 1587 the woods and underwoods belonging to the Duchy within the county were surveyed and certified as under 2°; — Tue Forssr oF QuarLEMoRE There is one park called Quarmore park in the parish of Lancaster containing vj miles about, and there is in the same park one wood called Eascow containing six acres besett with eller, hasle, and whitethorn of forty years’? growth worth ten shillings the acre; five score small saplings for building timber worth five shillings the sapling, fit to be reserved for the repair of Her Majesty’s castle of Lancaster and the tenants’ houses thereabouts ; one other wood in the said park called the New Park, containing x acres, wherein groweth xl doted okes for firewood worth ij’ the oke, and xl small saplings for building timber worth v‘ the sapling and fit to be reserved for the repair of the said castle and tenants’ houses; one other wood there called Dickson Carr containing xvj acres slenderly besett with eller of an evil growth, and would be new fallen and sprouged and then in time there would grow some commodity to her Majesty ; one wood called Rawne Tree Carr containing viij acres besett with eller of xxx years growth worth xiij® iiij¢ the acre; one other wood called Redcarr containing xx acres besett with eller of xxxilij years’ growth worth to be sold xiij® iiij* the acre. There is also one wood called Wellen Banck in the parish of Lancaster containing xvj acres slenderly besett with hasle wood of xxviij years’ growth worth ij® vj‘ the acre, and there groweth in the same 100 small saplings for building timber worth to be sold for iiij* the sapling ; one other wood there called Totell containing xiij acres and there groweth in the same xxx doted okes for fire- wood worth ij’ vj‘ the oke ; one wood there called the Marries and Little Browe containing vj acres slenderly sett with ellers of xl"* years’ growth worth xiij® iiij? the acre. And in the same there groweth iiij score saplings for building timber worth vj° viij? the sapling. M® there standeth abroad in the said park cxl doted okes for firewood worth ij’ the oke. There are also two woods in the forest of Quarlemore called the Gaits and Corneclose containing xxj acres and there groweth in the same woods cxx saplings for building timber worth v* the sapling and there is also in the same iiij acres besett with eller and whitethorn of xxx years’ growth worth v' the acre; one wood called the Hollinhead in the forest aforesaid containing by estimation four miles about. And there is in the same one parcel of ground called Burwengreve containing xvj acres wherein groweth c saplings for building timber worth vj’ viij? the sapling ; one other wood in the forest aforesaid called the Old Ditch containing xij acres and there groweth in the same iiij® xx young saplings very small worth ij® vj‘ the sapling ; one other wood within the said forest called the Rounde Hill containing vj acres wherein groweth cxxviij okes for building timber worth vij [sic] the oke ; one other wood within the said forest called the Hill at the Birkestele containing viij acres and there groweth in the same cx timber trees worth vjé viij‘ the tree ; one other wood within the said forest called the Asshpotts containing viij acres besett with eller and hasle of xx" years’ growth worth iiij® the acre wherein groweth iiij*x saplings worth ij’ vj* the sapling ; one wood within the said forest called the Hill between the Steangaits containing xx acres very thin besett with eller of xxvj years’ growth worth ij’ vj‘ the acre. And in the same there groweth lxxviij saplings for building timber worth vj° viij4 the sapling ; one other wood within the said forest called the Hill at the broken Stair containing xij acres, and there groweth in the same ccxij small saplings for building timber worth to be sold for five shillings the sapling one with another ; one other wood within the said forest called the Hill near to the Cock Glade containing xxx acres, and there groweth in the same cxxx small saplings worth iij* iili* the sapling ; one other wood within the said forest called Emerick containing xxiiij acres besett with hasle and thorn of xxx years’ growth worth v° the acre, and there groweth in the same xl small saplings worth iij’ vj‘ the sapling. M® the woods within the said forest are to be reserved for the repair of Her Majesty’s said Castle of Lancaster, being distant from thence two miles, and also for the repair of her Majesty’s tenants’ houses thereabouts (who by custom have timber for the repair of their houses by the oath of iiij sworn men there) and for the Fishcalls upon the water of Loyne. M® there hath been delivered in the said forest of Quarlemore to the repair of her Majesty’s Castle at Lancaster, since the xx" year of her Majesty’s reign that now is until the first day of July 14 Duchy of Lanc. Plead. bdle. 345. Baines, Hist. of Lancs, (ed. 1836), i, 254. N6 Duchy of Lanc. Misc. Bks. 128, pp. 12-20. 447 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE 2gth year [1587] the number of iiij score timber trees worth vj" viij* the tree, and there hath also been delivered to the copyholders and customary tenants of Skearton, Slyne and Warton, within the same time for their necessary reparations of their fire houses and barns upon view and certificate of vj sworn men in every of the said towns as hath been accustomed cccl timber trees, and to the farmers of Quarlemore and farmers of Loynes Milne and the Fish Garths, calls and wears by grant from her Majesty iiij score timber trees ; and also for dogstakes and gates in and about the said forest and park xx"® trees worth ij’ iiij’ the tree; and also to her Majesty’s Justices of Assize and auditor for service at her Majesty’s Castle of Lancaster for fire xl"* doted Stubbs worth ij* vj* the tree. Mé there hath also been delivered yearly certain fee trees within the said forest, viz. to M‘ Auditor one tree, to M' Receiver one tree, to the Surveyor one tree, to the head Steward one, to the clerk of the County Court one, to the Keeper of the Woods one, and to the axbearer one tree, being fewel trees worth ij® the tree. Tue Forest oF WYERSDALE firewood worth ij’ the oke. M? the said wood is necessary to be reserved for the shade of the deer and repair of her Majesty’s tenants’ houses. There is also one other wood within the said forest called Brigbanck, containing iij acres besett with eller of an old growth worth v‘ the acre ; and there groweth in the same xviij old okes for fire- wood worth xviij? the oke ; one other wood there called Horseholme and Mirkeholm containing itij acres besett with hollyn, eller, hasle and thorn of iiij score years’ growth worth vj‘ viij* the acre ; one other wood there called Cadshaybrowe containing vj acres besett with hasle and ash of Ix years’ growth worth five shillings the acre ; one other wood there called Haythornthwaite containing itij acres besett with eller, hasle, haythorn, and some ash of an old growth x* the acre ; and there groweth in the same ccc young sapling spires like to be for building worth ij’ vj‘ the sapling spire ; one other wood there called Larpitts containing iij acres besett with hollyn, eller, and whitethorn of xxx years’ growth, worth vj’ viij? the acre ; one other wood there called Whitridingbrow containing xvj acres all sett with young sapling spires and birtches of xl"* years’ growth worth xx‘ the acre; one other wood within the said forest called Hollinhead containing viij acres besett with eller, hasle, and Whitethorn of xl"* years’ growth worth vj viij’ the acre, and there groweth in the same xxx"® small saplings for building worth ij* vj‘ the sapling, and xx old okes for firewood worth ij’ the oke ; one other wood there called the Crowebrowe containing five acres besett with eller, hasle, and whitethorn of Ixx years’ growth worth vj* viij* the acre ; and there groweth in the same six saplings for building timber worth ilij* the sapling and lxx old doted okes for firewood worth ij* the oke ; one other thorn of an old growth worth x‘ the acre; and there groweth in the same lxx small okes for slender building worth ij* the oke ; one other wood there called Dunockshaye containing four acres besett with hollyn, hasle, and eller of fifty years’ growth worth ij* viij* the acre, and there groweth in the same lx old scrud saplings for firewood worth xviij‘ the sapling ; one other wood called worth iijs ilij* the tree, which bridges are over such dangerous waters within the said f hath been drowned for lack of the same. ‘ Teaco M° there are certain fee trees yearly going out of the said forest of Wyersdale, vizt. To the aks one, to the surveyor one, and to the keeper of the said forest one, being fewell trees worth 1)° the tree. Tue Forest of Mirescowe There is one park within the said forest called Mirescowe park, in the parish of Garstange containing by estimation six miles about, and in the same there is iii; ie woods slenderly sett with eller, hasle, and whitethorn of lx years’ growth, worth v* the acre, and there is in the same c old dotered okes for firewood worth ij’ the tree. ; 448 FORESTRY There is also one wood called the outwood of Mirescowe containing cxxxij acres slenderly seth with eller, hasle, sallowe, whitethorn, hollyn and blackthorn of iiij score years growth, worth vj vilj the acre, wherein is forty stoved saplings for building timber worth iiij’ the sapling, and three score doted okes for firewood worth ij’ vj? the oke. ; a M‘ there are certain fee trees yearly taken within the said forest of Mirescowe, viz". to the steward one, to the receiver one, to the surveyor one, to the keeper of the wood one, being fewel trees worth ij the tree. M‘ the farmers within Mirescowe hath liberty by virtue of their leases to stubb up ellers, brushes and brambles within the said forest of Mirescowe by reason whereof the underwood is greatly decayed, wherein order is specially to be taken. There is also one wood called Buckeshead, in the parish of Ormeschurch, containing by estimation fifty acres wherein is four acres besett with hasle, eller, birtch, and whitethorn worth vj* viij4 the acre, and there is in the same Ix young saplings for building timber worth iiij* the sapling, fit to be reserved for the repair of her Majesty’s tenants’ houses and the chancel of Ormeschurch, which her Majesty is charged to find timber for the same. ; M® there hath been delivered to the Queen’s Majesty’s tenants in Bruscowe for the repair of their houses, viz. to Richard Hill, Richard Parker, John Mawdesley, Henry Haworth, Robert Mawdesley, and divers others her Majesty’s tenants thereabouts since the xx" year of her Majesty’s reign until the first day of July in the xxix'* year the number of xxxvij" timber trees worth itij* vj* the tree. : In the year 1610 a survey and valuation of the woodlands belonging to the Duchy in the county was made, including timber trees, saplings and underwood upon the copyhold and leasehold tenements. A summary is set out on the following pages :— 2 449 57 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE [5 sor bEgF or sppe Afrenise] “pg ‘sg1 gbof ‘1vL0], *RIATD SV TYLOT vosduyaney Sopa poom purjsny —XOIMITIVG FLIVMHLYTEEVET : ; aveMyIqINy uoqnog -[wor!99] IH wormoz “yg Nas DUCTMYISULT aUUMY WAT TY emywiry . WUT TE oe yaeg opepsfaiy * AOTAA JOMO'TT puv sroddq sI9yJO pur YIIoyrPAY |LAL "(vxq) Aormeg : . ? : * -yreg eprsrav Ay yaeg vosmey MoMA ont. 0) pasta] purjioom yp “yreg : * spply poysoyaezy s19yo pur uosuryiy “oaD siayjo pue Aqyary Aruapzy poop, 2U0}sIUUOD Surutolpe spooming * stayjo pue Aommeg sallyAy [uojstuog] auoysiuu0s sIoy1O pur soyx/v AQ slouLIy sipyo pue Auudg “YR SPUNOF WATS, PUL “TTL yi Jowms93 [7 ‘ [yrmjoxs] poopy yumiprog AOI TTIVE, AVAHSHAAW PT STTHd SSHNUNA AO dIHSGUYOT AH.L — | ‘sor gor |porssé1 grit s$ 161F sl owe — | ‘speoy o1 t£ ‘of gg 11f‘or ‘saan of lt+ _ —_ 008 _— _— — —_— —_— 09 —_— _— _ —_— —_— —_ 00z —_ —_ oF _ = SS = = = a = = — ph sl HLF _ = i ee = — _— — —_— ph sit _ —_ _— — —_ — — —_ —_ 6£F a = =e —_ fone = — _— = pg str gt os _ = _ feat ~ is _ — | SPF TIE JO pg 6 UF | ZS = = 7 = be = = = pg si LEFT | —_ — — 002 — — |o0$‘r _— ott —_ _ 009 —_ 00$ — |josoe | — — ost _ spjeura _ — — 00z —_ _— og — — sz qe § pue pb sg 67 _ oft — ot — — — _ — ‘sz yw yse F pur 197 = = —_ a = — = <= —_ sol 177 DOz o$t —_ — — _ = = = = ov St 00z _— _ — — _— _ = = pels 0S = = ae =a = om ass —_ _ —_— of —_— —— 00z oz ool = mas —_ — — — 00% oot _ ooF _— — =< 2) ecu = ——s — 00$ — —_— SZ Ye OOI — ee oOo1 = = — — 009 — PRI Iw 0701 _ _— oO7z —_ ool _— 009 | oo! _ —_ —_ oF oS1 _ — = oz = = = —_ — _— -= = — OO _ _— = —_— —_— -= 00% _— —_— 009 — of = = ae — — |oootr | — — _— oF a = — = — |ooo'r | — foozr | — — pS sz tee say “pti wespeol uy] pz ayy | pLav | lav | phaw | ‘poaw | rsqw | cpz1av | anddod | poomispuy sSuijdes padesaq pue paqqnis-104s 82217, Jaquiry, 450 FORESTRY ogi F yyiom _ peesg bziF ) — sol voF | ‘pg st ogF Pg ‘sgt Lot ‘sizad VI 4B *D 0g — ‘ogo‘ol — ‘668 ozg‘z ‘padesaq “60841 : 5 TWLOT, = es ee a —_ == ph 5S S9F . . : s a . . . [Pea Tewep tant <— = aaa = ie “56 £F A ‘ ‘i F ‘ r Fi uozySnoig pen = = =— — — ‘ph sft git sJUSUIaUa} Jay}O PUL USUI] $,JI2UIEL) “TILA (@ a2 —_ A’, = = es “5S Lyf 5 a : 7 ‘ “ ‘i * amossequing eras —— 521 —— tis = SF . . . . . . . . are : : . a331sde gq = = eas = = ane uF { . . : 7 7 a88ry [aseE — oof ‘pz ie COO‘! _ = ogs sz ye ght : ? : ; * poom pry, — ee pg 1 ot _ — 0g ‘sz ye gSE : : * poom 3xeN ¢ Aysuaydsoy zy, = = aa — a _— sz yeok Ssh ye ooz |° . : : astddog saddgq 61 7£zF IWLOT, THA.LUYVO ‘ogg [{7¥ 181 °F = Ee pevoleiy \). . =e EvF ‘09g { ‘ogz } _ pee 2% peap gzl‘E ee *9300q-y8nojd pur ‘aj300q-asnoy ‘s8urpring Aressaoau jo redex ay Joy ose pue vas ay jo suimopseao Wo purjst oy} Surureyureu Joy yioq ‘spoom pres ay] Jo yyauaq ay3 wWoysnd Aq unep ‘sututolpe ssauing Moy jo syuruo} Foye ONT 1 Es ‘AauyeAA JO purysy oy y— ‘purysy Aouye ay, — = —_ = —= _— —_ “SOI uy + a8ury ‘sef ipl = “poo~y opisdurey —_— ogl — oF — — — PBI woos {sz ye ghz * uospreyory Maye ‘oO E1 — OO1 — — — ogz ‘PBI 3e CO! g : BreqTanti) eqn AN pete] ared meg : + -youeg woysyoeg oe ‘ : ‘ : ; : ; aso[2MaN ~ = re Sal _ = = pe st ory : : ayoousing oosusaI£) Jadaay ‘uosulpmey uyol v off 00S _ _ 00S 000'1 = POI 1 009 ‘bis ‘uoysorg “SOUT, JO s1oxo oY J, sazov of b ‘[Aqiamog] poomy Aqineg sbDy “pz ye speoT “pt WwW “pe Ww 9 41V P38 IW “p71 ay SSaNYNA MOT astddog 10} 319 poomsapuy sSurjdeg ysaqjewig pue spuodsas saa1y, 1aquiry, ae 451 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE 9 St izi] wzgz SLF fo0S‘1 | “pg s$1 £F ‘zo€ z7F ‘o6f 1zF ‘6£ TVLO J, = = ‘pz1 Ww og _ ‘pz yw oof ph sf ye 91 i ~ (asvay) uorSurreg TMA SI \. He zt i eae 9 £ 91! ‘0g ‘pz woot 9 ‘sl ye of ‘pz ye oz _— “ * WOSpIEYNY “UAA o £ 61, cS ‘pz woot ‘pt ie gol SZ ew of — : : uosuryieg “Mp Y ) 7 oO gt gi 709 ‘pzi yw ott pt yw tg Ge Ie OL = 7 + AIST. ews, a | ylvgq Oosr9 JA] o $ oF POOL |‘pzr qe 00S ‘pe ye OO! SZ ye oF orf ‘£1 : ‘bso ‘A3|sq[1,., “MPA J | SSUNUAGNNOWV AO Lsauod ‘+ 11 ogi) 0 6S LEFT ‘ob6 |-ph 561 1 F f060'1| sszr 7eF ‘Sgo'1 ‘sol 9g F ‘£68 : WIOT, _ vol _ _ pzr ye Si sE We oz : *g jo ‘uosuryitg ‘sous, | * : ‘ * fasurmg — ‘vt —_ pt ye of! oF! sf qe of { ; : punrg uyof ers : pavapoo a, uyol —— — 0 SI _ _ _— $F ‘ozi—yse Bunog — adysmea —_ ‘sf yey O1 | ‘pz ye OO! _ _ — —— $ aEMYWIYIET _ sf yey Oz _— ‘py yw coz — *s€ qv soyse +1 : : yywod IN | * [prosfoqqy] epassiqy LSadOd FIVASUVIM dn = — = — 3S ott 3 + snies ‘styd “IIA —— = — = —_ — "St * gwsprig sour pur [tA —_—— — _ = — = sl OF a[MUy ~~ — ‘pzy yw oof — 79 yw of s£ av of -——-— poom ppeyssurjoyy 9 L 16 — ‘pz yw oo$ "pg we oz prl ye orth pg “sz ye Ozh —— YAVg etowUIEN?) a es LSadOd YALSVONVT woo, | Taulea | oot) | tages | TIPS Pe | on, son = Be 452 FORESTRY CLITHEROE Clitheroe Moor.—76 ash trees, £53. Chatburn, copyholders.—29 ash and oak, £7 135. 4¢. Hollins, £10. x $5 Timber lately sold, value £30. 9 , Will. Talior and other tenants. —Ash and oak, 641, £35. Worston and Pendleton.—No woods. Penpiz Forest.—Woods and underwoods worth £100. Bowranp Forgst.—Divers tenants, underwoods, £20. John Swinglehurst hath ground called the Fence, containing 30 acres fit to be coppice. Underwood of divers tenants, 400 loads at 12d. Richard Swinglehurst, 10 saplings in the lanes, 2d. each ; and 40 loads of underwood at 12d. the load. John Parker, 30 saplings, 18d. each. Leonard Holme, 100 loads of underwood, £5 ; 40 acres fit for coppice and ‘lyethe fit for the game.’ John Crumbleholme, 3 timber trees, £2 ; 3 ash, £3; 2 elms, 205.; decayed trees, 4, 255. Mr. Swinglehurst, 30 saplings, 2s. each ; 60 ash, 18¢. each; 120 loads of underwood at 12d. each, 30 acres fit for coppice. James Parker, 40 loads of underwood, £2. Torat—8z timber trees, £57; 740 saplings, £48; 66 decayed trees, £6 105. Sd.; 2,860 loads of underwood, £143. There are 100 acres fit for coppice, and very necessary both for increase of timber and for the preserva- tion of His Majesty’s deer. Burntey Paris Ightenhill—Timber worth £12 9s. 84. Habergham Eaves— Nicholas Barcroft, 250 timber trees at 5s. each ; 40 saplings at 6d. Richard Pollard, 30 timber trees at 45., 15 saplings at 12d. George Rotswell, 11 timber trees at 35. Nicholas Barcroft, 40 timber trees at §s., 20 saplings at 12d. Torar—f8z 18s. Hugh Halstead, 15 timber trees at 8s., 140 saplings at 62. Mr. Habrigham of Habrigham, 3 timber trees, £2, on copyhold land. John Whitacre, 35 timber trees at 85., 55 saplings, £2 155. Nicholas Whitacre, 16 timber trees at 6s. ; 40 saplings at 12d. Robert Tattersall, 50 saplings at 122. Totat— {37 11s. Stephen Hargreaves, 70 saplings at 25. Mr. Townley of Royall, 430 timber trees, being ash and oak, at 10s. ; 100 saplings at 12d. Mr. Wodroofe, 5 timber trees at 55. Richard Folds, 6 ash and oak, 40s. Mr. Townley of Townley, 80 oak and ash of his wife’s inheritance, £30. Totrat—f260 5s, Widow Hostine (sic), 21 ash and oak at 135. 4¢. each. Simon Haydock, 11 ash at 35. John Halstead, 20 timber trees at 5s., 100 saplings at 34. Mr. Townley of Townley, woodland in Brunshaw called Shore Hay (undivided), valued at £60. Torat—f£81 18s.(?) Sum Totat—1,036 timber trees . . é . £421 Is. 4d. 630 saplings i ‘ . - £26 15s. Rossendale Forest Colne Parish |e are no woods worth marking. Haslingden Parish Torrincton Paris Mr. Richard Nutt of Nutt Hall, 7 timber trees {2 6s. 8¢. and other items, totalling £95 135. 4d. Certain woods were not surveyed because the tenants would not permit it. SUMMARY Ls @ Timber trees, 7,063. : : ; F ‘ . + 530 13 4 Saplings, 21,302 . : F : . , ‘i . + 310 § 4 Dead and decayed trees, 18,380 . . ‘ : . - 535 9 9 Underwood, 10,460 loads. ‘ : : : oe BAB OO There are now uncoppiced and fit for coppice within the forests of Bowland, Wyresdale, Amounderness, and the lower part of Low Furness, 1,382 acres, which grounds are necessary to be kept for the good of the country, the increasing of timber, and for the maintaining of His Majesty’s game. The said coppices are worth 3s. the acre, and at 13 years’ growth qos. the acre—{2,764 65.17 ™ Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. bdle. 17, No. 12. 453 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE THE CHASES OF BLACKBURNSHIRE AND BOWLAND Soon after Robert de Lacy had acquired the hundred of Blackburn from Count Roger of Poitou he also obtained from him a grant of Bowland in Yorkshire and the parishes of Ribchester and Chipping, which until then had been reckoned as part of Amounderness, but thenceforth were included in the hundred of Blackburn." From this time dates the conversion of large tracts of waste land in the latter hundred, the last retreat of the wolf and wild boar, and of both waste lands and townships in Bowland, into forest, or more correctly, into chases, for no subject of the crown could possess a forest in the strict sense of the term as applied to a region under the jurisdiction of the forest laws.® From this time also dates the connexion of Bowland with the Lancashire fee of Lacy, known as the honour of Clitheroe. Reference to the map of the forest regions will assist in illustrating the description of the chases belonging to this honour. PeNDLE Forest, containing an area of 12,962 acres, occupies the upper part of the valley of the West or Lancashire Calder, and takes its name from Pendle, anciently Penhull (1,830 ft.), the elevation on which this river has its source. On the north it adjoins the Yorkshire manor of Barnoldswick, the dividing line being long uncertain and the cause of a dispute between Queen Isabella, then lady of Clitheroe, and the monks of Kirkstall, which was determined in 1335.1” Ightenhill Park occupies the southern part of the forest, from which it is separated by the River Calder. TRAWDEN Forest, containing 6,808 acres, occupies the extreme north-eastern corner of the county and for a considerable distance marches with the county of York. It occupies the valleys of two streams, Trawden Brook and Wycoller Beck, which take their rise in the elevation known as Boulsworth Hill (1,700 ft.), and extends down to their confluence with Colne Water, a tributary of the Calder. RossENDALE Forest, originally including the greater part of the townships of Accrington and Haslingden, and extending westward as far as Hoddlesden Brook, may be said to have embraced an area of 22,000 acres, exclusive of Musbury Park, which originally belonged to the lordship of Tottington in Salford Hundred. It lay mainly on the north bank of the River Irwell from its source on Thieveley Pike (1,474 ft.) nearly to Ewood Bridge in Haslingden, and extended over high moorland northward to the escarpment overlooking the valleys of the East and West Calder known as Hambledon Hill (1,342 ft.), along which runs a ditch known as the ‘Pale Dyke.’ There can be but little doubt that before the Conquest an almost unbroken stretch of woodland waste lay between Pendle, Boulsworth, and the head of Rossendale, in which arose the townships of Cliviger, Burnley, Worsthorne, Hurstwood, Briercliffe, Extwisle, and Marsden, names which are not significant of early village settlements. RamsGrEAvVE, a small detached or outlying wood, having an area of 776 acres, was given tothe monastery of Whalley in 1361 and long provided that house with fuel and timber. Torrincton Forest formed part of the Montbegon fee until 1235, when it was acquired from Henry de Monewden by John de Lacy, earl of Lincoln.!! In a charter of this earl dated at Ightenhill in 1237-8 (not 1176) reference is made to Pilgrim-cross-shaw in the forest of Tottington.’” About 1220 Roger de Montbegon gave to the priory of Monk Bretton ‘ my forest called Holcomb,’ saving venison and hawks.!*% By this and other grants the forest area was soon restricted to the region known as Musbury Park. Litrte Bowtanp anp Leacram originally no doubt formed part of the parish of Chipping and were thrown into the forest of Bowland, lying immediately to the north, when Robert de Lacy formed his forest there. The area is 4,664 acres. Chipping Brook, from its source between Whitmore and Fairsnape Fells in Bowland and Bleasdale to the confluence with the River Loud and that river to its confluence with Hodder, form the boundaries on the west and south, whilst the last-named river separates these places on the east from the southern and detached portion of Bowland known as Radholme, Lees, and Browsholme. "8 Lancs. Pipe R. 382. "° Tn the following account the popular term ‘forest’ will be employed in reference to these chases which for centuries have been known by that description. ” Kirkstall Coucher (Thoresby Soc.), 321-39. ™ Cal. Chart. R. 1226-57, p. 213. ™ Whitaker, Hist. of Whalley (ed. 1876), i, 323. % Lansd. MSS. 405, fol. 434. 454 FORESTRY Bowranp Forsst, lying in the county of York, extends to an area of 25,247 acres,™* and adjoins on the west the Lancashire forests of Wyresdale and Bleasdale, and on the north the chase of Roeburndale. The ancient lords of Blackburnshire in the twelfth century granted to several of their most important tenants very liberal rights of chase within their tenures. Although the exercise of these rights was challenged in 1323, no doubt of their creation exists, seeing that the grants to the family of Arches in Wiswell, Hapton and Osbaldeston ; of Alvetham in Altham and Clayton le Moors, to the dean of Whalley, ancestor of Towneley, in Towneley, of all ferae bestiae outside the chief lord’s demesne inclosures there ; to the ancestor of Nowel in Great Mearley with licence to take dead wood in Bowland, Sabden, and Pendleton Wood, have been preserved in Christopher Towneley’s MSS.! In order apparently to safeguard the rights of chase in these manors, which remained in the hands of the chief lord, Edmund de Lacy in 1251 obtained a charter of free warren in his demesne lands of Clitheroe, Chatburn, Downham, Ightenhill, Worston, Padiham, Burnley, Briercliffe, Little Marsden, Pendleton, Colne, ‘Gret Merclesden’? (Great Marsden), Haslingden, Widnes, Appleton, Cronton, Upton, and Tottington.’ As early as 1247 mention occurs of two foresters of Blackburnshire who were pardoned for the death of Adam Kalveknave, probably a deer-stealer, whom they had slain in self-defence in the forest.” A few years before, viz. in 1241-2, the vaccaries and stud farm of Black- burnshire had been extended at a yearly value of 100 marks, and the profit of Rossendale Forest at 1005.8 A release made by the abbot of Kirkstall in 1249 to Margaret, countess of Lincoln, for 10s. a year, of the right to take yearly twenty wain-loads of timber in the third part of the forest of Blackburnshire, then belonging to her in name of dower, points to the necessity even at this early date of husbanding the woodlands of this district.° In 1258 there were, or might be, seven vaccaries in the forest of Bowland worth but 5s. each.!%° In the time of Edward I the Earl of Lincoln made certain concessions to his free tenants in Blackburnshire whereby they were acquitted of giving puture of the chief forester’s horse and groom, formerly maintained at the expense of the country when engaged in keeping the forest, and of pains and penalties when deer were found dead in the forest, even if they had failed to make it known.}! The De Lacy Compotus of 1296 contains many details illustrating the issues and profits of the Blackburnshire chases. At Accrington 156 cheeses weighing eighty-two stones and over thirty stones of butter were produced, three vaccaries let to farm yielded a rent of 103s. 2d., brushwood sold to a forge or bloomery for twenty-seven weeks brought in a rent of 345. In Pendle Forest, winter and summer agistment, hay sold, and the escape of cattle yielded £9 8s. 8d., and ‘ thistle- take’ of natives 2s. 6d. more ; seventeen ash trees had been sold for 10s., brushwood for 65., and eighty wild boars for 66s. 1d. In Ramsgreave, besides a revenue from summer eatage and charcoal, hollies and oaks sometimes brought in profit. In Hoddlesden (now Yate with Pickup Bank) brushwood was sold to supply a forge for thirteen weeks. In Rossendale the summer and winter agistment yielded £5 35. 8d., and for agistment of eighty beasts belonging to the abbot of Whalley another mark was received, whilst an iron forge was let to farm for 60s, a year. In Tottington the herbage of Cowhope, Alden, Musden, Ugden, and Wythens brought in £6 tos. 84., agistment in the forest 6s. 4d., and pannage the considerable sum of 155. 5d., pointing to a good crop of acorns and beech-mast. At Ightenhill there was a stud farm with a stock of fifty-two mares, two rounteys, twenty-nine three-year-olds, twenty-two two-year-olds, and twenty-two foals ; but of those nine mares, two three-year-olds, and seven two-year-olds had died of the murrain or had been worried by wolves. The stock in twenty-eight vaccaries at the end of 1296 stood as follows :— 4 ——— Punt Bulls Cows Bullocks Heifers Twinters Calves Trawden . .... 5 5 197 26 29 69 (38 males) 82 Pendle. . . . .. II 14 463 66 55 137 (63. 4, ) 172 Rossendale . 7 11 I 413 66 51 141 (75 » ) 179 Accrington. . . . . [3] 3 106 28 34 31(19 » ) 46 14 The Higher Division in the par. of Slaidburn, 19,750 acres; the Lower Division, embracing Radholme, Lees, and Harrop, 3,714 acres in the par. of Whalley, and Browsholme, &c. 1,783 acres extra parochial. ” Whitaker, Hist. of Whalley (ed. 1876), ii, passim. 26 Cal. Chart. R. 1226-57, p. 357- "” Cal. Pat. 1232-47, p. 496. "8 Lancs. Ing. (Rec. Scc. xlviii), 157. ™ Duchy of Lanc. Great Coucher, i, 80. 180 Yorks. Ing. (Yorks. Rec. Soc.), xii, 49. ™\ Coucher of Whalley (Chetham Soc.), 1161. 455 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Besides this stock, ninety-four cows, three bulls, 129 oxen and sixty-nine calves had been drafted during the year for sale or disposal elsewhere. Gilbert, son of Michael de la Legh, chief stock-keeper, had sold 137 oxen for £57 145. 6d., and seventy-two cows, and eleven calves for £24 95. 10d., while the rent of twenty-seven vaccaries put to farm yielded £81 for the year. 7 Murrain and wolves took toll from the stock, and cattle thieves had been active. There are similar accounts for the year 1305. The household accounts of Thomas of Lancaster for the year 1318-19 contain some references to the taking of harts for the earl’s use in Blackburnshire, and of bucks and partridges from Bowland.#3 Soon after his succession to his wife’s inheritance, in order to check the trespassers in his chases and parks in Blackburnshire, Tottington, and Bowland, he obtained a royal commission for the appointment of justices to try offenders according to the effect of the grant by Edward I to Edmund of Lancaster, his brother, and his heirs, that they should have justices to try trespasses committed in their chases and parks.’# After the earl’s attainder the free chases of Blackburnshire and Bowland suffered at the hands of cattle thieves and deer stealers. On 16 May, 1322, a commission was directed to the officers of the crown to try those who had committed depredations in the late earl’s deer parks and forests of deer and cattle, horses and dead stock.85 In Toxteth many head of deer had been killed with the apparent connivance of the parker, the parsons of Sefton, Prescot, and Aughton being prominent offenders. In Simonswood many roe deer were taken and venison in Hale Park, Lindale Park, Upholland Park, Pimbowe Park, Healey Park, and Croxteth. Many of the leading families in south-west Lancashire, such as Lathom, Dacre, Molyneux, Holand, Waleys, Bickerstath, and Norreys were convicted. In Healey Park two wild cows were killed, and in Musbury Park three members of the Radcliffe family, with Richard the parson of Bury and several Heatons and Haworths, had stolen the king’s deer. Roger, the lord of ‘Lyttil Bolton,’ Adam the clerk of Bury, a Klege (Clegg) and others hunted in Musbury Park, in the forest of Rossendale and Tottington, but John and Adam de Radcliffe and Roger de Bolton pleaded that they had merely chased in their own territory (marche) in Salfordshire, their dogs only once passing into the king’s free chase and that harmlessly. Adam de Bury ‘le prestesone,’ John del Lawe, chaplain, and about twenty-five others were presented as common trespassers against the king’s venison in the chases of Blackburnshire, especially in Ightenhill. In the last-named place the park with sixty acres of meadow was reputed to be capable of maintaining thirty mares with their offspring of three years. Nicholas de Mauleverer, then constable of Skipton Castle, and a number of people from ‘Cravin’ and ‘ Ayredale’ took the horses from the stud-farm outside the park and the stock of cattle from Pendle and Trawden and, having slaked their thirst with the contents of a tun of wine which they found at the manor-house of Ightenhill, drove them into Yorkshire.!#* A number of Amounderness and Lonsdale people were also presented as trespassers against the king’s venison in Fulwood, Myerscough, Bleasdale, and Wyresdale. William, son of Roger de Eccleston, Richard de Whalley, and Adam de Formby had taken ten deer there, whilst Roger de Burgh, and two Crofts had taken other ten. ‘Thomas Banastre, knt., with two Rigmaydens entered Wyresdale, pretending that they had licence to hunt, and slew three bucks and some roe deer, openly hunting with hounds and horn. Even the sheriff, Robert de Leyburn, with his friends had entered Fulwood and departed with two stags, whilst John de Plesington had accounted for six deer in the forest of Amounderness. At an inquest held at Ightenhill, in 1323, it was presented that John son of Gilbert de la Legh claimed free chase upon the ‘Estemores’ in Towneley and Cliviger, belonging to the land which he had by marriage, and had there taken four deer. Adam Noel claimed free chase within the bounds of Great Mearley, but as yet had taken no deer. He had acquired three old oak trees in Sabden by purchase. Adam de Clitheroe claimed free chase to the west of Hindeburn Water, '? De Lacy Compoti (Chetham Soc., O.S. cxii), 1-39. 88 In 1318 Robert de Holden accounted for twenty harts taken by Richard de Merclesden in Blackburn- shire, for carriage of twenty harts from Ightenhill to Pontefract against the feast of All Saints, and for driving of sixty-three cows from co. Lanc. to Canterbury at Midsummer, 1318. At Michaelmas, 1319 twenty-four harts were received from Blackburnshire for which Richard de Merclesden received 488. At the same time Robert de Pievre received for his expenses in staying in Blackburnshire with seven harriers and taking six harts there 245. 6¢., and Gilbert de Bulling 6s. for taking three sturgeons, 6¢. for bringing them by sea to Preston, and 6s. for their carriage thence to Pontefract. Phillipp’s MSS. 3853, penes W. Farrer. : ™ Cal. Pat. 1313-17, p. 65. ® Thid. 1321-4, p. 160. 6 The stock was valued by the sealed verdict ot a jury at Ightenhill, 4 October, 1323 (the day before the king arrived to spend ten days there), at the sum of £236 6s. and consisted of four bulls (535. 4d.) eighty-eight cows £58 135. 4d.), seven oxen (£5 13s. 4d.), three bullocks (405.), four heifers (53s. 4d.) and six calves (6s.), two rounceys (£13 6s. 8¢.), sixteen mares (£80), six draught horses (£6), three three-year- old colts (£15), eight two-year-old colts (£26 135. 4d.), seven three-year-old fillies (£14), four two-year. fillies (£6), and a tun of wine (66s. 82.). ; : Petar ies 456 FORESTRY excepting in Hoddlesden and Ramsgreave. He had taken four deer in Hindeburnschagh, Cundeclif, and Ketilhyrste. John son of Simon de Alvetham and his brothers Thomas and Richard claimed free chase in Altham and Clayton-le-Moors, where they had taken four deer, but not in Accrington. When the king’s ‘ harasse’ at Ightenhill was robbed Gilbert de la Legh ought to have roused the people of Burnley against the robbers, but he did not. He was taken from Ightenhill Park by William Daltre and his three sons to Holbeck, near Leeds, and there detained until he paid a ransom of £20. The master foresters and their subordinates were said not to be of good name. }37 In 1334 a number of Lancashire gentry and clergy were presented at a county court held at Wigan for having entered the parks of Musbury and Ightenhill, and Richard le Skinner, parker of Ightenhill, that he rode with thirty armed men to Prescot church on Sunday after St. Barnabas 1330, and dragged Richard de Holand, Thomas de Hale, and John Walthew from the church, and would have beheaded the last named then and there had he not claimed the refuge of that church.¥8 In 1327 the free chases of Blackburnshire and Bowland had been granted to Queen Isabella for life in furtherance of a resolution of Parliament for the increase of her dower from £4,500 to 20,000 marks a year, in consideration of her services in the matter of the treaty with France and in suppressing the rebellion of the Despensers.¥® In 1331-2 orders were made for the arrest and imprisonment at Clitheroe of those who had entered her parks and chase of Blackburnshire and Bowland and stolen her deer.“ An inquiry was also directed touching the petition of the tenant of Bowland against Richard de Spaldington, late keeper of that chase, who it was alleged had felled and sold 200 oaks and 300 ash trees there, had taken stags, hinds, bucks, and does at his pleasure, and had oppressed the tenants and bondmen there by ransoms, fines, and various extortions.“! In 1331 he was exonerated of the charges and restored to office.“ The year following an order was made for the repair of the palings and hedges of Ightenhill Park and the three closes belonging to it, called Westclose, Higham, and Fillyclose.' In 1334 an inquiry was directed touching spoils of oak-trees and waste of deer alleged to have been committed in the free chase of Blackburnshire by Richard de Merclesden, who held the office of chief forester there for life by the grant of Earl Thomas, confirmed by the king in 1330;/* and in 1337 justices were commissioned to try seventy-six persons of this and the adjoining county of York charged by Queen Isabella with having entered her free chases of Pendle, Rossendale, and Trawden and her park of Musbury, hunting there, felling trees, and carrying away her deer and trees. Other persons to the number of twenty-two were likewise charged with the same offences in Bowland Chase and Radholme Park. In 1343 four mares, including a dappled grey, a red bay, a black and a brown bay, were delivered to Edward the Black Prince from the harras or stud-farm at Ightenhill.’“ The accounts of the forest issues for 1342 disclose little change since 1296. Some of the vaccaries were in the queen’s hands, as were the closes of Westclose, Higham, and Fillyclose in Pendle. Other vaccaries were let to farm. About a score of people belonging to the neighbour- hood were allowed to agist colts, fillies, and ‘stags’ in Higham Close during the spring at 1s. a head, whilst in winter about seventy cattle and twenty-four ponies were agisted there. Over 187 Assize R. 425, m. 13 d. tom. 26 d. 1385 Coram Reg. R. 302, Rex, m. 6d. Proceedings were still being taken against some of those who had been charged ten or a dozen years after the alleged offences, but few, if any, convictions are recorded. 139 Cal. Pat. 1324-7, pp. 69, 135. 40 Tbid. 1330-4, pp.199, 284. In 1332 an order was issued for the arrest and imprisonment of forty-four persons (named) who had broken into Ightenhill Park, hunted and carried away deer, and threatened all whom they had injured, so that none dared to follow their plaints against them ; ibid. 573. Ml Thid. 1330-4, p. 141. It was found, by inquest taken in 1332, thatin the time of Earl Thomas the keeper of Bowland Chase was accustomed to have from every man holding a messuage and 4 oxgangs of land in Slaidburn and Newton, or a messuage and 2 oxgangs of land in Bradford and Grindleton, or holding ‘rodland’ (i.e. assart land) in those towns to the value of those oxgangs, one puture of the victuals found in the tenant’s house for himself and his groom, four foresters and their grooms, with two dogs, once a year at any time save in Lent, or 14d. for that puture ; that when such tenements were subdivided a similar contri- bution was made by the tenants, but not one puture from each subdivided tenement, as had been wrongfully taken by Richard de Spaldington. In the time of Edward I, whilst the Lady Alesia de Lacy was lady of that chase, the then keeper had taken one bushel of oats, two trusses of hay, and one puture for his groom by force and duress. This puture Earl Thomas caused to cease as levied contrary to right; Coram Rege R. 283, Rex, m. 48. 1 Cal, Close, 1330-3, p- 355. “3 Thid. 447. ™ Cal. Pat. 1334-8, p. 65. 45 Ibid. 452. Some of the offenders were foresters of Blackburnshire, and were afterwards pardoned on condition of performing military service abroad for twelve months at their own charges. At the queen’s petition the service was remitted ; ibid. 1345-8, p. 44. “46 Exch, K.R. Equicium Regis, 358, 7 31. 2 457 58 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE one hundred cattle were agisted in Ightenhill Park during the summer of 1340 at 15. for a cow or ox and 6d. for a ‘twinter,’ and in Fillyclose and Royle seventy cattle and a few mares. !47 Parcels of ‘waste’ in Pendle, which may be recognized as Park Hill in Barrowford and Heyhouses in Sabden, had been granted in fee-farm ; brushwood and iron ore were sold for 174 weeks, and had | realized 52s. 6d. Both in Pendle and Rossendale the foresters and keepers had been amerced for inadequately keeping the queen’s herbage. Deer drivers were employed in Trawden and Rossen- dale and two in Pendle for thirty-one weeks, from Michaelmas to 3 May, to prevent the deer from straying. Considerable sums were also expended in the repair of cowhouses and hedges. The lactage of 321 young and forty-two aged cows realized £50 14s. More than eighty cows and calves died of murrain; sixteen cows were sent to Rising for the queen’s larder, price 6s. 3d. each ; and seventy-four sheep, price 6s. each, values which point either to the scarcity of mutton or the inferiority of the beef. In Rossendale there were vaccaries at Deadwenclough, Wolfenden, Love Clough, Goodshaw, Constable Lee, Crawshaw, Bacup, Rawtenstall, Riley, Cowhouse, and Hoddlesden. In Pendle at Over and Nether Rough Lee, Barley, Whitehalgh, Over and Nether Barrowford, Higham, Over and Nether ‘Goldyaue’ (Goldshaw), Hawbooth, and Redlaihalghes (Reedley Hallows). In Trawden at Wyculre (Wycoller) two, at Winewall one, and at Berdeshagh two vaccaries. Cowhope, in the chase of Tottington, was agisted, as were the pastures of Ugden, Musden, Alden, and Affetside, and Musbury Park. In Bowland, at the Brennand, Swindlehurst, Trough, and Glasterdale (one), ‘ Heghokes,’ Burholme, Browsholme, Randolfbooth, Graystonlegh, Whittledale, Harden, Colswain- chepyn, Lekhurst, Stapeloke, and Batherarghes (Batterax). From the four wards of Slaidburn, Harrop, Bashall, and Chipping came issues for agistment in summer and winter, brushwood and turves ; 23s. for a forge at work in Bashall ward for twenty-three weeks; £7 for agistment in Radholme Park ; £2 for a plat of waste called Laithgrim ; and other sums for farms of plats of waste called Crombewalholme, Swainesholme, the Leghes, Heslum Brook, and a dozen others. _Lactage of 102 young and thirty aged cows yielded £17 115.3; many heifers and calves had died of the murrain. The queen had one bull, twenty-nine oxen, and nine cows sent to Rising for the larder.18 In 1344 a commission was issued for an inquiry touching persons who hunted and took the queen’s deer, hares, rabbits, pheasants, and partridges in her chases and warrens in Blackburnshire, Tottington, Rochdale, Penwortham, and Bowland, and felled her trees and committed various offences against her and her tenants." The same year Richard de Merclesden was committed to gaol for having wrongfully exacted from the abbot of Whalley puture out of the abbot’s manor of Brendwood in Spotland for himself and four foresters, his horse and a groom for every Thursday and Friday night for twenty months or more.’ At this time the queen dowager was constantly suffering from the depredations of deer-stealers and trespassers in her free chases. In 1347 these misdeeds culminated in the burglary and robbery of her treasury at Whalley, when it was alleged that £2,000 of her money and £3,000 in goods, with many charters, writings, and papal bulls, were carried off, and her houses in the chase of Bowland burnt down. In response to the queen’s complaints justices were assigned to hear and determine trespasses committed in her chases and parks against vert and venison, whilst her foresters were authorized to attach and imprison at Clitheroe all persons found trespassing and indicted by inquest of such offences."* The abbot of Whalley was also a sufferer at this time in this respect.'*? The year following the king assigned certain revenues out of the chancery to the queen in recompense for Blackburnshire and Bowland, which he delivered to Earl Henry as part of his inheritance.!§4 In the time of Richard II the letting of the vaccaries for terms of years became a general practice, and the Duke of Lancaster ceased to keep stock or stud farms in his hands, but let the lands within the chases which were not reserved for the support of the deer. In 1379 thirty-six heads of families dwelling in the chase of Pendle, and described as boothmen (pastores) of the Duke of Lancaster, contributed to the poll tax levied that year, in Rossendale chase 22, in Trawden chase 6 and in part of Bowland chase 6.’° In 1400 the mines of coal and stone in the chases of Blackburn- shire were worth 145. 4d., three woodmotes in each chase 305. 3d., whilst the ‘more driveres’ received £4 65. 2d.; rent of lands brought in £5 45. 724., farms of herbage £146 18s. 2d., farm of Ightenhill Park £16 19s. 2d., and farm of Musbury Park £8 6s. 8d. No stock had been sold during ie Rentals and Surv. -%. a 5 Mins. Accts. bdle. 1091, No. 6. ° Cal. Pat. 1343-5, p. 4173 cf. ibid. 1345-8, pp. 378, 384-5, 394-5. ™ Ibid. 203. ) Thid. 1345-8, pp. 381-95. Robert son of Robert le Forester of Lonsdale and hi indicted in 1348 of having with greyhounds hunted a stag from Tatham F ell, a oe greyhounds and stag entered the free chase of Bowland, where the stag was taken, the dogs bein "qlerwarils taken by the foresters of Queen Isabella. They were outlawed, but surrendering to the Mech be Pri were afterwards pardoned ; ibid. 1348-50, p. 113. sie 7 Thid. 378. 8 Thid. 229. ™ Ibid. 217. ** Lanc. Lay Sub. 1,82. 458 FORESTRY the year, nor were there any vaccaries. Inclosing a ‘launde’ in Pendle cost 13s. 44., and a man maintaining the pales of Ightenhill Park received 40s. in wages.'* Ample material to illustrate the development and settlement of the forests and chases of the county in the fifteenth century is to be found in the Ministers’ and Receivers’ accounts of the Duchy.” In 1443 when the king’s tenants of Clitheroe and Tottington attorned to him after the reconveyance of those estates to him from his feoffees there were in Trawden 11, Pendle 24, and in Rossendale 25 tenants. There is little mention of the deer in these chases during the fifteenth century, or of trespassers against venison save an occasional presentment for deer-stealing. “Thus Robert son of Lawrence Legh of Clifton in Burnley, gent., was presented for having killed a stag with a crossbow in Rishton Thornes in the forest of Pendle shortly after Midsummer, 1440, which he carried away. In Lent, 1498, the king caused all persons claiming rights of chase or other liberties within the forests and chases to be summoned to prove their warrant to use such liberties,’ and a few years later directed a survey to be made inter alia of the Blackburnshire chases with a view to improve the same for his ‘most singler profitte and auvantage.’ Asa result the chases were in 1507 let by copy of court roll in parcels as hereunder.!® Penpig Forest Old Farm New Rent Westclose and Huntersholme (pasture). z . 1135. 4d. £8 Higham Booth (vachery) ‘ ‘ F ; ‘ 1om. £10 New Laund (pasture). : . 4 : ; 8m. 1om. Barley Booth and. : ‘ : : : : 1135. 4d. £10. 2 small parcels (vachery). F 2 : ; 75. 4d. Higham Close alias Nether Higham ™ (vachery) 3 La 135. 4d. £6. Over Goldshaw and Nether Goldshaw with the Crags (vachery) . : ; ‘ : : : £8 tos. £13 6s. 82. Filly Close’ (pasture) . ‘ ‘ : : : L9 6s. 8d. £10 135. 4d. Old Laund (pasture). ; : : . : 605. L4 6s. 8d. Whitley Carre (pasture). : . : 106s. 8d. £6 65. 8d. Over Barreford and Nether Barreford (vacheries) , L4 with Russheton Thornes : ‘ 3 4 10s. Over Rughley and Nether Rughley alias Rughley Liz 135. 42, Booths (vacheries) . £9 £13 65. 84. Haw Booth (vachery) . ‘ : j : . 535. 4d. 8 Whitley inHaw Booth. . . . . . 6m8 tt £ Redhalowes (vachery of 200 acres) . : : : £9 65. 8d. Lio Trawven Forest Berdshaw Booth (vachery) . P ; i : Lio 135. 4d. £L13 6s. 8d. Over Wicoler and Nether Wicoler (vacheries) . : L4 138. 42. £6 Wyenwall (vachery) £8 135. 4d. RossenpaLe Forest Over Haddes, and Frerehill, alias Henneheedes}® (pastures) . . ‘ : ; ‘ , 135. 4d. 265. 8d. Cowhouses (vachery) . ' ‘ : ‘ 4 £6 9 Rounstall alias Rotenstall (vachery) . : F 535. 4d. 765. 8d. Constablelegh (vachery) and . : ‘ F ; £10 135. 4d. LS Okeneywood (pasture) . 4 : : . £8 65. 8d. Dedwenclough (vachery) ‘i " , F ; £6 £10 135. 4d. #6 Duchy of Lanc. Auditor’s Accts. 72287. ! Dep. Keeper’s Rep. xlv, App. 20-4. 188 Pal. of Lanc. Assize R. 20 Hen. VI, 3, m. 10. 189 Pal. of Lanc. Prothon. writs, 13 Hen. VII. 1 Farrer, Clitheroe Court R. 235. The date of the commission for disafforesting given by Whitaker in Hist. of Whalley (ed. 1876), i, 287, as 1502 is incorrect. 161 A parcel of land called the Fence, lying within the forest or chase of Pendle, and within the pastures or vaccaries of Sabden, Westclose, and Higham, upon which ‘the herde of the stagges always before the deforesting had their several being,’ was not granted, but was surrendered to the tenants of Higham, Westclose, and Goldshaw Booth to their use with their other tenements ; Clitheroe Cr. R. Ightenhill, 6 June, 18 Hen. VIII. 1? «Hath byn usyd to be agistet to the somme of £9 6s. 8d. and no more by cause of the recourse that the dere of Penhull hath therunto.’ 16 =1 Z/ Latham \ke : Haigh ( AA y Ormsfirk * ce \ Aspull yy § on “ly in x ees F Middleton ? “ar Qupshton ~ wi gyn n She ptt “Ceale , Jonge Oldhamy ne toe a 7 Maghull, Winstanley Mobertieid T gc Y Prestnich aon : be A oughton ; g eae seftoy~ Bes i sousical "Lei - Snttardf Rotley tial Dae b Tinewistg 2X Wf é pil Pennington . saifora NON eSteN ba & 2 ( 1°) fas Wal Heulcheth Barton * Rushalme Read ih gees ait epaetowel Minington Fo \ Heoton i Norris - ANCIENT EARTHWORKS LANCASHIRE SOUTH OF THE SANDS Earthworks of one kind or another have been made and used for pur- poses of defence by well-nigh every race of mankind; they date from the present day, back through successive ages, probably to those far-off prehistoric times when war was waged with primitive weapons of flint and stone. Speaking in a general way, a defensive earthwork was originally formed by the excavation of a ditch or fosse round a given area, the earth being piled up inside to form a raised bank, rampart, or vallum. This bank was often increased and strengthened by turf sods or rough stones ; along its top a strong fence was erected, usually made either of horizontal logs or of upright wooden stakes interlaced with wattle work. Sometimes stones, if they happened to be more abundant than trees in the vicinity, were used for the fence instead of wood. Of course all vestiges of the perishable timber work have long ago disappeared from our ancient earthworks, and stones have, in the majority of cases, been removed in later days for the making of field walls. Such an entrenched inclosure was usually placed on some point of vantage, varying according to the particular ideas of its makers ; it was often at the top of a high hill, or perhaps it was upon a slighter elevation protected from attack by water and swampy marsh ; sometimes it was even in a hollow for the sake of shelter—different races and peoples having a predilection for very different situations. In most instances the dwellings of the makers of the stronghold were constructed within it, but in others their huts were clustered in some sheltered hollow hard by. Lancashire has many remains of ancient defensive earthworks, although they are not nearly so numerous here as they are in some parts of the country. Some are well preserved and of sufficiently imposing dimensions to attract the notice of every passer-by ; very many, however, are mere worn and damaged remnants of former considerable entrenchments, relics of the past which it requires the eye of an archaeologist to discover or to distinguish with certainty from mere natural features of the ground. Time has a very destructive effect upon these remains. Rain and frost are continually at work disintegrating the material of artificial mounds and ramparts, gradually making them lower and smaller, as has been proved by recorded measurements, Ditches again are continually becoming wider and shallower through the same agencies ; not only do they tend to get filled up with the soil washed down from the banks above, but dead vegetation accumulates in their hollows and raises the levels within. But the greatest destroyer of these interesting memorials of the past is undoubtedly man— the agriculturist and the builder. In Lancashire, as everywhere else, the ancient earthworks have unfortunately suffered greatly from this wear and tear of time. Nevertheless they are still numerous enough and sufficiently 597 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE well preserved to exhibit considerable variety in form and choice of site, showing that they have been constructed by distinct peoples and at widely different dates. Unfortunately, however, knowledge of the whole subject of earthworks is still in its infancy, and it is quite impossible to determine the age of the majority of the remains by appearances alone with any degree of accuracy. This will readily be understood when we remember that primitive forms of earthworks were undoubtedly reproduced by different peoples through long periods of time ; and that the works themselves were frequently occupied by successive peoples who made alterations in their defences to accord with their own particular ideas upon the subject of fortification. All we can do at present, therefore, is to arrange our local earthworks into a series of classes which have been provisionally tabulated, according to form, by the Earth- works Committee of the Congress of Archaeological Societies ; and we must look forward to the time when comparison of numerous examples of these various classes from different parts of the country, coupled with careful excavation of particular remains, may throw a clearer light upon what is now obscure. In the following pages the most important examples of these several classes now extant in Lancashire South of the Sands are described under the names of the parishes where they are found ; these, for facility of reference, are placed in alphabetical sequence under each class.’ Plans are drawn on a uniform scale of 25 in. to the mile (based on the Ordnance Survey) for facility of comparison; details are filled in from personal examination of the remains. The ground adjacent to the earthwork is contoured by lines showing every 123 ft. of vertical height ; these contours do not attempt to show all the inequalities of the surface, but it is hoped that they will be found sufficiently accurate for the purposes required. The writer thanks very many who have given him much valuable information and assistance, including especially Mr. W. J. Andrew, F.S.A. ; Mr. H. T. Crofton; Mr. William Farrer; the late Mr. I. Chalkley Gould, F.S.A.; Mr. W. Ferguson Irvine, F.S.A., and Mr. C. Madeley. (Crass A) Defined by the Earthworks Committee as ‘ Fortresses partly inaccessible by reason of precipices, cliffs, or water, additionally defended hy artificial works, usually known as promontory fortresses.’ This class is poorly represented in Lancashire, but we have two prominent examples which seem to fall within it. Warton with Linpetu (6 miles north of Lancaster)—On the top of Warton Crag, half a mile north-west of Warton Parish Church, are the now somewhat fragmentary remains of an ancient hill-fort. The site is upon an irregular plateau, 500 ft. above sea level, at the highest end of a rocky head- land. This headland projects southwards between the Vale of Burton on the east and the shallow waters of Morecambe Bay on the west. The dip of the ' At the end of the chapter will be found an Index including all the earthworks, with a reference to the class under which they have been placed. 508 : a ae 35 on ae tee R, %0.-. an Boy ; CALE OF FEET So: aS c _ S. :9 5 100 200 300 2 ie - _ EERE . “a a? PS), daed ‘ 450; iS “° : as ‘ 2 pomp COON AMI ines. The three Ramparfs marked A.R.RKR, Hitt-rort, Warton al 2 NS 509 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE limestone strata is towards the north, so on that side the hill has a gentle slope from the summit downwards. On its other three sides—to the east, south, and west—the escarpments of the rock form a number of terraces one above another ; these not infrequently rise in vertical crags, varying from ro ft. to as much as 100 ft. in height, but their rocky faces are cut into at intervals by slopes of scree or of grass. The command is, of course, complete, and a finer site could hardly be chosen for defensive purposes. The area of this fairly level summit is roughly quadrilateral and is about 71 acres. It is defended naturally on two of its sides—the west and south- east—by the craggy limestone escarpments already mentioned ; even the broken slopes of grass and scree which intersect the latter would, owing to their steepness, be very difficult of assault. The northern side of the hill, with its one long slope, could not be rushed by any foe, owing to the fact that the surface of the limestone has been weathered into veritable leg-breaking channels and ‘ pot-holes’ by the chemical action of rain-water. Nevertheless, it was once strongly defended by a series of no less than three formidable ramparts of stone constructed at intervals, one above another, up the hillside. The first of these walls begins near the edge of the cliff on the south- east side; it is, as now seen, little but a heap of moss-grown stones, which can with difficulty be followed through the thick bracken and brushwood, and has evidently been much quarried for the modern walls round the top of the cliff to the south. It runs in a north-north-west direction for nearly 280 ft., and then bends round to the north-west ; after a course of 200 ft. further, it again curves gradually round to the west for 75 ft., and finally runs in a straight line south-west for another 350 ft. to the escarpment on the west side of the hill. The best-preserved portions of the wall now discoverable are in the neighbourhood of the first-mentioned bend in its course; here several upright stones are still standing, one 3 ft. high above the ground; also, by the removal of some of the fallen stones, the two facings of the original wall are to be seen ; they are built of unhewn stones in ‘dry masonry,’ i.e. without any mortar, and inclose a core of irregular rubble. The thickness of the wall at its base is well shown hereabouts, and is on an average about 10 ft. Some yards further north-west what appears to be a circular chamber is discernible within the thickness of the wall, very similar to those sometimes found in the walls of the Welsh ‘caers’; it has an internal diameter of 5 ft. There is no sign of any fosse outside the wall. At about 25 ft. lower level, and some 150 ft. horizontal distance down the face of the slope upon the north-east side of the hill, the remains of a second wall are to be traced, parallel with the first ; the moss-grown stones are now well-nigh hidden in fern and brushwood, and they are also being rapidly buried in the soil thrown out by innumerable rabbits. At a distance of a further 240 ft. in the same direction, and about 50 ft. lower down, remnants of a third parallel wall still exist in the same ruinous state. But, fortunately, certain particulars of their state as they existed before they were quarried for modern fences have been placed on record. Fifty years ago, when the 6-in. Ordnance Survey map was made, the third or lowest wall was visible in a curve 300 ft. long on the north-west side, in a position outside of, and 75 ft. away from, the recent straight stone fence. Another quarter of a century earlier Dr. Whittaker described ‘two circum- 510 ANCIENT EARTHWORKS vallations’ here. In the eighteenth century the remains were in still better preservation, for in an account written in 1788 the three parallel walls are described and figured by Hutchinson as completely inclosing the camp on the north and north-west slope from cliff to cliff, although they were even then fallen to ruin; the first and highest wall had the greatest strength, being 10 ft. thick where the facings showed ; the second was slighter in build, and the third, or lowest, of greater thickness than the second, though not quite so strong as the first. In this account of the camp various entrances are mentioned. The highest rampart had two, roughly dividing the wall into three equal lengths. The second had also two; these were not opposite to those in the highest wall, but were situated further north and west respectively. The third wall had apparently three, which were placed so as to alternate with the two gates in the second wall. But it is hardly probable that all these entrances were, as suggested, original; the walls are now too shattered to identify them satisfactorily, except the one near the south-east end of the upper rampart ; this appears to be about 8 ft. wide only, not ‘ six paces,’ as stated in Hutchinson’s account. Within the central and uppermost area of the camp, a long low rock escarpment, 8 ft. to 12 ft. high, runs from the north-east side for rather more than half the distance across it ; it is parallel with the line of cliffs to the south-east, and distant from them about 200 ft. Under the sunny shelter of this ridge are to be seen foundations of several small stone-walled inclosures, semi-lunar in form. The first, at A on plan, measures 24 ft. by 24 ft.; a second at B is 70 ft. by 18 ft.; and a third at C is 27 ft. by 25 ft. There are two more beneath the same sheltering ridge just outside the first rampart. These inclosures may not be contemporary with the ramparts. Scattered over the whole of the plateau are many natural rock cavities which could easily be converted into rude dwellings by covering over with wood and thatch. That the place was, in ancient days, a centre of population is shown by the recorded former existence of ‘innumerable small oblong barrows of earth’ at the foot of the crag, and of many sepulchral cairns similar to two which were opened in 1785; these two revealed stone cists inclosing cremated remains and prehistoric pottery.” Wuattey (6 miles north-north-east of Blackburn).—In Planes Wood, about a mile east-south-east of this village, on a farm called ‘ Portfield,’ are the worn remains of an ancient earthwork. It is situated at an altitude of 400 ft. above sea-level, upon a hill which is a spur of the range running south-west from Pendle Hill 4 miles away. This spur overlooks a gap in the range through which the River Calder cuts its way to join the Ribble. The stronghold is, in form, a long irregular pentagon, and covers the entire flat top of the hill. This hill is exceedingly steep, almost a cliff, on the south-west side. The ground falls fairly quickly on the south-east ; to ? For further information see Baines, Hist. of Lancs. (ed. 1868), ii, 601 ; Hutchinson, in Arch. ix, 211 ; Whittaker, Hist. of Richmondshire, ii, 288. See also Ord. Surv. 1-in. 49, old 98 SE.; 6-in. 18 SE. ; 25-in. 18, 16. References to Ord. Surv. maps are for positions of earthworks, and do not necessarily imply that the remains are shown thereon. 511 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE the north-west the slope is not so rapid, while to the north-east the land only drops slightly at first and then rises to a similar height again at a distance of 70 yds. The command, therefore, is magnificent on three of its sides, but on the fourth the stronghold was only tenable during the days of short-range weapons. : Ancient roads are said to have been traced from Portfield in three directions; one led eastward to Caster Cliff in Marsden (q.v.) ; another south-east towards Burnley, and a third to join the important Skipton and Ribchester road near Clewford, west of Whalley. The elevated plateau within the camp (over 34 acres) is so nearly level that it has some appearance of artificial improvement ; it is protected by the above-mentioned steep natural scarp, some 50 ft. high, along its south-west side ; its other sides were defended by single, and in some places double, ramparts and ditches, which are now more or less obliterated. The north- west side has practically no rampart remaining upon the edge of the plateau, but slopes downwards 15 ft. deep to the bottom of a fosse; beyond this rises a rampart, now 4 ft. high and 18 ft. thick at its base ; outside it again is a second fosse at a rather lower level than the first. Along the north-east side, i.e. from the northern apex of the stronghold to the back of Portfield farm-house, only a single rampart and fosse remain. The first is about 20 ft. thick at its base, and its top rises some 3 ft. to 4 ft. above the interior plateau ; outside it, some 7 ft. below the top of the rampart, are traces of a fosse. Buildings and gardens have, however, altered the grounds considerably here- abouts. Along the east side the artificial defences have disappeared ; down the slope from the plateau, about 70 yds. south of the house, however, the lane at its foot runs in a hollow, which probably represents a former ditch. This continues round to the south-east side, and here, above it, are traces in the wood of an outer rampart upon the slope similar to that upon the north- west side. Above this the bank is steep below the edge of the plateau, but no remains of artificial defences are now visible. As far as we can judge from much obliterated remains, therefore, this stronghold was originally de- fended by double ramparts and ditches on every side except the south-west, where the steep scarp of the hill made them unnecessary. This earthwork has often been described as Roman, but no evidence is forthcoming to justify this. There is no record of any antiquities having been unearthed here, nor does the place seem to have any local traditions.® (CLass B) Defined as ‘ Fortresses on hill-tops with artificial defences following the natural line of the bill, or, though usually on high ground, less dependent on natural slopes for protection.’ We have but few of this class in Lancashire, and those very small in size compared with examples in other parts of the country. And this is noteworthy because the hill-tops of the county afford abundant points of vantage for the erection of earthworks of this description, which in some parts of England and Wales crown nearly every suitable summit. We can * Watkins, Roman Lancashire, 86, 219 ; Whittaker, Hist. of Whalley (ed. 2), 252, vol. ii, 19. Ord. Surv. 1-in. 68, old 92 SW. ; 6-in. 55 SW.; 25-in. 55, I0. 512 "SCALE OF FEET (e) 100 200 300. 325 PAN\\\ : “Qe ¥ “thy, : ant \ on - y Re Sa “ ne aU My ‘. " . % i Ny ss : ‘ : Ny wy ag, ~ . . ay ars 4, (sy %s . . fay it ee eae); SS wi Wad dts Se it “dh YW yg N My 4,5 4s fe ap t) %, 4” ony “Orr egI 7, NN Nii CNY) SCALE oF FEET -100°"" 200 300 _..* ei * ; o'Q00-. ae eeoe® | a OT am UNG A SECTION from A 0B. Same Scale Hamp arts marked P i, fe. RRR. Difehes D.D.D.D. ENLARGED SECTION fom O soc. me 3° Feet, Caster Curr Camp, Marsden 515 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE exposed near Newchurch, was traceable near the earthwork at Portfield (q.v.), and finally joined the Roman road which ran north-west from Ribchester. A second ran nearly southward. A third went north through Colne into Yorkshire. Single specimens of Roman coins have been found around the hill, and several hoards have been unearthed not far away ; but no other discoveries in connexion with the site appear to be on record. These entrenchments have been described by many writers as those of a Roman camp, and this has even received the name of ‘Calunio’; but there is no foundation for such an identification. The earthworks outwardly resemble many hill-fortresses seen elsewhere which have been proved to be the work of prehistoric inhabitants of the country. But the spade, carefully used, is required to throw light upon the matter here.* TINTWIsTLE (12 miles east of Manchester).—On Buckton Moor, in the north-west of this parish, and three-quarters of a mile east-south-east of Mossley Station (L. and N.W. Railway), is an ancient stronghold known as Buckton Castle. It is a small earthwork of uncertain origin, but seems best included in the class we are now considering. Though formerly in Cheshire, this district is, as shown in recent Ordnance Survey maps, now apportioned to the county of Lancaster. The site of the ‘ Castle’ is 1,123 ft. above sea level, and is on the edge of the high hills which run on the left of the deep valley formed by the River Tame. Behind it, to the north-east, the moor gradually rises to a height of 1,540 ft. a mile and a half away ; to the north the ground falls slightly. To the west the hill-side drops very steeply towards the long defile of the Tame valley, the fall being at first as much as 300 ft. in a horizontal distance of 200 yards. To the south the little Car Brook runs at the bottom of a gorge a quarter of a mile away, and some 500 ft. lower. Perched as it is on the edge of such steep declivities, the earthwork forms an imposing object upon the sky-line when viewed either from the west, or especially from the south. The outlook from it is most extensive, reaching far away over the plain of Cheshire to the south, and over south-east Lancashire on the west and north, while to the east parts of Derbyshire and West Nab in Yorkshire are visible. Although situated upon ground which rises on the north-east side, its interior area is sufficiently raised above the adjacent moor to make the command from it complete. An ancient road runs north and south along the side of the hill just below the ‘Castle,’ and the Roman fortress called Melandra lies 4 miles to the south. The earthwork consists of a raised interior platform surrounded by a ram- part; outside this is a broad and deep fosse on three of its sides; on the fourth the steep natural scarp of the hill beyond the rampart is ample protection. Buckton Castle has been frequently described by local historians and others, some of whom have placed on record details of interest in connexion with it. As far back as 1776 the Rev. John Watson wrote an account of it in Archaeologia, and this seems to have caused Aiken to visit it about 1793, and Ormerod in 1817. The following is a brief description of the remains as now existing. The small interior platform, which has the appearance of ‘Whittaker, Hist. of Manchester, i, 134, 186; Whittaker, Hist. of Whalley (ed. 1872), i, 42,44; Watkin, Roman aie 86, 199; Baines, Hist. of Lancs. (ed. 1868), ii, 27; Ord. Surv. 1-in. 68; old gz SW.; 6-in. 56 NE.; 25-in. 56, 8. 516 ANCIENT EARTHWORKS having been raised artificially, measures 32 yds. across from north-west to south-east, and 26 yds. from north-east to south-west. The rampart which surrounds it stands conspicuously above the level of the moor, meacuring from 18 ft. to 32 ft. in diameter at its base, being widest on the south side, and narrowest on the north-east. Its height above the interior area ranges from iia = Fe = Rising ground 7 RAov% cee it beyond Bucton Moor. Se ev eet ote ae eS 43 ee eee oo ew %. SCALE OF FEET ° 190 200 300 ENLARGED SECTION fromA./oB. Seale V__32 0 Fee 50, yy b.. Sea feve/, / 2ft. to 5ft., being greatest on the south-west side. This rampart shows signs in several places of being both faced and revetted with walls of ‘dry masonry’; but whether this is really so, excavations in the accumulated debris can alone reveal. In one or two places examined superficially, rows ot stones, apparently the top courses of facing and revetting walls, are 8 ft. apart, showing a core of earth and rubble between. Outside and below this rampart 517 Bucxron Casriz, TInrwisTLe A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE runs a formidable fosse round three sides of the work, i.e. from north-west to east and south ; along the south-west side the steep escarpment of the hill made one unnecessary. This scarp has an angle of 45 degrees, and was apparently perfected artificially when the earth which forms the extra strong rampart above it was thrown up. The depth of the ditch from the top of the rampart is as much as 20 ft. on the north-east side, and from the outside edge 1oft. Its width at the level of the outer edge averages 33 ft. In places it is excavated out of the sandstone rock, thus producing material for the supposed stone wall facings above. These fosses must always have been dry defences. The excavated material from the fosse at the north-west corner has been thrown out in a heap down the steep hill-side at the west end of the fosse; it thus forms a kind of bastion, flanking the long scarp on the west side of the stronghold. On the south-east side of the earthwork the moor beyond the fosse is at a higher level than round the other sides. Here, therefore, a second rampart has been constructed in places for additional strength. Only worn traces of this are now to be seen, but ninety years ago, when Ormerod sketched his plan, it was distinctly visible for a length of about 200 yds. At present there are two entrances into the interior plateau. The first is on the north-west side over a level bank, 32 ft. long and 16 ft. wide, which crosses the fosse and passes through a break in the rampart beyond. At the south-south-east side there is a similar break in the rampart and a shallowing of the fosse outside, making a passage through the defences into the area; but this is not shown in the plans drawn either by Ormerod in 1817, or by Aiken in 1793, or by Watson in 1776; it is evidently there- fore not original. The stronghold would appear to have been supplied with water by a natural spring within it at the south-west side ; Aiken mentions a well here. There seems also to be a spring, used in recent times, in the inner side of the ditch on the east. Aiken described ‘ruins 6 ft. or 7 ft. higher than the area’ near the south- east side, but these are not now visible; there are a good many stones, however, about the bottom of the ditch on this side, some of which have formerly been employed by shepherds or others to construct rude shelters. Mr. S. Andrew mentioned having found mortar attached to stones within the stronghold, but the writer failed to discover any on a recent visit. The same author records a road leading to the castle on the north side, with pavement in places ; also, near this road, down the side of the hill, two deep trenches, apparently outworks. There was long a tradition among the natives in the district of buried treasure hidden within the area of this ‘castle.’ So persistent was this that in 1730 over one hundred people assembled, and vigorous digging took place during several days ; some traces of this are still visible in the holes and mounds of earth near the entrance. But nothing resulted. Since that time, however, the legend has received some verification by the accidental discovery, in the middle of the eighteenth century, of various ornaments and a chain of gold beads beside the old road on the west side of the hill; and Mr. W. J. Andrew records that half a century later further very similar gold beads were unearthed close to the earthwork.§® * Arch. v (1776), 87; Aiken, Hist. of the Country round Manchester (1795), 471; Ormerod, Hist. of Ches. (ed. 1819), iii; S. Andrew, Trans. Lancs. and Ches. Antig. Soc. x, 46; W. J. Andrew, Fourn. Brit. Numismatic Soc. i, 10 ; Ord. Surv. 1-in. 86, old 88 SW.; 6-in. 97 SE. ; 25-in. 97, 16. 518 ANCIENT EARTHWORKS \ (Crass C) ‘Rectangular or other simple inclosures, including forts and towns of the Romano-Brittsh period.’ While earthworks of Classes A and B belong for the most part to very indefinite dates, and are often of prehistoric origin, many of this class belong to the historic period. Under this heading are to be included the remains of these earthworks and stone walls now or formerly extant of the Roman fortified stations at Burrow with Burrow (12 miles north-east of Lancaster), Lancaster, Manchester (Castlefields), and Ribchester. As these sites will be dealt with in the chapter on the Romano-British period, it is thought better to omit any description of them here. (CLasses D anv E) Defined respectively as ‘ Forts consisting only of a mount with encircling ditch or fosse, and ‘ Fortified mounts, either artifctal or partly natural, with traces of an attached court or bailey or of two or more such courts.’ It is convenient to take these two classes together in dealing with examples in the county, for the reason that, although mounts without visible remains of baileys exist locally, it is probable that this may mean that in these particular cases they have suffered destruction. Speaking generally, the extant remains of one of these mount and court forts, as they are called, consist primarily of an artificial conical hill; this varies from 10 to as much as 60 ft. in height, and is surrounded by a ditch or moat, now generally dry; the top of the hill or mount is flat, or sometimes saucer-shaped, and it occasionally shows traces of a raised rim of earth all round. Abutting upon the ditch at one side of this mount an inclosure or courtyard is often seen ; it is frequently crescentic in shape and defended by rampart and moat; this courtyard generally covers an area two or three times as large as that of the mount. Beyond this again, there is sometimes a second and still larger inclosure, similarly defended by entrenchments ; and in a few instances there is yet a third and much more extensive court, partly surrounding the smaller ones. Sometimes towers and walls of masonry are now seen crowning these conical mounts and their adjacent ramparts ; but, wherever they are found, they must be of later date than the original con- struction of the castle. For heaped-up earth is not, of course, solid enough to bear the erection of stone walls upon it for many years ; and the defences upon the ramparts of all these castles were necessarily in the first instance of wood. These wooden palisades have long ago disappeared. For a long time the nature of these moated mounts was not understood by archaeologists ; they were frequently supposed to be sepulchral tumuli, and as such they are often marked in the maps of the Ordnance Survey; but their real object, as defensive earthworks of a definite class and period, is now universally recognized. Mount and court castles of this description are very widely distributed in Great Britain, and they are also found in Normandy and in Flanders. They 519 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE were greatly in vogue in the eleventh and twelfth centuries in these countries. Very fortunately we have preserved to us a graphic contemporary description of one of them whilst it was still a castle in active being. This is contained in the life of a certain Belgian bishop who died a.p. 1130.° And, further, the celebrated Bayeux tapestry, supposed to have been worked in the eleventh century, includes some remarkable contemporary needleworked pictures of several of these mount and court timbered castles.’ Lancashire possesses a number of these mount and court castles ; in fact the earthworks of this class form quite the most interesting series which the county has to show, though the examples are small in size compared with many seen elsewhere. Their courtyards are most often of the crescentic or half-moon form, various other shapes found in England being conspicuous by their absence. While in many instances elsewhere the early timber stockaded mount and court fortalices have in course of years (when the earth has had time to become solid) had their palisades replaced by the stone towers and walls of the mediaeval castle, this has rarely been the case in Lancashire. It is to be noted that while the earthworks of Classes A and B, which, roughly speaking, were the strongholds of early inhabitants of the district, were upon the hill-tops, and while those of Class C were in the plains and in association with the oldest roads through the country, these mount and court castles (Classes D and E) cling conspicuously to the courses of the principal rivers. In the north we have a remarkable series of them down the Lune Valley. Just beyond the limits of the county we have Sedbergh, Kirkby Lonsdale, and Black Burton, while within it are Whittington, Arkholme with Cawood, Melling with Wrayton, Hornby with Farleton, Halton, and Lancaster. On the Ribble and its tributary the Calder are Preston and Penwortham and Clitheroe ; on the Roch, Rochdale; and on the Mersey, Warrington. Lancaster, Preston, Penwortham, and Warrington guarded the fords of the great road north and south across these rivers. It is curious to note, however, that the site of the important royal castle of West Derby is an exception to this general rule. Finally, who were the people who first constructed these moated mount and court forts? Few archaeological questions have been the cause of greater controversy ; champions have been eager to ascribe them exclusively to the Saxon, to the Dane, and to the Norman. The balance of probability would seem to be that this type was, in the majority of instances, the work of the Norman ; in the words of the late Mr. I. Chalkley Gould, ‘ from the time of the Conquest to the days of anarchy when Stephen was reigning but not ruling.’ During the latter’s reign so many fortified strongholds were con- structed by the landed proprietors that his successor, Henry II, thought it advisable to destroy no less than 1,150 of them; and after that no castle could be built without a royal licence to ‘ crenellate’ or fortify. What evidence Lancashire has to offer towards the final solution of this question will be seen in the detailed accounts of the different remains. One thing is clear from excavations that have been made in two or three of the mounts in the county, viz., that their heights were at various times increased * «Vita Sti. Johannis Epis. Mornorum,’ Acta Sanctorum, Bollend. die 27 Jan. vol. ii, 798, as translated in Clark, Med. Mil. Archit. i, 33-4. "See Fowke, The Bayeux Tapestry, plates xxii, xxiii, xxiv, xxvi, lii, liii. 520 ANCIENT EARTHWORKS by successive residents upon their summits; and another is that they were abandoned after comparatively short existences as fortresses. ARKHOLME WITH CAwoop (93 miles north-east of Lancaster).—Close to the north-east corner of the little church here, a circular earthwork mount, placed at the east end of a high headland, towers above the wide-spreading valley of the Lune. This mount is now known by the name of the Chapel Hill. The site is an imposing one, and strikes the observer at once as exceed- ingly suitable for defensive purposes. It is on the highest point of a little isolated hill, which projects quite close to the right bank of the river, about one-third of the distance down the course of the latter from where it leaves the mountains at Kirkby Lonsdale to its estuary below Lancaster. The height of the hill above sea level is about 140 ft., and it is about 60 ft. above the flat meadows and the river below. The mount absolutely commands the whole of its surroundings, the nearest ground of equal elevation being 270 yards away. The visible remains now consist of an artificial mound of earth, circular and conical in form and truncated, or cut level, upon the top; this mount (A) is 110 ft. in diameter at its base and measures about 45 ft. across its top ; its height above the small plateau upon which it is placed is about 20 ft. On the north-east, east, and south-east sides the very steep natural scarp of the ground, probably also increased artificially, forms ample protection against attack. There is no distinct fosse now to be seen upon the other and unpro- tected sides, but there are very apparent traces of the former existence of one upon the north-west of the mount, where a footpath runs along its hollow. On the south side, the fact of its being within the area of the graveyard will explain the filling up of a probable fosse. Whether there was a base court, or bailey, adjacent to the mount, is now not at first sight apparent. But beyond the ditch on the north-west side examination discloses a distinct raised area forming a kind of platform (B); this seems to run round to the west and south-west (including the site of the church), and covers in all about half an acre of ground ; along its north and west sides depressions and the lower- ing of level distinctly suggest former fosses. But the whole of the ground has been so altered by digging in the churchyard, and also by a modern extension of the latter, that no very definite opinion upon the point can be expressed. Just south of the mount a deep cut and ancient lane leads down to a ford across the Lune to Melling (q.v.). The earthwork mount there is seen about a mile away on the opposite side of the river to the south-east, while across the flat meadows 14 miles south the mount and court castle of Hornby (q.v.) is in view. Whittington Mount (q.v.) is 2? miles distant on the same side of the Lune to the north. This mount has often been described as a sepulchral tumulus, and has also been called a Roman Jdofontinus. But, fortunately, an examination of its interior by the spade, recently made by Mr. H. M. White of Burton, has removed all doubts as to its true nature. Mr. White kindly informs me that at a few inches below the surface on the summit of the mount, he found a rough cobble pavement. Digging down g ft. deeper he discovered another pavement which was covered with charred wood and other matter, in which were embedded bits of bone and 2 521 66 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE fragments of iron much corroded. This is a very similar result to that of the excavations in the castle mounts at Penwortham (q.v.) and at Warrington (q.v.). It shows that the mount at Arkholme was originally only about 11 ft. high above the base court or bailey, and that after the wooden residence he bnntiey, = 37, a SCALE OF FEET fe) 100 200 300 _ 1 rn j ENLARGED SECTION fromD./oE. Cuaret Hint, ArkHoLme ¢ \\ I Dy built upon it had been inhabited for a considerable period, it was raised some g ft., and a fresh timber residence probably erected upon its summit. There are no signs of any masonry either upon the mount or defences of the bailey, so that the earthworks can only have been palisaded. Arkholme church, a pre-Reformation chapel, is built with its chancel almost within the former fosse of the mount, so that the latter 522 ¢ HW] =— ae ad } Mi ANCIENT EARTHWORKS must have fallen into disuse before the present ancient building was erected.® CLITHEROE (94 miles east-north-east of Blackburn).—The celebrated castle is on the top of an isolated crag, rising in the middle of the vale down which the River Ribble winds its way from the heights of the Pennine chain in Yorkshire. This vale has long been a thoroughfare for traffic, both warlike and peaceful ; an old Roman road runs up it, and passes just south of the Castle Rock; the latter effectively bars the pass, and the out- look from its summit is most commanding. The castle is but small and is now a ruin ; it consists of a _circular walled keep ‘on the northern and a highest point of the crag, within which stands a tall square tower ; to the south of this, and at a lower elevation on the slope caused by the dip of the strata, lies a more or less oblong court or bailey, also walled round; this is now largely occupied by the outbuildings and : 2, ‘ gardens of themodern >“ geewionl from D.WE. residence built for the . ‘Same Scale. steward of the ancient honour of Clitheroe. 12 A = he B The plan of the fort- . ~« ressisthatofa mount OD \\ . andcourt castle of the , x << - . 22s. 2 Beagrie rs ae ee SCALE OF FEET . 100 200 300 Wa... class we are now con- Cuitnerok Caste sidering. It is not an earthwork in the ordinary acceptation of the term, for the reason that no soil was available upon the top of the limestone crag on which it is placed, while stone was of course abundant. Nevertheless it is so similar in design, and withal so rude and early in its workmanship, that it certainly belongs to the same era as the many mount and court earthworks to be seen in the county. The mount itself (A) is apparently a natural semicircular rock, which has probably also been scarped artificially in places; it is precipitous in parts, especially to the north and west, and rises to a height of about 130 ft. above °H.M. White in litt. ; Baines, Hist. Lancs. (ed. 1868), ii, 619; Watkins, Roman Lancs. 223; Ord. Surv. I-in. 49; old 98 SE.; 6-in. 25 NE.; 25-in. 25, 4. 523 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE the vale below. The top of the mount is truncated and nearly circular, measuring about 8o ft. in diameter, and is at least 22 ft. higher than the north end of the bailey. It is surrounded by a wall upon every side except the south, where the bailey abuts upon it. This wall, which is 12 ft. high inside and 6 ft. thick, is very rudely built of limestone rubble, and has every appearance of having formed the first defence erected upon the rock. On the southern half of the summit area a square tower has been built inside the wall ; this tower is also of early workmanship, but is apparently of later date than the above-named hastily constructed wall, as it contains lintels, &c., of dressed sandstone. The bailey (B) lies to the south of the mount at a lower level ; it is now cut up by modern terracing, and is so altered by this and by the erection of the steward’s residence that it is difficult to identify its original limits ; as far as we can judge by Buck’s view of the castle as it appeared a.p. 1727, and by the present condition of the site, both it and the mount together probably covered only about three-quarters of an acre. This bailey is also in part encircled by a thick wall of limestone. Possibly there was also an outer court (C) at a still lower level, which extended some 260 ft. south of the mount. No fosses are now visible about the bailey, though they once existed, as shown by documents mentioning the ‘castle ditches’ and ‘moats’ as early as 1304. About ‘a furlong to the south of the castle and much lower down,’ Clark alludes to a straight bank of earth with an exterior ditch ; this he thought was very likely an outwork. The ancient entrance to the castle was apparently on the east side, where the present steep road from the town leads up to the modern residence ; the approach on the west side seems to be of more recent date. As far back as 1102 a grant by Robert de Lacy includes ‘ houses which formerly belonged to Orme the Englishman,’ situated both within and below ‘le Baille’ of the castle. Supposing this word ‘ formerly’ to refer to but very few years prior to 1102, there is great probability in the suggestion that the mount and court castle of Clitheroe was originally constructed by the great Roger the Poitevin, and that it was the castle referred to (though not by name) in Domesday Book, where Barnoldswick and Colton are described about 1086 as im caste//atu (the castelry or honour) Rogeri pictavensis. The castle at Clitheroe is specially interesting for two reasons. First, because it is an undoubted example of a mount and court fortress whose defences were from the first, owing to local circumstances, of stonework instead of the usual earthwork and timber. Secondly, because we are able to date its origin as above very closely, certainly within fifteen years.’ Hatton (24 miles north-east of Lancaster)—A hundred yards to the north-east of the parish church, upon the top of a lofty cliff on the other side of the little beck, towers a circular artificial mound of earth, which bears the name of the ‘Castle Hill.’ This and some adjacent earthworks are the remains of a small mount and court castle, which is very strikingly situated. The site is nearly 200 yds. away from the present banks of the Lune, which runs through the flat meadows below. It is at an altitude of 100 ft. above the sea and go ft. above the river. It is situated at the extreme corner * Dom. Bk. fol. 332 ; Clark, Mil and Med. Arch. i, 397, 402; Farrer, Lancs. Pipe Rolls, 385 ; Armitage, Engl. Hist. Rev. xix, 225-7 ; Baines, Hist. Lancs. (ed. 1868), ii, 15 ; Buck, Antiguities (ed. 1774) ; Ord. Surv. t-in. 68, old 92 SW.; 6-in. 47 SW. ; 25-in, 47, 14. 524 ANCIENT EARTHWORKS of a promontory, formed by the deep valley of the Cole Beck where it has cut its way to join the low-lying river. The ground falls almost precipitously for 50 ft. or so on the sides next the brook, the south-west and south, while to the south-east it is but slightly less steep. On the north side, however, it is only separated from equally high ground behind by a slight depression, and at less than 200 yards’ distance the hill rises about 25 ft. higher. As long as weapons were short in range the position would be a magnificent one, and the command from the top of the mount complete ; but with the advent of Tee ere ee ee . ete Nays wae (STS, E SCALE OF FEET 100 200 300 a A a | ee River near. ENLARGED SECTION from DME. Scale 222 09 reer. E v Se > a 0 A ~ Leves Castiz Hitt, Hatron the long-bow it would not be at all secure. The view from the fortalice is extensive on every side except the north; it ranges both up and down the valley of the Lune and over the undulating ground across the river to the distant hills beyond ; Lancaster is just visible to the south-west. Halton mount (A) is visibly artificial, and, as usual, circular and conical, with a truncated top; it is about rooft. in diameter at its base, and rises 12 ft. above the level of the bailey (B), the top measuring about 35 ft. across. The fosse which once separated the mount from the bailey has been almost 525 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE filled in by former ploughings, but it is still traceable by the curved depres- sion along its course, and is especially recognizable where the rampart of the bailey approaches the mount from the north, There 1s no fosse round the mount on its west, south, and south-east sides, where the steep, and in places almost precipitous, natural slopes, which were possibly artificially scarped as well, formed ample protection. The bailey lies to the north-east of the mount, and is crescentic in shape. The area of it and its defences and those of the mount taken together is hardly an acre. Its interior has apparently been raised artificially to a height of about 4ft. above its immediate sur- roundings ; this in order to command equally high ground near it on the north. The site shows traces of ancient ploughing, which has largely obliterated the former defences; but a rampart of varying height is still visible on the north-west and north sides, and is traceable on the north-east ; the fosse outside this has evidently been well-nigh filled by former cultivation of the field, and is now only to be identified by a depression about half-way round, beginning from the west. The highest surviving portion of the| rampart is now only 2 ft. in height above the level of the bailey, and 6 ft. above the ground outside, from which position it is best viewed. The hill upon which the castle is situated has been grazed for the past fifty years or more, and all its steep slopes, both artificial and natural, have become terraced by the continual tread of animals. This has also tended to obliterate the pre- viously ploughed defensive earthworks. There are no signs of any masonry about the castle, and its palisades must, therefore, have been of wood. The church of Halton, just across the beck below the mount, is rebuilt upon an ancient foundation, and there is a Saxon cross standing beside it. The mount has been often described as sepulchral, and also as a Roman dotontinus, but there is no doubt that it is a mount and court earthwork castle of the usual type.” Hornsy witH Farteton (8 miles east-north-east of Lancaster).—About a mile north of this village, on the right-hand side of the road, just before the bridge over the Lune is reached, is a very fine earthwork of the mount and court class—in fact, the best example which the county of Lancaster now possesses. It is known by the name of the Castlestede. The site is remarkable, being at the north-west extremity of a ridge of high ground, which projects as far as the banks of the Lune, at the point where the ancient ford crossed the river. To the north stretch the wide flat low- lands on either side of the river called Hornby Holmes; across the Lune to the west is flat meadow again, while to the south the valley spreads out in a broad expanse towards the River Wenning and Farleton and Claughton. The end of the promontory upon the flat top of which the castle stands is 125 ft. above sea level and 50 ft. above the meadows beside the river. Behind, to the south-east, the ground drops slightly at first and then slopes upwards to a similar elevation some 100 yds. away ; at a distance of 250 yds. it rises to as much as 16oft. in height. The earthwork consists of a very perfect moated mount of moderate size, with a relatively large court or bailey attached to it on the west; the total area covered by the castle and its defences is about 2} acres. The a : FRA een rae li, 607 ; Watkins, Rom. Lancs, 222; Ord. Surv. 1-in. 59; old gt 526 ANCIENT EARTHWORKS mount (A) is now overgrown with trees; it is visibly artificial, composed of earth full of small rounded ‘drift’ stones ; its shape is circular and conical, with a truncated top ; measured at the bottom of the ditch its diameter is 120 ft., and its height from the same place is 20 ft. ; its flat top is 60ft. across. A fosse, some 30 ft. wide at level of its edge, and now averaging 8 ft. to 10 ft. deep, surrounds it, except for a few yards on its north side, where a long and steep scarp to the low meadows at foot of the promontory takes its place. The view from the top of the mount is most extensive, and the command perfect, as the rising ground to the south-east is not near enough to overawe the site. The mount castle at Melling (q.v.) lies 14 miles away to the north-east, and that of Ark- holme (q.v.) 14 ae gine miles to the a =i - eee baile o a pee ON Ree . ; , (B), which ms .: Qs NCTA a is Te : tends from the mount to the top a \ “8 of the cliff above a BCil\\s oi the river, is oval te a ay ee . h ere . Cyaan ee Ne yw RS in shape; its in- if) aru fg BW terior area mea- SNe bhi rr > ar : 12° sures 250 ft. from \ \e \ east to west, and \ iy \ ae “ G ‘ 200 ft. from < - vt north to south, \-\ SCALE OF FeeT fi which is nearly : eo 90. A990 double the size SECTION fromD.foE. same scale. of most of the 1) 8 A E other castle bai- Bon Yj leys in the RRC Ste SR lle SECTION fromF. foG. same seale. G county ; it slopes B inclination of the on Z We ground from east Castestepz, Hornsy to west, and is elevated some 5 ft. or more above the adjacent ground level to south and east, and from 40 to soft. to west and north. A rampart is raised along its south side, which now averages about 6 ft. in height from the interior plateau ; its fosse is about 18 ft. deep from the top of the earthwork; before denudation and silting up, however, it was of course deeper, and the rampart correspondingly higher, making together a very formidable defence. Around the west and north sides of the bailey, the natural escarpment, some 50 ft. high, formed sufficient protection ; this has the appearance of having been also artificially improved in parts, as it has a fairly uniform steep scarp all round, at an angle of 35 to 40 degrees. An entrance has been cut through the rampart into the bailey on the south side, but this is probably modern, made when the interior was ploughed. 527 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE There are no signs of any masonry about the castle, the earthworks of which must therefore have been palisaded with wood. Some excavating, of which traces are still visible on the west side, was once done upon the mount by Dr. Lingard ; he expected to find sepulchral remains, but, in the absence of these, no record or section unfortunately was preserved. Castlestede has been variously described as a British camp, and its mount as a Roman 4éotontinus and a sepulchral tumulus; but it is without doubt a very typical and fine example of a mount and court castle. Of the date of its construction no evidence is, up to the present, forthcoming. As no walls of masonry were ever erected upon the site, this stronghold was probably abandoned for the spot where the present Hornby Castle towers above the River Wenning less than a mile away ; similar migrations to con- tiguous sites will be noted later in the cases of Warrington to Bewsey and West Derby to Liverpool.” LancasTER.—The town, dominated by its important castle, lies on the south bank of the River Lune, some seven miles from its mouth. The castle, as now seen, is principally a mediaeval structure; this has been con- siderably altered, moreover, during the last century, by the building of the great Shire Hall, in the place of the ancient towers and walls of its north- west side. The site is upon an isolated hill, which is an offshoot projecting into the plain from the high fells to the east. The broad waters of the Lune sweep round it in a curve from east to west some quarter of a mile to the north ; the top of this hill, upon the southern half of which the castle stands, has an altitude of about 120 ft. above sea level; its sides fall rapidly to the west, north, and east, and less so to the south. The view from the spot is most extensive ; to the west across the flats and over Morecambe Bay; to the north over the hills of Lancashire and the mountains of the Lake Country ; to the north-east up the Lune valley ; to the east across the high fells as far as the mountains of Yorkshire; and to the south over the Fylde district. The old church stands upon only slightly lower ground to the north, but the artificial works of the castle overlook it, and the command all round is there- fore complete. Moreover, the site overawed the lowest ford of the Lune, across which a very old and important highway ran north and south. Earthworks encircle the north and north-west sides of the entire hill some distance down its slopes. They have apparently nothing to do with the castle, and will be described in the chapter on the Romano-British period. The mediaeval fortress stands across a corner of the site of the Roman castrum. There is very little doubt that the present stone castle gradually replaced one of those earlier mount and court earthworks with timber palisading, of which several in the district have been described above. The ground plan of such an earthwork is still easily recognizable. Within it, on the north- west side, stood the usual mount. This, as in many other instances in the country, has been absorbed by the building of the fine rectangular keep, 80 ft. square, of Norman masonry. The present walls round the courtyard of the castle to the south-west of the keep are apparently upon the ramparts of the 1 Baine : : och Pa . . Stic, gy gee oA NE ee et ee ae Mare a 528 ANCIENT EARTHWORKS ancient bailey ; this was of the crescentic form, with its horns half encircling the mount. The fosses outside the walls have now been mostly filled up and built over ; but, as seen in old plans of the castle, they were vast and deep. We know that they were made considerably more formidable at the time the walls of masonry were erected, probably in the early years of the thirteenth century. The shape of the castle ditch surrounding the mount and bailey is, or rather was, an irregular circle, and the area inclosed and covered by it was about 13 acres. This was larger than that of Lancaster’s companion royal castle of West Derby, but not nearly so large as the mount and court castle at Warrington. History helps to confirm the early origin claimed for this castle by reason of its plan, taking us back, as it does, to the time when walls of masonry had not yet come to be used in this district for castle construction in place of the earlier earthworks surmounted by wooden palisades. There are of course many references to this castle in early mediaeval documents. The sums expended upon its upkeep and victualling are frequently detailed in the sheriff's accounts of the reigns of Henry III and John, side by side with those of the other local royal castle, the mount and court earthwork of West Derby.” MELLING wiTH WrayTon (10 miles north-east of Lancaster).—A lofty earthen mount, placed upon an elevated plateau, is in the vicarage garden here, just 30 yds. east of the church. The site is a fine one, being on a little raised knoll which rises out of the hill-slope on the east side of the spreading Lune valley ; its height is 15oft. above sea level, and some 75 ft. above the flat marshy meadows on either side of the wide flooding river. ‘The views, both up and down and across the vale, are most extensive, the command from the top of the mount being complete for short-range weapons; after the introduction of the long-bow, however, it would be assailable upon the south-east side, where the ground rises to a similar height 75 yds. away, and to 2¢5 ft. higher at a distance of 120 yds. The fine mount and court castle at Hornby (q.v.) lies 14 miles away to the south-west, and the mount at Arkholme (q.v.) is on the opposite side of the river, barely a mile distant, to the north-west. The earthwork, as now seen, consists of a mount (A) only ; but this is placed upon an elevated circular plateau (B), which strongly suggests a former base court or bailey. The mount is conical, slightly oval in shape (with its greatest length north to south), and has a truncated top; it measures some 100 ft. by 125 ft. in diameter at its base, and its flat summit is about 40 ft. across ; its height is about 20 ft. from the level of the plateau. The base of the mount has been considerably cut and altered by gardening operations, so that it now shows a terrace about 15 ft. wide all round, retained in parts by a wall below it, 5 ft. high ; there is no ditch extant, but in all probability a former one has been filled in. The ascent cut to the summit is modern. The elevated plateau, towards the east end of which the mount rises, was formerly almost circular ; it measures about 210 ft. across its longest remaining diameter ; a portion of it has evidently been long ago cut away on 9 Baines, Hist. Lancs. (ed. 1868), ii, 169, 554-63; Clark, Med. Mil. Archit. 1, 90, 123, 138, 401 ; Cox, in Trans. Lancs. and Ches. Hist. Soc. (New Ser.), xii, 95, 1223 Ord. Surv. 1-in. 59; old gt NE. ; 6-in. 30 SE. ; 25-in. 30, 11. 2 529 67 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE the north side for the foundations of the original vicarage; and Canon Grenside informs me that when this house was enlarged by the addition of the present drawing-room, further portions, amounting to 60 ft. by 26 ft. in area, had to be removed, first for the actual site, and afterwards to admit of more light and air to the room. The west end approaches close to the chancel of the church, the nave of which is built upon a slope about 15 ft. lower. No ramparts or fosses are now visible around this plateau, but the SCALE OF FEET ee" =) 100 =200° 300\ ; SECTION from F. foG. Same oN oa ¥4 25 . ” oT, ERLE, eve/ above Sea. SECTION from D. fo E.Same Scale. eve/ above Séd Castte Mount, Metinc ground looks as if it had been considerably altered in mediaeval times. The field to the south presents a distinct appearance of having been dug out level for a distance of 200 ft. from the plateau; very probably the soil used for the mount was carried from here; and the excavation thus made would also prevent the site being commanded on this side even by short-range weapons, as would otherwise have been the case. Of course this mount has, like many others, been frequently described as sepulchral, and also called a Roman dotontinus. The spade alone can 528 ANCIENT EARTHWORKS decide the former question, but its position and surroundings, as well as the antiquity of the church and manor here, distinctly point to its being an | earthwork mount castle, with probably a base court or bailey attached, like the more perfectly preserved examples which the Lune valley has to show.” Newton In MAKeERFIELD (15 miles east of Liverpool).—Nearly a third of a mile north-north-east of the parish church is a conspicuously placed artificial hillock called the ‘Castle Hill’; three good-sized oaks grow upon al ge E84, SCALE OF FEET : me ° 109 200 300 SECTION Crone foD. eole « Scale. ca Qs DEA Castte Hitt, Newton in Makerrietp & au & it, possibly the descendants of the ‘gnarled trees three centuries old’ described by a writer sixty years ago. The Castle Hill occupies a commanding site at the north-east corner of a slightly raised plateau; it is within an elbow formed by the deep-cut valley of the River Dene, which separates it from the adjacent level country on two of its sides, the north and the east ; on the west side, the plateau is continuous with a ridge running in that direction, while to the south it gradually falls away to a little stream in low and formerly marshy ground. 8 Baines, Hist. Lancs. (ed. 1868), ii, 616 ; Watkins, Roman Lancs.222; Ord. Surv. 1-in. 59, old gt NE.; 6-in. 25 NE., ; 25-in. 25, 4. 3531 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE The Mellingford Brook joins the Dene just opposite to the site. Of recent years the waters of these two streams have been dammed up to a higher level, and form what is now known as Newton Lake. The mount (A) so placed is slightly oval in form, conical and truncated at the top. It is raised upon more or less bare sandstone rock. On its north-west, west, and south-west sides it is defended by a fosse; on the other sides the steep scarps of the river valley are ample protection. The height of the mount is 17 ft. from the present bottom of the ditch; it is 105 ft. in diameter at its base, and its top measures 40 ft. across. In 1843 there was a raised rim of earth round the top along the south side, but this has disappeared. The ditch is now only about 5 ft. deep and 32 ft. wide ; originally (as excavation showed) it was at least 2 ft. deeper and partially cut into the rock; it has apparently always been a dry fosse. There are no signs of any masonry upon the mount. From its top the ‘Castle Hill’ effectively commands the whole of its immediate surroundings ; it also overlooks the level ground on the farther side of the river valleys. There is no adjacent bailey now traceable ; it is possible, however, that there may formerly have been one in part of the slightly elevated field to the south (B), which has been altered by much ploughing; an old inhabitant still remembers the existence of ditches and banks here. The interior of this mount was extensively investigated in 1843, and a fair account of the proceedings has been preserved ; owing, however, to the explorers being under the impression that they were excavating a sepulchral barrow, features in accordance with that idea would seem to have received most attention. The results are nevertheless very interesting. First, a shaft was sunk vertically from the top to the bottom of the mount at its centre ; then a second was driven horizontally on the ground level from the west side to meet it ; next, another shaft was excavated from the centre to the south side, and, finally, one from the centre to the east side. It was found that the substance of the mount was clay, marl, red sand and sandstone, partly, at any rate, dug out of its fosse. These materials were heaped upon what was seen clearly to have once been grassy sward and rock. Burnt clay, coal ashes, wood charcoal, stones showing action of fire, roots and branches of oak, were found, apparently, in both the horizontal and vertical shafts. On the south side, 10 ft. within the mount, a long narrow chamber was discovered on the ground level. It was 21 ft. in length, 2 ft. wide, and 2 ft. high; its roof was arched over with lumps of pressed clay ; the floor was covered, 3 in. deep, with what appeared to be a mixture of wood ashes, calcined bones, and half- burnt animal matter ; below the floor level a trench, 15 in. deep, was found, lined with two tiers of rounded oak timbers, and filled with clay. On the roof of this chamber was discovered a very distinct and remarkable impression of an adult human body, of which a full description is given. The mouth of the chamber was found to be closed with bundles of grass, fern, dry roots and clay, none of which were carbonized. Other ‘finds’ were a broken whetstone, unearthed near the centre of the hill, and a fragment of pottery (both figured and described in detail). This ‘ Castle Hill,’ like many another in the district, has been described as a sepulchral barrow, and also as a Roman Jotontinus; but the position in which it is placed, and the excavations above recorded, distinctly point to its 532 ANCIENT EARTHWORKS being a defensive earthwork of the class we are now considering ; and this notwithstanding the curious interment found below it. History, unfortunately, has no account to give of the origin of this castle. Newton was the seat of a barony, of which this mount was very robably the site, even if it was not the spot where the earlier ‘king’s house’ of Edward the Confessor’s time, mentioned in Domesday, stood.” PENWORTHAM.—Just across the river, to the west of Preston, 70 yds. north-north-west of Penwor- tham Church, and within the area of the present extended graveyard, a conspicuous artifi- cial mount crowns the summit... of a large hillock which bears ..25: | the name of the ‘Castle Hill.’ -Thisis the earthwork, nowmuch jworn and altered, of a small mount and court castle of the usual type. It is situated on the south bank of, and some six miles up, the estuary of the River Ribble, that important natural boundary of territories in ancient times. It stands upon the top of a cliff, at the end of a high pro- montory which projects towards the north, being a spur of the flat heights of Penwortham. On the west the site is separated 20. Ole toad lo Feny> - kena L's from the adjacent elevated land SAC ear rey by a long and deep gorge. To ) 1900 200 300 the north is the river, which in SECTION from D.toE SameScale. former days washed its base. On the east, a tract of low re- claimed land occupies an older bed of the Ribble, a branch of which at no distant date en- SECTION frgm Fro. Same Seale. circled the Holme (then an é A island) and ran along the foot of J 5 Cc G the cliff which bounds the old \ 8 churchyard and the castle hill. Ss SSYP, . The end of the headland (C on Casriz Hitt, PenworTHaM plan), thus so well protected by nature, has an elevation of 60 ft. above sea level. On its south-eastern side rises the oval hill (AB) upon which the fortalice was constructed ; this is some 30 ft. higher than the plateau (C). At the south end of 4 Dom. Bk. fol. 2694 ; Gibson, Manchester Lit. and Phil. Soc. (Ser. 2), vii, 3253 Lancs. and Ches. Hist. Soc. iv, 205 ; xxv, 1073; Baines, Hist. Lancs, (ed. 1868), ii, 217, 218; Ord. Surv. 1-in. 84, old 89 SW.; 6-in. 101 SE. ; 25-in. 101, 16. 533 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE this, again, towers the artificial mount of the castle keep (A), the summit of which rises another 15 ft.; or a total of about 105 ft. above the level of the sea. It forms a conspicuous object when seen from Preston and the north and east. The main castle hill (AB) is divided from the slightly lower neck of the promontory on which stands the church, by a deeply excavated fosse which cuts across the headland. From its top the mount commands its entire surroundings, having a most comprehensive view both up and down and across the Ribble, and far over the country beyond. An ancient sunk road leads down the gorge on the west to the water’s edge, where a ford crossed to the opposite side. The castle hill at Penwortham guarded the estuary of the Ribble very effectually, and it also completely controlled the important road across the river to the north. To describe what remains of the earthworks more in detail. The mount (A) is conical in form ; it is slightly oval in plan, and has a diameter of 120 ft. at its longest base ; its summit is now worn so round that its area can only be given approximately as 25 ft. across; its height above the plateau to the north (upon which it stands) is about 15 ft. No fosse now divides it from this, but one has very probably been filled up. The plateau (B) evidently formed the bailey of the castle; it is now 25 ft. or more above the level of the lower plateau which surrounds it to the north and north- west, and about 75 ft. above the ancient river bed to the east. Its area is now very small; but it was once probably larger, extending round the east side of the mount in the frequently-found crescentic form ; the cliff on this side, which is above the old river channel, has the appearance of having suffered very much by erosion. The loss of area here is also shown by the cut appearance of the eastern end of the fosse which divides the site from the slightly lower land where the church stands to the south. This fosse is the only one now visible around the fortalice. It is 35 ft. wide from edge to edge, and 15 ft. deep at either end, though shallower in the centre. According to a description written ninety years ago, however, ‘a fosse 39 yards square, measured in the centre of the moat,’ having its ‘ sides facing the four cardinal points,’ then surrounded the mount. This account can hardly have been strictly accurate in detail, as the mount is oval in outline. It is abundantly evident that the site has been much altered in several ways ; first, by the filling in of the fosses round both bailey and mount (except the por- tion now seen upon the south side) ; secondly, by a general rounding off of all the slopes of the ancient earthworks; and, finally, by the wearing away of the east side of the hill by former river erosion. It has been sug- gested that the lower plateau (C) may perhaps have formed a second stockaded bailey ; but its value for defensive purposes can never have been great, as much of its interior area is commanded by the higher ground on which the church stands. There is no sign of masonry upon any part of the earthworks, so the defences of the castle must always have been of wood. It is interesting to record that some fairly careful excavation was under- taken upon the castle site in the year 1856. Of this two accounts (one illustrated by figures of the finds) have been preserved to us. These accounts 534 ANCIENT EARTHWORKS differ in certain details, but that by Hardwick seems to be the most trustworthy. The operations were as follows :— First a trench about 50 ft. long by 12 ft. wide appears to have been cut from the north-east side of the mount (A) as far as its centre; here its depth was I1 ft. or more. Secondly, a shaft was sunk to the same level rather south-west of the centre of the mount. At the bottom of the trench, and also of the shaft, a rude pavement of boulders was discovered ; it extended nearly level for two-thirds of the length of the trench, and for the remaining third (towards the centre of the mount) was as much as a foot higher ; its width was not ascertained beyond the breadth of the trench (i.e. 12 ft.), but it is said to have had the appearance of being continued on either side. On the top of this pavement lay a stratum, 2 ft. 6 in. thick, of decayed vegetable matter, chiefly rushes and grass, intermixed with large quantities of bones of various animals; these were generally broken. There were also sundry objects of iron, bronze, and wood. The soil beneath the pavement was saturated with decomposed animal matter, which turned blue on exposure to the air, probably the result of vivianite produced by iron in contact with the bones. Lying upon the pavement and its debris, or projecting out of the ground, were the broken timbers and wattling of what appeared to have been a circular habitation ; this was divided into several chambers. On the top of the debris were remains of the beams, wattling, and thatch of one or more roofs, seemingly of varying construction and materials in different places : all were black with both smoke and age. Near the centre of the mount a thick oak post was still standing which had been broken off 5 ft. from the floor, and was bored with holes for the insertion of pegs; other very similar posts and beams were found prostrate. The broken bones of animals discovered in the mass upon the floor were all of species used for human food. Those of the boar greatly predominated, but there were remains of deer, ‘long’ and ‘ broad-faced’ oxen, hares, rabbits, and also of geese and fowls. It was noted that bones of the goat and sheep were curiously absent. A few mussel shells were also found. Of objects used by former occupiers of the habitation were a broken wooden paddle, two net weights of lead, a curved bronze loop (possibly for harness), the leather sole of a shoe, part of a knife-handle of stag’s horn, wooden pegs, an iron ‘ Roman key,’ and three iron nails—all found beneath or among the decayed matter lying upon the pavement. Last and most important a beautiful prick-spur was disinterred and picked up among matter thrown out from the excavations ; as far as known it came from the layer of débris lying upon the floor ; its blue colour, and the fact of portions of the said stratum being found adhering to it, would also seem to confirm this ; there is always the possibility, however, of its having fallen from the higher floor shortly to be described. Experts have variously described this spur as of Saxon and Norman workmanship, but it is most probably of the latter date. This ancient wooden habitation was evidently occupied sufficiently long for the bones of hundreds of successive meals to have been thrown upon the floor, and to have been covered by relays of rushes ; even as now com- pressed, these amounted to a horrible mass 2 ft. 6 in. thick. Above these remains earth appears to have been subsequently heaped. PEE) A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Excavations through this earth showed first, in ascending order, two layers of sand and one of clay, as if the material had been carried from different localities ; these combined were 5 ft. thick. At this height a second ancient floor appeared, shown by a thin layer of vegetable mould; upon this lay a second rough pavement described as ‘about 2 yds. in breadth.’ No timbers or rushes or objects of any kind appear to have been found upon this floor, which was at a depth of 7 ft. below the top of the mount. The soil which was subsequently piled upon the second floor was composed of sand, clay, and vegetable mould well mixed together ; it was not in separate layers like that found between the two pavements. Briefly summarized, the story which these interesting excavations seem to reveal is that first, a stone-paved timber-palisaded dwelling was erected upon a low mount at the south end of the plateau (AB), and was long inhabited; this low mount would not be a very commanding position, as recorded measurements show it as only a few feet higher than the level of the bailey. Secondly, earth was heaped up over this habitation to a height of 5 ft., and another pavement was laid upon the top. Thirdly, the hill was raised another 7 ft. at least, by the piling up of more earth upon it. These successive stages may be compared with very similar ones revealed by the excavations of the mounts at Arkholme (q.v.) and at Warrington (q.v.). As no walls of masonry were ever erected here to replace the first wooden defences, it is probable that the castle, like so many others in the county, went early to ruin ; tradition says that its timbers were used in part construction of the wooden buildings of the adjacent priory by the monks of Evesham ; the site certainly came eventually into their possession. The interesting problems have yet to be solved, whether the first low mount with the relics found upon it was the keep of the important little castle known to have been erected shortly prior to 1086, and whether the two later elevations were the work of the subsequent barons. Present evidence is scant and conflicting, but this was probably the case.’ Preston.—In the hamlet of Ashton, in the north-west of this parish, lies the derelict mansion of Tulketh Hall, once surrounded by beautiful pleasure grounds ; in these grounds, probably about 300 ft. south-west of the hall, the earthworks of what appears to have been a mount and court fortalice existed up to the year 1855, when they were unfortunately destroyed. The site which they occupied was west or the deep valley cut by the Moor Brook between Preston and Ashton. It was on the top of a cliff over fifty feet high and eighty feet above sea level; this cliff is now some six hundred yards north of the present banks of the River Ribble, the inter- vening ground being occupied by low land called the Marsh. The cliff at this point projects forward to the south ; at the apex of this projection the earthworks were erected. The situation is eminently suitable for defensive purposes ; it has, moreover, a most extensive outlook, both up and down the river and across it to the castle at Penwortham, five-eighths of a mile to the south. These two fortalices of Tulketh and Penwortham would effectually *® Dom. Bk. fol. 270; Thorber, Trans. Lancs. and Chet. Hist. Soc. ix, 61-76 ; Hardwick, Hist, Preston (1857), 50-120; Taylor, Preston (1818), 50; Baines, Hist. Lancs. (ed. 1868), ii, 151-2 ; Armitage, Engl. Hist, Reo. xix, No. 74, pp. 243-5 5 Ord. Surv. t-in. 75, old 89 NW. ; 6-in. Ixi S.W., 25-in. Ixi, 13. 536 ANCIENT EARTHWORKS guard their respective sides of the River Ribble, and the important road north and south which passed across it by a ford between and below them as late as the middle of the eighteenth century. This road is shown on a map dated 1715. The site of the castle is now much excavated and built over; the present contour of the ground, however, and details shown in the 6-in. Ordnance Survey map of 1847, together with particulars recorded by Hard- wick in 1855, just before its destruction, enable us to piece together some idea of the nature of the earthwork. It stood upon the extremity of a pro- jecting cliff, much of which has been cut away for a sand-pit. Two houses in Tulketh Crescent, now occupied by the Church Army, were built upon part of its remains, possibly a rampart, fifty years ago; they are on ground some 20 ft. higher than the adjoining row of houses on the west. The mount was upon a portion of the cliff which has gone ; as shown in the 6-in. Ordnance Survey map, it was circular and conical, with a basal diameter of about 125 ft. Hardwick describes the partial destruction of the mount when workmen were also ‘ busily occupied in filling up trenches and levelling the ground for building and the working of the clay found into bricks.’ He says that there were considerable remains of a fosse which was ‘ semicircular in form and detached the nose of a promontory from the mainland.’ This suggests the crescentic form of bailey, which agrees with the plan of Pen- wortham opposite and with the majority of the mount and court forts in the county. The old 6-in. Ordnance Survey does not show this semicircular fosse, but to the north-west of the mount appear two parallel lengths of fosse 100 ft. and 200 ft. long respectively, connected by a cross-length at one end. No remains of masonry were recorded by Hardwick, pointing to the earthworks having beeen surmounted by the usual timber palisades; ‘ruins’ of buildings were mentioned by Baines, quoting from West ; but Hardwick clearly shows that both Baines and West confused the remains at Tulketh with the ruins of the Hospital of St. Mary Magdalene on the ‘ Maudlands’ at Preston. At whatever time the castle was constructed, it would seem to have ceased to be in use for military purposes in 1123. In that year we find that its site belonged to Stephen count of Boulogne, under the honour of Lancaster, which had lately been given to him by his uncle, the king. The count presented ‘villam scilicet Tulketh ’ to thirteen Cistercian monks from Normandy, who established themselves there for four years, and then migrated to Dalton-in-Furness, where they founded the great Furness Abbey on land also given them by Count Stephen. The spot where these monks settled in Tulketh is usually supposed to be upon the site of the castle owned by Count Stephen.’ . Rocupate.—Rather over a quarter of a mile south-west of the old parish church, on the right-hand side of the new Manchester road, and within the township of Castleton, are remnants of the earthworks of a mount and court castle. They are situated upon the top of a lofty natural hill, composed of sand and gravel, which forms a north-west spur of the high ground to the south of the River Roch. The hill attains an altitude of 480 ft. above sea level, and towers some roo ft. above the low ground 6 Baines, Hist. Lancs. (ed. 1836), iv, 304; ibid. (ed. 1868), ii, 437, 630; Hardwick, Hist. of Preston (1857), 117-20, 508 ; Ord. Surv. 1-in. 75; old 98 NW.; 6-in. 61 SW.; 25-in. 61,9. 2 537 68 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE beside the river, which now runs about 200 yds. away to the north, though in former days it skirted the foot of the hill. The eminence is triangular in shape, with its base towards the south. Its north-west, north and north-east sides are exceedingly steep slopes, at the bottoms of which ran the Roch in the one case, and a little rivulet falling into it in the other. The south side is less steep, and its foot is joined by a neck wt SCALE OF FEET 9 100 |."200 300 SECTION from D.fo E. same Scale... BU. Rampart, D.Ditth.F D. Former.Ditch. B Rp “ Le te ee ‘Old river SECTION fromF.foG Same Scale bove sea kevek, os ag ASUS ibove S€a /evel. Castiz Hirt, Rocupare of fairly high ground to the elevated hamlet of Castleton beyond. In early days the waters of the Castle Mere spread out broadly a quarter of a mile away to the east, while at 150 ft. distance to the south-west again a deed records that the valley was in the thirteenth century filled with water. The site effectually overlooks the ancient ford called Trefford, which crossed the Roch Just below it on the north. The view from the spot is very extensive, and 538 ANCIENT EARTHWORKS the command is of course complete. A modern residence (A) has been built upon a part of the plateau on the top of the hill, and its grounds occupy the slopes. The earthworks now remaining serve to show the plan of the former mount and court castle upon the triangular plateau on top of the hill; it covered an area of about anacre. They are now considerably mutilated, and the mount was completely demolished when the present house was built. Very fortunately, however, a plan of the remains as they existed in the year 1823 was carefully prepared from actual survey by the late Mr. H. H. Fishwick, and is available. The bailey of the castle (B) faced to the south. Its shape was an irregular square. It had an interior measurement of 120 ft. east and west, and roo ft. north and south, and an area of rather over half an acre. Being on the top of the hill, it was much higher than any ground near. The earthen rampart which formerly surrounded it is still intact upon its east and west, and for some distance along its south sides ; its height is now from 6 ft. to 7 ft. There are traces of an outer fosse on its west and south sides only; probably the very steep slopes of the hill were sufficient protection elsewhere. The plan made in 1823 shows a second fosse, described as 8 ft. deep, at the foot of the hill on the south and south- east, where the natural defence was less strong (v. HHHH on plan); this also probably guarded the ancient entrance (KKK) at the south-east corner towards the old highway. The mount (A), which was destroyed when the present house was built, is shown on the above-named plan of 1823. It stood at the north end of the hill at the apex of the triangular platform, and projected into it as far as the dotted lines on plan opposite. It was circular, as usual, with a diameter at its base of about rooft. Its top was flat, and had an area described as measuring 17 perches, which was 8 ft. high above the level of the bailey. No fosses around the mount are now visible, nor are any shown in Mr. Fishwick’s plan. Probably the steep hillsides to the north, west, and east were ample protection, and a formerly existing fosse between the mount and bailey has been filled up. The site is still known as the Castle Hill. It has long borne this name, for in a lease to the tenant in the year 1626 the house upon it is called ‘Castle Hill,’ and is further described as the ‘reputed scite of a castle standing there but now clean defaced.’ In an inquisition taken in 1610, the same house and its appurtenances are mentioned, and are described as covering 2% acres, which coincides with the measurement of the present residential property. This mount and court castle was an important fortalice in early Norman, and perhaps even in pre-Conquest, days. Like many others in the county its palisaded earthworks seem never to have been replaced by walls of masonry, and it was abandoned certainly as early as the first years of the thirteenth century.” Warrincton.—About 100 yards to the north-east of the parish church of St. Elphin, where the Clergy Orphan Schools now stand, there was formerly a mount and court castle of considerable size and of historical importance. Unfortunately, however, owing to successive building operations ” Baines, Lancs. (ed. 1868), i, pp. 482-3, 5043 Fishwick, ‘Castles of Lancs. and Ches.’ in Trans. Antig. Lancs. and Ches. Soc. xix ; Fishwick, ‘Rochdale Manor Inquisition, a.p. 1610,’ in Trans. Rochdale Lit. and Scien. Soc. 1903 ; Ord. Surv. 1-in. 85/86, old 88 SW.; 6-in. 88 NE.; 25-in. 88, 4. 539 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE on the site during the last century, very few remains of it are now to be traced. The sloping approach to the entrance upon the north side of the present building is upon the last surviving remnant of the earthen mount which formed the keep, while to the west, north, and east of this, at distances shown on the plan, depressions still mark the lines of the ancient fosses which surrounded the mount and its adjacent bailey. These depressions are mainly the fortunate result of the sinking of the soil since the ditches were filled in, over fifty years ago. Other banks and ditches, ancient and modern, are also discernible, but they have been too much altered in recent times to distinguish them satisfactorily. Though so little elevation is now visible, the site is still called ‘The Mount’; prior to its destruction, the whole earthwork was for centuries known as ‘ The Mote Hill.’ The fortalice was placed in as good a position as the locality afforded, upon what has been described as ‘an humble elevation,’ barely 30 ft. above sea level, which is the termination of a low ridge running from the north-east to the church. It was some 250 yds. away from the Mersey, which runs on the south ; but it was only just above the flood waters of the river, which in former days used to overspread the Howley marshes far and wide. The summit of the artificial mount (but not the bailey) would overlook its near surroundings, and would, especially, command the old road, now represented by Church Street, across the ford at Latchford. This was a very important highway in ancient days, and up to the end of the fifteenth century, when the bridge was thrown across the river lower down, and traffic diverted. In early days the town of Warrington clustered just below ‘The Mote Hill’ and the church, but after the new bridge and road were made, the tide of building set in nearly a mile away to the west. The ford was prob- ably the razson détre for the placing of the castle in an otherwise not very good position. It was secure in the days of short-range weapons, but when the long-bow came in the bailey would be commanded by the rising ground which overtops it at a distance of 100 yds. on the north, and would be untenable. Though little but the ground plan is now traceable upon the site, we are fortunately able to piece together an idea of the former appearance of the earthwork from written references to it made years ago. AA first partial excavation of the mount (AA) took place in 1832. It was described at that time as slightly oval in form, with a level summit measuring about go ft. across ; another account gives 162 ft. from north-west to south-east, and 129 ft. from north-east to south-east, as the diameter of the top, which would be substan- tially correct for that of the base. Its height was described as gft. only above the surrounding land. Although partially cut into before the year 1848, when the old Ordnance Survey map was published, the mount is well shown thereon. There are earlier allusions to it by Ormerod in 1819, by Pennant in 1773, and by Whittakerin 1771. In 1832 a moat with water in it ran round its base on the south and west sides, while in 1773 this fosse ran all the way round the mount. Of the court or bailey (B), which lay to the north-east of the mount, we can still form some idea by an inspection of the site. Its interior is slightly elevated above the surrounding ground. Notwithstanding that it was partly filled in with earth from the mount and ramparts in 1841, the fosse is 540 -44ft SCALE OF FEET 3 re) 100 200 300 - (of %¢ Forg qt Latehfor Howley Marshes ———— SECTION from E fo DO. Same ‘Scale A. sile of Mount B. Boiley FE Fosseés. . A. D B ANAT oT OTT $s DIAGRAM of EXCAVATION OL Oe NOT fo scale. — B E Tue Mount, WarrincTon 541 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE still well seen to the north-west of the mount, where its bottom is 12 ft. below the highest part of the latter. Proceeding northward round the outside of the bailey, the ditch is now some 6 ft. below the interior area of the former. Its course can be distinctly traced curving round to the east and then south-east, well outside the angle and line of the modern fence. About roo ft. north-east of the buildings within the area, it apparently turns acutely south-west through the gardens, and runs between St. Elphin’s Well and the school buildings to the south-east side of the former mount in the direction of the church. Signs of the ditch which separated the mount from the bailey can still be seen. The bailey evidently had considerable ramparts around it as late as 1819, when Ormerod mentioned the existence of ‘ earth- works’ near the circular mount. Warrington was by far the largest of the mount and court castles in the county, its total area being nearly three acres. The spade has been so repeatedly at work upon the site that the original mount has now well-nigh disappeared. First, excavation was made in the ‘Mote Hill,’ to discover its nature, in 1832; secondly, a considerable portion was removed and thrown into the ditches when the Clergy Orphan Schools were erected in 1841; thirdly, an enlargement of these buildings in 1851 resulted in the final destruction of the whole of the mount with the excep- tion of the small portion previously described. These various operations resulted in interesting discoveries both of relics and of the nature of the interior of the mount. As far as can be gathered from the extant accounts of the excavations, the accompanying diagram would roughly represent a section of the artificial hill. (FF) represents the original ground level. Above this was heaped sand and earth in stratified layers (E), to the height of about 6 ft. On the top of the hillock so formed there was a circular depression (D) about one foot deep in the centre. This hollow was filled with a mass of carbonized vegetable remains—reeds, straw, and brushwood ; on the top of and mixed with this were bones and decayed animal refuse, which gave off a very offensive smell ; the bones were all broken and were those of oxen, sheep, deer, boar, geese, &c., such as would be thrown upon the floor of the dwelling in uncivilized days after every meal. At one point a pit of conical form was brought to light, which was half-full of white wood ashes and calcined bones as if from a fire ; pieces of coal were also discovered in the earliest excavation. Some distance from the fireplace a well was found dug down into the original and undisturbed ground, and lined with oaken staves laid horizontally against four stout corner posts ; this well had been filled up with earth at a later date, but water rose within it when opened. Several massive beams of timber and a few squared stones were also dug out of the mount, but their original position is not recorded. In the stratum of animal and vegetable refuse at the bottom of the well, in the fire cavity and mixed with the soil thrown out, many interesting articles used in former days were discovered. These included (1) many fragments of pottery pronounced by Mr. Akerman at the time to be early mediaeval ; (2) half a horseshoe curiously vandyked on its outer edge ; (3) a curved knife-blade, said to be Saxon ; (4) part of a small stone quern; (5) a large iron nail and another smaller ; (6) a slender bronze fibula, described as Saxon ; (7) a few portions of Roman amphorae (probably from the site of the Roman station a mile away); (8) an earthen- 542 ANCIENT EARTHWORKS ware button veined like marble; (9g) some plates of fused lead; and (10), most noteworthy of all, two rude chess pieces made of jet (probably from York- shire); these remarkable specimens have been variously ascribed to the ninth, tenth, and twelfth centuries. Above the stratum of animal and vegetable débris in the hollow (D) was a layer of pure vegetable soil (CC). Laid upon this were a number of boulder stones forming a rough pavement. Associated with these stones a silver penny of Henry III was found. On the top of this pavement again there was another 3 ft. thickness of clay, earth, and sand (B). In this a number of military and other relics belonging to the seventeenth century were discovered. ‘Tradition has always said that the mount was raised higher by the Parliamentarian forces when they besieged the town in the year 1643, in order to place a cannon upon it and bombard the church. The relics found in the top layer of the mount distinctly confirm this. The results of the various excavations seem to show that a dwelling con- structed of timber once stood upon the saucer-shaped summit of the low oval Mote Hill. This was evidently occupied long enough for a horrible fester- ing mass of food refuse to accumulate upon its rush-covered floor, upon which, and into a well, many objects which date from Saxon and Norman days were dropped by former inhabitants of the dwelling. Subsequently a layer of fresh clean earth appears to have been placed over this debris, and a rough pave- © ment of stone to have been laid thereon. That this was either during or after the reign of Henry III is evidenced by the finding of the silver penny associated with it. Many centuries after this the mount was again raised 3ft., probably during the Civil Wars in 1643. These successive strata of occupation remind us of those revealed by excavation in the mounts of Pen- wortham and of Arkholme (q.v.). Documentary evidence fortunately informs us of the nature of the timber habitations which formerly stood upon the top of the mount ; for in a survey of Warrington made in 1587 the Mote Hill is called ‘The scyt of the Mannor or Barronage, now decayed and no build- inge thereuppon.’ Whatever may have been the date of its origin, and whether the large and important castle on the Mote Hill at Warrington was in exis- tence much after 1228 (when we have mention of it) or not, no sub- sequent walls of masonry replaced the original palisading of wood upon the - earthworks.”® West Dersy (34 miles east-north-east of Liverpool).—Only faint traces upon the site now remain of the once important little castle here. A meadow just across the old lane which runs diagonally on the north side of the new church by the Croxteth Park gates still bears the name of the Castle Field; . it can easily be identified by the police-station which has lately been erected within it in the corner next the church. An inspection of this field reveals a slightly raised area in its southern half, together with a series of shallow depressions, which are quite distinct from the balks of former ploughings also visible; these depressions are seen much more distinctly on ascending the 8 Kendrick, Trans. Lancs. and Ches. Hist. Soc. iv, 18; v, 59-68; Gibson in Baines, Hist. Lancs. (ed. 1836), iii, 580; Baines, Hist. Lancs. (ed. 1868), ii, 223-4; Whittaker, Hist. Manchester (1771), i, 203-43 Ormerod, Hist. Ches. (1819), i, 4473; Pennant, Tour from Downing to Alston (ed. 1801), 11; Watkin, Roman Lancs. 224-53 Objects in Warrington Museum ; Copies of Surveys, &c., Warrington Library ; Beaumont, Annals of Lords of Warrington (Chet. Soc. lxxxvi-Ixxxvii) ; Ord. Surv. 1-in. 97, old 80 NE.; 6-in. 116 NW.; 25-in. 116, 1. 543 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE tower of the church and looking down upon them; the ground plan of the earthwork of a moated mount and court castle is then easily discernible. After obtaining this general idea of the site, it is not difficult to plot out the form and size of the mount and its adjacent bailey upon the field, as is shown in the illustration. The position of this castle is upon slightly sloping ground, which, not many hundred yards away to the south, forms a watershed between two SCALE OF FEET ) 100 =200 300 oo! 4 4. % % 2 . ve < . Mag, 7a F i ° i, : ee, : ‘ . < . . Ny cae . WOW Mis, *, s < - E é = Mile, - a) sn > ss Ee “Se. 43 oF 0 a SS “Th wy CP MATTT EO 7 ba beacuse SECTION from 0.fo E. same scale. FFF. Fosses.A.Mount B. Bailey. > 3 brooks, each about a mile distant, to north-east and south-west respectively. A now much reduced streamlet bounds the immediate site on the north-west and north, and another, which falls into it, on its south-west and south sides; probably in days when the woods of West Derby were very extensive, as was the case when the castle existed, these streams and their marshy banks on three of its sides would form no mean protection. The castle field is now slightly lower than those which surround it; but this is explained by the fact that it was never ploughed till about the year 1820, and then apparently only 544 ANCIENT EARTHWORKS once, while the adjoining land has probably been getting higher and higher, owing to its cultivation, during hundreds of years. Crossing the field from its gate towards the north-west, a circular depres- sion is found; this occupies the site of the moat round the former mount or keep of the castle (A). To the south-west of this is a contiguous elevated area, which was the interior of the court or bailey (B); this bailey is of the frequently found crescentic shape; it is encircled by a depression now only some 2 ft. to 3 ft. deep, which marks the course of its ancient fosse; the ground covered by the bailey and fosse is rather more than that occupied by the mount and its defences, and the area covered by the entire castle is about 13 acres. Nothing can now be gleaned either of the height of the mount or of the ramparts round the bailey; for about the year 1817 Mr. Gascoigne, the lord of the manor, unfortunately had the field levelled by filling both into their respec- tive fosses; in the interval of time since elapsed, the loose earth has sunk in the ditches, and their position, as in the similar case of Warrington Castle, is luckily again discernible. That prior to that time the mount was still a con- spicuous object is shown by the fact of its being drawn as a circular hillock upon Yates and Parry’s Map, published in 1768. Its diameter was about 140 ft., and from its summit there must have been complete command of the country for some distance round. Of the former size of the fosses, all that we can now glean is that the one round the mount, which measures 40 ft. across, was apparently wider than that round the bailey, which is only 30 ft. from edge to edge; and this remark would also seem to apply to the portion of the fosse encircling the mount which divides it from the bailey. Documentary evidence fortunately serves to throw light upon the time when West Derby Castle fell into disuse, owing probably to the migration of the neighbouring population to the banks of the Mersey at Liverpool in 1207 and 1208, and to the subsequent erection of a castle there. Although we cannot say who constructed it, the once important castle of West Derby was apparently in existence for 180 to 1go years. It was doubtless one of the usual mount and court earthworks of the period, defended by wooden palisades erected by its ‘carpenters’ upon the ramparts within its broad ditches. Falling into disuse about the middle of the thir- teenth century, it never attained to walls.of masonry.” WuiTTINGTon (12 miles north-east of Lancaster).—The churchyard here appears to cover the area of a mount and court castle, the earthworks of which are now, however, much mutilated. The church stands within the former bailey, and the mount rises at its western end. The upper part of the village of Whittington, that adjacent to the church, lies upon the south-east slope of a somewhat steep hillside. Into this slope a valley has been cut by a little brook, the Selletbeck, which runs north and south just west of the churchyard. Within the hollow ‘combe’ thus formed, and on the east side of the brook, rises a considerable natural hillock. It is roughly oval in shape, and fairly flat upon its top, which is some 25 ft. or more above the fields immediately to the south and east. The sides of this hillock are steep towards the brook on the west, and also, though to a less degree, on the east. To the south the slope is more Baines, Hist. Lancs. (ed. 1836), iv, 45 5 ibid. (ed. 1868), ii, 287; ibid. (ed. 1887), v, 105 ; Ord. Surv. 1-in. 97, old 80 NW.; 6-in. NE. ; 25-in. 106, 8. 2 545 69 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE gradual. On its north side the hillock is divided from continuously rising ground by a hollow through which the road now runs. The churchyard occupies the whole of this elevated site, which was, in early days, an excel- lent one for defensive purposes. Upon it a mount and court castle was erected, the remains of which are still distinctly traceable, notwithstanding that the whole aspect of the ground has been much altered by the spade through successive generations. The ground covered by this castle was probably about an acre. The present remains of the mount consist of a low artificial hillock of earth, slightly oval in form; its diameter at the base, through its greatest length, is about 170 ft.; its height from the level of the upper end of the bailey, where the latter abuts upon it, is about 12 ft. ; it is best viewed from the low meadows to the south, above which its summit rises about 37 ft. ; a sun- dial now stands upon the top, and gravestones are erected up its slopes. The mount has been cut away in part on its north-west side, for the building of houses between it and the road. No remains of a fosse are extant, unless perhaps the sunken road to the north represents its former course along that side ; grave-digging has probably filled it up elsewhere. The bailey, which was more or less crescentic in shape, lay to the east and south-east of the mount ; the present church has been erected within it ; its interior sloped downwards from west to east, and it was elevated about 20 ft. above the low ground to the south and east, and to a lesser height above the hollow down which the road runs to the north ; no remains of ramparts or fosses are now visible around it, but here again the whole site, long occupied as a grave- yard, has been dug over repeatedly during hundreds of years. The outlook from the spot is very extensive, both down and across the valley of the Lune on the south and east ; on the north and west, however, hills shut out any distant view. In the days of short-range weapons the command from the top of the mount would be complete ; but in later times the fortalice would not be tenable, as the hillside rises to an equal height only 100 yds. away on the north. Like many of the other mount and court castles in the Lune valley, this earthwork was probably abandoned at an early date; there are no signs of walls of masonry having replaced its A — ‘ 20 Nn original palisades of wood. Abbas, ey eee’ Suu Viti, 2 23 <3 (CLass F) =s ‘ supplied with water in the en- SECTION from A [oB. enlarged double circling fosses. While some of size Flan. the islands, perhaps the earlier Tae ones, are round or oval, the great \\ \ \ majority are either square, ob- Asram: Bamrurtonc Hatt long, or irregular angled shapes. Of the rounded form, Old Brynn (vide plan), Arley in Blackrod, and Morley’s in Astley, may be cited; of the square, Barrow in Burtonwood, Clayton in Droylsden, Horton Castle in Lathom, The Hutt in Halewood, Hornby with Farleton (vide plan), New Hall in Ince in Makerfield, New Hall in Tyldesley cum Shakerley, Old Bold in Bold, Rufford (vide plan) and Sefton ; of the oblong, Bewsey (vide plan) and Bamfurlong in Abram (vide plan) ; of the irregular, Gidlow in Aspull. Most of these moats are single, but sometimes they are found double fossed, while occasionally the moat is widened out into a sort of lake with an island in the middle, as at Wardley in Worsley parish. Every now and then we find two islands side N. by side within the same water defence, or perhaps an annex alongside the main inclosure; the latter is seen at Bradley in Burtonwood and at Bam- Bs furlong in Abram (vide plans). Some moats may have originated as early as Saxon days, for a protection against robbers generally and marauding Danes in particular; others were made to protect the homesteads dur- ing the reigns of Stephen, John, and B. Henry III, when intestine wars har- p\ rowed the country ; others again Rurrorp Moar were dug out much more recently, certainly as late as the days of Eliza- beth. The fosses of some are far more formidable than those of others; e.g. at Hornby with Farleton, at Rufford (vide plans) and at Heaton Norris; these may be compared with the narrower moats at Old Brynn and Bamfurlong (vide plans), 547 \ SCALE OF FEET te) 100 = 200 =—300 re SECTION from AfoB double Size of Plan. A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Homestead moats were rarely placed upon points of military vantage like mount and court earthworks, but were often rather in hollows for the sake of shelter, without any ‘command’ over the adjacent ground ; in such cases their water defences could only serve to ward off attacks from gangs of robbers ; an important object also was to secure protection from wild beasts. Not infrequently we find that the dwelling-place which once stood within the defended area, and which was of wood, has disappeared, leaving the island platform vacant; this is so, for example, at The Peel in Heaton Norris, at Horton Castle in Lathom, at Lovel’s Hall in Halewood, at New Hall, Ince in Makerfield, at Rixton with Glaze Brook and at Rufford. Sometimes an ancient manor-house or mediaeval mansion still stands upon the spot, as seen in the beautiful ‘ black and white’ timbered halls at Arley in Blackrod, at Morley’s in Astley, at Speke and at Wardley, or in the fine Tudor edifice at Bewsey. But more often a much later farm-house occupies the site of the original edifice, as, amongst others, in the cases of Bradley (where the older fortified gatehouse remains) and at Low Hall, Hindley. There are over seventy of these homestead moats still extant in Lancashire south of the Sands, and many more have probably been filled up. But they are not by any means universally distributed, as they are, for example, in some of the eastern and southern counties of England. North of the Ribble they are curiously rare. In the district south of that river they are fairly widespread over the lower ground, except along the coast on the west; in the hilly districts of the east they are practically absent. The great home of moats in this county is conspicuously the broad plain extending from Preston to the middle reaches of the Mersey ; they cluster most thickly perhaps around Wigan, but they are abundant over the whole of a triangle formed between Preston, Manchester, and Widnes. On the other side of the Mersey, on the plains of Cheshire, they are likewise very numerous. The majority of the moats in Lancashire are square in shape, or approximat- ing thereto, and their most frequent size is about 260 ft. by 260 ft., outside measurement. The following is a list of those now or recently in existence in the district :— Parish Name Parish Name Abram . . . . Abram Hall Burtonwood. . . Barrow Old Hall Bamfurlong Hall (vide Bewsey Old Hall (vide plan and section) plan Bickershaw Hall Bradley Hall (vide plan Altham . . . . Old Hall and section) Ashton in Maker- Old Brynn (vide plan and field section) Chorley . . . . Astley Old Hall Aspull . . . . Gidlow Hall Gillibrand Old Hall Astley . . . . Site of Morley’s Hall Clayton le Woods . Clayton Hall Clifton with Salwick Salwick Hall Barton upon Irwell Site of Barton Old Hall Coppull . . . . Blainscough Hall Bedford . . . . Site of Hopecarr Hall Culcheth . . . Old Abbey Farm Blackrod. . . . -Arley Hall Old Hall Farm Bold . . . . . Old Bold Hall Moat House, Gorsey Lane Droylsden . . . Clayton Hall Cranshaw Hall Eccleston (near Bradley Hall Broughton (near Moat by Broughton Tower Chorley) Tingrave Farm,New Lane Preston) Farington . . . Lower Farington Hall 548 SCALE OF FEET 200 300 0 fete) t ; Burronwoop ; Bewszy Orv Hatt N. Wer pier, A ix = ss = si si ¥ es 2, si = % Typ its SL SS SCALE OF FEET “lay, ft SF fe) 100 200 300 %%, tas S$ = 4 tb 5 44, = gat liq SECTION from B. lo A:enlarged double size of Plan. \ AW Hornsey witu Farieton: SCALE OF FEET 200 300 (SS Z | TS. ir 100 Oo a Burronwoop: Brapiey Hat 549 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Parish Name Parish Name Haigh Moat House Rainford . Mossborough Hall Halewood Site of Lovel’s Hall Reddish . . . Old Reddish Hall Old Hutt Rixton with Glaze Site of Old Rixton Hall Wright’s Moat Brook Yew Tree House Rufford . . . Moat (vide plan and sec- Harwood, Great Martholme tion) Haydock. . . Moat near Piele Hall Heath Charnock Site of Old Hall ee Ordsall Hall Heaton Norris . Peel Moat seo : ; : Scarisbrick Moat in Old Wood Hindley . . . . Lowe Hall, Platt Bridge : F ? Sefton Site of Old Hall Hornby with Farle- Moat by Camp House : de oh roe Speke. . . . . Speke Hall = (vide plan and section) Standish with Lang- Langtree Old Hall Ince in Makerfield. New Hall HES Peel Hall Lathom . Site of Horton Castle Tarbock . Tarbock Hall Lowton . Mossley Hall Tatham . . . Moat by Tatham Hall Tyldesl ith ll Maghull . Old Manor House ore’ wert New ela ee : Shakerley Melling . Site of Old Conscough Hall Middleton Old ral Westhoughton . Lee Hall Farm Westleigh Parsonage Farm Overton . Remnant of Moat Site of Old Hall Osbaldeston . Old Hall Whittingham Chingle Hall Winstanley . Moat, Winstanley Park Pennington . Urmstonesin the Meadow Withington . Old Hall Farm Poulton with Fearn- Bruch Hall Worsley . Wardley Hall head Wrightington . . (Crass G) Site of Chisnall Hall Defined as ‘ Inclosures mostly rectangular, partaking of the form of Clas: F, but protected by stronger defensive works, and in some instances provided with outworks. The works referred to under this class are in many instances sites of feudal strongholds and of fortified manorial residences ; they include many of the castles erected at a later date than the mount and court fortalices (Class E) of Norman days. The island platform within the deep and broad water moat was usually fortified by strong walls of masonry, instead of by the earlier palisaded ramparts of Class E; the elevated mount is absent. Examples are :— BaRNACRE WITH Bonps (104 miles south of Lancaster).—Half a mile east of the town of Garstang stands a ruined tower, a remnant of the little castle of Greenhalgh. The site of this fortress is upon a rounded knoll, about 125 ft. above sea level; it rises not far away from the left bank of the River Wyre, in a flat country. The ground falls away gently all round, and the command is complete. The castle, an almost square building, was surrounded by a very deep circular fosse ; this made so good a defence that in the Civil Wars Green- halgh was one of the only two strongholds unreduced by the Parliamentarians in this district in 1645. This fosse, which is now filled in with the excep- tion of a small portion, is interesting because we know the date of its 55° ANCIENT EARTHWORKS excavation ; for the castle was erected by Thomas Stanley, earl of Derby, in 1490, when he obtained the necessary licence from Henry VII.” CANTSFIELD (104 miles north-east of Lancaster).—Between this village and that of Tunstall, on the right-hand side of the high road from Hornby to the north, is the handsome modern resi- dence called Thurland Castle. This was built about a century ago, being incorporated with the remains of the ancient castle which stood upon the spot. It is surrounded by a deep and wide moat, which was the original water defence of the me- diaeval stronghold. The site is upon a small natural hummock in nearly level ground, at the foot of the north-western slope of a hill rising between the River Greeta and the Cant Beck; this hill, though higher in elevation, is not near enough to interfere with the position as a defensive one, and the castle effectively commands the whole of its surroundings. The low mound upon which the castle - : SCALE OF FEET stands is flat upon the top and oval ° 100 200 300 in shape; it is completely encircled Cancerrire » “Titoreann Cass by the deeply - excavated moat, which is filled with water, and measures about 25 ft. across from edge to edge.” Formidable moats of this class surrounded the following local fortresses not now extant, viz.:— LiverPoot.—The early thirteenth-century castle. LaTuHom (3 miles east-north-east of Ormskirk).—-The Old Lathom House, destroyed during the civil wars of the seventeenth century. (Crass H) Ancient Village sites protected by ramparts or fosses.—The second or outer bailey of a mount and court stronghold (Class E) often contained within it the germ of a village or of a town, but the above definition describes a more simple form of defence, not attached to any feudal castle; it also includes those earthworks and moats which were often made by monastic communities around their village settlements ; a good example of the latter is at :— Wuattey (6 miles north-north-east of Blackburn).—The ruins of the celebrated abbey are on the north-east side of the River Calder in this "! Camden, Britannia (ed. Gibson), 974; Baines, Hist. of Lancs. (ed. 1868), ii, 534 ; Ord. Surv. 1-in. 67, old 91 SE.; 6-in. 44 NE. ; 25-in. 44, 8. Leland, Ivin. vi, 593 Baines, Hist. of Lancs. (ed. 1868), ii, 622 ; Ord. Surv. 1-in. 49, old 98 SE. ; 6-in. 20 SW. and 19 SE. ; 25-in. 20, 13, and 19, 16. 351 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE village. Remains of defensive earthworks are still to be seen in places around its site. Beginning at the west end of Church Street, a fosse runs. from south to north for a distance of 150 yds.; then it turns almost at a right angle to the left and runs a slightly convex course for a distance of ; 300 yds., just under the railway viaduct ; between this and Broad Lane it turns at a right angle towards the south-south-west, running in a straight line, though now partly destroyed, for another 230 yds. ; here it crosses the lane by the cottage, and turns off rather to the right again and runs in a west- south-west direction to join the river. Returning to the neighbourhood from which we started, on the south or abbey side of the original area of the parish churchyard, there was also, before the addition was made to the latter, a deep fosse, which ran from west to east : it probably turned round south before reaching the village to join the river and complete the circuit. This would appear to have been the inclosure ‘ of 36 acres 3 roods and 14 poles.’ But there were other fosses dividing up portions of the site, e.g. that crossed by the bridge outside the north-east gateway leading into the third court, and another running along the west side of the modern vicarage garden. Further earthworks, though non-defensive, are to be seen north-west of the vicarage ; they are the dams of the former fishponds of the monks. Though probably now much silted up, the fosse of the outer inclosure is still of considerable size. The portion running along the east side is 5 ft. deep and 21 ft. wide, and that along the north 6ft. deep and 24 ft. wide. There seem to be remains of ramparts in places, both inside and out ; these are now only from 2 ft. to 3 ft. in height above the adjacent ground. The earthworks here are interesting because we know both who their makers were and the time of their excavation. When the monks of Stanlaw migrated to the deanery at Whalley in 1296, they selected a site for their new abbey with a view to warmth, shelter, and residential conveniences, rather than to defence. Therefore the buildings cluster in a slight hollow beside the river. Nevertheless, as usual at this period, they thought it necessary to protect themselves from human foes and wild beasts by the construction of earthwork ramparts and fosses on the three sides not guarded by the river. These works were at first, necessarily, palisaded with timber only ; but afterwards stone walls, removed in 1661, were erected on parts of them.’ (CLass X) Includes * Defensive earthworks which fall under none of the above-enumerated headings.’ As was pointed out at the beginning of this chapter, although many earthworks can be classified without difficulty by their outward form and appearance, others cannot be so easily assigned. The following come under this heading :— MELtor (3 miles north-west of Blackburn).—Half a mile east-north- east of the parish church there is an interesting and well-defined little rectangular earthwork; it is known locally by the somewhat ubiquitous *® Coucher Book of Whalley Abbey (Chet. Soc.), x, xi, xvi, xx; Whittaker, Hist. of Whalley (ed. 1872), i, 136-7 ; Baines, Hist. of Lancs. (ed. 1868), ii, 8-10 ; Ord. Surv. 1-in. 68, old 92 SW.; 6-in. 55 SW. ; 25-in. 55, 10, * 55? ANCIENT EARTHWORKS term ‘Roman Camp.’ The site is in the centre of Mellor Moor, upon the rounded top of the highest hill in the neighbourhood, which rises. 735 ft. above sea-level ; the sides of the hill slope away gradually all round, making the position an excellent one. The views on all sides are exceedingly extensive, ranging from the estuary of the Ribble on the west to the mountains of the Pennine Chain on the east; a finer spot for erecting a fortified post could hardly be imagined. The ‘camp’ is but small,. inclosing an oblong interior area only 60 ft. long by 35 ft. broad; this is raised about 3 ft. above the level of the adjoining ground. Around it is a rampart, now 2 ft. high, inclosed by a fosse about 5 ft. deep from its upper- most edge. Outside this is a second rampart, rising about 2 ft. higher than the ground outside. The inclusive measurements of the work and its defences. are 130 ft. by 110 ft., and the ground covered by it is about three-eighths of an acre. pee ea This earthwork has been described as Roman by many writers, partly on account of its form, and partly because of its supposed connexion with the Roman fortress at Rib- chester. It has also been suggested that it is a small homestead moat, which it somewhat resembles in size and plan ; but the situation is far too exposed and bleak for that. The work would seem rather to be a military out- post of some sort, perhaps dating from the : days of the Civil War. That it is not of the 0 mich ae pal — time of the young Stuart Pretender, as has ; : : been suggested, is proved by the fact that it was mentioned by Dr. Kuerden before the Enlarged dows on of Flan close of the seventeenth century.” Below is a list of earthworks which can WU either still be seen or have been described by Marton various writers as formerly existing in the dis- trict. Pending further investigation and classification, they must here be placed in Class X, as falling under none of the previous headings. Whether all of these are ancient defensive works is doubtful. The list also includes works, now or formerly extant, which date from the seventeenth century. These remains of ‘mudde walles’ for town defence and ‘orbicular sconces” and ‘mounts’ for ordnance, which were thrown up by Roundheads and Cavaliers, have occasionally, as in the case of the ramparts which seventy years ago encircled Wigan, been ascribed to earlier ages. Aughton, nr. Ormskirk. ‘Trenchfield, 17th Briercliffe with Extwistle, nr. Burnley. Small century. square work on Beadle Hill. Briercliffe with Extwistle, nr. Burnley. Smalli Blackrod, nr. Wigan. Castle Croft. square work, ‘Twist Castle. Blatchinworth and Calderbrook, nr. Rochdale. Broughton, nr. Manchester. Castle Hill. Blackstone Edge, 17th century. Bury. Castle Croft. * Whittaker, Hist. Whalley, ii, 396 ; Baines, Hist. of Lancs. (ed. 1868), ii, 94 ; Watkins, Roman Lancs. 55,. 218 (quotes Kuerden) ; Garstang, Ridchester Rep. (1898), 13 ; Ord. Surv. 1-in. 75, old 89; 6-in. 62 NE.; 25-in. 62, 7. 2 553 79 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Carnforth. Moot How. Manchester, 17th century. Chadderton, nr. Manchester. Mound. Cuerdley, nr. Warrington. Cromwell’s Bank Preesall with Hackensall, nr. Fleetwood. The , nr. ‘ - Mount. Preston, 17th century. Prestwich, nr. Manchester. Castle Hill. Prestwich, nr. Manchester. Rainshough Hill. Farleton, in Hornby with Farleton. Mound. Halton, nr. Lancaster. Site of Camp, High- field. Walmersley cum Shuttleworth, nr. Bury Castle. Hapton, nr. Accrington. Castle Clough. Steads. Heapey, nr. Chorley. Pickering Castle. Warrington, 17th century. Wigan, 17th century. Lancaster, 17th century. Worsthorne with Hurstwood, nr. Burnley. Small Lathom, 17th century. square work, ‘Ringstones’ on Hambledon Liverpool, 17th century. Moor. (Crass Z) Though all were not defensive works, it is well to include in an account of local earthworks the long ‘dykes’ often found running in a more or less continuous line across country for many miles. Some of these long earthen banks and excavated ditches were originally constructed for military purposes ; others were designed as boundaries between either peoples or tribes or properties. | Where only fragments of short length now remain, it is difficult to decide for which of these purposes the works were originally made. Rusnorme (24 miles south-south-east of Manchester).—The best pre- served portions of the ancient dyke now known as Nico Ditch are to be seen along the southern boundary of this parish, between Slade Lane and the Gore Brook. The total length of the dyke is over 5 miles; it runs on the south-east side of Manchester, midway between there and Stockport, roughly in a direction from north-east to south-west ; building operations have, how- ever, obliterated the greater part of it. The work consists of a ditch, which is now often hardly to be dis- tinguished from an ordinary field division, and a bank, formed of the soil dug out of it; the latter is always upon its north or Manchester side.” The course of the dyke is as follows :—Beginning at the south end of Ashton Moss, in Ashton-under-Lyne, it ran in a south-west direction to Debdale Clough ; thence it curved slightly northwards and ran ina fairly straight line by Holland Moor House (crossing near where the canal and the two railway lines now intersect), on to the south side of the old Yew Tree Cottage, and across the Stockport Road to Midway House ; thence straight on again (now cut by the railway line) across Slade Lane, south of Slade Hall, and on 50 yards south of Birch House; thence across Whitworth Lane and Wilmslow Road, north of Ashfield, and so to the Gore Brook. A noteworthy feature in connexion with it is that, for a great part of its course, it forms the boundary between ancient townships. Beginning at its eastern end, the portion in Ashton parish does not serve such a purpose. But beyond Debdale Clough it divides Gorton on the north from Denton on the south ; and further on it separates Gorton on the north from Reddish on the ** A good section of the ditch is to be seen just west of Wilmslow Road, by Platt Unitarian chapel ; it is here 12 ft. wide from edge to edge and 3 ft. deep, but there is no rampart remaining. 554 ANCIENT EARTHWORKS south ; on as far as Slade Lane again it divides Rusholme on the north from Levenshulme on the south. After this it enters into Rusholme, within which parish, however, it divides certain recognized areas until the end of its course. The dyke is also very frequently mentioned in early deeds as a boundary between properties. Mr. H. T. Crofton has brought together many of these references. In such deeds it is never called Nico Ditch, which seems to be a comparatively modern name, but Mickle Ditch with variants ; never- theless, there is no doubt about the identity of the references to the dyke in question, although there were, of course, many minor boundary ditches in the district, which are also frequently mentioned in old docu- ments. To quote these early references seriatim:—In 1484 a Rusholme deed calls it the ‘Miche Wall Diche, and in 1317 another similar deed the ‘ Mekel Dyche.’ In 1320 the boundary of Manchester Manor on the Reddish side calls it ‘ Mikle diche.’ In 1270 a Slade deed has it in an already corrupted form (proving its then antiquity) as ‘ Milk Wall,’ and about 1200 a deed of land in Ashton (belonging to the monks of Kersall) calls it ‘Mykel Diche’ again. Another deed in the Towneley MSS. makes mention of it about the same period as ad magnum fossatum. From these references it is clear that as early as 1200, at any rate, the dyke was already a well-known and apparently then ancient landmark. It is also noticeable that the rampart was a recognized feature in its appearance as well as the ditch, as. it is called ‘ Miche Wa// Diche’ and ‘ Milk Wall,’ ’ Other dykes in Lancashire, south of the Sands are as follows, viz. :— Cliviger, nr. Burnley. The Old Dyke. Hornby with Farleton. MHarrington’s Dyke in Roeburndale. Halliwell, nr. Bolton. ‘ Danes Dyke.’ Newchurch, nr.Bacup. The Dykes, Broad Clough. LANCASHIRE NORTH OF THE SANDS Although in Lancashire North of the Sands there are numerous early village sites and walled inclosures, there are only two strong defensive earth- works, and neither of them is of large size. ‘They are Pennington Castle Hill and Aldingham Mote (or Moat). (CLass A) ‘Fortresses partly inaccessible by reason of precipices, cliffs, or water, addt- tionally defended by artificial works, usually known as promontory fortresses.’ PENNINGTON (near Ulverston).—Pennington Castle Hill is situated about two miles west of Ulverston, and just at that point where Furness Fells. slope down to meet the undulating country of Low Furness, which coincides. here with the junction of the Silurian with the Carboniferous strata. The position is about a mile north of the old pre-Reformation road across the 3 A. Crofton, Trans. Lancs. and Ches. Antig. Soc. iii, 190; Esdaile, ibid. x, 218 ; Farrer, Lancs. Pipe R. and Chart. 327-8 ; H. T. Crofton, Trans. Lancs. and Ches. Antig. Soc. xxiii, 44-50 ; W. J. Andrew, in fizt.; W. S. Ogden, in Jitt.; Ord. Sur. 1-in. 85; old 88 SW. and 81 NW.; 6-in. 111 NE., 104 SE., and 105 SW. ; 25-in. 111, 3 and 4., 104, 16., 105, 13. 555 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE eninsula, which entered at Conishead Bank, and followed the line now called Red Lane. It is possible the site was originally chosen as command- ing this road. At this point the stream called Pennington Beck runs south in a rather deep ravine, and on the east bank the cliff projects in a rather sharp elbow or angle. This elbow has been isolated by a semicircular rampart and fosse forming a quadrant-shaped inclosure, the ward of which measures I 56 ft. by 132 ft. In digging the fosse the earth has been thrown inwards, making a rampart the highest point of which (on the north) seems about 12 ft. above the ward level. z The ditch itself measures about 45 ft. from the @\8 rampart top to the outer edge, but was never ws intended to hold water. 4 S$ The precipitous slope which forms the é| a N north-west and south-west sides of the inclosure = 3N probably is much the same now as when the & 3 S fortress was made, for there seems no real reason 3. SP to suppose (as has been suggested) that part of \ > A the inclosed area has been washed away in his- oO torical times. No trace of rampart or parapet exists on the edge, but a strong palisade alone would make a good defence here. The exca- SCALE OF FEET vated defences are strongest on the north side, ¢ i Aces ina as there the ground is level outside, whereas Castie Hitt, Pennixcron on the south there is a moderate slope. There is a break in the rampart on the south-east which seems an ancient entrance. Pennington is a pure Anglian name, and it appears in the Domesday Survey with two carucates. From time immemorial the manor has belonged to the Pennington family (now represented by Lord Muncaster), whose ancestors are said to have abandoned it as a seat in the thirteenth century. The ‘ capital messuage’ of Sir William Pennington is, however, mentioned in a dispute as late as 1318, and the Castle Hill may therefore be the site of the Penningtons’ early home, or it may be more ancient. The great tumulus half-a-mile to the south-east (mentioned elsewhere) may perhaps guard the secret of the origin of Castle Hill as well as its own. (CLasses E anp F) ALDINGHAM.—Aldingham Mote stands on the east coast of the Furness promontory overlooking Morecambe Bay, and situated at a point approxi- mately five miles south of Ulverston and four miles east of Furness Abbey. The position is a striking one, being on the actual edge of the sea cliff. The earthworks are of two parts, probably of different dates. The ‘ Mote’ itself is of the mount and court type, and occupies the highest position in the immediate vicinity, the ground shelving off on the north, west, and south. The mount, with its fosse, measures about 220 ft. through its longest axis, and its summit is 15 ft. above the present level of the surrounding ground, and probably between 25 ft. and 30 ft. above the 556 ANCIENT EARTHWORKS original bottom of the fosse. Since it stands on the very edge of the cliff, there is no doubt that part of the mount and about one-third of its fosse on the south-east side have been washed away, and the complete plan is there- fore not now recoverable. About 120 ft. from the north edge of the mount fosse to the north, there remains a portion of another fosse, quite straight, about 250 ft. long, and abutting with its east end on the cliff itself It is about 18 ft. wide at the bottom, with a diagonal entrance across it, from which a slight artificial scarp runs towards the present farm. It is doubtful if either this AS Po ee ane entrance or scarp are : 1 4 ancient. There can be no doubt that this formed a 49 part of the fosse inclos- nye 3 ing the court, but since Linus” it must have been filled up from the west end, and is washed away at the other end, it is im- possible to guess whether it joined the fosse of the mount or surrounded it. About 100 yards = due north we come to TT an inclosure, roughly rectangular in plan, but Farm buildings TITIT YT TODIVTTISIVT? “be, ; he rom 1 ‘ony SECTIONS TOIT VIFF which is not a true rer, square. The moat is Sail 36 ft. to 40 ft. wide, zN = and still contains water 23 a = 4 aN on the north and west Pay % 4, cota. sides, and is marshy else- el a ee where. The space in- } ane closed is barely 100 ft. (60 § Hicuh Haume.—On an see eminence 500 ft. above sea level isa mount, partly 464- fossed, which would come under Class D, but that so far as can be judged it is more likely to have been a beacon hill than a stronghold. The fosse is SCALE OF FEET © 190 200 390 +467 only about 4 ft. deep at Hicu Haume, Datron m Furness the north-east and be- ; West, The Antiquities of Furness (ed. W. Close, 1805), 389-91. "Ibid. 21. Vol. lili. ‘The ancient settlements, Cemeteries and Earthworks of Furness.’ 558 ANCIENT EARTHWORKS comes slighter as it approaches the south. On the west and north-west there is no fosse, and the mount is here on natural rock. The fosse is about ro ft. across at the north and north-east, where the sides of the mount are highest, being about 12 ft. at the north-east. The entrance is from the south, and here the mount is but about 7 ft. high. The summit is slightly hollow, sloping to the south-east, and there appears by the stony character of the surface to have been a rough wall round, or a building upon it. (Cass Z) TorveR : BLeaBeRRY Haws.—A rampart, very similar to those on Hawkshead Hall Park, extends from a hill rooo ft. in height across a valley 200 ft. deep, on to the summit of another hill about 70 ft. higher than the first, passing which it turns at a right angle, and after a straight run of less than 200 yards, ends. In part of its course a stone wall is substituted for the earthen rampart. HawksueaD Hatt Parx.—Two ramparts of earth, one running north- east and south-west, the other leaving it at right angles and running south- east, are situated on the range of heath-grown fells, known by the name of Hawkshead Hall Park, which here attain a height of about 800 ft. above sea level. The first rampart (now not more than 2 ft. high) is nearly a quarter of a mile long and about 11 ft. wide, with a shallow trench about 4 ft. wide on its east side. The other and longer one is similar, with a trench to the south. Another rampart over half a mile in length is in the immediate neighbour- hood. These ramparts, if they may be so-called, do not appear to be of defensive character. INDEX OF THE ParisHes (NoRTH AND SOUTH OF THE SANDS) IN WHICH EARTHWORKS ARE SITUATED, WITH THE LETTER OF THE CLASS TO WHICH THEY BELONG Parish Class Parish Class Abratiies: 3060 oa 6g? cies a F, F, F Broughton (near Manchester) x Aldingham . . . (E, F) Broughton (near Preston) . F Altham . ..... F Burrow with Burrow C Arkholme with Cawood D Burtonwood . . . . . F, F, F Ashton in Makerfield F Bury: ae ts ae ee ee x Aspull . : - Boy = Cantsfield G euugnton # Carnforth . xX Barnacre with Bonds G Castleton . D Barton upon Irwell . F Chadderton x Bedford be. Se F Chorley . . . F, F Birkrigg Common. See Clayton le Woods F Urswick Clifton with Salwick F Blackrod . . . . F, X Clitheroe ek D Blatchinworth and Calder- Cliviger Z brook xX Coniston H, H Blawith H, H Coppull F Bold ee ee ee F, F, F Cuerdley xX Briercliffe with Extwistle . X, X Culcheth F, F 559 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE INDEX—(continued) Class Parish Dalton in Furness Derby, West. See West Derby Droylsden . : Dunnerdale with Seathwaite Eccleston (near Chorley) . Farington. . Farleton. See Hornby with Farleton Haigh se oe ae) Halewood. . 2. . Halliwell . 2. 2. Halton . + 8 Hapton ae Harwood, Bret. 2 8 Hawkshead Haydock 4. gaa ee Heapey . ve Heath Chamoek., : ‘ Heathwaite. See Blawielh Heaton Norris es Hindley . . tM Hornby with F arleton : Ince in Makerfield . . Lancaster . Dathomt... sg0 se). Ge). ae. eg Liverpool . - Lowton j Maghil . . .. Manchester . . ‘ Marsden, Great and Little j Melling £ Be Melling with Wrayton e 6 Mellor. . . i). Se Middleton. . 2... , Newchurch . . a we Newton in Makerfield ah si Osbaldeston . . . , , Overton: igs sess ee 5S N*“ > = mM IN Id sy ey oy Aa? hy OD v QS x > a A » my Hy UN WxMO ah Parish Pennington (near Dalton) . Pennington (near Leigh) . Penwortham . ‘ ‘ Poulton with Rearnhead ? Preesall with Hackensall . Preston a 3 4% « @ @ Prestwich. . 2. 2. 6 Rainford 6 4 -s «we Reddish . . . ... Ribchester. . . , Rixton with Glaze Brook 3 Rochdale. See Castleton Roeburndale . . . . . Rufford . . .. Rusholme. . . . . Salfordisce a. BG. ak Scarisbrick ; Seathwaite. See Durneidale with Seathwaite Seftony 5° Us te ie cee tig? age Speke . . Standish with Langtree . . Tarbochk . . . 1. Tatham ; Tintwistle. . . . . . Torver - Tyldesley with Shakerley . Urswick . . 2... wy Walmersley cum Shuttle- worth . Sy Warrington . . en 3 Warton with Lindeth West Derby . . . . Westhoughton . . . Westleight ss. 3. 95 a) Whalley . 2. . 2. Whintingham. . . «+ Whittington « 5 . «. « WWUGAT 5) ae ae ow, Winstanley See Ss Withington . . . Worsley Worsthorne with Haverwood Wrightington. . . . 560 ie] b e 1 sy > ie) bd bd S34 NIN Oss PN OD ey fay ay ay jooee ke > tn v > my bay Dd by yf yt Oy SCHOOLS INTRODUCTION ANCASHIRE is a county of late de- velopment. It did not become in the early or later Middle Ages the site of a church of first-rate import- ance, and for the same reason was not the home of a school of any magnitude. Mountainous, and therefore thinly peopled, with small industrial development, boasting no ports of any size, with little or no intercourse with France, Germany, or the Low Countries, it lagged far behind the commercial and industrial development of the south, the east, and the west, and even of the Midlands. Lancaster, a port (though trading only with Ireland and Scotland) as well as a fortress, gives specific evidence of the existence of its school as early as the beginning of the thirteenth century, and the school of Preston, the next great port, is conjecturally almost as early. Liverpool Grammar School can be traced no higher than the sixteenth century. Lancaster had no hinterland. The hinterland of Preston gives us Middleton School in the beginning of the fifteenth century, and Blackburn, Leyland, and Whalley, all of the early sixteenth century. The hinterland of Liverpool probably boasted of Manchester School from the time when the church was collegiated in the first quarter of the fifteenth century, though its present endowment dates from nearly a century later. Prescot is ascribed to the same period. Farn- worth, Warrington, Bolton le Moors, St. Michael’s-on-Wyre, Winwick and Kirkham, complete the tale of pre-Reformation Grammar Schools in the county. The reign of Edward VI was singularly barren of new foundations here as elsewhere. Penwortham, which was more of an elementary school—being primarily for children in the ‘Absay, catechism, primer, and accidence,’ and only secondarily for ‘others in grammar,’ seems the sole product of the days of the reputed father of Free Grammar Schools. Clitheroe received its charter from Queen Mary. The Elizabethan era saw two archbishops and two bishops (one of them afterwards an archbishop) found grammar schools at Rochdale and Riving- ton in its earlier, and at Hawkshead and Warton in its later development, while Blackrod, Urswick, Halsall, Wigan, Heskin, and Churchtown had lay founders. Burnley was a chantry endow- ment converted to educational uses. In the reign of James I, Standish, Ormskirk, Oldham, Chorley, Leigh, Cartmel, Crosby, Bispham, Bury, Bolton le Sands were all, except Crosby and Bury, the result of joint parochial effort. The earliest elementary schools whose endowments have been traced — Astley in 1630; Hindley, Haigh, Ringley, Rumworth, and Much Woolton be- tween that year and the outbreak of the Civil War—were Caroline efforts. From that time until the passing of the Technical Instruction Act, 1890, the Grammar or Secondary founda- tions were few and far between. Upholland, Over Kellet and Cockerham under Charles II, Newchurch under William III, Ulverston and Tunstall under George II, none of them of any importance, seem the only examples. In the days of George III Stonyhurst College was created by a contingent of English Catholics flying from the French Revolution to Lancashire. The middle of the nineteenth century saw the rise of a ‘Public’ School of the second order in Rossall. The beginning of the twentieth has witnessed the conversion of some modern sub- stitutes for the extinguished grammar school at Liverpool from proprietary into municipal and endowed schools ; while the manufacturing towns are humming with what were formerly called Science and Art, and now Secondary Schools, of all sorts and for both sexes, separate or mixed. It has been found impossible for lack of space to treat these as their promoters might wish, and as their educational activity deserves. It is satis- factory to know that most of the old schools also have been restored to light and leading by the aid of new endowments, notable instances being Lancaster by Miss Bradshaw’s gift, and Bolton through the benefactions of Mr. W. H. Lever. Never in the whole history of education in England could the historian have given a better account of their present prosperity and future prospects. THE ROYAL GRAMMAR SCHOOL, LANCASTER At Lancaster, as we might expect, we meet with the earliest school in the county—how early we can but guess, but no doubt as early as the title of Lancashire, which is not one of the earliest counties. As is usual with the early schools, we first hear of it in a casual men- tion, Thomas of Kyrkeham, schoolmaster of Lancaster > (magistro scolarum de Lancastria), appearing as witness to a deed in the chartu- lary of Lancaster Priory. The deed is undated, but is with others of the early thirteenth ) Hist. of the Church of Lane. (Chet. Soc.), ii, 316. 2 561 71 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE century. He was a secular, of course, though no doubt a cleric. The next master men- tioned was a married man; for on 17 April, 1284, Emma, wife of Master Thomas of Lan- caster, brought an assize of mort d’ancestor against John of Bleghan and Sigred his wife, and a few weeks later ‘Thomas le Scholemaster of Lonecastre’ and Emma his wife successfully defended a counter-action brought by the same Sigred.? Nearly two hundred years later we meet with the first known endowment of the school, given by John Gardyner, burgess, and probably miller, of Lancaster ; for the original endowment of this school, like the chief endowment of Man- chester School, was a water-mill. A building lease? was granted 4 August, 1469, to John Gardyner of a water-mill at Newton, situate upon an island called the Eyre, with 13 acres of land called Briar-butts on the east of the Loyne or Lune, by the then abbess of the Brigittines of Syon (whose abbey is now Syon House, near Isleworth, a mansion of the duke of Northumberland), to whom Lancaster church was then appropriated. ‘The lease was for the term of 200 years, at the yearly rent of 6s. 8d. A proviso appended declares :— Because the said John Gardyner intends, God per- mitting, to establish a certain fit chaplain to celebrate worship in the church of the Blessed Mary, of Lan- caster, every year, and to instruct and inform boys in Grammar, the said mill is let by the said Abbess and Convent for the time and price stated above, and withal the said chaplain shall specially recommend in his prayers the living and dead of the said monastery, and shall also instruct the boys coming there in grammar freely, unless perchance something shall be voluntarily offered by their friends to the said chaplain in recompense. The good abbess and her nuns, by an arrangement not unusual, were content to take part of the rent in reversion, and be paid in specie current, not in this world, but the next. In 1469, then, it was clear that Gardyner (or those with or for whom he was acting) had already determined to found a grammar school in the usual form of a chantry priest who was to perform the double function of singing for the founder’s soul and keeping a grammar school. Fortunately, however, for its subsequent fortunes, the original intent was not carried out. On 21 June, 1472, John Gardyner made his will, and thereby constituted a chantry and a school to be supported out of the profits of the * Lancs. Assize R. (Lancs. and Ches. Hist. Soc.), ii, 183-5. * Baines, Hist. of Lancs. (ed. 1870), ii, $67. This lease is said to be preserved among the muniments at Halton Hall. Newton Mill; not, however, as one institution, but as two. The will is in Latin :—‘* . . . First I bequeath my soul to Almighty Gud the blessed Mary and all his saints and my body to be buried in the parish church of the Blessed Mary of Lancaster near the altar of St. Thomas of Canterbury on the south side. Item, I will and appoint that a certain Chaplain shall be there to celebrate for ever. He then bequeathed certain vestments and plate to the same altar, and proceeded :— Item, I will that the chaplain shall perceive and have yearly from the mill of Newton a hundred shillings ... Item, I will that a certain grammar school within the town of Lancaster be maintained freely at my own expense and that the grammar master keep- ing the same school have by the year six marks to be perceived of the same mill . . . and that William Baxsterden keep the same school for term of his life, as long that is to say as the same William is able to instruct and teach boys. Item, I will and assign my water mill aforesaid . . . to remain in the hands of my executors with one close containing one acre and adjoining the same mill, for which mill and close my same executors shall pay yearly to the same priest and grammar master keeping the school aforesaid 100s. and six marks as is before written. Item, I will that the residue of the annual rent of the same mill be kept for the maintenance and repair of the mill aforesaid. The testator further bequeathed ‘all his lands and tenements’ for the maintenance of an alms- house, which he had ‘ ordered to be made anew,’ and the maintenance of the poor there and of one Chaplain in the parish church aforesaid of Lancaster to celebrate at the same altar where the other priest will celebrate, provided nevertheless that the same priest if necessary will celebrate in turn within the said almshouse if there be any poor there who cannot go to the said church. He also willed that— Ralph Elcock, chaplain, have the choice of my two chantries aforewritten, and that Christopher Leye, chaplain, do occupy the other chantry if he wishes. A number of devises of leasehold estates show that by ‘all his lands and tenements’ above mentioned he meant only his freehold lands, and that he held by lease from the abbess of Syon * Duchy of Lanc. Misc. Bks. 25, fol. 19. The Charter Book of Lancaster contains an English version of the same will. The will was proved at York more than ten years afterwards on 12 Sept. 1483, and Nicholas Gardyner appointed administrator before Ralph Faucet, LL.B., official of Master John Shirwood, D.D., the archdeacon of Richmond. The will, how- ever, 1s not at York, nor among the wills proved in the archdeaconry of Richmond. The enrolment in the Duchy Books is in Latin, and bears every mark of authenticity, but nothing is said as to the date and place of probate (Wallace, End. Char. Lancs.). 562 SCHOOLS not only the mill but also premises in Aldcliffe and Thornham, the tithes of Newton and Bulk and Skerton, and the herbage of ‘ Rigges.’ Upon the death of Ralph Elcock and Christopher Leye, or their refusal to accept office, the executors were to choose other suitable priests, but he gave no direction as to the appointment of future schoolmasters. He appointed as his executors these two chaplains, and Nicholas Gardyner and John Boyvel, and bequeathed 10 marks to Sir Thomas Broghton, knt., ‘to fortify my executors in fulfilling my will,’ -and he also begged ‘the most mighty prince Richard duke of Gloucester’ to be supervisor of his will, and in his absence Sir Thomas Broghton. The will therefore provides (a) out of the leasehold mill and land attached for (1) a chantry chaplain, receiving £5 a year, to pray for his soul at the altar of St. Thomas of Canterbury, where the testator was to be buried; and for (2) a grammar school, of which the first master was to be William Baxsterden, who was to have £4 a year; (6) out of his other property for an almshouse, with a second chantry priest to celebrate at the same altar or in the alms- house. The almshouse we may dismiss at once. It was established on 12 June, 1485, by Ralph Elcocke and two others (presumably executors) for four poor with 7d. a week each and a laundress at 2d. a week, under the management of the chantry priest Nicholas Green, who was to be elected by the mayor and his 12 brethren, In the Chantry Certificate of 1546 it appears that the chantry priest and four poor were duly main- tained. The almshouse, rebuilt in 1792, still stands on the old site, and four poor women receive 5s. 6d. a week each from the trustees of the Lancaster Municipal Charities. The licence for the first chantry was duly obtained on 16 March, 1484, but apparently it was not at the altar of St. Thomas [Becket], since the almshouse priest who was to celebrate at the same altar is called the ‘lady priest.’ Ralph Elcocke, the executor, had, in pursuance of the will, apparently elected to be the chantry priest. The schoolmaster, not being an eccle- siastical person, required no licence in mortmain. By a deed of 1 March, 1500, in the possession of Mr. Roper, late town clerk of Lancaster, an ordinance was made as to the school betwixt Sir Rafe Elcocke, priest, hole feoffee and administerer of divers goods of John Gardyner late discesed, upon the one partie, and Rychard Nelson, the mair of Lancaster and Sir Nichollas Greene, the chantrie Prist of the Almeshouse, upon the other partie. The deed witnesses that the forsaid Sir Rafe hath grauntyd unto the forseyd Rychard Nelson and Sir Nichollas and their successors to have the nominacion eleccion and the correccion of the Lady Prist and scole maister of Lancaster belongyth to the Almyshouse of the sayd John Gar- dyner, soe that the seyd Richard and Sir Nichollas and their successors performe and fully kepe the ordinacion of the New Mylne hereafter ensuying the will and the mynd of the seyd John Gardener, that is for to sey, after the discese of myn executors that the mayr of Lancaster and the Chantrie Prist occupying for the seson shall have the nominacion, eleccion and correccion of the Lady Prist and the scole maister foresayd, soe that thei be abull in sciens and conver- sacion, the seyd prist seying masse in the chapelle of Our Lady with all other divine service as a Prist ought to do, the scole maister being a profund gramarion keping a Fre Scole, teching and informing the children unto their most profette nothing taking therefor. It is clear that this deed, 48 years before the supposed invention of the term ‘free school’ by Edward VI to mean a school free from ecclesiastical jurisdiction (which no school was, as every grammar schoolmaster had to be licensed by the ordinary) or a school giving a liberal education, uses the term ‘free school’ as one of known meaning: which it expounds in the statement that the schoolmaster is to take no- thing for teaching. The deed could do no otherwise, if the trust was to be properly carried out. For the will of John Gardyner had said that the school was to be maintained ‘ freely (4ere) at the Founder’s charges,’ i.e. not at the charges of the children and their parents, while the corpus of the charity, the water-mill, had been expressly leased to Gardyner on condition that the schoolmaster was to instruct the boys coming there in grammar /reel, unless perchance something shall be voluntarily offered by their friends to the said chaplain in recompense. The chantry priest and schoolmaster were to be their own governing body :— ‘The profetts of the seyd Mylne to be recevyd by the forseyd Prist and scole maister and by their successors . .. The Prist and Scolemaister to have the charge of the reparacion of the myll and myll garthe and of all that to the same belongith at the over sight of the Meyre and the Chantrie Prist aforeseyd.’ They were to collect the profits weekly or fortnightly at the mill and ‘to reserve the money of the seyd profetts and put it into a box... and at the quarter ende to bringe the box to the Meyre and the chantrie prist off them to receive their duty. And if it happyn that the seyd Lady Priest and Scole Maister do not their dutye or be found culpable in any such causys which is specifyed in the endenturs tripartyte of the or- dinacion of the foundation of the Chantrie of John Gardener then shall it be lawffull for the Meyr and the Chantre Priest and their successors to monesh onys, twyse, thrise, and then to putt owte and to elect another abull Priest and Scole Maister.’ 563 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE The deed contained in a condensed form statutes for the school :— The tyme of the begynyng of his informacion of the scole in ye morrow tyde at sex of the clocke, and soe contynowyng unto viij. The seyd scolemayster to begyn agayn at the or of x and to contynue unto xii, and then from ij afternone untill sex at even, sayng dayly at the breking up of the scole de profundis for ye sowlys of John Gardener and Isabell his wiff, ye sowlis of breder and sisturs belongyth unto the monastery of Seynt Brigitt of Syon and for all crystyn sowlys. In 1511 a survey® of the property of the abbey of Syon in Lancashire stated that ‘the Mylle that John Gardyner toke of my Lady ther is not well repared nor the Dam mayntened.’ The surveyor therefore made a memorandum to inquire whether it would be hurtful to my lady or her tenants to take the mill. The Valor Ecclesiasticus of 1535 records the almshouse chantry ; but not what for con- venience may be called the mill chantry ; nor is it mentioned in the chantry certificates of 1546.° It is, however, mentioned in 1548 in the following terms :— A stipendiarie in the parishe church there. Or- deyned and founde by the mayer and burgesses of Lancaster with parte of the profitts rysinge and growinge of one mill graunted to them by Indenture for terme of years and the residue of the profitts are ymployed to the mayntenaunce of one Grammer Schole, for which purpose they say the mill was graunted to them. John Lunde pryest in- cumbent of thage of liiij yeres hath yerely for his none.’ Thus the payment to the priest had become reduced from {5 to £4. It is not stated how much the residue of the profits was. A mis- statement as to the origin of the chantry is made, and a curious statement as to the title of the corporation. The chantry had not been ‘ordeyned and founde’ by the mayor and burgesses, but by Gardyner’s will, and the corporation title was the instrument of 1500, which assigned to them Gardyner’s lease of 1469. On the dissolution of the chantries, John Lund, the priest of the chantry, was pensioned off 25 February, 1548,8 and the £4 a year 5 Based on evidence taken at a court held at Ald- cliffe ‘the Monday after the Feast of Decollation of Seynt John in the second year of King Henry VIII,’ 1 Sept. 1511. The survey is set out at length in Baines (1870 ed. ii, 568), but no reference is supplied. ® Duchy of Lanc. Colleges and Chantries, Certifi- cates (pt. i), No. 69. * Leach, English Schools at the Reformation, from Duchy of Lanc. Div. xviii, vol. 268. * Duchy of Lanc. Misc. Bks. 135, fol. 65. which he had received was for the future handed by the town to the receiver of the duchy of Lan- caster. As regards the school, no ‘continuance’ certificate for that part of the endowment has been found ; possibly such a certificate was not considered necessary, the endowment being clearly secular. On 22 May, 1571, ‘Lune mill being now by the greate rage of water utterly decayed’ and no longer able to yield profit to the duchy or support to the school in Lancaster, a commission” was appointed to inquire who was the owner of the property and what could be done with it. The return made in the following year to the chancellor of the duchy stated the owner to be Robert Dalton, who had purchased the mill from Philip and Mary in 1557-8." It mentions that the mayor and burgesses had kept up the yearly payment of £47 to the chantry priest until the dissolution of the chantries, after which the sum was paid to the ‘ prynce,’ and of £3 65. 8d. to the schoolmaster, and of 6s. 8d. to Robert Dalton until the decay of the mill, which had rendered the payments and the con- tinuance of the school at Lancaster impossible. It estimates that the repair of the mill would cost £110, but does not recommend it :— Notwithstandinge, it standithe in suche damige of ffreshe water besydes the salte water whiche doethe ebbe and fhowe dayly aboute it that no man wilbe bound ffor the upholde of it ffor that it hathe bene three tymes within the memorie of man with extreme waters clearely overthrowne and _ dyverse personnes drowned in the same. Here ends the history of Lune Mill at Lan- caster. Though the commissioners did not actually recommend its abandonment, they clearly thought it would be waste of money to repair it, no tenant being procurable, and it prob- ably was left to be eventually washed entirely away by theriver and the tides. When Robert Dalton died a few years later, the inquisition ® Duchy of Lanc. Mins. Accts. No. 2682, bdle. 168, 1-3 Edw. VI. Duchy of Lanc. Special Com. 204. " Pat. 4 & § Phil. and Mary, pt. 8. This patent granted to Robert Dalton of Bispham the lordships and manors of Aldcliffe and Bulk, and all messuages, &c., late to the priory of Lancaster of old regardant and pertaining and formerly parcel of the possessions of the late dissolved monastery of Syon, and a number of other tenements in Aldcliffe, Bulk, Lancaster, Warton, Halton, Bolton and Scotforth, all formerly belonging to Syon. Mills are not mentioned except in general words, and no details of the premises are given. ‘The consideration paid was £1,667 175. 4d. for the whole. No particulars for the grant have been found. The return states, wrongly, that this was the sum mentioned in Gardyner’s will. The commissioners appear to have abstained from examining the interior of the documents produced before them. 564 SCHOOLS post mortem concerning his property,’® taken at Wigan on 13 January, 1578-9, mentioned no mill except in general words. It does not appear in the subsequent history of Lancaster, though it is said to have been seen depicted in an old print of the town not now forthcoming. Its situation, no doubt, was somewhere near the former boundary between the township of Bulk and the borough, near where the lines of the Midland Railway now lie. It is certain that the corporation conceived itself to be the lessee of the mill, burdened with the obligation of maintaining the school so far as the rents permitted. The next definite mention of the school is in the will of Randall Carter, of Southwark, citizen and tallow chandler, bearing date 18 April, and proved 20 April, 1615. He be- queathed to John Marshall and Richard Year- wood, both of St. Saviour’s, Southwark— as feoffees in trust towards the maintenance of an usher in the Free School of Lancaster in the county of Lancaster, one annuity of {£10 per annum to be issuing out of my lands, tenements, and hereditaments in Whitecross Street, in St. Giles without Cripplegate, during so long time as the said Free School shall be maintained and the said annuity so employed. At an inquisition’ held at the courthouse of St. Clement Danes on 14 February, 1666-7, under a Commission of Charitable Uses, the jury found that Carter had died on 20 April, 1615, and that Yearwood’s heir at law Edward Payne, by deed dated 5 February, 1666-7, had con- veyed the annuity to the governors of the Free Grammar School of St. Saviour’s, Southwark, and that John Harrison, of Lancaster, was and had been usher in the Free School of Lancaster and diligently had employed himself in the said place from the 5th day of May, which was in the year of our Lord, 1656, unto that time. The will and inquisition show that the school had been resumed before 1615, and was then a going concern. The register of St. John’s College, Cambridge, affords evidence that the school was carried on during the Civil War, for John Houseman, admitted 28 April, 1640, from Sedbergh, is re- corded as having been previously at Lancaster School for three years, under Mr. ‘Scholecroft ’ ; and on 12 April, 1654, were entered Augustin and Richard Schoolecroft, sons of James Schoole- croft, clerk, ‘bred at home’ by their father. He ceased probably in 1663, as on 20 June, 1664, two boys, bred at the grammar school under Mr. Holden for one year, were admitted. As one of these came from Tunstall he must have been a boarder. 8 Duchy of Lanc. Ing. p.m. vol. xiv, No. 1. 4 Wallace, End. Char. Lancs. The school next appears in the corporation books, which record the appointment, 6 Novem- ber, 1680,!° to the head-mastership of Thomas Lodge, ‘now present schoolemaster of Hever- sham,’ at a ‘yearly sum of thirty pounds of lawful English money . . . out of the Towne’s Re- venue.” His duties were to commence on the first of January following. It is stated further that Mr. Lodge’s salary shall continue, ‘if he shall happen to fall into sickness or any other distemper and continue for the space of six months or under,’ so long as he provides a sub- stitute. On 23 August, 1681, there were ‘presented in presence of the Maior, the Bay- liffs, 8& others of the Corporacion & Burrough of Lancaster, for the use of the ffree schoole scholars there by Mr. Thomas ffoster,’ fifty- three volumes of classical works.’ In the winter 1681-2 the condition of the school buildings demanded attention. At a meeting of the town council on 31 January— Whereas the ffree Schoole of the Burrough afore- said is much out of repaire and darke and the number of Schollers there so many that the said Schoole is too litle ; And for the repairing amending and enlarging whereof and for erecting of a Roome for a Library for the said Schoole and retirement of the Schoole- master It is ordered that Joshua Partington, Sen., Thomas Baynes, Robt. Carter, John Yeats Younger & Richard Stirzaker shall as shortly as they can assesse the sume of Thirty pounds or thereabouts upon ffree Burgesses and other Inhabitants within the said Burrongh and such as have Estates there & Stocks of money or goods according to the rates of the Assessments for the last Quarterly paymt for paying & disbanding the forces since 29 September, 1677: that the same may be repaired amended & enlarged for ye creditt of the Towne. Accordingly the school was rebuilt, probably on its former site, on the west side of the church- yard. The headstone of the door, bearing the date 1682, now lies in the grounds of the present school. Thomas Lodge sent boys to St. John’s Col- lege, Cambridge, from 1682 (12 October) to 1685 (16 February), all as sizars. In 1701, Laurence Herdman, who went up as asizar on 17 June, is recorded to have been under Mr. Bordley. In 1700, ‘Giles Heysham, merchant, left to the town of Lancaster £100, which was applied to augment the Usher’s salary.’ It is possible that the corporation, having made use of this hundred pounds, resolved to set apart a field on the west side of the town, which had formed part of the wastes belonging to the corporation, 18 W. O. Roper, ‘Lancaster School,’ Trans. Lancs. and Ches. Antig. Soc. xiv, 1897, pp. 12, 13. 18 See, for the detailed list, ibid. 13, 14. 565 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE to represent that sum. At any rate, ata meeting, 19 February, 1708, it was Agreed then in Councell that the whole Rent of Deep Car Meadow, late in possession of Tho. Sherson, Esq., be for the future yearly paid to the Usher for the time being of Lancaster Schoole according to direc- tion of a Draught of a Declaration in trust now read in Council. The declaration in trust is not forthcoming, but the rent of Deep Carr Meadow, called the Usher’s Meadow, has always been paid first to the ushers, then to the governing body. On 6 September, 1708, it was agreed that Mr. Atkinson, of Sedbergh, be invited over hither to be Headmaster of this Schoole, that Mr. Simpson, Mr. Backhouse, & Mr. Hopkins be sent to give theinvitacon ; Alsoe that they wait on Mr. Whar- ton? & intreate him to attend here on thursday next to examine the abilities of the Candidates ; in case Mr. Wharton cannot attend then goon to Mr. Lodge with the like invitacon, Two days later it was agreed declared in Councell that Tho: Holme, Clerke, be head Schoolemaster of Lancaster Schoole during pleasure of the Councell & the usuall Salary of £30 be paid yearly ; that Mr. Tho. Hardy be Usher during pleasure of the Councell. On 10 July, 1712, appears the following entry = Memorandum. That Mr. Alderman Waller did then pay to the hands of Mr. Hen: Welch and Mr. Ja: Smethurst, present Chamberlains of the said Burrough, the sume of Ten pounds, left by the late Will & Testament of Christopher Procter, gen., lately deceased, for the use of Lancaster Schoole. For many years ten shillings as interest on this ten pounds was annually credited to the school. In 1717 the council ordered that the Sallary of Mr. Thomas Holme, Head School- master of the ffree School of Lancaster, be suspended and not paid him unless he decline Preaching at Claugh- ton Church. The difficulty was arranged by Holme agreeing to have a curate to officiate for him. Again, in 1720, after it had been recorded that the ffree School . . . is of late very much reduced and lessened, It is, therefore, ordered . . . that Mr. Holme, present Schoolmaster of the said Schoole, do shew cause why his Sallary should not be suspended. Accordingly the council a month later decided that the salary should be stopped, ‘but with time to remove till Christmas next.’ Within a year the subject was before the council again. " Head master cf Sedbergh School. Mr. Holme had neglected to ‘ provide for himself otherwayes’ before Christmas, and so on 21 Sep- tember, 1721, the council ordered that the said Mr. Holme’s Sallary shall no longer be paid him, but that he have notice to provide otherwayes for himself, for the same reason—of the decay of the said School. Nothing more is heard of the matter and Mr. Holme’s salary continued to be paid until 1725, when he stated he had accepted a benefice, and resigned his post. He died in 1740. His successor was appointed at the Antient Sallary of Thirty pounds per annum certain & independant, and ten shillings the interest of Mr. Procter’s gift, & an addition of Six pounds per annum for three years certain. The usher’s salary was also augmented by £7 6s. per annum. ‘The augmentation to the master’s salary was for some years continued at £6, but subsequently reduced to £4 ros. In 1737 commence a series of accounts relat- ing exclusively to the school. The receipts con- sist of amounts given by various gentlemen on ‘Play-days,’ and these amounts were expended in the purchase of books for the school. The first account shows the amounts ‘received for Play-days,’ from 1733 to 1737, to be £3 165.8 The individual gifts range from 10s. 6d. to 2s. 6d. These accounts cease in 1764. In November of that year Mr. Cockin, scrivener and accomptant, was appointed by the council to teach writing and accounts at a salary of £10 a year. He was required to teach from 1 March to 1 November, with a winter vacation of four months, and allowed to receive from each pupil, in addition to his salary, 1s. en- trance fee, gd.a week for writing, and 12d. for accounts. On 24 June, 1779, a meeting of the council was held ‘to take into consideration the Behaviour of the Rev. Mr. Watson, Head Master of the free Grammar School at Lancaster, on 23rd day of this instant June, to Master Richard Hinde, Son of Thomas Hinde, Esquire, Mayor of the said Borough, and one of the Scholars in the said School,’ and it was unanimously resolved that the behaviour of the said Mr. Watson to the said Richard Hinde ‘hath been improper and inhuman and unjustifiable, and that by means thereof and from the said Mr. Watson’s conduct at this meeting, he hath highly incurred the displeasure of the council. And it is further unanimously resolved that if the said Mr. Watson shall in future persist in such conduct proper steps will be taken, at the expense of the Corporation, to amove him from his office of schoolmaster. And the bailiffs are directed to deliver a copy of this resolution to the said Mr. Watson.’ * For a list of the books purchased with this sum, with prices, see W. O. Roper, op. cit. 18, 566 SCHOOLS In 1792 the salary of the head master was raised to £50, which may be considered to in- clude the interest on Procter’s legacy, no subse- quent payment being made specifically on that account. In 1794 the Rev. John Widditt was unani- mously elected ‘High Master of the Grammar School at Lancaster’ in the room of the Rev. James Watson, resigned, who received the thanks of the corporation for the faithful discharge of the Duties of his office of Master at the Free Grammar School in this Town, for a period of near Thirty years, for the great services he hath thereby rendered to the Publick, and also for the honourable manner in which he hath now resigned. On Tuesday, 15 December, 1801, ‘the scholars performed Home’s tragedy of “ Douglas ” before a genteel and crowded audience in the school.” ‘The prologue spoken on that occasion contains the following lines :— Let no proud critic hither bend his eye, Our faults & imperfections to descry ; For who can e’er expect in us to find The just resemblance of our author’s mind ? Can energy attend the tongue of youth, Whose artless lips distil the words of truth ? —— Ah! let the critic think of this, and then, Young as we are, we tread the stage as men ; Young as we are we mount the tragic stage, To paint the manners of a barb’rous age ; When madding discord shook the world with arms And fill’d each pious soul with just alarms. Tis well those gloomy days of blood are o’er, And jarring chieftains scourge the land no more : At peace with all the world, no foe appalls Britain, secure within her sea-girt walls. In 1802 the Rev. Mr. Widditt resigned, and as acompliment received the freedom of the city. Under his successor, the Rev. Joseph Rowley, rules were drawn up for the management of the school :— The school was to be open ‘to any Boy who is able to read English pretty well.’ ‘Both the Masters shall teach English and Latin promiscuously as they shall be requested, the former to be taught grammatically as well as the latter.’ 75. 6d. a quarter was to be paid for every son of a non-freeman. The masters were to exchange sides on Tuesday in every week ; Friday in every week was to be set apart ‘for hearing over what they have said on the preceding days, and every Saturday for the repetition and application of grammar.’ The school hours were to be : In summer, from six to eight and nine to twelve and two to five ; in winter, from eight to twelve and one to four, and prayers were to be ‘read (as heretofore hath been accustomed) every morning.’ ‘That perquisites, called Cockpennies, shall be given to the Master at Shrovetide only, & since there is no quarterage at all paid by freemen’s children, & only a small one by non-freemen’s, it is hoped these circumstances will be then considered, & also at the entrance of every new Scholar.’ Seven-twelfths of the cockpennies were to go to the high master and five-twelfths to the usher. In 1812 the Rev. Joseph Rowley resigned, and the Rev. John Beethom was appointed, with the Rev. George Morland as usher. ‘Twenty pounds was added to the head master’s salary, bringing it up to £70; £14 to the usher’s salary, bringing it up to £30; and £10 to the writing-master’s salary— in the expectation that they will exert themselves in promoting the interests of the School by a strict and regular attention to their several duties. In September, 1823,a committee was appointed by the corporation for the purpose of examining into the state of the school, and on 7 July, 1824, their report was read and adopted. In this report it was stated that there were then 64 boys at the school, 46 of whom were the sons of freemen, that the master had 18 boys under his care, and the usher 46, that about $0 attended the writing master ; that the school, with the exception of some trifling repairs, which the high bailiff would attend to, was in good order. They recommended that the master should have the appoint- ment of the usher, subject to the approval of the cor- poration, with a view to the removal of the unpleasant feeling which had subsisted between the masters, and for the establishment of subordination and unanimity of method in teaching. They further recommended that, in order to induce men of sufficient attainments to preside in the school, the emoluments should be increased ; and that in lieu of the annual gratuities called cock-pennies, there should be paid for each boy under the care of the usher, Ios. per quarter ; for each boy on the two lowest benches, under the care of the master, 15s. ; and for each boy on the upper benches, 20s. per quarter ; that the sum of £70 per annum, theretofore granted to the master, should be continued, and that the sum of {£40 per annum, theretofore granted to the usher, should be paid to the master, making his salary £110; that the rent of the Usher’s meadow and Randall Carter’s legacy of £10 per annum should be continued to the usher in part of his salary, and that he should receive in addition one-fourth part of the quarterage, the master guaran- teeing that his emoluments should not fall short of £60 per annum ; that there should be no gratuitous education, either for the sons of freemen or others, there being ample provision for that kind of education, in the National and other schools. They suggested that at the expiration of each half-year there should be a public examination of the boys, and that the school should be under the supervision of a committee, who might visit it at certain periods, and ascertain the degree of proficiency of the boys. Finally, they recommended that the writing master should in future be nominated by, and be under the control of, the mas- ter, and that he should annually receive {20 from the 567 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE corporation, and that he should be paid for teaching writing 7s. 6d., for writing and common arithmetic 1os., and for fractions 125. 6¢. per quarter by each boy. The head master appears always to have been appointed by the mayor and council, and the usher and writing master also until the alteration in 1824, The Charity Commissioners of 1826 report :— There is a building adjoining the church-yard on the west side, which bears the date of 1682. This building consists of a school-room, appropriated to the use of the master and usher, and two rooms above, in one of which the writing master instructs the boys belonging to the school, and in the other he teaches girls in writing; there is also a library over the porch. . . . The school-house is repaired out of the funds of the corporation, and is now in a very good state. The school appears always to have been open to the admission of all boys of Lancaster and its neigh- bourhood without restriction, and previously to 1824 no payment was made to the master or usher, except a gratuity at Shrovetide, under the name of a cock- penny ; the reasons which made it necessary for the corporation to adopt the system that all the scholars should pay a certain sum per quarter, are stated in the report of the committee, and it will be observed that the funds appropriated to the maintenance of the school (exclusive of what is contributed gratuitously by the corporation) are wholly insufficient for the support of a free school. There are at present 60 boys in the school, many of whom are instructed in the classics, besides some additional scholars under the tuition of the writing master only. It is customary for several members of the corpora- tion to visit the school three or four times in the course of the year.’ An old boy has left the following notes on the school between 1825 and 1832 :— The School was a two floored building. The School room on the ground floor ran the whole length of the building ; the upper storey was divided into two rooms. ‘The entrance to the Schoo! was in the centre of the front. All South of the door, on each side, was considered ‘low side,’ all north ‘high side.’ Mr. Beethom presided over the ‘high side,’ but on Wednesdays the masters exchanged classes... . Mr. Sanderson (the Writing & Mathematical Master) had the upper rooms, & after saying one lesson half the boys went to be instructed by him in the forenoon, the others in the afternoon... . We had two home lessons to prepare each night. They were neither long nor dificult, but it must be remembered that music, drawing, dancing, foreign languages (except Greek & Latin) were extra-mural, & if studied at all, had to be acquired in the evening or early morning.... The fixed holidays were 44 weeks at Christmas & Mid- summer, Monday & ‘Tuesday at Shrovetide and Whitsuntide, and Fridays, Mondays, & Tuesdays at Easter, the Kings birthday, Mayor choosing day, the Char. Com. Rep. xv, 262 (1826). Monday before (called Auditors day), the middle fair days & one day each Assizes. We had usually one day before & one day after the Christmas vacation to follow the hounds if they cast offnear the town. .. . On the Monday before Mayor choosing day the Corpora- tion Accounts were audited. At about a quarter past eight in the morning the Mayor Bailiff & Auditors preceded by the mace bearer—wearing their laced hats but no other insignia—entered the School & invited the Masters to assist them to audit the accounts, & to give the boys holiday. Immediately after our dismissal we used to set off with the Mace bearer to turn out the other Schools. . . . On Mayor choosing day we marched to St. John’s Church with the Corpora- tion in the morning, & in the afternoon we were regaled by the new Mayor & bailiffs; we received two Mayors cakes, two apples, two pears, a cup of sweet wine, and a horn of nuts at each place.... The boys at the National School used to waylay & rob us, but most people tried to create a diversion by throwing them apples out of the front windows & letting us escape at the back.... The first six boys had wedding money, that is, each watched one day a week & solicited remembrance of the happy couples as they emerged from church. If any inquisitive person ventured to ask what claim we had upon him the answer was ready, that it was ‘an ancient custom & had to be kept up.’ In the case of a gentleman’s wedding the present was generally a guinea, the usual donation half a crown. In 1850 Mr. Beethom resigned, and the Rev. Thomas Faulkner Lee was appointed head mas- ter. He found 17 boys; by 1865 he had 158. In 1851 the corporation presented a memorial to the Lords of the Treasury, which recited that the endowment was paid chiefly out of the funds of the corporation, and that it was believed that such endowment had been augmented from time to time by individuals whose benefactions, having at a remote period been intrusted to the cor- poration, had become intermixed with their own corporate property, and were not then distinguish- able therefrom, with the exception of a field of about four statute acres called the Usher’s Meadow, and an annual sum of £10 payable to the usher under Randall Carter’s will. There is no evidence apart from what is above set out in support of this conjecture, which appears to be an attempt to supply ‘ business’ reasons for the strong support which the corporation had lent out of its common funds to the school. The object of the memorial was to obtain consent to the appropriation of land for a new school, and in reply the Treasury authorized the corporation to appropriate land in East Road for a school and master’s house, and to mortgage the master’s house, but not the school, to raise so much money as might be necessary to make up the deficiency between the subscriptions received and the actual cost. “Towards the cost, which appears from the minutes of the corporation to have been about £2,000, the corporation applied the proceeds of sale of the old school, and £500 from their corporate funds. The rest of the cost 568 SCHOOLS was defrayed partly by subscriptions, including £100 from the Duchy of Lancaster, and as to £1,000 by money borrowed on mortgage at 4 per cent., which was paid off in 1882, but the master continued to pay the sum of £40, origin- ally the interest on the mortgage debt, to the corporation by way of rent for the use of the house, until the scheme was established. By royal warrant in 1851 Queen Victoria directed that the school should be called ‘The Royal Grammar School.’ In 1859 the subscription of 100 guineas which the duchy had paid from 1834 to 1855 for the Lancaster races was given to the school for three University Exhibitions of £30 each and a prize of £15 for a non-university boy on leaving. When Mr. James Bryce, now the Right Hon. James Bryce, ambassador to the United States, visited the school as assistant commissioner to the Schools Inquiry Commission in 1867, he found it in a flourishing condition. ‘There were 158 boys, 74 boarders, partly accommodated in the head master’s house, partly in another which he had built, and 84 day boys, ‘sons of pro- fessional men and manufacturers living in the town or along the lines of railway, and of sub- stantial shopkeepers.’ There were 7 assistant masters. Five or six pupils went to the university every year; freedom was allowed to drop Greek and substitute French or German. The higher classical and mathematical work was very good ; in the lower forms history and geography were very respectable. Altogether the school was spoken of in terms of high praise. Mr. Bryce was, however, quite in error as to the benefits conferred on the school by the corporation. He was given to understand that they contributed £200 a year; but he had not discovered that 5 per cent. interest was charged by them on the money they had advanced for building the school, and this in perpetuity. In fact, they were making a very handsome profit out of it. In 1872 Dr. Lee retired, and on 20 April gave £30 for a Whewell Divinity Prize. The Rev. W. E. Pryke then became head master. In 1878 William Bradshaw built a laboratory. In 1884 Mr. Pryke made a swim- ming bath, which was bought for the school in 1902 out of a gift of £2,000 by Lord Ashton, In 1884 Mr. Albert Grey erected and equipped a gymnasium, The school buildings were en- larged in 1888. In 1881 Mr. John Grey gave £150 for a gold medal for the best boy in mathematics and science. Miss Betsy Jane Bradshaw by her will (22 October, 1890) gave £10,000 to her executors, Sir Thomas Storey, Lawrence Holden, solicitor, and John Sanderson, bank manager, ‘for any charitable or educational purpose.’ This the executors determined to apply to the Grammar School. Mr. Pryke resigned in 1893, unable, in view of the large interest paid to the corporation, to carry on the school at a profit. Mr. George Alfred Stocks, the second master, was elected. The Bradshaw trustees approached the cor- poration and the Charity Commission, and Mr. Arthur Leach went down as assistant com- missioner to arrange for a scheme. It was eventually agreed that the corporation should give up any further charge for interest on the money spent on buildings and pay a fixed sum of £200 a year to the school, while the Bradshaw fund of 9,000, invested on mortgage, was made part of the endowment ; the accumulated interest on {980 was made an exhibition fund to the universities, together with Sir “Thomas Storey’s gift and the Baker and Blades Exhibition funds, producing from £30 to £40 a year each. By a scheme under the Endowed Schools Acts approved by Queen Victoria in Council 13 May, 1896, these arrangements were carried out, and a governing body established of 15, five appointed by the town council, one by the school board now merged in it, two by the Lancashire County Council, one each by the councils of Owens College, now the university of Manchester, and of University College, Liverpool, now the uni- versity of Liverpool, and five co-opted persons. The tuition fees for scholars over ten years of age may range from £10 to £16; in fact, boys above twelve pay 12 guineas a year. ‘There were in 1902 119 boys, of whom 42 were boarders. Next year Mr. Stocks went to Black- burn Grammar School. The present head master is the Rev. Herbert Armstrong Watson, scholar of Dulwich College and of Peterhouse, Cambridge, where he took a second class in the classical tripos. He was eight years an assistant master at Manchester Grammar School, seven years head master of Maidstone School, and five and a half years of Yarmouth Grammar School. With 6 assistant masters there are 83 boys, of whom 20 are boarders. PRESTON GRAMMAR SCHOOL Preston, one of the most ancient boroughs, naturally possesses one of the most ancient schools of Lancashire. There is a strong temptation to see the first reference to a schoolmaster in an early charter,! without date, but ¢. 1230, whereby William, son of Richard Cross, grantsin perpetuity to William of Kirkham, clerk, certain lands in the town fields of Preston. For at the same time other charters granting other pieces of land to the same Master William were made ‘with the common assent of the whole town.’ It is certain that the ' Cockersand Chartul. (Chet. Soc. xxxix), vol. i, pt. il, 217-21, quoted in The Hist. of the Parish of Preston, by Henry Fishwick (1900). 2 569 72 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE title of master (mazister) at that date betokened the university graduate, and that being so, the grant of lands was probably an endowment for a master to teach the Grammar School. This in- ference is rendered more probable by the fact that Master Thomas of Kirkham subsequently appears as schoolmaster of Lancaster. However that may be, the school is quite defi- nitely referred to in 1358, when ‘ John, clerk of Broughton, schoolmaster of Preston,’ was indicted with others for a riot in connexion with the proclamation of a pardon to a murderer. The matter-of-course way in which the schoolmaster is mentioned shows that the school was no new thing. The school next appears in the deed of appoint- ment (5 January, 1399-1400) of Richard Mar- shall, clerk, to the mastership of Preston Grammar School (ad scolas gramaticales de Preston regen- das). He is identified by Colonel Fishwick with Richard le Marishall, who is described as school- master on the Gild Roll of 1415, in which he appears with two sons, showing that he was not in holy orders) An Alexander Marescall had paid 2s. for the tenth in 1333-4, and John le Marisshall was one of the aldermen of the gild in 1397 and mayor in 1400. The next school- master mentioned was equally well connected. On 20 May, 1474, Thomas Preston, master of the school of Preston, received letters dimissory for orders from Archbishop Neville, Preston being then part of the archdeaconry of Richmond in the diocese of York. Nicholas Preston was mayor in 1468. The school was concerned in a dispute as to the chantry of Our Lady in the ‘ paroch ’ church of Preston in 1528.7 Roger Lewyns, priest, had filed a bill in Chancery against the mayor and burgesses for trespass in turning him out of the chantry of which he had had peaceable possession from 1518, when he succeeded George Hale, clerk, until 1526. According to Lewyns’ story he was appointed on St. Luke’s Day, 1518, by Thomas earl of Derby. But in 1526 the mayor, with Henry Clifton, Nicholas Banastre, and other burgesses, came into the church armed with ‘ bylles, swor Js, and bucklers,’ and just as he had finished his masse and before he had space to dof his albe and amyce... cruelly and violently brake one cofur standing at his altur end’ and carried off the chalices, vestments, books, and ‘juelles’ belong- ing to the chantry, and Lewyns went in ‘great perell of his lyfe’ and of being‘ cruelly slayn and murdered.’ The mayor in defence pleaded ® that Lewyns had neglected an essential part of his duty, viz. that of keeping a free school for the children ? End. Char. for Preston, Rep. to Char. Com. by G. W. Wallace ; Com. Pal. 312, 1905, p. 32, from Duchy of Lanc. Plead. Hen. VII, 17, L. 6. * Duchy of Lanc. Plead. Hen. VII, 17, L. 62. of the inhabitants, and that this was the reason for his forcible ejection. We learn from his statement that his chantry had existed for eighty years, had been instituted by a previous mayor and the burgesses, and was supported out of the profits of certain lands and tenements (of the annual value of £6) in Preston and Walton, the gift of ‘dyverse and sondrye well disposed persons’; also that Lewyns was not appointed by, but accepted by the town at the instance of, the earl. The ‘Chantrie at the altar of our Ladie’ within the said ‘paroch’ church of Preston was, according to the Chantry Certificate of 1546, of the foundacion of Helene Houghton, ther to celebrate contynuallie for his sowle and all cristen sowles, and th’incumbent thereof to be sufficiently lerned in gramer to th’entent to have a fre gramer skole kept ther also, as by the seyd foundacion it doth appere. There was a Helen Hoghton, née Masson, who in 1450 married Henry Hoghton and obtained on 16 March, 1468, a papal bull to legitimise their issue, because the marriage had taken place without the consent of the husband’s father. If Mayor Walton was correct it could hardly have been this Helen Hoghton, but an earlier one, who founded the chantry, as eighty years before 1528 brings us to 1448. The Hoghtons had long been connected with Preston ; between 1371 and 1524 several members of the family held the office of mayor. It is of course possible that the chantry was not a Hoghton chantry but a Masson chantry. For the other chantry in the church, that of the Holy Rood, was a Hoghton chantry, founded by Sir Richard of Hoghton, who died in 1341. Or Helen Hoghton may have merely conveyed the property as heiress of a last surviving feoffee on behalf of the town. In the Valor of 1535 the value of the chantry is given as £2 14s. 10%d., and Nicholas Banastre was priest and schoolmaster, as he continued till its dissolution in 1548. The Chantry Com- missioners of 15464 and 1548 § reported that the chantry was ‘to teach one Fre Grammer Schole,’ and that the yearly income was £3 25. 4d. Banastre’s age in 1548 is given as forty-two, so that he could hardly have been the Nicholas Banastre who was made mayor by Sir Richard Hoghton’s orders in 1528, and set aside on appeal to the chancellor of the duchy, Sir Thomas More. But he was probably his son. There were Banastres mayors at intervals from 1346 - downwards. By a warrant signed by Sir Walter Mildmay and Robert Kelway on 11 August, * A. F. Leach, Engl. Schools at the Reform. 117, from Duchy of Lanc. class xxv, bdle. v, 3rd portion, m. 45. ° Ibid. 122, from Duchy of Lanc. Div. xviii, 264. 579 SCHOOLS 1548,° addressed to the chancellor of the duchy, finding that a Grammer Scole hath heretofore been continually kept in the parish of Preston with the revenues of the chauntrey of Our Lady founded in the church there and that the Scolemaster there had for his wages yerely of the revenues of the same chauntrey {2 16s. 244. which scole 1s very meete and necessary to continue, it was ordered that the same scole shall continue and that Nicholas Banis- ter, Scolemaster there, shall bee and remayne in the same rowme and that he shall have for his stipend and wages $65. 2d. yearly. The continued stipend was thus cut down from the amount found by the chantry certificate to within about 2s. of that stated inthe Valor Eccle- stasticus of eleven years before, but on what prin- ciple is not clear. The stipend duly appears in the Duchy Ministers’ Accounts’ in 2 & Edward VI and 3 & 4and 4. & 5 Philip and Mary as paid to Nicholas Banastre, schoolmaster in the parish of Preston (/udimagistro). But in 1559-60 and 1560-1 the payment is entered but struck out as not paid, and after 1562-3 no further mention of the payment occurs. The reason no doubt was that Banastre was in 1561 found to be a ‘recusant at large,’ and confined to the county of Lancaster ‘the town of Preston ex- cepted.” He was called an ‘ unlerned scolemaster,’ and a rank Jesuit. On 21 February, 1567-8, when the bishop of Chester was ordered to hold a visitation to see that ‘no obstinate persons having been justly deprived of offices of ministry be secretly maintained,’ Banastre appears among those priests who had been refused the ministry because of ‘the contempt and evill opinion’ which they had of religion. Meanwhile the lands of the chantry itself were from Easter 1549 ® leased to William Kenyon for twenty-one years. The corporation, of which Lawrence Banastre, probably the schoolmaster’s brother, was mayor, in the beginning of Philip and Mary’s reign applied to the Duchy Court to set aside the lease on the ground that for 100 years past there had been a free school at Preston ‘for the educacion and bryngyng up of young children,’ with lands worth 5 marks (£3 6s. 84.)a year, and that Kenyon had by ‘sinister means’ proved that these lands were part of the chantry endowment, and obtained a lease ‘to the great injury of the inhabitants and bringing up of yong children of the towne and the countrey there nyghe adjoyning.’ ‘The application was not successful. It was quite clear that the endow- ment fell within the Chantries Act. Nor, as the stipend was continued under Mildmay’s warrant, did it much matter to the school at that time, 6 A, F, Leach, Engl. Schools at the Reform. 123, from Duchy of Lanc. Div. xxv, R. i, No. 8. 7 Bdle. 173, No. 2714, 2722; bdle174, No. 2723. 8 Wallace, End. Char. p. 31 note ; Duchy of Lanc. Drft. Leases, 28. though it did afterwards when the value of money diminished. Kenyon’s rent was duly accounted for in the Ministers’ Accounts until the end of Philip and Mary’s reign. Then the chantry lands were granted to the Savoy Hospital, 20 June, 1558, after which the rent would, of course, be paid to the hospital, and so appears no more in the Duchy Ministers’ Accounts. Probably Banastre was deprived of office in 1561, since at the gild of 1562 William Clayton appears as schoolmaster. No doubt he was paid by the corporation. The statement made in 1528 that the chantry lands were of the annual value of £6 suggests that there were other school lands besides those of the value of £3 6s. 8d. a year let to Kenyon of which the corporation were trustees, and the existence of which secured the continuance of the school. It is quite certain that £2 16s. was not adequate pay for a school- master even in the days of Edward IV, much less in the days of Edward VI, and Banastre’s pay must have been made up from some other source. As the school was a free grammar school, that source could not have been tuition fees; it must have been endowment in some form, and _ per- manent endowment rather than a voluntary pay- ment by the corporation. ‘That after the loss of the chantry lands and the cession of the crown payments in lieu of them the status of the school was maintained—that is, that the income of the master was kept up—is clear from the next master, Peter Carter, being a fellow of St. John’s College, Cambridge. His tombstone in the churchyard was inscribed ® to the effect that he was ‘author of annotations on John Seton’s Logic and died nearly 60 yeres old a.p. 1590.’ His successor was William Gellibrand, of Ramsgreave, near Blackburn, B.A., Brasenose College, 14 January, 1569. He appears as school- master on the Gild Roll in 1602. On 26 August, 1607, he became rector of Warrington. Henry Yates seems to have followed, holding office from 1607. During his time a definite assign- ment of income was made to the school. On 24 August, 1612, the corporation ordered that the two bailiffs should, in lieu of the amounts formerly expended by ancient custom at Easter for beer, cheese, bread, and ale for the mayor, burgesses, and strangers, pay to the new scholemaster for this towne of Preston or to his use the sum of twentie marke in parte of pay- ment of his stipent and wages, that is to say, either of them £6 135. 42, and all future bailiffs were required to pay £13 6s. 8d. ‘yearelie’ between them. We are left to guess what the whole amount of the stipend or wages was and whence derived. But we should not be far wrong in supposing that the whole was £20 a year, out of which the usher was paid £6 135. 4d. ® Henry Fishwick, Hist. Preston, 208. 571 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Hugh Whalley was the next master. On 31 January, 1620-1, he is described as ‘ gentle- man’ when his son was buried. So he was not in orders. In September, 1622, he appears on the Gild Roll as schoolmaster with two sons. ‘ The next name on the Roll,’ says Colonel Fishwick,” ‘is William Walton, who is described as the horse trainer of the borough; the Latin word used to express the trade is “ hipodidasculus.”’ But ‘hipodidasculus’ is not a trainer of horses but of boys, an usher, and the entry bears testimony to the growth of the school in numbers, an usher being now required. In 1636 Whalley went on to Kirkham Grammar School. Roger Sherburne succeeded and appears as schoolmaster (/udimagister) on the Gild Roll of 1642. He probably departed in 1649. On g September, 1650, one of the bailiffs, William Curtis, having publicly refused to pay his half of the sum of {13 65. 8d. to the master, ‘to the great affront of the Corporation,’ was ordered forthwith to pay it ‘to Mr. Robinson, now schoolmaster, and on default to be leavied of his gocds.’ We may presume that Mr. Robinson’s political and religious views were not pleasing to the recalcitrant bailiff. Perhaps as a consequence of this and to provide the augmentation which here as elsewhere cheered the hearts of the scholastic profession under the Commonwealth it was ordered by the corporation, 16 July, 1652, that the sum of £22 of current English money shalbee paid unto the said Schoolemaster yearely. . . . out of ye Reveneues of this Towne by the Baylives thereof, yearely, for the tyme being, in liew of theis somes following, formerly payable by them forth of the Revenewes of this Towne, vizt. £6 13s. 4d. formerly payable to the Schoolemaster, {£5 65. 8¢. usually payable to ye Bayliffes for their yearely fees and weekly wages, and 4os. yearely payable to the steward of this towne, and £6 yearely payable to ye usher of the said Schoole ; and also the said Steward haveing the benefitt of the Corts and other profitts formerly accustomed to ye said Steward (excepting th’fore- menconed some of 40s.) is to allow and pay to the said Schoolemaster yearely, if his availes will amount to soe much, the some of qos. The register of St. John’s College, Cambridge, gives us the name of Mr. Winckley as master in 1656, Elisha son of John Clarkson, draper, of Preston, being admitted as a sizar there at the age of fifteen on 23 April, 1661, having been six years under Winckley. He was of a Preston family, and was probably John Winckley, curate of Garstang in 1641 and then of Brighton. The Gild Roll of 1662 gives William Yates as ‘pedagogus,’ possibly meaning usher. In 1666 the corporation built the school, which * Fishwick, op. cit. p. 124, from Dodsworth’s collection. served for nearly 200 years, at the bottom of Stonygate, near to the churchyard. Itis described in 1686 as ‘a large and handsome schoole house, and in 1824 as ‘two good school rooms, one above and one below.’ The White Book of the Corporation records on 6 September, 1675, Richard Taylor as late schoolmaster, when William Barrowe, of St. Alban’s Hall and Corpus Christi College, Oxford, was appointed. He resigned in 1677. George Walmesley, of Jesus College, Cam- bridge, B.A. 1675, was appointed master 10 May, 1677. He became M.A. 1679, and being about to take orders was required in November, 1680, to resign before 7 February following. This he did before 6 December, 1680, when Richard Croxton, of Emmanuel College, Cambridge, was appointed head school- master, to have his allowance and sallary £30 per annum. . beside the profits of a close of ground in Preston belonging to the said school and to apply himself wholly to the duties of his office but not to be obliged to renounce his function in the ministry.” The close referred to was one in Broadgate in Preston, which Bartholomew Worthington had by will 18 December, 1663, given, after his wife’s death, for the augmentation of the yearly wages of the masters of the free grammar school of Preston. It was leasehold for ninety-nine years, but fifteen years later the freehold was acquired by the corporation. It was an acre and a half, and was sold at various dates from 1802 to 1805 for money and chief rents pro- ducing about £55 a year. In 1780 it had been let at £12 a year. Richard Croxton was in 1689 a nonjuror and therefore was removed from the mastership, Thomas Whitehead, of Jesus College, Cam- bridge, was appointed 30 September, 1659, but either never took up the office or liked it not, as on 4 November of the same year Thomas Lodge, head master of Lancaster Grammar School, was elected ; he held office for nine years. A distinguished master followed, Edward Denham, scholar of Eton and fellow of King’s, Cambridge, elected 19 September, 1698, and resigning on appointment as head master of Macclesfield Grammar School, 6 July, 1704. He died in prison in Chester Castle under a charge of murder in 1717. On his election the town council promulgated some ‘ Orders to be observed in Preston School.’ These fixed the school hours at 6.30 a.m. (in summer) or 7.30 (in winter) to 11 a.m. ‘or longer if the business of the Schoole require,’ and 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. winter and summer ; there was to be no school " Wallace, End. Char. 33, from White Book of the Corporation. 572 SCHOOLS on Thursday after 3 p.m. and on Saturday no afternoon school, ‘unless for omission of duty or the performance of school exercises which have been ordered.’ ‘Leave to play’ was not to be granted above one day a week, and ‘ whoever excepting the Mayor, Bayliffes and Scholars going to the University obtains a Play, doe give 2s. 6d. to be laid out in books.’ The holidays had grown considerably, being from ten days before Christmas to the day after Twelfth Day ; five days at Shrovetide ; five days at Easter ; three days at Summer Fair, and two days at Winter Fair. The summer holiday was ‘att Whitsun- tide 3 weeks in the whole,’ but it was pro- vided that in the long vacation att Whitsuntide the boyes learne to write, that time being fixed on as the most convenient for a writeing master to teach the schollars of this schoole. After four years of Mr. Powell (1704-8), Edward Mainwaring, a fellow commoner at St. John’s College, Cambridge, was elected head master on 30 August, 1708, and stayed for nearly twenty years, being promoted to Birming- ham in 1726. Two of his boys entered his old college in 1716 and 1717, but both went on to Sedbergh, the most famous school in the north, then under Posthumus Wharton, another Johnian, to ‘finish’ before going to Cambridge. In 1724 the salary of the master was £30, besides the house and field worth about £6, and that of the usher £13 65. 8d. In 1728 a new master’s house was built with accommodation for boarders during the régime of William Davies, a Welshman, of Christ Church, Oxford (1708 to 1715), appointed on the recom- mendation of David Pulteney, M.P., on 17 Sep- tember, 1726. He retired after eleven years to a living in Herefordshire. Robert Oliver, of Worcester College, Oxford (1727), and afterwards of Merton, M.A. 1734, vicar of Warton in Lonsdale, became head master on 20 October, 1737- He wasalso, on 23 June, 1744, made vicar of St. George’s, Preston. Three years afterwards, 3 February, 1747-8, the town council resolved that, ‘being greatly remiss and negligent in his duty, he be removed from his place as Schoolmaster.’ But February, 1764, saw him still master and reigning on. According to his account the real charge against him was that he had canvassed for the Whig candidate at the election in 1747 ; though the corporation accused him of cruelty to the boys and only giving two hours a week to his duty. He retired to his livings. Another Welshman followed, Ellis Henry, of Wrexham, and of Brasenose College, Oxford, B.A. in 1763. He remained for little more than a year. Thomas Fleetwood appointed 13 November, 1770, held for eighteen years. Robert Harris, B.D., fellow of Sidney-Sussex College, Cambridge, was elected 24 June, 1788, and enjoyed the longest tenure of any master, resigning only in 1835 after a forty-seven years’ reign. From 1798 he also had the vicarage of St. George’s, Preston, and this he held for no less than sixty-four years, dying at the age of ninety-eight on 6 January, 1862. In 1818, when Carlisle’ wrote, there were some forty boys in the school, the master receiving about £100 a year ‘exclusive of the compliments that are usually made to him at Shrovetide by the boys under his immediate care.’ The ‘compli- ments,’ according to the Charity Commission which visited the school in 1824, took the sub- stantial form of ‘half a guinea to 2 guineas, but one guinea is the most usual sum.’ But as there were only fifteen boys in the upper school under the head master the result was not very great. ‘There were no boarders, the head master having given them up some four or five years before. The usher taught reading and the rudiments of grammar, with writing and accounts as an extra. The lower schoolroom was let by the corporation to a private schoolmaster for £6 65.a year. On 26 June, 1835, George Nun Smith, from Yoxford, Suffolk, was appointed head master. There were then forty-nine boys in the school. In 1841 the corporation transferred the school to new buildings at the corner of Winckley Square and Cross Street, then the fashionable part of Preston, which were rented from a private company formed for the purpose of pro- viding the buildings. They comprised a big school and two class rooms, and in the basement a covered play room and a very small play ground. The buildings were bought twenty years later from the shareholders for £2,374 175. 34. about a fourth of what they cost, and in 1868 the Literary and Philosophic Institution adjoin- ing was acquired for £1,509 7s. and added to the school. ‘This building contained the Shep- herd Library, founded by will of Richard Shepherd, 18 June, 1759, now removed to the magnificent Harris Institute. ‘The school rose in numbers after its removal, and in 1855 numbered 100. After short intervals of Edwin Smith, brother of G. N. Smith, his predecessor, and a former sizar of St. John’s College, Cambridge (January, 1855, to 17 December, 1857), John Richard (17 December, 1857, to December, 1859), and John William Caldicott (31 January to May, 1859), during which the school declined, the Rev. George Turner Tatham was appointed head master on 26 May, 1859. He found only nineteen boys. By 1867, when Mr. Bryce visited for the Schools Inquiry Commission, he had raised the number to 127, of whom seven- teen were boarders in the head master’s house, a private house about seven minutes’ walk from the school. Asa result of returning prosperity 18 End. Gram. School, i, 712. 573 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE and of the educational movement for the develop- ment of grammar schools, the corporation in 1860 applied for and in 1865 obtained a scheme for devoting an apprenticeship fund of about £21 a year to scholarships in the school. Mr. John Goodair in 1861 gave £200, and his son William Henry Goodair in 1879 another £200, towards a university exhibition, but as the fund was too small it was allowed to accumulate till 31 March, 1904. Meanwhile Thomas Miller in 1867 founded the first actual exhibition, stipulating, when giving the beautiful public park on the banks of the Ribble to the town, that the cor- poration should apply £40 a year in such an exhibition. In 1867 there were nine boys on the foundation as freemen’s sons paying 2 guineas a year, and the rest paid from 6 to 10 guineas a year according to age, with French and German 2 guineas a year extra. The head master re- ceived only £100, and the second master £65 a year. ‘The corporation paid the costs of re- pairs and of cleaning and warming the school. There were three other assistant masters paid by the head master. Only twenty-six boys learnt Greek. The larger part of the school formed what was practically a modern side. Mr. Bryce pronounced its ‘ educational condition satisfactory, in many points highly creditable,’ considering the short tenure of the head master. In 1874 Mr. Tatham retired to the vicarage of Leek. Mr. Alfred Beaver Beaver then held office for twenty-two years. By will 1 December, 1876, Edmund Robert Harris gave £3,000 to the cor- poration for scholarships for boys attending the grammar school, and under a scheme approved by the Master of the Rolls 19 July, 1880, in an action Jacson v. Queen Anne’s bounty, two Harris Scholarships were established, one at £70 and the other as near thereto as possible, tenable at Oxford or Cambridge for four years. Five Thornley scholarships, tenable in the school, were created under the will of Edmund Thorn- ley, 28 April, 1876, proved 6 October, 1878, two of £7 105. a year, and three of £5 10s. a year. During Mr. Beaver’s time the school rarely exceeded sixty boys. In 1898 Mr. Henry Cribb Brooks, M.A. of Cambridge and Dublin, was appointed. Un- til 1904 the school was practically farmed by him and was considerably raised in numbers and status. But the head master’s profits were quite inadequate for the position he occupied and the labour he bestowed. On 25 August, 1904, the corporation resolved to take over the manage- ment of the school, paying the head master a fixed salary of £400 a year and taking all the fees, which are at the same figure—a good deal too low—as they were in 1867, When the Board of Education inspected the school in 1905, there were seven assistant mas- ters and 155 boys, of whom 112 came from Preston itself. None were over seventeen years. Only one boy learnt Greek ; English, French, and mathematics were favourably reported on; science and art, introduced by the present head master, not so favourably, The school is badly in need of funds. A new founder seems to be required, such as Harris proved to the Harris Institute, which unfortunately has developed in- to a rival institution, before the grammar school could be effectively financed and organized. Failing this, the corporation, now the local edu- cation authority, should extend to it as liberal support as that which, for example, Bedford Grammar School receives, if the school is to satisfy the needs of such an important borough. THE HARRIS INSTITUTE, PRESTON This was founded under the will (1 Decem- ber, 1876) of Edmund Robert Harris above mentioned, who gave the residue of his personal estate to Charles Roger Jacson and three others upon trust within ro years of his death to establish or build and endow a convalescent hospital or orphan- age or almshouses or a literary and scientific institution or a free library or all or any of them or any other charitable institution (not being a merely religious institution or a school for elementary education) which they might think proper, and which might contribute to perpetuate the remembrance of his father and his family in the town and neighbourhood of Preston. The case got into Chancery, and under a scheme of the court of g May, 1881, the Avenham Institution, founded in 1850, was transformed into the Harris Institute, under a council of twenty- one persons, including three nominees of the corporation, to whom more representatives of the corporation, of the Lancashire County Council, and of the Victoria University have been added. From Harris’s bequest £ 23,564 was spent on the buildings in Corporation Street ; and £57,600, including £2,600 under Miss Tuson’s will, forms an endowment. The institute is mainly a technical school and a school of agriculture. As many as 300 scholarships are awarded. There are about 4,200 individual students in various subjects. MIDDLETON GRAMMAR SCHOOL This school is of ancient origin. In an anony- mous pamphlet published in 1892, it is pointed out that by some old deeds of the latter part of the reign of Henry III (c. 1265), preserved in Prest- wich church, lands in Chadderton were granted to members of the family of Scolecroft or Schoolcroft. In Chadderton there was a croft called Scowcroft, variously spelt Scholcroft and Scholecroft in ancient deeds, only two or three fields’ breadth from the school erected by Dean 574 SCHOOLS Nowell in the reign of Queen Elizabeth. The name Schoolcroft certainly justifies the inference of the existence of an early school to which it belonged. Probably the schoolmaster was main- tained, as in modern America, by the assignment of certain crofts for his support, just as the village blacksmith or the hayward used to hold portions in the common fields ex officio. However that may be, from the year 1412 Middleton became an endowed free grammar school. On 22.August in that year the bishop of Lichfield, this part of Lancashire being at that time included in the diocese of Coventry and Lichfield, granted licence to Thomas Langley, bishop of Durham from 1406, in 1407 chan- cellor of England, and thirty years later a cardinal, to consecrate the church of Middleton, which he had rebuilt. Langley was born at Langley Hall in the parish of Middleton, and is supposed to have been educated at the grammar school. The re-built church included a chantry of St. Cuth- bert which the bishop founded, the priest of which was to pray for souls and, in the words of the later Chantry Certificate, ‘ to teache one gramer skole, fre for poore children.’ The foundation deed is unfortunately not forthcoming, but no doubt the wording was much the same as in the case of the chantry school which the same bishop founded in Durham itself! two years afterwards. There was another chantry in the church said to have been founded by the lord of the manor, the priest of which no doubt was to keep a song school. The endowment of the chantry consisted of lands at Whessoe and Sadberge in Durham, but chiefly of a rent-charge out of the manor or lord- ship of Kevardeley in Jancashire belonging to the monastery of Jervaulx, out of which also the main part of the endowment of the Durham schools, £16 135. 4d. a year,? came. This endowment was purchased for Durham after Langley’s death by his executors under licence 1 October, 1440. Probably the same was the case with this school also. The Lichfield register records the institution on 10 March, 1443-4, of Henry Penulbury (Pendlebury), to the perpetual cure of the chantry of the Blessed Virgin Mary and St. Cuthbert in the church of Middleton in succession to ‘Thomas Percevall, the last chaplain, on the nomi- nation of Nicholas Hulme, true patron of the same. Nicholas Hulme was one of Langley’s executors. The next master we hear of was named Clayton. He is referred to by his successor, Thomas Mawdesley, who was presented to the rectory of Radcliffe 24 November, 1534, in his will (mentioned later on), wherein he directed that his body should be buried in the school chapel, 1 V.C.H. Dur. i, 371. * Ibid. 373. under the blue stone ‘ wher my maister Clayton’ lies. Clayton was probably Nicholas Clayton, who entered in ‘Canon Law at Cambridge in 1496, depositing 3 canon law books for his caution,’ and who was dispensed from lecturing in 1497. The Chantry Certificate of 1546 shows ‘the chauntrie in the paroch churche of Mydleton, Thomas Mawdesley, preiste, incumbent ther, of the foundacion of Thomas Langley, sometyme bishopp of Durham, ther to celebrate for the sowles of the kinges of Englande, the said bishop and his ancestors, and the incumbentes herof to teache one gramer skole, fre for poore children . . . The same is at the alter of Saynt Cuthbert . . . and the same prist, nowe incumbent, doth celebrate and teache gramer accord- inge to the entent of the saide foundacion.? ‘The goods of the chantry were a chalice of silver of 10 02z., ‘thre vestiments’ i.e. sets of vestments, ‘one masse boke, and 2 alter clothes. Sum totall of the rentall ~ £6 135. 4d. Sum of the annual reprises, 135. 42. And so remanyth £6.’ The ‘reprise’ or taking back or outgoing of 135. 4d. was no doubt, as in the case of the Durham chantry school, for distribution to the poor on Langley’s obit on 20 November. The Chantry Certificate of 1548 gives the additional information that Thomas Mawdesley, incumbent, was ‘of the age of 5o yeres . . . and his lyvynge besides is nil.’ £6 a year was not a sufficient endowment for the master of a wholly free grammar school, but supplemented by fees it no doubt was enough. The School Continuance Commissioners, Sir Walter Mildmay and Robert Kelway, on 11 August, 1548, finding that a Grammer Scole hathe likewise beene continually kept in the parish of Midleton with the revenues of the chauntry founded in the parish church there and that the Scolemaster there had for his wages yearly £5 10s. 8¢., which scole is very meete and necessary to continue, appointed that the said Grammer Scole shall continue still and that Thomas Mawdesley, scolemaster there, shall bee and remayne in the same rowme there and shall have for his wages yerely {£5 10s. 84. Why this deduction of 9s. 4d. was made from the clear £6 found by the Certificate does not appear. Probably it was made for the fee of the collector who collected the rent from Jervaulx Abbey, now the king’s property. The Ministers’ Accounts for the Duchy of Lancaster show in 1548-9 110s. 8d. paid ‘to Thomas Mawdesley, Schoolmaster (/udimagistro) in Mydelton,’ and the payment was continued until 1562. Thomas Mawdesley by his will of 12 March, 1§54, gave additional endowment to the school which he had taught for some thirty-five years, 575 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE He directed that the income of his messuage at Boarshaw in Middleton should be applied “to the use and profitt of a preiste conyng in gramar and songe, so long as the lease enduryss, to mende and uphowde the fre scole of Myddleton, and to synge in my chappell (ie. the school chantry chapel) for one yere’ for his and his relations’ souls and ‘ for the sawlls of my founders and benefactors and all cristen sawlls’; and he adds: ‘I will specially that the said preiste shall uphoude the fre schole at Myddelton accordyng to the foundacion.’ He bequeathed to ‘Edmund Ireland, usher of the said fre schole,’ a .Vedulla gramatices, and to Alexander Nowell, usually considered founder of the school, at which he had in fact been him- self a pupil, the works of St. Jerome. Ireland seems to have succeeded Mawdesley as master. Robert rather than Alexander Nowell was the re-founder of the school. Ac- cording to a letter written to Lord Burghley by Dean Alexander Nowell about 1594 my brother Robert late atterney of Her Majesty’s Court of Wards about vi hours before he died said unto me ‘ Forget not Myddleton schole and the col- lege of Brasennose wher we were brought up in our youth and yf you wolde procure any thynge to con- tinue with my money, you shall do it beste and moste surely in the Queenes Maiestie name, whose poore officer I have been’ and upon these words I was occasioned to think of the foundacion of Mydleton schole and of certen scholers to be chosen out of that schole into the college of Brazennose there to be maynteyned with certen exhibicion. He thereupon began to pay {20 a year to Brasenose College for the maintenance ‘ there of six poor scholars from Middleton School. Three years later he obtained a formal refounda- tion of the school. By letters patent 11 August, 1572, reciting that Alexander Nowell, clerk, dean of St. Paul’s, had humbly prayed that whereas within the town or parish of Middleton a certain grammar school, anciently held and used, then from the smallness of the stipend of the Headmaster of the same had been deserted and almost reduced to nothing, Queen Elizabeth, for the re-establishing the same school and also for the better information and education in letters of boys and youths* dwelling in Middleton, Prestwich and Oldham and other places thereunto adjoining, . . . granted and ordained that there shall be for ever in the aforesaid town and parish a free and perpetual grammar school . . . to be called the Free School of Queen Elizabeth in Middleton, to consist of one master and one under- master. The appointment of the masters was vested in the dean, and on his death in the principal * Not young men asin End. Char. for Middleton (1901), p. 9. Boys were from 7 to 14, youths from 14 to 21. and six senior fellows of Brasenose. The queen also purposed to add to the foundation of the college six scholarships, to which were to be appointed six proper youths who shall have perfectly learned the rudiments of grammar, either in the said school— which she chiefly desired—if so many from time to time therein should be found who should have been in the same school for 3 years at least, or otherwise in the schools of Whalley or Burnley in the said county of Lancaster, if so many should be found fit, . . . or otherwise in any other grammar school in the said county, . . . to be called Queen Elizabeth’s Scholars. Nowell was to appoint the scholars during his life, and afterwards the college. Licence was also given to him to found seven more scholar- ships, and to make statutes. ‘The queen then granted for endowment of the school rent-charges payable to the crown out of the capitular estates of St. Paul’s, being payments for chantries which had been dissolved and confiscated under the Chantries Act, amounting to £23 os. 6d. a year, and two payments of £2 135. 4d. each out of Boyton Hall. The chantry payments were real gifts from the crown, ‘Her Majesty most graci- ously and bountiously giving freely £20 yearly for ever, which I would have purchased of Her Majesty.’ Licence in mortmain was also given for the acquisition of further property up to £100 a year. Out of the £28 7s. 2d. granted, the college were to pay the crown a rent of £8 75. 2d., the residue, £20, going in a stipend of 20 marks, £13 6s. 8d., to the master, and 10 marks, {6 13s. 4d., tothe usher. There was, however, a flaw in the grant of Boyton Manor, as it was alleged the crown never had seisin of it, and the manor was granted to the lessee on 30 September, 1572, in return for a fixed payment of (4 135. 4d. a year. By deed of 28 October, 1574, the dean covenanted to pay the college £20 a year and this £4 135. 44., which the lessee was to pay during his lease, of which fifty-eight years were then to run. With £912, the greater part, if not the whole, of which came from Robert Nowell’s estate, the dean in 1575 bought from Lord Cheney the manor of Upbury and the rectory of Gillingham, Kent, and having granted a lease of ninety-nine years at £60 135. ad.a year to Lord Cheney, conveyed the reversion 10 April, 1579, to the crown, and the crown by letters patent 25 June, 1579, transferred the property to the college as governors of the school. The college was to employ the income in paying to 13 poor scholars, elected out of ‘ Her Free School in Middleton or other schools in her county of Lancaster according to her foundation of the said school,’ £3 65. 8d. each for their maintenance (ad ipsorum victum) ; to the master LT Bi. 4d, and to the under master £3 6s. 84d. in augmenta- 576 SCHOOLS tion of their stipends. Also, as she understood the stipends of the principal and fellows were very small, she gave 6s. 8d. a week for the improvement of their commons, 135. 4d. to the principal, 10s. to the vice-principal, and the rest for the other fellows. The payments prescribed amounted to £65 3s. 4d. leaving £1 105. unappropriated, no doubt as a margin for expenses, legal and other. From the beginning this sur- plus was carried to the general college account ; as well as the whole surplus of the improved rents after the falling in of the lease in 1686. The school continued to be carried on in the old school till 1586, when Dean Nowell bought the field on which the school now stands, and thereon built a fine school house of stone in Her Majesty’s name, with lodging for the schoolmaster‘ and usher to the value of the whole above noted 2,000 marks and above. By deed 20 November, 1597, Nowell, then himself principal of Brasenose, conveyed the site and buildings to the college as governors of the school. Difficulties very early arose with the under lessee of the lands of Upbury, Sir Edward Hoby, chiefly as to his paying rent partly in kind; since he was in arrear with that, a petition to the Lord Keeper ensued. In this it is stated that Dean Nowell had to advance money to carry on the school and maintain the Middleton scholars, and that ‘near 200 scholars are taught’ in the school. The school was therefore in a very flourishing state at that time. But the usual result of endowment consisting of fixed charges instead of lands, the increase of which rose with the value of money, followed. In 1609 the 13 scholars had ceased to be drawn from Middleton School, and the endowment was practically considered as one for any school in Lancashire. In the time of the Commonwealth the school was in danger of losing even its fixed endow- ment of £28 a year under the first Elizabethan letters patent. This sum being a charge on the dean and chapter of St. Paul’s, and paid by them, there was some difficulty, when deans and chapters were abolished, in obtaining payment. Eventually, however, it was charged on the revenues of the sequestrated rectory of Whalley by order of the trustees for ministers and school- masters, commonly called the Trustees for Plundered Ministers. On 29 September, 1652, Mr. Lawrence Steele, the receiver, was ordered to pay Brasenose College the sum of £28 7s. 2d., * Not ‘scholars,’ as ‘scholmr’ has been misread by a mistake repeated in End. Char. for Middle- ton, p. 12. The sum of 2,000 marks includes the whole of the endowment, not the school buildings only. and also twice that amount for two years’ arrears. He, however, demurred for reasons not explained, and so by a further order of 16 March, 1652, William Farmer was ordered to pay it, and Mr. Stockdale, his successor, paid it afterwards up to 1658, and presumably to 1660. When chapters were restored after the Restoration the payment was renewed by the dean and chapter of St. Paul’s. In 1710 the scholarships had through change in the value of money so depreciated that Brasenose College consolidated the 13 into one. For many years before 1818 the mastership, owing to the smallness of the master’s stipend, had been filled by a curate of the parish. From 1778° it was held by the Rev. James Archer, who gave a ‘commercial education . . . having seldom fewer than from 40 to 50 pupils under his care, who are boarded and lodged in the village.’ Day boys were charged £1 45. a year. The usher’s department was practically an ele- mentary school at 2d. a week, the usher’s pay from the college being £10 a year. The master was paid by the college only the original sums of £13 6s. 8d. and £1, under the two letters patent, and received also £5 10s. 8d. from the crown in virtue of the continuance payment in respect of the old Langley endow- ment, alleged to be £3,000 a year. The college admitted ‘considerable value, but not £3,000 a year.’ In point of fact it was only £536 in 1802, and half a century later £583. In 1827 an information was brought by the attorney-general against Brasenose College claim- ing a proportionate share of the increased revenues for the school. Because there was no trust declared of the surplus, and it was shown that in the donor’s own time as principal it had been applied by the college to its own purposes, the in- formation was dismissed, as well as the subse- quent appeal to the House of Lords (13 August, 1834).° When Mr. Bryce reported on the school to the Schools Inquiry Commission in 1867,’ he described it as with the exception of that of Oldham the most woe- begone in all Lancashire. It stands in a hollow on the bank of ... the Irk, . . . once a clear trout stream, now black and fetid with the refuse of dye and print works... Inside is a big bleak room with an exceedingly small stove. The walls are covered with a dirty whitewash ; the floor is flagged. and the children’s clogs rattle over it ; there is little furniture, and that old and battered. On the day of my visit there were 34 children, 21 boys and 13 girls. 5 Carlisle, op. cit. i, 707. 6 Art. Gen. v. Brasenose College, Clark and Finnelly, 295. ” Sch. Ing. Rep. xvii, 337. 2 si7 73 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE It is interesting to relate, however, that the assistant-commissioner found ‘the girls learning Latin and Greek equally with the boys... the fees £2 2s. a year.’ But as most of them left at the age of 14 their classical education did not come to much. The first class of 4 boys and 4 girls did Valpy’s Latin Delectus and the elements of Greek Grammar ; ‘they seemed to know a little and might perhaps have answered well if they had not been so frightened.’ As the population was then some 10,000, the existence of this starved endowed school had only become a hindrance instead of a help to education. The college at that time paid the master, James Jelley, £30 a year more than the original sums granted for his salary. In 1872 the Endowed Schools Commissioners were moved by the people of Middleton to take action for the improvement of the school; a visit of an assistant-commissioner was promised, but nothing was done. In 1881 the Oxford University Commissioners’ Statutes converted the Middleton scholarships at Brasenose College into two Dean Nowell’s exhibitions of £25 each, with preference for Middleton School. In 1887 the Charity Commissioners investi- gated Middleton’s claims. There were then 54 children in the school, of whom 13 were girls, under the Rev. James Jelley, a demy of Magdalen College, Oxford. But the average age was thirteen, and the highest achievement, preparation for the Oxford local examinations. The college (21 June, 1889) intimated their will- ingness to co-operate in reforming the school by increasing their annual payment to £200, and by giving £500 towards new buildings, and a scheme on that basis was published by the Charity Com- missioners in 1890. But the local committee, relying on vague rumours as to the value of the property, refused this quite adequate offer, being the full amount to which, on the original pro- portions, the school was entitled, the total income of the estate being in 1893 £1,030 a year. The result was that nothing more was done. Mr. Jelley obtained clerical work, and in 1go1® there were only 18 boys. The school is still the old room built by Nowell, soft. long by 25 ft. wide, and is an interesting specimen of Tudor architecture, of the local sandstone pointed with hard millstone grit, in which the mouldings of the string courses and dripstones are in most places sharply cut and unworn to the present day. The question of a new scheme to take advan- tage of the offer made by Brasenose College is now once more under consideration, and it is to be hoped that this interesting and once famous school may be revived. * End. Char. for Middleton, 19. PRESCOT GRAMMAR SCHOOL*® We have no account of the foundation of this school, which was in existence in the early years of the fifteenth century ; it was formerly supported by gifts, mulcts, rents, and the interest of invested moneys. On an inquisition taken at Wigan the commissioners state ° :— 2do Octobris, 1627. James Renricke did give 300 4i for the mainteynance of a Freeschoole in the parish of Prescott and att the request of Edwarde Eccleston esqe deceased that the same schoole should be erected in Eccleston soe as the said Edwarde wold give in addicion thereto an 100 # and an acre of land: but the matter hath beene neglected by the space of 23 yeares, and now promoted by the schoole wardens of Prescott whose desire is that the said 300 4 may be conferred to the mainteynance of the schoole of Prescott. . . . Henry Eccleston, Esq., sonne and heire of the said Edward summoned before us the said commissioners, hath beene offered that if he would obtaine the said 300 4 and give 100 # and an acre of land for the aforesaid use that then the schoole should be founded in Eccleston aforesaid, the which the said Henry Eccleston hath neglected and is content the said schoole should be erected in Prescott aforesaid. The schoolwardens of Prescot were ‘to pro- secute suites for obtaininge the said 300 Ui.’ The school building, which is cruciform, was erected in 1750, upon land given by Basil Thomas Eccleston. The school had a prefer- ence with other Lancashire schools to scholar- ships at Brasenose College, Oxford, but this has been lost. The present endowment amounts to about £120 per annum. About 50 boys are in attendance. MANCHESTER SCHOOLS THe GRAMMAR SCHOOL The origin of Manchester Grammar School is somewhat of a mystery, which the author of the standard history’ of the school has deepened rather than cleared. ‘After the dissolution of monasteries,’ he says, ‘education diffused itself generally and the important object of the foundation of Grammar Schools very soon became a measure of general policy. It appears that the bishop of Exeter, Hugh Oldham, had during the latter part of his life erected a Free School on a site near the present college at Manchester, the boundaries of which are specified in the foundation charter (schedule annexed), executed by John and Hugh Bexwyke on 1 April, 1525,’ and he bequeathed ‘ for endowment . . . divers lands specified in con- veyances executed by the same parties’ in 1515. * Baines, Hist. of Lancs. iii, 701 ; Char. Com. Rep. Xx, 219. *° Harl. MSS. cod. 2176, fol. 394 and 42 ; quoted in Baines, op. cit. p. 7o1. ‘William Robert Whatton, Te Hist. of Manchester School, 1834. 578 SCHOOLS But he proceeds to annihilate the credit usually given to Oldham of being the founder, by saying (though only in a note) that ‘to Hugh Bexwyke, . in some way connected with the bishop and perhaps his chaplain, the school is mainly, if not altogether, indebted for its very existence.’ How a school founded by a deed of 1525, and endowed several years before—the historian has quoted a deed of 1515—could be due toa general movement following on the dissolution of monasteries is not easy to understand. ‘The foundation or endowment of the school was in no sense a measure of general policy, but the out- come of the spirit of the time acting on the minds of charitably disposed individuals. What part precisely Oldham played is not easy to determine. He was undoubtedly the principal benefactor. But the school seems to have been endowed at least in 1506 as a free school, if it did not exist earlier as part of the foundation of the Collegiate church in 1420. Hugh Bexwyk, priest, was not even a subor- dinate founder; but another member of the Bexwyk family, Alexander, or, more properly, Richard Bexwyk, merchant, was connected with the early history of the school. For on the dis- solution of the chantries in 1548, the com- missioners who surveyed them found ? in the towne of Manchester a chauntrie of two pryests within the parish church there, off the foundacion of Alexander Bessike, merchant, to celebrate there for his soulle, and thone of the two pryests to teach a fre schole, which is observed accordinglie. Robert Prestwich, clerke, and Edward Pendilton, school- master, incumbents there, have the clere yerely revenue of the same for their salarie, £8 125. 3¢., and their lyvinge beside is nil. The landes and tenementes belongynge to the same are of the yerely values of £8 125. 3d. The two commissioners, Sir Walter Mildmay and Robert Kelway, charged with ordering the continuance of such chantry endowments as were for grammar schools, preachers, and the poor, on 11 August, 1548, appointed that ‘ the free scole in Manchester shall continue, and that [blank in MS.] Pendilton,* scolemaster 7A. F. Leach, Engl. Schools at the Reformation, from -P.R.O. Duchy of Lanc. Div. xviii, vol. xxvid. 3 Edward Pendilton is described by Anthony Wood, the seventeenth-century historian of Oxford Uni- versity, as the ‘famous schoolmaster of Manchester in Lancashire, who circa 1547 was admitted to the reading of any book in the faculty of grammar, that is, to the degree of Bachelor of Grammar ; but the day or month when is not set down in the public registers, now very much neglected.’ The degree in grammar was a quite ordinary degree inferior to that of master or bachelor of arts, and was in fact a licence to teach as a schoolmaster, i.e. in a secondary or boys’ school, while the M.A. degree was a licence to teach as a master of the schools, ie. in a university or men’s school (Boase, Reg. of the Univ. of Oxford). there, shall continue in the same roome of Scolemaster, and shall have for his wages yerely £4 15. 9d That this chantry was the beginning of the endowment of the grammar school there seems no reason to doubt. But there is a mistake in the name of the founder of the chantry, if, as would appear, this was the Jesus Chantry, founded in 1506 by a deed between James Stanleye, master, and the fellows of Manchester College, including John Bexwyk and Richard Bexwyk the younger, Richard Bexwyk the elder, and others, master, wardens and yeomen of the Gild of St. Saviour and the Name of Jesus. This deed recites that— lately a chapel was built and founded on the south side of our collegiate church to the praise of God and the honour of our Saviour and his name Jesus, by Richard Bexwyk the younger ; and it granted to Sir Oliver Thornellye, chaplain, licence to receive and keep all the offerings at the image of St. Saviour in the chapel. This was the chantry part of the foundation. Richard Bexwyk, or Beswyk, as he spells him- self, the younger, was a considerable merchant trading chiefly with Ireland, where he made his will, ‘written with myn own hand,’ 30 June, 1510. He gave £200 ‘to the making ofa milne upon the water of Herks for the fyndyng of the four conducts’ (i.e., hired chaplains of Manchester College), desired that ‘the terme of Manchester mylnes, whan that they fall, goo to the same,’ and left £40 ‘to the honoryng of chapell of Jesu.’ He further directed that ‘if my goods in Ireland will not perform my will my goods in England to answer it.’ But the conducts never got these mills since they were transferred to the school trustees. The fact that stalls were assigned and are still reserved for the Archididasculus and Hypodidas- culus in the choir of the Collegiate church, which stalls were erected between 1506 and 1512, is also strong evidence of the existence of the school earlier than the received date. The miserere of the master shows a fox running away with a goose and a bear licking his cubs into shape, while a young bear reads a book. ‘The usher’s miserere represents a girl—it may be St. Margaret—coming from a shell and slaying a dragon, and was perhaps intended to symbolize knowledge slaying ignorance. ‘The master’s stall is between those of the canons and minor canons on the Decani or south side, and that of the usher is similarly placed on the Cantoris or north side. This is the regular position for the master at Lincoln, and probably at York, and was adopted by Henry VIII in the Cathedral Grammar School of the new foundation. Whatever Richard Bexwyk may have done, the deeds still extant in the possession of the governors of the grammar school establish the 579 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE title of Hugh Oldham to be the chief bene- factor, as having been the donor of what until quite recently was the main endowment of the school, the corn-mills of Manchester. These were the old manorial water corn-mills on the River Irk, at which every demesne tenant of the lord or other resident in the township of Man- chester was bound to grind his corn and pay the fees exacted for doing so. As lately as 1834 these fees, though reduced only to fees for malt, brought in £2,000 a year. Where Hugh Oldham was born or what family he belonged to has been a matter of dis- pute and guessing. He is chiefly known as a pluralist cleric, who between 1485 and 1504 held as many as eleven benefices scattered up and down the country, which were relinquished in 1505 on his appointment as bishop of Exeter. These ecclesiastical preferments were the re- ward of official and legal work in connexion with the Court of Chancery, in which he per- formed minor services,* and held from 1 August, 1499, the dignified position of clerk of the Hanaper.® He was then rich enough to found an educational establishment, not on the gor- geous scale of Wykeham or Wolsey, the multi- millionaires of their age, but on the lower plane of Lord Mayor Sir Edmund Shaa at Stockport in 1487, or of Lord Mayor Sir John Percival at Macclesfield in 1502. Oldham’s foundation has been commonly represented as an imitation of an example first set by Colet, in that it was a school of the Renaissance and free from clerical control. But both foundations were the outcome of a long- standing movement, and both copied a much older model, dating far back in the ages to the beginnings of English history. In point of fact Oldham’s benefaction was not entrusted origin- ally to lay trustees, there being only one such in the first deed of 1515. Nor were lay trustees for schools a novelty. Lay trustees began with the first grammar school founded by a gild, and when that was, it is difficult to say. The grammar school at Stratford-on-Avon was in the hands of the gild of Stratford, who were practically a town council, in 1402-3 ; William Seven- oaks, mercer of London, who founded Sevenoaks Grammar School in 1432, established a body of lay trustees and prescribed that the master should not be in holy orders. A generation before Colet’s foundation Sir Edmund Shaa had in 1487 placed Stockport Grammar School in the hands of the Goldsmiths’ Company of London. In 1500 the mayor and town council of Lan- caster were, as we saw, the governing body of the local grammar school. Oldham, indeed, according to the old story,® which refers to a time several years earlier than * Exch. K.R. 14-16 Hen. VII, 218, No. ro. *Pat. 7 Hen. VII, pty >. § Holinshed, C/rom. (1808), ili, 617. Colet’s foundation, is supposed to have advised Richard Fox, bishop of Winchester, when like other successful statesmen he contemplated ex- piating by some religious or charitable founda- tion any misdeeds he may have committed, to make a college for secular clergy, not to ‘build houses and provide livelihoods for a com- pany of bussing monks, whose end and fall they themselves might live to see.’ Yet, when he himself came to endow Manchester Grammar School, the original deed of 1515’ did not place the foundation in lay hands, but in those of the warden and fellows of the college of Our Lady of Manchester, who were all bound to be priests, while one of these very ‘ bussing monks,’ the abbot of Whalley, was a party to the deed, a member of the governing body, and in default of the college was to act as trustee, and the master was to be either ‘a secular or a regular’ —i.e. a secular cleric, one of the ordinary clergy, or a ‘bussing monk,’ or regular canon, or even a friar. In fact, Oldham was imitating William of Wykeham, as he had imitated the founders of the earliest schools in England, in giving the control to a collegiate church of secular canons. As has been said, the major part of the endow- ment of the school was the corn-mills of Man- chester, with certain lands on the banks of the Irk ; anda fulling mill or ‘walk’ mill on the same stream (so called because the cloth was walked on in water mixed with fuller’s earth), also with lands attached. The exact interest which the school trustees had in these properties before Oldham’s death in 1519 is difficult to determine. At that date a perpetual lease obtained from Lord De La Warr, 3 October, 1509, must have come into operation by which Hugh and Joan Bexwyk and Ralph Hulme were to hold at a rent of £9 13s. 4d. The ‘walk’ mill, with lands attached called the ‘ Heaths,’ had been leased by Thomas West, knt., and by Lord De La Warr, lord of the manor of Manchester, and Elizabeth his wife at a rent of £1 16s. 8d. for fifty-one years to Oldham as early as 22 June, 1495, and as late as 2 September, 1518, Oldham gave to Nicholas Galey a twelve years’ lease of the ‘ Heaths,’ with a three years’ occu- pancy, subsequently to become annual, as manager of the ‘walk’ mill. Oldham at his death prob- ably bequeathed his interest to the school trustees. The corn-mills, with lands on both sides of the Irk, were leased for ever by Lord De La Warr, 3 October, 1509, to Richard Bexwyk for £8 135. 4d., and on the same day the reversion was granted to Hugh and Joan Bexwyk and Ralph Hulme, the school trustees, at a rent of £8. At that date the corn-mills were held by John Rad- cliffe, gentleman, and William Galey, ‘ milner of Manchestre mylls,’ under a forty years’ lease from Lord De La Warr, obtained 9 March, 1500, ata "See infra, p. 581. 580 SCHOOLS rent or £8 13s. 4d. Radcliffe’s trustees surren- dered their interest on 22 May, 1515, to the school trustees for £89 6s. 8d. Possibly Oldham provided this sum. In the school muniments there is a lease (11 October, 1515) by Man- chester College, who, on 20 August, superseded the trustees as governing body, to Hugh and Joan Bexwyk for sixty years of the water corn- mills and lands in Ancoats at a rent of £15 10s. 8d., and on condition of payment of the lord’s rent of £8 135. 4d. On 20 June, 1515, the school trustees leased the corn-mills for seventy years, and on 20 August released the fee and leased and released the reversion of the ‘walk’ mill (thus carrying ‘out what in later days became the ordinary means of conveyance) to the warden and fellows of the collegiate church ‘to the use and intent expressed in an indenture’ of thesame day. ‘Thisindenture, which must be considered the real endowment deed, was made between Hugh Oldham, now described as bishop of Exeter, Thomas Langley, rector of Prestwich, Hugh Bexwyk, chaplain, and Ralph Hulme, gentleman, of the first part ; John, abbot, and the convent of Whalley of the second part; and Robert Clyf, master or warden, and his fellows chaplains of the college of Blessed Mary of Manchester of the third part. It wit- nessed how often considering and intimately desiring (sepius animadvertentes ac intime cupientes) that grace, virtue, and wisdom should grow, flower, and take root in youths during their boyhood, especially in boys of the county of Lancaster, who for a long time through the default of teaching and instruction (doctrine et erudi- cionis) had wanted such grace, virtue, and wisdom in their youth, as well through their fathers’ poverty as through the absence and want of any such person who could instruct and educate such children (infanses) and their minds in wisdom, learning, and virtue : Therefore, to remove this defect, and with the in- tention that such a fit person, eminent for wisdom, character, and virtue, and for example in his own person, shall freely (4éere), and without anything being given therefore or taken by him, teach and instruct others, as well youths as grown-up persons, in his learning and wisdom, that so persevering to their old age they may show the same in many ways and daily, the said parties have agreed as follows. After reciting the lease and release of the corn- mills and ‘ walk’ mills to the warden and fellows of the college, and a similar lease and release by Ralph Hulme and Richard Hunt of lands in Ancoats which they had by gift of Mr. Bernard Oldham, archdeacon of Cornwall, the whole value of all which is £40 a year, beyond all reprises, the deed proceeds :— For the execution and performance, therefore, of so public and divine a work (vulgaris divinique operis) all the parties to this indenture, like wise virgins having their lamps lighted, covenant that during the lives of Oldham, Langley, Hugh Bexwik, and Ralph Hulme, they, with the Warden and Fellows, may nominate and ordain a fit person, secular or regular, learned and able, to be school-master (magistrum scholarum) to teach and instruct grammar in the town of Manchester ac- cording to the form of grammar now learned and taught in the school of the town of Banbury in the county of Oxford, which in English is called ‘Gram- mar,’ and an usher (Aostiarius) as a deputy or substitute of such person to teach and instruct in his absence or for his relief or assistance such grammar. After their deaths the wardens and fellows under- took ‘to provide and nominate’ the master and usher. They covenanted to pay the master £10 and the usher £5 by quarterly instalments. William Plesyngton was to be the first master, and Richard Wulstoncroft the first usher. It was also agreed that the master and usher should attend service in the choir in surplices on feast days ‘like other fellows of the college,’ and ‘every Wednesday and Friday should go in procession with their scholars before the warden round the cemetery or in the church or otherwise.? The college undertook to perform every year on 4 March a solemn obit for the souls of Roger Oldham and Margery his wife, Mr. Bernard Oldham, Richard Bexwyk, William Galey, Robert Bexwyk, Robert Chetham, William Bradford, chaplain, and for the souls of Hugh Oldham and others named, ending with Alexan- der Bexwyk. Every fellow who attended was to receive Is. and so on down to the choristers, who got 3d. each. The deed concludes with a covenant that the master and usher shall, on ad- mission, take oath ‘to teach and correct all their boys and scholars equally and impartially’ and not to take ‘any presents, gifts, or any kind of thing by colour of their service or office’ or teaching, except their stipend only, without any fraud cunning and device.’ How entirely this foundation was really Oldham’s may be gauged by the presence among the schood deeds of a receipt, 19 November, 1515, by Ralph Hulme and Richard Hunt for £50 from Hugh Oldom Byshope of Exchetor towards the foundying of a Free Scolle at Manchestur to begyn opon the Monday next aftur the Ephephany of our lord god next commyng (i.e. 7 January, 1515~—6) and ever to endure. Oldham covenanted to pay £50 more within two months after the college had by deed bound themselves to pay the stipends of the master and usher. If the stipends were not paid by the Purification (2 February) Hulme and Hunt were to repay the sum of £50. Moreover, the Roger and Margery Oldham whose souls were to be prayed for were undoubtedly the bishop’s father and mother, and Mr. Bernard Oldham, arch- deacon of Cornwall, who had given the lands in Ancoats, was his brother. Oldham died on 25 June, 1519. Six years afterwards Hulme turned out to be a fraudulent 581 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE solicitor. ‘Though he was clearly only trustee, he had the assurance to claim the mills and lands as his own in a suit in the Duchy Court against his co-feoffees, Hugh and Joan Bexwyk, and Lord De La Warr had to givea certificate to the chancellor of the duchy, 18 May, 1523, that Hulme had only obtained the property as a trustee for and to the use and towards the foundacion and mayntenaunce of a free scole for the techyng of gramer in Manchester, which free scole as by reporte and saying of the said Rauff, the said Hugh and Johane Beswyke entented and purposed to founde maynteyn and upholde and the better by reason of the said purchase, yf he myght opteyn it of me to their use for the purpose and entent aforseid. Lord De La Warr said he sold it for the some of £8 and not above, to my remem- braunce . . . for he shold not have bought the pre- mysses of me to his owne use nor to none other entent than towards the furtherance of the said Scole as is aforsaid, and though he should have gyven me Cy hi He complained that the including of Hulme’s own lands as part of the security for the rent was put in by Hulme of his own device and not in response to any demand by Lord De La Warr. This certificate was further enforced by a Latin deed of 12 July, 1523, by which Lord De La Warr, ‘with the intention that the lands and tenements comprised in the deed of 1509 might go to the use and profit of the free school of Manchester’ (dibere scole de Mannchester), released the rent secured to him by the deed of 1509, in order that the lands of Ralph Hulme might be discharged from any liability for it, and a new deed was made securing the rent only on the school property. This new deed does not ap- pear to be extant. But it was probably in consequence of this claim by Hulme and the re- settlement which it involved that the otherwise inexplicable deed of 1 April, 1525, was executed, which is commonly regarded as the foundation deed of the school. ‘This time the deed is in English, and its preamble makes it clearer than before that Hugh Oldham was the real founder, and the Bexwyks, at the most, subordinate bene- factors, if indeed they were that. But the strange thing about it is that, while by the foundation deed of 1515 the warden and fellows of Man- chester were made the trustees and governing body, or in their default the abbot of Whalley, by this new English deed an entirely new body of twelve lay trustees or feoffees was constituted. The whole constitution was remodelled on a scheme of divided responsibility. Thus the ap- pointment of the head master and usher was given, not to Manchester College, but to the president of Corpus Christi College, Oxford, though it is true the warden of Manchester indirectly received the power of dismissal and, instead of the abbot of Whalley, the power of appointment in default, as well as certain other governing powers; while the abbot of Whalley came in to name the receiver of the school and to be one of four persons to have a key of the school chest or treasury. The feoffees were made a co- optative body, to be renewed whenever they sank to four, by the election of ‘honest gentilmen and honest persons within the parisshe of Manchester.” Their duties were confined to holding the pro- perty and managing it; they were empowered to give leases for terms of ten years only. No explanation of this re-settlement is vouchsafed in the deed, no reference whatever being made to the former deed of 1515. The most probable solution of the difficulty is that the original deed was void for lack of a licence in mortmain, and that in view of the adverse claim made by Hulme it was thought desirable to have a re-settlement and avoid the statute of mortmain by vesting the property in a number of lay feoffees instead of in an ecclesias- tical corporation.® The second deed is certainly the more inter- esting because the ‘actes, ordinaunces, provisions, constitucions, articles, appoyntments and agre- ments’ on which the property was to be held are set out in a schedule in English instead of in Latin, and on a much more extensive scale. The preamble, as already stated, offers conclusive evidence that, whatever share the Bexwyks may have had, the real founder was Oldham. Where the Right Reverend Father in God Hughe Oldome, late Bishoppe of Exeter, decessed, considering —it is no longer in the plural, ‘the parties to the deed,’ but Oldham alone—that the bringyng upp of childerne in their adolesency and to occupie theym in good lernyng and maners from and owte of idyInes is the cheiffe cause to advaunce knawledge and lernyng them, when thei shall come to the age of virilitie, or wherby thei may the better knowe, love, honor, and drede good [sic] and his lawes, and for that the liberall science or arte of Gramier is the grounde and fon- tayne of all the other liberale artes and sciencys wiche sourde and spryng owte of the same, without wiche scyence the other cannot perfitely be hadde, for science of gramyer is the yeate by the wiche all other ben * Whatton’s suggestion that the re-settlement showed the wise foresight of the persons interested in the school, who substituted a lay for aclerical governing body in anticipation of the dissolution of monastic houses, is not very happy. Manchester College was a secular body, like Winchester and Eton, Corpus Christi College and St. George’s, Windsor, and no one in 1§25 could have foreseen the dissolution of the monasteries, not to mention secular colleges. It should be noted that in 1525 to the abbot of Whalley was still assigned the important function of appointing the school receiver, and that the warden of Manchester occupied the same position with reference to the High Master—except that he was not concerned in his appointment or in the management of the estates—as the Provost of Eton and the Warden of Winchester occupied in those schools. 582 SCHOOLS Jerned and knawen in diversitie of tongies and spechies Wherfore the seid late reverend Father for the good mynde wiche he hadd and bayre to the countrey of Lancashire, consideryng the bryngyng up in lernyng vertue and good maners childeryn in the same cuntrey shulde be the key and grounde to have good people there wiche hathe lakked and wantyd in the same, as well for greate povertie of the commen people ther as also by cause of longe tyme passid the teyching and bryngyng up of yonge childerne to scole to the lernyng of Gramyer hathe not be taught there for lakke of sufficient Scolemayster and ussher ther, so that the childerne in the same countrey having pregnaunt wittis have been most parte brought up rudely and idely and not in vertue, cunnyng, erudicion, literature, and in good maners And for the seid good and charitable deds by the said late bishoppe purposed and intendyd as is before seid in the same Schire hereafter to be hadd seen used and doone, that is to say, for gramyer there to be taught for ever, the said late Bushopp of his good and liberall dispociccon att his grete costs and chargies hathe within the towne of Manchester buylded an howse, joynyng to the collegge of Maunchester in the west partye . .. . for a Free Scole ther to be kept for evermore and to be called Manchester Scole. [Besides that he had] at his more further expences and charge purchased a serteyne leese of many yers wiche ar yett to come of the corne milles of Manchester with all the appurtennce And also caused other lands and tenements in Mannchester beforeseid called Anncotes and a burgage in Millegate to be disposed and converted to and for the use of the contynuaunce of techyng and lernyng to be had taught and con- tynued in the same Scole for ever. The trustees to whom the property was now conveyed were headed by Sir Lewis Pollard, one of the justices of the Common Bench (Common Pleas) and Sir Anthony Fitzherbert, justice of the King’s Bench; then came Sir William Curteney of Ilton, Devon, and Sir Thomas Denys of Hilcarn, Devon, knts., who had no doubt been friends of Oldham when bishop of Exeter. The rest were local people, Sir Alexander Radcliff of Ordsall, Sir John Beron (Byron) of Clayton, knts., Edmund Trafford of Trafford, Richard Assheton of Middleton, Thurstan Tyllesley of Worsley, Robert Longly of Agercroft, Richard Holland of Denton, and John Reddiche of Reddiche, “esquiers.” Acts and ordinances appended laid it down as the first duty of the feoffees to keep in repair the ‘Scole- howse,’ and this is to be done ‘at the discretion of the Warden of the College and the church- wardens of the college churche.’ It is interesting to find, what was perhaps rather rare at that date, that a library formed part of the school building. For the next item is— Within the same Scole ner lybrare of the same by nyght or by day any other artes, thyngs, plays or other occupacions be hadd or used in theym but all ways kept honeste and cleynly as it besemeths a Scole ora lybrare ; and that in the cleyneste maner without any logyng there of any Scolemaister or usher. Many of the ordinances are taken from Dean Colet’s statutes for St. Paul’s School, London, or rather, if the Manchester historian had good authority for his statement (of which he produces no evidence), from their common model in Ban- bury School. Thus the school was to be cleaned out by ‘too pooer scollers’ who were ‘to have of every scoller at his fyrst admyttyng one peny sterling.” The tariff was higher in London, being 4d. ‘And therefore to write in a severall booke all the names of scollers that so cum in to the scole.’ Every third year this book was to be delivered to the warden of the college, ‘to thentent that therin may and shall allwaies appere wiche have been brought upp in the same Scole.? This admirable provision for a continu- ous school register, which by the way does not appear in the St. Paul’sstatutes, has unfortunately been neglected, and Manchester School knows nothing of its old boys before the seventeenth century. An important change between the earlier and later foundation deeds appears as to the qualifica- tion of the master. He is to be named, as already said, by the president of Corpus Christi at Oxford, of which college Oldham was ‘Primarius benefactor,’ instead of by Manchester College, and to be a syngilman, prest or not preste, so that he be no religiouse man, beyng a man honeste of his lyvyng and hoole of body, as not being vexed or infecte with any continuall infirmitie or dissease, and having sufficient litterature and lernyng to be a Scole maister, and able to teche childeryn gramyer after the Scole use maner and forme of the Scole of Banbury in Ox- fordchire nowe there taught, wiche is called Stan- bryge gramyer, or after suche Scole use maner as in tyme to cum shalbe ordeyned universally throughe oute all the province of Canterbury. Stanbridge was a scholar of Winchester and New College, and first usher and then master of Magdalen College School. This hankering after uniformity in grammar—which, if not as bloody in its effects as the desire for uniformity of religion, was perhaps equally deadly to the advancement of learning—was soon to be gratified by the adoption of the Erasmus-Lilly Grammar by the authority of the crown, not only through- out the province of Canterbury, but throughout England. In its later form of the Eton Latin Grammar it held sway in schools until the Kennedy Primer of 1870. That there may be no doubt what was meant by a free school it was specially provided That every Scole maister and Ussher for ever from tyme to tyme shall teyche freely and indifferently {i-e. impartially] every child and scoler comyng to the 1 He is, by the way, never called High Master except once in a casual reference which would seem to have crept in by accident from the St. Paul’s statutes, but always ‘ Scolemaister’ simply. 583 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE same Scole without any money or other rewards takyng therefore, as cokkepeny, victor peny, potacion peny or any other whatsoever it be, except only his said stipend and wages hereafter specified. This passage, taken in conjunction with the Latin deed of 1515, makes it clear that thirty years before its supposed invention in the days of Edward VI the term /idera schola was already commonly used, not in the sense of a school in which a liberal education was given or which was free from clerical control or with some guessed meaning of the sort, but simply and solely to designate a school in which no tuition fees were charged. Admission fees might, as therein provided, be charged, and in some cases fees for fires, birches, lights and the like, but not tuition fees. In this later deed, as in the earlier, there is not the faintest suggestion of reformation in religion. Now, as before, only with the qualification ‘if they be within hooly orders,’ the high master and the ussher are at every festivall day and double feest beying keped holy day [to be at] dyvyne service in their surplis in the qwire of the Colligge, [and] every Weddynsday and Fryday wekely for ever with their scollers, beyng and going too and too together, shall go in procession solemply before the Warden [and] every scoller to say if he be able of lernyng the comyn latyny [i.e. litany] withe the suffragies foloying and De profundis for the saule of Hughe Oldom, late bisshopp of Exiter and founder of their Scole, his father and mother saulez [and for others quite different from those in the former deed], and for the saules of Hugh Bexwyk, clerke, and Johann Bexwike, wyddow, special benefactors of the said scole . of all feoffes and benefactours to the mainten- ance of the same Scole at that day departed. | More- over every morning the maister or ussher, wiche of them commythe fyrst in to the Scole in the mornyng, say openly with the scollers ther theis salme Deus misereatur nostri with a collet as they use in churches dominicall days [Sundays] and every night in suche like maner the maister or usher to syng antyme of our Blessed lady and say De profundis for the sawles. . . and then the whole string is repeated ; and to say in audible voice in the Scole before the beginning of De profundis in this maner ‘ For the sowle of Hugh Oldom, late Bysshop of Exiter, Founder of our Scole, and his father and mother sawles, and for the sawles of George Trafford and Margaret his wif and for all the sawles that ther be boundon to pray for and for all the benefactors sawles and all cristyn sawles De profundis. The usual objection to holidays other than holy days appears. The lawgiver does not indeed say point blank as Colet did, ‘I will there be no remedies,’ but The said Highe Maister nor the Usher shall graunte no lycence to the scolers ther to play or departe from ther Scole or lernyng except it be by the consent of the Warden . . . . andthen to play honest gammes and convenyent for youthe and all together and inone place, to use their latyn tonge. 3 The masters were allowed ‘yerly only xxte days to sport them,’ and not both to be absent together. At St. Paul’s the chaplain was to teach the petties their A B C and to read. At Manchester the pupil-teacher system prevailed. The high maister ... shall always appoynte one of his scollers, as he thinketh best, to instructe and teiche in the one end of the scolle all infaunts that shall come ther to lerne their A B C, prymer and forthe till they beyng in Gramyer and every monethe to chese another newe scoller so to teche infaunts, any scholar refusing ‘to be banished the same scole for ever.’ The school was open to the world. Under ‘the Acts and Ordynaunce concernyng the Scollers’ it is provided that no scoller ne infaunt of what cuntrey or schire so ever he be of, beyng manchilde, be refussed, except he have some horryble or contagious infirmite infectyf. A curious provision in these peaceful days is :— No scoller ther beyng at Scole weare any dagger, hanger or other weppyn invasyve, ner bryng into the Scole staff or barre excepte theyr meyte knyffs. They shall use no cok fyghte ner other unlawfull games and Ryddyngs aboute for victours or other disputs had in this parties wich be to the grete lett of lernyng and virtue and to charge and costs of the scolers and of their friends. School began at 7 a.m. in winter and 6 a.m. in summer, except for such as were allowed to come late on account of distance. It was against rules to take meat and drink to the school, but if any lived so far away that they had to bring food with them they were to eat it at some house in the town. When there was over £40 in the school chest, a novel provision required the rest to be giffyn to the exibicion of scollers yerly at Oxford or Cambrige, wiche hathe be brought up in the seid Scole of Manchester and also only suche as study arte in the seid Universitis and to suche as lake exhibicion . . . soe no one scoller have yerly above 26s. 8d. stirlynge and tyll suche tyme as he have some promocyon by felloshipp of one college or hall or other exhibicion to the sume of 7 marcs. So that the value of a university scholarship seems to have been £1 6s. 8d., and of a fellow- ship £4 135. 4d. Whatton, in his History, oddly miscalls the first high master William Pleasyngton, who was appointed in the deed of 1515, ‘ Thomas Pleas- ington, appointed 1519.” Nothing more seems to be known of him. Whatton then gives a list of five masters between Pleasyngton and Edward Pendilton, the ‘famous’ schoolmaster named in the Chantry Certificate in 1546— 84 SCHOOLS William Hind, James Plumtree, Richard Brads- haigh, Thomas Wrench, and William Jackson —without saying whence he got the names ; and adds the remark :— Of these gentlemen nothing is now known, either from the School Records or from the various College Registers of the Universities. This remark still applies, except perhaps to the last-named. But one cannot help suspect- ing that, as there isa mistake in Pleasyngton’s Christian name, there may be similar mistakes in the rest. It is tempting therefore to identify James Plumtree with John Plumtre, fellow of Merton College, where he took his B.A. degree in 1538 and his M.A. in 1542, who became master of Lincoln Cathedral (choristers’) Grammar School on 27 February, 1547-8. Thomas Plumtree, of Lincoln, who went to Corpus Christi College 12 May, 1543, is a little too late. A William Jackson took his B.A. degree at Oxford 12 December, 1530, and his M.A. 10 June, 1535. William Terrill, James Battison, and Richard Raynton, who followed Pendilton, remain un- identified. Thomas Cogan, bachelor of medicine, ap- pointed in 1575, has been traced to a fellow- ship at Oriel in 1563, having taken his B.A. degree in 1562. He became M.A. 5 July, 1566, and M.B. 31 March, 1574. He seems to have held office for about thirteen years, probably retaining his practice as a physician, to which he wholly gave himself after his retire- ment. He published in 1586 two medical treatises, The Haven of Healthand a Preservation ‘rom the Pestilence, together with a school book, An Epitome of Cicero’s Familiar Letters. He wiped off a debt of 40s. and earned a gift of gloves from his college, Oriel, by a gift 11 October, 1595, of Galen’s Works and other medical literature. His successor as master was Edward Clayton, or Cleton, as he appears in the Oxford Register when he matriculated at Brasenose College, 9 November, 1579. He took his B.A. degree in 1583, and his M.A. in 1588. He held office till his death, and was buried in Man- chester Church 21 January, 1604-5. Someone must have intervened between him and the next master known, John Rowland. Rowland is described as ‘plebeian’ on matriculating at Corpus Christi College, 10 November, 1621, when he must have been already some years in the university, as he took his B.A. degree next year, and became M.A. in 1626. He was seemingly the first fellow of Corpus to be appointed. At Manchester his sole relic is a letter (3 October, 1630) as to his leaving, from which it would appear that, with the consent of some of the feoffees, he had left the school under his brother as his deputy while he went off to qualify for his D.D. degree and to act as chap- lain to the earl of Manchester. For this certain of the feoffees had removed both him and his brother. Rowland questions the legality of their action, with good reason: ‘I know well the founder gave the feoffees noe power either to put the High Master out or in.’ The statutes provide for the president of Corpus appointing, but no one was charged in terms with the power of dismissal, though the Warden of the College seems to have been indirectly invested with it. As at that time the collegiate church was dis- solved, or did not exist, no one had any power of dismissal by statute. So Mr. Rowland was pretty safe. After trying cajolery, reminding them that the earl of Manchester had sent them lately a brace of bucks, and promising that if the town wanted anything he, Rowland, ‘would prefer it to them,’ he proceeds to intimidation, referring to the earl’s displeasure at their discourteous treat- ment of his servant, and finally concluding with the threat :— I pray be not offended if I make triall to recover my School by law if I cannot regain it by love. Whatton assumes that John Rowland was dis- possessed, but this is extremely doubtful in the circumstances, and the fact that he was not beneficed till 1634, when he became rector of Foots Cray, Kent, suggests the contrary. Thomas Harrison, who had been put in by the feoffees in Rowland’s place, was also a Corpus man and a Lancastrian, coming from Prest- wich. He matriculated at All Souls, presum- ably being a Bible clerk there, 1 July, 1625, and took his B.A. degree at Corpus, Oxford, 16 March, 1628-9. He became rector of Crick in 1635, but was dispossessed in ‘the troubles.” In 1645 he was a prisoner for debt in London. Of Robert Simmonds, said to have been appointed in 1637, nothing is known; but he only held for a year. Ralph Brideoake, appointed in 1638, was a man of some celebrity. Born at Cheetham Hill, near Manchester, and no doubt educated at the school, he matriculated at Brasenose at the age of sixteen on 9 December, 1631," and became B.A. on 9g July, 1634. On 31 August, 1636, being then chaplain of New College, he was, on the king’s visit to Oxford, in virtue of royal letters, created M.A. He was then made curator of the University Press, in which position he did some service to Dr. Jackson, the president of Corpus, who in return appointed him high master. The Civil War found him one of the earl of Derby’s chaplains, acting as his secre- tary during the siege of Lathom House, and afterwards manager of his estates. His faith- fulness to the earl, and efforts on his behalf 4 Foster, Alumni Oxon. Whatton says 1630. 2 585 74 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE when he was sentenced for treason after the battle of Worcester, recall Cromwell’s devotion to Wolsey after his fall, and procured him a new patron in the Speaker Lenthall, to whom he became chaplain and preacher at the Rolls. After the Restoration he turned again, in 1667 became dean of Salisbury, and ended as bishop of Chichester (1674-8). Nehemiah Painter, not identified, followed. There seems to bea gap before John Wickes in 1652, who took his M.A. degree in 1661 and B.D. 1670. William Barrow, who followed, achieved a record in length of tenure, holding for forty-six years, from 1675 to 1721. The school must have been full in his time, as in 1685 there were three masters—the high master, the second, and the petties’ master—receiving £60, £28, and {12 a year respectively. In 1690 there was a rebellion at the school, probably arising from a ‘ barring-out.’ The boys locked themselves in the school and were supplied by the town’s people with victuals and beds, which were put in through the windows. They even got firearms and ammunition, with which they fired at the legs of those who attempted to get in. This rebellion continued a fortnight.” At the end of the seventeenth century there was founded what was for a long time practically an exhibition endowment of the school, the Hulme Exhibitions. William Hulme, of Kears- ley, by his will 24 October, 1691, five days before he died, gave lands at Heaton Norris, Ashton-under-Lyne, Redditch, and Manchester, after the death of his wife, to James Chetham, William Hulme, and William Baguley, and their heirs, to the intent and purpose that the clear annual rents . shall be paid and distributed to and amongst such four of the poorest sort of Bachelors of Arts taking such degrees in Brazennose College in Oxford as from time to time shall resolve to continue and reside there by the space of four years after such degree taken ; such said Bachelors to be nominated and approved of by the Warden of the collegiate church of Manchester, the rectors of the parish churches of Prestwich and Bury .. . my will and mind being that no such Bachelor shall continue to have anything of this my exhibition but only for the space of 4 years to be accounted from the time of such degree taken. There can be no doubt that what Hulme intended was to encourage what is now called post-graduate study. Until after the Restoration the normal period for study at Oxford was seven years, the B.A. degree being taken at the end of four years, and the M.A. degree after another three years. But the modern practice of leaving the university immediately the B.A. degree is taken seems to have been coming into vogue. * Whatton, op. cit. Grundy," his Hulme, according to James physician, said that the county, especially this part of it where he lived, sent more scholars to the University than any other like county or place, but that many that sent their sons were not able to maintain them in the University any longer than to make them B.A.’s and then such young scholars are necessitated to turn Preachers before they are qualified for that work, which is the occasion that we are not so well provided with orthodox and able ministers as other counties ; therefore that he designed a considerable part of his estates towards the main- tenance of 4 such Bachelors of Arts that were Lanca- shire scholars. This account was given in an affidavit, the object of which was to establish that Hulme meant to restrict the exhibitions to Lancashire lads. This was supported by other witnesses, but parole evidence could not of course control the plain words of the will, which left the exhibitions open. Nevertheless the electors, being all of the immediate neighbourhood of Man- chester, settled the form of nomination for candidates in the terms :— N., son of N.N. of N., in the county of Lan- caster, and Bachelor of Arts of Brasenose College in Oxford. The first exhibitioners were elected 25 June, 1692. For many years the endowment was practically attached to the school, and was a great attraction from the school to Brasenose College. Barrow’s very long reign was followed by Thomas Colborn’s very short one, from 1720 to 1722. John Richards, who took his M.A. at Corpus 17 March, 1721, began his head-master- ship 23 April, 1722, and held till 1727. The earliest extant feoffees’ minute book begins in his time. An early entry records the fact that at a meeting held ‘att the Bull’s head’ acommission of bankruptcy was ordered by the feoffees to ‘be endeavoured and presented against Charles Beswick, Glover, late Receiver,’ who apparently had appropriated school funds. The feoffees’ dinner bill on this occasion amounted to £2 5s. 5d. We learn that Mr. Kenyon at- tended the feoffees’ meetings regularly as counsel for the school, receiving the fee of a guinea. On 17 December, 1725, he was ordered to state a case upon the Foundacion and Articles of the Free Schoole and for the masters’ behaviour as required by the said statutes and of the Feoffees’ power given to make Bylaws... . to increase or diminish the sallarys according to the merritt or neglect of the masters and what are the proper methods to proceed against the masters in case they neglect the School and still insist upon having and enjoying all the Revenues, and take Mr. Lutwich and Mr. Fazackerley’s opinion. '* Whatton, op. cit. 1i, 57 586 SCHOOLS The result of the opinion taken on the feoffees’ powers was seen on 28 July, 1726 :— An Act concerning the High Master of the Free Schoole of Manchester. Whereas the Feoffees of the said Schoole have had many complaints against Mr. Richards the High Master as to his Gross Negligence in the Absence from the Schoole so that the Inhabitants . . . are affraid to send their children to him and several years ... have sent them to distant Schooles And whereas the said Mr. Richards has been admonished of his neglect. ... Therefore the said Feoffees have thought fit to reduce his allowance to the summe of ten pounds per annum untill he approve himself in his constant attendance diligence and care . . . to the satisfaction of the Rt Revd the lord Bishop of Chester and Warden of Manchester. The reduction of salary seems to have been effective and to have produced Mr. Richards’s resignation, though no notice of it appears in the minute book. On 17 September, 1727, Henry Brooke was appointed high master. He was himself a Mancunian of Oriel College, M.A. 30 April, 1720. On the same day that action was taken against Richards the lease of the school mills was re- newed at £460 a year, and next year a bill was filed to restrain some Salford brewers from in- fringing the school monopoly by grinding malt at Sir Oswald Moseley’s horse-mill, instead of the school mill. The proceedings lasted till 1742, and Moseley had to pay £353 costs. In 1731 we find five masters paid, the high master £160, Mr. Purnall £50, Mr. Hobson and Mr. Gore as usual (which appears to be £20 a year), and Mr. Arrowsmith £10 ‘for his assisting in the schoole during Mr. Richards’ illness.’ Next year Mr. Gore, the writing master, received notice to quit unless he would take £12 s salary. Mr. Purnall was also given £10 a year in lieu of a house. Pupil teachers were employed in accordance with the statutes. It was ordered 1 May, 1733, that ‘the Two Lads who taught the Pets [i.e. the Petties or little ones] the last year be allowed for that teaching each £5.’ On 20 July, 1737, Mr. Robert Lowe, the new writing master, was to have £20 a year for teaching in the ‘ Under Schoole,’ or the ‘ Pet School.’ Mr. Brooke showed signs of activity at first in beginning a Register * of admissions. It com- menced very inauspiciously, as the first entry in *1730 May ye 19’ is that of ‘Thomas son of John Coppock of Manchester, taylor,’ who, after getting an exhibition to Brasenose and taking his B.A. degree in 1742, became chaplain of the » Manchester Regiment in Prince Charlie’s army in 1745,and was duly hanged near Carlisle 18 Octo- ber, 1746. Another scholar, William Brettargh, “ Edited by Rev. Jeremiah Finch Smith (Chet. Soc.), No. 69 (1866). son of a Leigh attorney, who entered on 23 January, 1734-5, of the same regiment, was transported for life. The next entry to Cop- pock’s in the register occurs 6 January, 1733-4. Between that day and 23 January, 1734-5, there are twenty-nine entries, representing prob- ably a school of about 120 boys. Only four of them are from outside Manchester and Salford, one being from Middleton, another from Whit- church, and two from Leigh. Only three are above the rank of tradesmen, as none of them are described as gentlemen—Allen Vigor, whose father was apparently ‘a gentleman by Act of Parliament’ (i.e. an attorney), and Taylor from Middleton, and Bourne of Whitchurch. The year 1735-6 contains only twenty-five names, none of them of the rank of gentleman. But in 1737 occurs the name of Joseph Yates, whose father was an esquire, perhaps a barrister, since the son became a judge. In 1740 we find John, the son of Legh Watson of Swinton, yeoman, who was the author of, for its period, a remark- ably good History of Halifax. In 1741 the entries fell to nine, a fact explained by the minute book, Mr. Brooke having begun to imitate his prede- cessor by prolonged absence. So that on 2 February, 1741, his salary was ‘stopt for his gross non-attendance of theschool.’ On2 June, 1743, the feoffees again resorted to the expedient of a reduction of salary to £10 a year. Next year, 3 August, 1744, Mr. Purnall was paid 30 guineas ‘ for teaching the Upper School 30 weeks, in the absence of Mr. Brooke, the High Master, in the years 1741, 2, 3, 4.” This action seems to have been effective. Brooke’s return to duty was marked by an imme- diate improvement in the Register, which records thirty entries from March, 1744, to March, 1745, as against five in 1743. One of thenew scholars was John Whittaker, the local historian, son of an innkeeper in Manchester, who went as a Lancashire scholar to Corpus, Oxford. In 1747 it appears that Brooke had entirely made his peace with the governors, for on 30 June they directed that he should be ‘allowed for his salary and gratuity £35 a quarter, and that all claims and disputes relating to Mr. Brooke’s demand shall be taken into consideration at the next general meeting’; and on 6 October he was ordered to be paid ‘£490 in full for all arrears and demands, it appearing by the Warden’s certificate and otherwise that he has duly at- tended for the time of 3 years and 9 months,’ and he was to be ‘let into possession of the School house in Milgate on 1 May next.’ In 1749 he retired to the living of Tortworth, Gloucestershire, where he died 21 August, 1759, aged sixty-three. William Purnall, who succeeded, had been second master for twenty-five years. Charles Lawson, of Corpus, was appointed second master. The governors’ minute book at this 587 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE time becomes a mere record of school bills. It ceased altogether on the passing of a private Act in 1760 which cost £600. A few ‘gents’ mark the register in Purnall’s first year ; one of the earliest of them, Millington Massey of Dunham, admitted 2 October, 1749, becoming senior wrangler in 1759. Richard Pepper Arderne of Stockport, admitted 20 June, 1752, was twelfth wrangler in 1766 (with Dr. Arnold, also from Manchester, senior wrangler), solicitor- general in 1783, Master of the Rolls 1788, and Chief Justice and Lord Alvanley in 1801. At school on 9 December, 1759, he took the title- réle in a performance of Addison’s Cato in the theatre, which began at 6 p.m. The performance of plays by schoolboys became very popular about this time, theatricals proving an effective sub- stitute for the old rhetoric. Twenty-five ad- missions are the total for 1753. John Crewe, who became Lord Crewe, admitted in 1754, can only partially be claimed as a Mancunian, since he went on to Westminster, then the great school of the aristocracy, particularly of the Whigs. The school gradually increased; 36 entries marked the year 1756. At this period the second week in January seems to have been the favourite time for entering new scholars, not, as now, after the summer holidays. Though not numerous, a good many more gentlemen begin to mark the register, though the two most suc- cessful, Cyril Jackson, dean of Christ Church, and William Jackson, bishop of Oxford, both used it only as a preparatory school for Westminster. Purnall died 16 April, 1764. Charles Lawson, having already been the second master for fifteen years, then ruled for forty-three years, making a total service of fifty- eizht years. He only ceased to attend school the day before his death, at the age of seventy- nine, on 19 April, 1807. This was pre-emi- nently the era of protracted head-masterships, to the ruin of many schools. His palmy period was from 1770 to 1786, 44 boys being admitted in 1770, the same number in 1775, and 65 in 1780, and they were drawn from a wider area and a higher class, especially from Wales and Derbyshire. The total number of scholars must have been about 250. This increase brought about a rebuilding of the school on the old site in 1776-7, the upper school being made 96 ft. long by 30 ft. wide, and some 25 ft. high. The lower school was partly beneath the upper, and about half its size. In 1790 the entries had fallen again to 21, and we find the same number in 1800. Among the pupils of this year was Ashurst Turner Gilbert, bishop of Chichester, who gave a racy account ® of the peculiarities Lawson had developed, particularly his way of addressing everyone in the third person, with the prefix of ‘Psha, blockhead.’ Thus, meeting 8 Manch, Schsol Reg. i, 124. young Gilbert just before the holidays, he in- quired : ‘Psha, blockhead, where does he go these holidays?” ‘Haslingden.” ‘ And how is he to get to Haslingden?’ ‘I should walk.’ ‘Pray, then, can he ride?’ ‘Yes.’ ¢Psha, well, then, he shall have my horse.” Oddly enough, Lawson never took orders, though it was reported that he had been made deacon before the canonical age, and had accompanied the Pretender to Derby. Jeremiah Smith, of Corpus, Oxford, was ap- pointed high master on 6 May, 1807, the salary then being £240 a year, gradually raised to £500 by 1834, when Whatton wrote; the second master, the Rev. Robinson Elsdale, re- ceived from £120 to £300 a year. Carlisle, in 1818, says there were two assistant masters besides the usher, and a master of the lower school, and there were 140 boys in the upper, and 30 to 40 in the lower school, the latter having fallen in numbers through ‘the establish- ment of the National and Lancasterian schools,’ There was considerable boarding accommodation at 50 guineas a year, but few boarders. In 1835 the total income from endowment had risen to £3,778. But from that time, owing to mills being established beyond the limits of the manor of Manchester, the school mills steadily decreased in value, till thirty years later the income from them was less than a tenth of what it had been thirty years before, viz. £372. Fortunately, the other endowments of the school had increased in value through the growth of the town and yielded about £3,000 a year. In 1849 a Chancery scheme abolished boarders and restricted the school to be a free school. In 1859 the governors had the good fortune to secure the services of Frederick William Walker, who, by a curious coincidence, was destined to re-create the only two schools which have definitely retained the title of high for head master, Manchester and St. Paul’s, London. He was a Rugbeian and Corpus man, who got firsts in classics and seconds in mathematics at Oxford in 1852-3, and showed his versatility by being also Boden Sanskrit scholar and Vinerian Law Scholar. He set to work to reorganize the school On 7 August, 1867, a new scheme was made by the Court of Chancery, which, while retaining 250 free places, after a long local struggle, imposed fees of 12 guineas a year on other boys. Already by 18691* there were 113 paying scholars. £10,000 was spent on new buildings. When Mr. Walker passed on to St. Paul’s in 1876 the school numbered 808, of whom 250 were free scholars. Samuel Dill, fellow and tutor of Corpus, suc- ceeded. A scheme under the Endowed Schools Acts, which became law 30 April, 1877, reduced Schools Ing. Rep. xvi, 325. 588 SCHOOLS the number of free boys from 250 to the mystic number of the draught of fishes, in imitation of St. Paul’s School, and reserved the free places for competition among boys from elementary schools, instead of leaving them open as of right. The scheme further substituted a mainly representa- tive for a co-optative governing body. At first the numbers of the school went on increasing till in 1883 there were 949 boys, of whom 796 paid and 153 were free scholars. In 1885-6 18 scholarships and exhibitions at the universities were gained by the school, six in classics, seven in science, three in mathematics, and one in modern history. The head boy was the son of a working carpenter. Later the numbers began to fall off. Mr. Dill resigned in 1895. John Edward King, the next high master, had been educated at Clifton and Lincoln College, Oxford, where he became a fellow and tutor. The competition of other schools in and round Manchester, and especially of those which were created or re-created out of the Hulmeian endowments, began to affect the numbers. The Hulme School in Manchester itself, in larger premises and with an ample site, and the resus- citated grammar school at Oldham, cut off some from below, while Owens College took off the larger growth who preferred to become university men at sixteen. But the scholars still numbered a round 800, quite enough for any school, and the university achievements remained remarkable. In September, 1903, Mr. King went on to Bedford. Mr. John Lewis Paton, the present high master, is probably the first Cambridge man who has sat in the high master’s chair. Edu- cated at the High School, Nottingham, and Shrewsbury, he was a scholar of St. John’s College, Cambridge, and took firsts in both divisions of the classical tripos in 1886-7, and won the chancellor’s medal. He was ten years an assistant master at Rugby, and subsequently head master of University College School, London. In 1906 there were 854 boys and 34 assistant masters, 160 entrance scholarships, and 20 leaving exhibitions. The tuition fees range from 12 to 15 guineas. Hutme GraMMar SCHOOLS The Hulme Grammar School was founded by a scheme of the Endowed Schools Commis- sioners, 4 July, 1882, out of the Hulme Exhi- bition Endowment, an account of which was given above under the Manchester Grammar School. Its first and present head master is Joseph Hall, M.A. (Ireland), Hon. D.Litt. (Durham), an assistant master in the Manchester Grammar School before his appointment in 1887. With a staff of 11 assistant masters there are 240 boys. The tuition fees are 10 guineas a year, and there are thirty-four entrance scholarships. The buildings form a fine pile, standing in ample grounds near Victoria Park. The Hulme Girls’ School, similarly assisted, has been similarly successful. Tue MunicieaL SECONDARY SCHOOL This school in Whitworth Street was estab- lished by the School Board in 1880, and is ad- ministered by the Education Committee of the Town Council. It has about 600 boys and 400 girls. The tuition fees are £3 a year to children of ratepayers and £4 10s. to other children, with 120 free places. Mr. R. Cros- thwaite, educated at St. Peter’s School, York, and Pembroke College, Cambridge, a senior optime in 1890, B.Sc. of London University, is head master and has a staff of some 23 assistant masters and 13 assistant mistresses. FARNWORTH GRAMMAR SCHOOL, WIDNES! William Smith, a native of Cuerdley or Widnes, became bishop of Lichfield in 1493 and of Lincoln in 1496. In 1509 he joined with Richard Sutton in the foundation of Brase- nose College, Oxford, but he had earlier, in 1507, provided for an annual payment of £10 to a sufficient and honest priest, being a Master or Bachelor of Art or a Master of Grammar at the least, able and willing to teach and teaching grammar freely in the free school at Farnworth. From this it would seem that the school already existed. The mayor and citizens of Chester were to appoint the master. The scholars were probably taught in some part of the church until the eighteenth century. Archbishop Bancroft is supposed to have been educated at the school. From 1662 the Chester Corporation ceased to meddle in the school affairs, a body of trustees being found in charge. The endowment of £10, though supplemented to some extent, after a while became too small to secure an efficient master, and the school declined into an ordinary village school. Efforts were made to improve it. In 1805 boys belonging to the chapelry, who learned grammar only, were free, but small charges were made for teaching English, reading, writing, and accounts. A new era began in 1861 with the appointment of James Raven as master, the growth of Widnes as a manufacturing town assisting; new buildings were provided, but at the master’s risk, and once more boys were sent to the universities. After another period of decline the school was re- organized by the Charity Commissioners in 1879, and new buildings were opened in 1884. 1C. Richard Lewis, Hist. of Farn. Gram. School (1905). 589 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE But it could not compete with the Municipal Secondary School, and though assistance was rendered by the County Council in 1901, it had, in 1904, to be amalgamated with the municipal school. Its endowments are to be used to pro- vide entrance scholarships to the combined institution. BLACKBURN GRAMMAR SCHOOL By a deed made between Thomas second earl of Derby and the church masters or church reeves of the parish church on 4 April, 1514, lands partly bought, it would seem, by subscrip- tion of the parishioners and partly given by the earl, were settled for the maintenance of a chantry in the Lady chapel on the south side of the church, with Sir Edmund Button as the first chantry priest. The earl and his heirs were to have the nomination in future of an honest secular prest, and no regular, sufficiently lerned in gramer and playn song, that shall kepe con- tynually a Fre Gramer Scole and maintaine and kepe the one syde of the quere, as one man may, in his surplice, every holyday . . . and if it fortune that no secular prest can be found that is able and suf- ficyently lerned in gramer and playn songe, ther to learne and do as is aforesaid, then . . . another secular prest that is expert and can sing both pricke song and plane song and hath a sight in descant, if any such can be gotten, which shall teche a fre Song Scole in Blackburne and also shall kepe the quere... every holyday, and if no such prest can be gotten, then . . . such another secular prest . . . as the churchwardens . . . shallthink . . . most suffycyent for the maintenance of the quere . . . and to kepe there a fre gramer or songe scole. This, if correctly copied by Whitaker,! is a unique provision, The requirement that a chantry priest should also, as master, keep a free grammar school, and sing in choir on holy days is common form, but that if no man could be found learned in grammar, one was to be found learned in plain song, part song, and florid solo singing, to keep a free song school, is quite ex- ceptional. It is the first foundation deed yet produced which provides in set terms fora free song school. What the third alternative of a person who could keep either a grammar school or a song school means, it is not easy to see. Perhaps, however, the difference lies not in his qualifications, but in the churchwardens appoint- ing instead of the earl. However, the point was probably not of much practical importance, as there could have been no difficulty in getting a grammar schoolmaster who could also sing in choir, since any cathedral or col- legiate grammar school could have supplied many of them at that time, and Horman, head master of Eton and Winchester in turn, says in his Fulgaria that without knowledge of singing, ‘Whitaker, Hist. of Whalley (4th ed.), ii, 322. grammar cannot be perfect. At all events, when in 15467 Henry VIII’s chantry commissioners reported on Blackburn they found Thomas Burges, preist, incumbent ther, . . . doth celebrate and manetene the quere every holie day accordinglie, and also doth teache gramer and plane songe in the said Free Skole, accordinge to the statutes of his Foundacion. Where, alas! are they? The ‘sum totall of the rentall’ of the endowment was then £5 85. 8d. net. Edward VI’s chantry commissioners add that Burges was ‘58 yeres’ old, and they put the ‘clere yerely revenue . . . for his salarie’ at £5 14s. The continuance warrant? issued under the Chantries Act of Edward VI, bearing date 11 August, 1548, continued the school, but at the stipend of £4 75. 4d. only. The dis- crepancy is probably to be explained by the exclusion of the copyhold lands given by Lord Derby, which were not within the Act. These copyhold lands became the subject of a decree in the Duchy Court* in Hilary Term, 1557, against the tenants who had withheld rents. It was then stated that the school had been ‘convenablie meintened’ ever since the foundation ‘and manie pore scolars to the num- ber of seven score at the lest there yerly at the same scole instructed and taught.” It was argued that the Act did not extend to lands given to the ‘ maintenance of Fre scoles nor never was meant to decaye anie grammer scole nor the exhibicion of anie Scolemaster.’ The copy- holds were therefore ordered to be surrendered to the new feoffees, and it was provided that the said scole and scolemaster shall be . . . kept for the instruccion and teachinge of scollers and youths . . . according to the tenure... of the foundacion. £20, however, was to be levied to buy back some of the lands from one Nicholas Halsted, who had bought some of the lands in Yorkshire bona fide. The decree, which was certainly not in ac- cordance with the general run of decisions under the Chantries Act, seems to have remained a dead letter. For ten years later, 8 August, 1 567,° letters patent were granted to the town incor- porating a body of the exceptional and unwieldy number of fifty governors, and it was recited that there was no less than £131 16s. 8d. due for arrears of the stipend, of which £60 was ordered to be paid by the duchy and £55 by the copyholders, who had apparently managed to escape paying any rent at all since 1549. A school was built and the rest of the money be- came aschool stock. This, with £250 subscribed * Leach, Engl. Schools at the Reform. 116-17, 121, * Ibid. 125. ‘ Duchy of Lanc. D. & O. x, fol. 2708, * Char. Com. Rep. xv, 12. 590 SCHOOLS by the townspeople was laid out in the purchase, not, unfortunately for the school, of land, but of a rent-charge on land of £20, secured by deed 30 September, 1590. In 1597 the governors, with the consent of the bishop, made statutes. They were of an ordinary type. One curious provision was that Noe scrivinor shall teach writing schole termes with- out urgent cause, oftener than once in the yeare for the space of one moneth ; onely in the moneth of September, if conveniently it may bee, but not at all betwene Monday next after St. Mychalles day and the first Monday in Lent. Boys were admitted at five years old, but they were to be taught chiefly by pupil teachers, the ‘grammarians.” ‘The authors in Latin and Greek were prescribed, and Hebrew was contemplated as a possible subject of instruction. The principles of arithmetic, geometry, and cosmo- graphy, with sure introduction into the sphere, are profitable. The exercises may be English speaking, Latin variations, double translations, disputations, verses, epistles, theories, and declamations in Latin and Greek. Once yearly at some convenient tyme, espetially in September, the schollars shall exercise themselves in writing verses or other exercises generally in praising God who of his fatherly providence hath moved the governors and benefactors to prepare the same [school] for the bringinge uppe of youth and profitt of his church . . . praiinge that others... may be sterred upp to bestowe there goodes upon such lieke godly uses. If the governors had had the good sense to invest the school stock in land instead of in rent- charges this prayer might have been dispensed with, But £80 given by John Astley in 1608 was not invested till 1625 ; and {90 given by Sir Edward Ashton in 1685-94 was invested in rent-charges. A list of masters from 1580 is given in William Abram’s History of Blackburn, published in 1877. They were, as in other grammar schools, univer- sity graduates. During the Civil War the school went on, though at one time ‘the master could not re- ceive his wages, the times being so distracted,’ and the school windows were broken by the Royalist soldiers. In 1742-3 it was agreed, no doubt for the benefit of the usher, that the cock-pennys which have formerly been divided betwixt the master and usher equally shall for the future be paid to each master separately from the boys under his particular care. Though the school was free, gratuities at Shrovetide, when the master gave a cock-fight, were practically compulsory. In the eighteenth century, as usual, the usher’s department had become little more than an elementary school. On 22 December, 1770, the head master com- plained that the school had become ‘ over-crowded by petty boys,’ and 5s. entrance fee was thence- forth required from boys entered under the usher. In 1791 it was ordered that ‘all scholars learning the Latin language shall be taught by the Upper Master.’ The usher’s office was dropped in 1819, when Thomas Atkinson insti- tuted reforms. In 1820 the old school in the churchyard was pulled down, and a new one built on the Bull Meadow near St. Peter’s Church was opened in 1825. Atkinson taught there for twenty years. By a scheme under the Endowed Schools Acts of February, 1877, a representative governing body of twenty-four was constituted, and twelve scholarships in the school and a leaving exhibi- tion to the university of £50 a year were estab- lished. Tuition fees were also imposed. In 1883-4 new buildings were erected near the park, west of the town; but the space for play- ground is cramped. The old endowments produce £130 a year; in 1884 the school received {10,000 from Mrs. Dodgson. There were about 80 boys when Mr. Allcroft, B.Sc., retired in 1903. Under Mr. George Alfred Stocks, M.A., scholar of St. Edmund’s School, Canterbury, and Pembroke College, Cambridge, a second-class man in the classical tripos in 1880, and seven assistant masters, there are about 180 boys, paying tuition fees of {9 to £12 4 year. STONYHURST COLLEGE, BLACKBURN} The English foundation of this, the only Roman Catholic public school, dates from 1794. It was originally started at Saint-Omer in 1592 as a Jesuit college for the children of English religious refugees: thence it was driven to Bruges, and to Liége in 1773, where the disturbances conse- quent upon the outbreak of the French Revolu- tion made its continuance impossible. The masters and 12 boys fled to England. Mr. Thomas Weld, who had been a scholar of the Bruges period, gave them Stonyhurst Hall and 44 acres of land. The gift was not accepted without reluctance, and they long cherished a hope of returning to Liége. With little money in hand it was only by great effort and the destruction of some things which might otherwise have been preserved that food and lodging were provided. School work was resumed before the end of October, and by Christmas about 50 boys were in residence. Buildings of a strictly utilitarian character were erected. In 1799 there were 90 boys, in 1803 as many as 170. The school, known as the college of St. Aloysius, had thus almost regained its old position, and a prospectus issued 1The Rev. John Gerard, S.J., Stonyhurst College Centenary Record (Belfast), 1894. 591 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE in 1797 contains some interesting details. The annual pension was 40 guineas ; for those under twelve 37; but scholars in rhetoric and philo- sophy paid 45, ‘on account of extraordinary expenses and some particular indulgences. There was a uniform dress for Sundays—a plain coat of superfine blue cloth with yellow buttons, and red cloth or kerseymere waistcoats. Latin and Greek, history, geography, and ele- mentary mathematics were taught; particular care was taken that boys should read well, write a good hand, and speak and write French with accuracy. All dined and supped with their masters and had the same table, no distinctions being allowed in diet or clothing. The garden and court used as a playground were described as very airy and spacious. Pocket money was limited to a guinea a year. There was then only one vacation—from 15 August to 15 Sep- tember. hile the college was conducted abroad it was of course impossible to have fre- quent vacations ; the boys mostly resided the whole time from their entrance till the comple- tion of their course. The semi-holiday periods, such as Christmas, were utilized for acting, and at Stonyhurst itself this was not entirely discontinued until 1898. The hour of rising was fixed at 5.30 a.m. in 1812 instead of the older custom of five in summer and six in winter. One internal difficulty arose from the suppres- sion of the Society of Jesus. The masters had been bound together by their common vows, and after these had been relaxed in 1773 they continued to live in the old way, hoping for the reconstitution of the order. As a temporary expedient a brief was obtained from Pius VI in 1778 formally establishing the Liége ‘Academy,’ and this was confirmed in 1796, and again in 1802 after settlement at Stonyhurst. The somewhat anomalous position of the rector of the college and his assistants was not removed till the order was restored in 1814, but even then local difficulties in England had to be met and overcome. A large additional building was added in 1809-10, on the east side. The number of boys continued to increase till there were over 200, but about 1815 a decline began, to some extent caused by the opening of other schools, especially in Ireland, some of them offshoots of Stonyhurst, and in 1829 there were only 120 boys. The numbers rose, though irregularly, until there were 150 in 1852, 200 in 1857, 250 in 1861, and 300 in 1884. This last figure has not always been maintained, but there were in October, 1907, 270 boys at the school. Additional buildings were constantly required, and further portions of the Stonyhurst estates were purchased. St. Mary’s Seminary was opened in 1830, and an infirmary in 1844; while in 1843 the completion of the old court on the west side by the erection of the present building was begun. This work was completed in 1856. A house by the Hodder, since greatly enlarged, had been occupied as a novice house as early as 1803; this became in 1855 a prepara- tory school. The first observatory was built in 1838 ; the second, for astronomy only, in 1866. Ten years later plans were adopted for re- placing the east or college building of 1810 by more suitable and artistic school rooms. This was done section by section, so as not to inter- fere with school work, until the whole was complete—thirteen years after the commence- ment. The double centenaries of Saint-Omer and Stonyhurst were duly celebrated in 1892 and 1894. The scholastic traditions of Saint-Omer have to some extent been preserved at Stonyhurst till the present day, but many have had to be abandoned owing to the rise of new studies and the entry of the boys into competitive examinations for the Civil Service and degrees at London University. The old names of the seven classes or ‘ schools’ are still in use: Elements, Figures, Rudiments, Grammar, Syntax, Poetry or Humanities, and Rhetoric being the ascending scale. Origin- ally the one master took his boys through all the stages, beginning afresh with a new set of boys when the old ones had gone. As in other Jesuit schools the stage has always had a prominent place in the scholars’ exercises. A school maga- Zine was started in 1881. A_ peculiarity in the teaching, introduced in 1855, is the division of the classes into two Opposite parties—Romans and Carthaginians —who contend against each other individu- ally, an extra holiday being the reward of the victorious side each half-term. At the same time was revived the institution of ‘extra- ordinary’ work for the more advanced boys of each class. The Stonyhurst name for monthly holidays— Blandykes—comes from a country house near Saint-Omer at which the boys spent a day once a month in the summer. The playground at Saint-Omer was called the Line, and the boys are still divided into Higher Line and Lower Line. ‘Stonyhurst cricket,’ now obsolete, is supposed to have been a tradition from the same place, representing perhaps an Elizabethan form of the game. In addition to the boys of the school is a class of Philosophers, pursuing higher studies, either for their own pleasure or in preparation for the degree examinations of London University, &c.; they correspond somewhat to the undergraduates at the universities, and special provision is made for them. Many distinguished Roman Catholics have been educated at Stonyhurst, of whom the best known are Charles Waterton the naturalist, and Cardinal Vaughan. 592 SCHOOLS LIVERPOOL SCHOOLS Tue GRAMMAR SCHOOL The history of Liverpool Grammar School, the early extinction of which reflects little credit on the citizens of that port, has been egregiously distorted by the local historians. Liverpool was originally only a hamlet in the parish of Walton, and the original church of Liverpool was a small chapel dedicated as usual to the same saint as the mother church, the Virgin Mary. The earliest mention yet produced,’ of the chapel of St. Mary del Key, so called from standing on the quay on which Liverpool developed as a seaport, is a deed of 1257 in which Randolph Moore (de Mor) grants half a burgage ‘next to the chapel.’ The first definite record of the chapel by name is on 19 May, 1355, when licence in mortmain was granted to the manor and commonalty of Liverpool to grant lands to the value of £10 a year ‘to certain chaplains to celebrate divine service daily for the souls of all the faithful de- parted in the chapel of St. Mary and St. Nicholas of Liverpool.’ It appears from later references that the chapel of St. Nicholas was an enlarged chapel built at the east end of the original chapel of St. Mary del Key. The two seem, however, to have formed one structure, spoken of together as the chapel of Liverpool. The first mention of any endowed school there is in the will of John Crosse, rector of St. Nicholas, Fleshsham- bles, London, in 1515. He gave ‘anew Town Hall to the maior and his brethren with the bur- gesses of Liverpool, the new Our Ladye Howse to kepe their courts,’ and directed that the ‘sel- ler’ under was to helpe the preste that synges afore our Lady of the chappelle of the Key . . . the said prest shall giff yerely 5s. to the prest that synges afore St. Katherine and all ye avauntage over shall be to the use of the preste that synges afore our Lady of the Key. By the same will he gave lands to the fyndinge of a preste to say masse afore the ymage of Seynt Kateryne within the chappell of Lyver- pull for the souls [of himself and his ancestors and benefactors on condition that] the maior and my brother Richard Crosse or his heirs after him shall order and put in a preste, suche as they shall thynke best convenient, the which preste shall keepe gramer scole and take his avauntage from all the children except those whose names be Crosse and poor children that have no socour. This is a rather remarkable limitation on a free grammar school. The limitation to namesakes is a curious development of the doctrine of founder’s kin which had manifested itself in Merton’s school, at Merton College in 1276, and Wykeham’s school of Winchester College in 1382, and sur- ‘John Elton, The Chapel of St. Mary del Key (Trans. Hist. Soc. Lancs. and Ches. 1904, liv, 82). vived to the eighteenth century in the case of Hodgson’s school at Aikton in Cumberland. We do not know anything about the school until 1526-7, when a bill in the Duchy Court recited the will, that the priest was ‘there to teach a Fre Scole,’ and that the feoffees held the lands and carried out the trusts till three or four years before, when one Sir Humphrey Crosse, clerk, entered and took the revenues of the school wrongly. A sub poena issued, but with what result does not appear. Sir Humphrey Crosse, the chantry-priest-schoolmaster, appears as such in the Valor Ecclesiasticus of 1535 as well as in the Chantry Certificates of 1546 and 1548.7 The Crosses were one of the oldest families in Liverpool. The first recorded mayor in 1351 and again from 1354 to 1363, William Fitz- adam, is said to have been the ancestor of the Crosses, and Richard Crosse was mayor in 1409, and John Crosse in 1459 and 1476, and it is probable that he was the founder of St. Kath- erine’s chantry, the priest of which was the grammar schoolmaster. The Chantry Certificate for 1546 states :— ‘The chauntrie at the alter of Saynt Katherine within the said chapell [of Lyverpole], Humfrey Crosse, preist, incumbent ther of the foundacion of John Crosse to celebrate ther for the sowles of his said founder and his heires and to do one yerlie obbet and to distribute at the same 35. 4d. to poore people. And also the Incumbents herof by ther Foundacion are bounden to teache and kepe one gramer skoole, to take ther advantage of skolers savinge those that beryth the name of Crosse and poor children. ‘The same is at the alter of Saynt Katherine within the chapell of Lyverpole in the paroche of Walton beforsaid being distant from the paroche church 4 myles, and at this day the said Incumbent doth celebrate distribute and teache accordinge to his said Foundacion.’” The goods were a 2 oz. chalice, 2 [sets of] ‘olde vestments, one masse boke, one superaltar.’ The income from endowment or ‘sum totall of the rentall’ was {4 155. 10d. From the report in 1548 we learn that there were in the town and parish of Walton 1,000 ‘houselynge people’ or communicants, which makes the population of Liverpool about 2,000 or half that attributed to Blackburn or War- rington ; and of the school it says :— and also to kepe a schole of Grammer free for all children bearynge the name of Crosse and poor children, which is not observed accordinglie, and the graunte is for ever. Humfrye Crosse incumbent of the age of 50 yeres hath for his salarie the clere yearlie proffits of the same, £6 2s. 10d. And his lyvinge besides is nil. The lands and tenements belongynge to the same are of the yearly value of £6 2s. 1od., whereof in reprises nil. The ornaments belongynge to the same are valued at 3s. The number of ounces of plate belonging to the same are by estimation 12 oz. * Lancs. and Ches. Rec. Soc. xxxii (1896), 156, 2 593 75 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE The odd discrepancy between the value of the endowment as stated in 1546 and 1548 is not without parallel in Chantry Certifi- cates. A possible explanation is that copy hold lands are excluded from the former survey. We are left to guess in what particulars the terms of the foundation were not observed in 1548. Certainly the default was not with respect to the grammar school, because the commissioners for the continuance of schools and curates of neces- sity continued the school. They found the chapel of Liverpool necessary, Walton church being 4 miles off, and continued it with John Hurde,‘ the chantry priest of St. John’s chantry, or the Rood Altar in the chapel, as its incum- bent. Also, finding that a grammar Scole hath been heretofore continually kept in the said parish of Walton with the revenues of the chauntry of St. Katharine founded in the said chaple of Liverpoole and that the Scole master there had for his wages £5 135. 334. yearly of the revenues of the same chauntry, which scole is very meet and necessary to continue, [they directed that] the said grammar scole in the said parish of Walton shall continue as heretofore hath been used and Humfrey Crosse, scole- master there, shall bee and remayne in the same rome and shall have for his stipend and wages yerely £5 1358. 34. Mr. Elton understands the reference to Walton to imply that the school was at Walton church, but the school was of course near the chapel and the chantry down in Liverpool, as it always had been. Liverpool merchants found it necessary to start the chapel down by the quay where they lived and did their business, and they naturally had their school there too—not 4 miles away in a country village, such as Walton remained until sixty years ago. It will be observed that a third sum inter- mediate between that given in the Certificates of 1546 and 1548 is now stated as the income of the schoolmaster. The hypothesis of deduction of official fees will not do, as the Chantries Act had directed that all pensions and payments under it were to be free of fees. The continu- ance of the stipend at £5 135. 33d. is based on the finding that that was what it always had been. The Ministers’ Accounts show that ’ Mr. Elton assumes that the ‘not’ is an insertion of a later transcriber in 1644, but the word appears in the contemporary return in the Duchy records, from which it was printed by the writer in English Schools at the Reformation, in 1896. ‘ Mr. Elton quite misapprehends the effect of this certificate ; he confuses the Rood Altar, which was of course on or by the Rood Screen, with the High Altar, and though he says that John Hurde died shortly after and was succeeded by John, whom he elsewhere calls William Janson, he yet says (p. 104) that nothing was done for the continuance of the chapel till Queen Elizabeth gave the town the nomination of the incumbent by patent 30 Oct. 1565. Humfrey Crosse received from the Duchy officials his salary at the rate specified.* The next mention of a school, though it is by no means certain that it is a mention of the grammar school, as claimed by Mr. Elton, is 12 August, 1555, when the corporation ordered that those persons whose names be here written, every two persons for their streets, shall move their neigh- bours for the clerk’s wages, that is to say wages for Nicholas Smyth, our clerk of the chapel and teacher of their children, who have concluded, and a book 1s made of [blank in MS.] good and lawful money of England to be made good and paid to the said Nicholas during his life. Also the moiety or one dimidium of the corn market is given him as per in- dentures made and sealed etc., and for want of having the one dimidium of the corn market he to have 3os. by the hands of the officers for the time being in that behalf. The fact that Smith was clerk of the chapel points to his being an elementary teacher rather than the grammar schoolmaster, it being the business of the clerk to teach the petties to read ; the grammar school would not admit them till they could. No doubt, here as else- where, there were difficulties in getting masters appointed by the crown. It was usual in the case of these continued schools to let the appoint- ment fall into the hands of the local crown officials, the general surveyor or auditors, and at Ipswich the delays and difficulties in appoint- ments are definitely stated as the reason for Queen Elizabeth’s charter granting the right of appointing to the corporation. ‘The same was no doubt the case here, and by a charter of 30 October, 1565, the appointment of the chap- lain was conferred by letters patent ® on the cor- poration, as well as that of ‘a discreet and learned man to be schoolmaster in the grammar school,’ though the ancient stipend still continued to be paid by the Duchy receiver for the county. The corporation within a few days of the grant of the charter agreed That it be nedeful to have a lerned man to be our scolemaister for the preferment of the youth of this town and that Master Maiore shall call the town to- gether within 10 days and take order for his wages over and above that the Queen’s Maiestie doth allow us, The Portmote book contains? a copy of the book made of the benevolent gift and grant of the corn burgesses of this the Queen’s Majesty’s borough corporate and port town of Liverpool for the supplying and supportation of a competent wages * Duchy of Lanc. Mins. Accts. bdle. 173, No. 2714. ° Notitia Cestr. ii, 192. ” Port Mote, i, 250. 594 SCHOOLS for a schoolmaster, being a lerned man, rated, cessed and laid by the auditors this year, bound by the whole Assembly 18 Sept. anno 1565. A list of subscriptions promised follows, ranging from the mayor’s 4s. a year ® and Mr. Corbett’s and Alderman Sekerston’s 35. 6d. down to one of 4d., the total being £5 13s. 6d., just about doubling the old stipend. This was really an inadequate sum for those days, Elizabethan founders aiming at a salary of £20 at least. But no doubt the school was still mainly a fee and not a free school. However, John Ore bachelor of arts being hired in London by Ralph Sekerston and others to be schoolemaster he appeared ® before the Assembly in the common hall and was admitted to enter and teach upon the proof and good liking, and to have for the year sick or whole £10 to be paid quarterly. In 1571, Peile, who was also chaplain, took over the school. He refused to accept half the toll of the corn market and collected his salary by a house-to-house visitation. In 1582 John Royle was appointed master and required to act also as clerk of the chapel and ringer of the cur- few, and was paid only £7 145. 8d. The incumbent of the chapel was again do- ing duty as master in 1599, and the corporation ordered that ‘Sir Thomas Wainwright shall kepe schoole here untill God sende us some suf- ficient learned man and no longer.’ In 1611 we learn that the school was on the west of the cemetery of the chapel, the Port Mote Book” recording a dispute with John Rose re- garding old chantry lands and ‘a wall of the cemetery of the chapel of St. Nicholas, on the east part of the Free School.’ In 1673, how- ever, it had been moved to the chapel of St. Mary del Key, the antiquary Brome recording : Here is now erecting a famous town house. . . Here also is a piece of great antiquity, formerly a chapel, now a Free School, at the West end whereof next the river stood the statue of St. Nicholas, long since defaced and gone, to whom mariners offered when they went to sea, In 1745, to the disgrace of the town, the parish vestry directed that ‘the school adjoining St. Nicholas Church in which John Walters teaches, being ruinous and a great nuisance, be taken down.’ So perished the chapel of the quay, the one ancient building of Liverpool. The grammar school was not long in follow- ing it. In 1818 Carlisle was informed that the school had been wholly discontinued since the death of the late master, Mr. John Baines, an excellent scholar, about 10 years ago. But the corporation have a plan at present under consideration to revive this ancient seminary and thus to give additional splendour to this flourishing town. ® Port Mote, i, 291. * Ibid. 298. ” Op. cit. ti, 743. The plan, however, was never executed. The result has been that Liverpool lacked any public provision for secondary education till after the Education Act of 1902. Liverpoor Instrrution, Liverpoot Instrrute, AND LIvERPOOL COLLEGE The place of the grammar school was supplied by semi-public private schools, the Royal Insti- tution School founded in 1819, the Liverpool Hea in 1825, and the Liverpool College in 1840. In 1864 the first of these schools numbered about 120 boys and had gained a good list of distinctions at the University, reckoning among its old boys the present Canon Duckworth, scholar of University College and fellow of Trinity College, Oxford, and the late George Warr, scholar of Trinity College and fellow of Trinity Hall, Cambridge. ‘This school was crowded out by the two later schools. The Liverpool Institute grew out of the Mechanics’ Institute, and was managed by a council of subscribers. It supported two schools in Mount Street, a high school for the upper middle classes at fees of 9 to 12 guineas a year for boys up to university age, and a commercial school at fees of £3 155. to £4 10s. a year, being a kind of higher elementary school for boys up to fifteen or sixteen years of age. In 18641 the former had 195 boys, the latter 630 boys. In 1894? the numbers were 228 and 661 respectively. By a scheme of the Board of Education under the Charitable Trusts Acts, 1905, this school became a public school and was handed over to the corporation of Liverpool. It was subjected to severe criticism for under- payment of its masters and the inferiority of its buildings at various times, but now this has to a great extent been remedied. In 1906, under Mr. H. V. Weisse with fourteen assistant masters and one assistant mistress, there were 350 boys in the high school at fees of 12 guineas a year ; and 250 in the commercial school at fees of 6 guineas. Mr. Weisse is also head master of this school, the Rev. A. Jackson being the senior assistant master with twelve assistant masters and one mistress) The decline in numbers is due to the drifting off of the poorer class to what used to be called the higher grade board schools. The Liverpool College was founded and governed by donors and subscribers, the founda- tion stone being laid 22 October, 1840. It was under Church of England management. It maintained three schools. The upper school, at fees of 17 to 23 guineas a year, had five university exhibitions attached, and aimed at 1 Schools Ing. Rep. xvii, 591. ? Royal Com. on Sec. Educ. vi, 136. 595 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE preparation for the universities. In 1865° it contained 119 boys and won a fair proportion of distinctions at Oxford and Cambridge, admissions to Woolwich and to the Indian Civil Service. The middle school, at fees of 11 guineas, had 275 boys. The lower school, with fees of £5 155. 6d. a year, had about 259 boys in 1868. All these schools were at first contiguous in Shaw Street, but in 1884 the upper school was removed to new and spacious buildings in Lodge Lane, close to Prince’s and Sefton Parks. In 1894 there were 240% boys in it. In 1867 the college registered itself under the Companies Acts with articles of association, which made it in effect a public endowed school. In 1906 it was under the Rev. John Bennet Lancelot, of the King’s School, Chester, and Jesus College, Oxford, second class classics 1887, as principal, with thirteen assistant masters and one mistress, and contained 250 boys, 15 of them boarders, at tuition fees of £25 a year. The middle school, at fees of £12 a year, contained 240, and the lower, at 6 guineas, 260 boys. [hese two schools became the property of the City Council after 31 Dec. 1907. BOLTON LE MOORS GRAMMAR SCHOOL The latest official return! of the Endowed Charities of the county borough of Bolton (22 February, 1904) repeats, without addition, the report of the former Commissioners of In- quiry concerning charities in 1828, which attri- butes Bolton Grammar School to Robert Lever in 1656, mentioning, however, an ‘old schul’ existing before 1644. This ‘old school’ was one of the numerous Lancashire schools founded in the first quarter of the sixteenth century, when that ‘wild country,’ as it is habitually called in the records of the time, was beginning to civilize itself. To Mr. B. T. Barton ? is due the credit of having published the information which ante- dates the school by 120 years. Ina case in the Duchy Court in 1571 a bill was filed to assert the right of the inhabitants of Bolton to certain property. It was shown that by deed of bargain and sale of 4 March, 1524, William Haigh of Wigan gave to John Lever (or Leaver) of Little Lever and others a messuage and tenement in Tockholes at Blackburn, of the yearly value of 335. 4d., towards the maintenance of a school- master to teach a grammar school in Bolton, and that for the accomplishment and perfect obtaining of this object the parishioners had ap- pointed feoffees to hold the lands and apply the profits accordingly, with the right of enfeofing ° Schools Ing. Rep. xvii, 573. * Royal Com. on Sec. Educ. vi, 139. ' End. Char. for County Borough of Bolton, 86, 42. * Hist. Gleanings of Bolton and District, 366 (Bolton Daily Chronicle Office), 1881. from time to time such others as the parishioners of Bolton should nominate and appoint. If this was the sole endowment of the school it could not have been a free grammar school. There was a schoolhouse which is mentioned in the earliest extant accounts of the new school. The school went on according to the trusts till Alexander Orrell, the last survivor of the original feoffees, died, when John Orrell, his nephew and heir, as the bill of 1571 alleges, got the lands conveyed to himself, ‘by colour whereof he detaineth the issues and profits of the premises to his own private uses.” This was denied by the defendant, but eventually all parties agreed that the lands and income should be applied to the maintenance of the school, A further endowment was given by James Gosnell, clerk, of Bolton, by his will of g January, 1622-3. He gave lands at Balder- stone to James Lever of Darcy Lever and others in trust, four-sixths for a stipendiary preacher other than the vicar, at £30 a year, one-sixth for the poor, ‘and the other 4th to the use benefit and behoof of the master and usher successively for the time being of and in Bolton aforesaid.’ It is not clear whether this gift came into practical operation before by a deed 14 July, 1652, John Gosnell, cousin and next heir of James Gosnell, and two of the executors conveyed the property to a body of trustees. The will is a sufficient proof that the school was existent at the time the will was made, and also sufficiently pros- perous to have an usher as well as a master. The deed of 1652 likewise affords prima-facie evidence that it was going on then. Meanwhile Robert Lever, citizen and clothier of London, by his will (16 March, 1641-2) directed that his brothers, William Lever of Kersal and John Lever of Athrington, both described as gentlemen, should hold the lands he had bought in Harwood in their joint names, but in return should pay £350 to his personal estate, ‘or in defaulte thereof should sell the lands to the best advantage.” This £350, with £250 more out of his personal estate, was to be employed for such pious uses as I shall appoint in my lyfetime, and for want of such appointment . . . in such pious uses as my executors or the survivor of them shall think fitt eyther for erectinge and mayntainynge of a free school or chapel or otherwise as to them shall seem meet. The executors were the two brothers and his nephews, Robert Lever of Manchester and James Lever. The testator died 25 May, 1644, and the two brothers before August, 1645. During the war Bolton was three times besieged, and the third time stormed and _ taken. Moreover, the heir of William Lever was an infant. So nothing was done until during the Protectorate, 4 August, 1655, an inquisition was taken at * Ibid. 369. 596 SCHOOLS Chorley under the Statute of Charitable Uses, and a decree issued which directed William Lever, the son, then of full age, either to pay £350 or to convey the lands at Harwood unto the feoffees named for ‘ the new school of Bolton.’ This decree on appeal was confirmed by the court 28 January, 1656-7. The executors then desired and instructed John Harper of Halliwell, clerk, and Robert Lever of Darcy Lever, gentleman, to take upon them the burden, oversight and care of the erection of a new school at Bolton in a certaine place then called the Ashton yard field. On this they spent £250 and the income of the land at Harwood up to Christmas, 1657, £160. This, together with £21 2s. 8d. which James Lever the nephew ‘gave of his own proper money’ and {4 for ‘some flagges [i.e. flag-stones] which were sould,’ and the interesting item of ‘15s, received for quittes [leaving gifts] at leaving of the school,’ showing that the school had been going on at least since the war, made £435 175. 8d., the total cost of the new school. By deeds of lease and release 22 and 26 Feb- ruary, 1657-8-9, the executors declared that they did think fit to make choice and bestow the gifts and legacies . . . by the said Robert Lever . . . for the building and erecting of a new Free Grammar School and endowing the same. It was therefore agreed that the new building intended and then used . . . should for ever there- after continue remain and be to the pleasure of Almighty God employed used and enjoyed for a Free Grammar School in Bolton of the foundation of Robert Lever late of London gentleman deceased. William Lever the younger conveyed the lands in Harwood to sixteen feoffees) among whom were several Levers, upon trust that the income should be paid to the High Schoolmaster and Usher of and in the said New School of and in Bolton aforesaid . . . for or towards the salary and better maintenance of the same High Master and Usher. This is one of many pieces of evidence that the title of high master was in old times frequently interchangeable with that of head, or, as was then more common, chief master, and not, as now, confined in practice to the two schools of St. Paul’s and Manchester. There does not appear to have been any defi- nite conveyance of the old school premises to the new school feoffees. But in the Private Act (1784) to be presently mentioned, it is recited that the old school together with the old revenues and pro- perty have ever since the year 1656 been united to the new school and the revenues and property thereof and the said schools have from time to time been con- sidered in every respect as one and the same school, and the Act definitely vested them in the trustees, The school accounts are extant from 1 June, 1658, and fully bear out the statement in the Act, including several payments made on behalf of the old school (155. 4d. and 4s. for straw, 125. for wood, 11d. for ‘nayles,’ 45. 4d. for ‘ witeninge the ould school’). ‘The title therefore of the present grammar school to date itself as a con- tinuous institution from at least 1524 is un- doubted. These accounts also make it clear that the school was going on before the first entry, which runs :— Imprimis payd to Mr. Dewhurst, scholemaster, in part of his wages, £6. Paid to Mr. Bray, usher, in full of his half yers wages ending 24 June, £6. Paid now to Mr. Bray per Mr. Dewhurste his part, £4 11s. 6d. Paid now to Mr. John Plumb per Mr. Dewhurst his part in full of all the yeare, L4 8s. 6d. ” So that it would appear probable that Dew- hurst, the head master, received £20 and the usher £12 ayear. Dewhurst apparently departed in 1658, and the usher acted as head, for we find ‘Mr. Bray in part of his years wages for teach- inge £9 ; Mr. Bray in full till 24 June, 1659, £10.” £30 was paid ‘ould Mr. Bradshawe to make up his debt, £200,’ probably advanced for building the new school, and Mr. Robert Lever of Darcy Lever lent the money to make up the deficit of £4 5s. 2d. The total income for the two years was £83, so that the endowment was adequate and the salaries up to the usual standard of the period. Bray still continued to act as head master, receiving ‘in full for halfe yeare’s wages now ended and in full of his teaching schole at Bolton £5,’ apparently at Martinmas, 1660. ‘The next master had higher pay, as in 1661 there is ‘paide to Mr. Marsden, scholemaster, by Mr. Andrews in parte of his half yere’s wages £13.’ He was also paid ‘ for a book called Richardson’s Photocryden, which is for use of the schole, 15. 64.’ By Michaelmas Marsden was gone, there being paid to ‘Mr. Robert Boulton, scolemaster, for his quarter wages due £6 10s. The usher at the same time received nearly £14 a year: ‘Mr. Nicholas Leige, second master, a quarter’s salary,’ in December, 1666, £3 6s. 8d. Next year William Stempe was “headmaster,” but received only £20 a year. His ushers were Richard Duckworth to 1670 and then Timothy Dobson. In 1672 Anthony Chester came for half a year, and then William Baldwin, whose salary was £30 a year. Phineas Rothwell held from 1677 to 1682, with John Pendlebury usher, then Mr. Adam Coupe (1682), who at first ‘taughte bothe schooles,’ i.e. both the head master’s and usher’s divisions, and after- wards was assisted by William Yarwood. A school library was added by deed of 10 November, 1686, by the Rev. William Board- 597 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE man, who gave two farms in Little Lever and the tithes therefrom to the trustees, who were to employ the rents for the erecting purchasing and maintaining a library at or in the said school house of the best sort of school books and such other profitable books as they should think fit or necessary. Afterwards they were to pay 40s. a year to the “upper schoolmaster,’ and 20s, to the ‘ usher or under master.’ The residue was to go to maintaining and providing the said library as well with desks, tables, boxes and shelves as also with such other necessary ingenious and profitable books, moral or divine, or for history, mathematics or other learning as the feoffees should decide. A considerable number of the old books ot this library are still preserved. There is no catalogue older than 13 February, 1735, when it contained Scapula’s Lexicon, Cooper’s Dictionary, and Fox’s Martyrs in folio, Littleton’s Dictionary, Bithner’s Lyra, Godwin’s de Presulibus Angle in quarto, Livy, Pliny, Quintilian, Cornelius Nepos, Terence, Juvenal, &c. The only Greek books were Busby’s Greek Grammar, Xenophon, Iso- crates and Hesiod. In 1691, the question having been raised, the feoffees declared their opinion ‘that the freedom of this school doth only extend unto the whole parish of Bolton and no further.’ This was in the time of Mr. John Shelmerdine, who became head master in 1687. In 1704 his salary was raised to £39 6s. 8d. a year and that of the usher to £16 135. 4d. Next year Shelmerdine died and James Bateman was appointed. The age of long head-masterships had now arrived. Bateman held for twenty- one, and his usher, James Horrocks, for thirty- one years. Bateman had the most distinguished pupil the school ever produced in Robert Ainsworth, the author of the Latin Dictionary published in 1736, which, revised by successive editors, remained the standard work until superseded by the Americans, Lewis and Short, in 1870. It is stated in a notice of Ainsworth’s life prefixed to the second edition of the dictionary published in 1746 not only that he was a pupil of the school but that he himself ‘afterwards taught school, in the same town.’ His name cannot be found in the feoffees’ minute book ; probably he was an assistant master directly employed by the head master and not the usher. He afterwards had ‘a considerable boarding school at Bethnal Green,’ then of course a rural suburb, and at Hackney, and died 4 April, 1743, at the age of eighty-three. So that his dictionary, dedicated to Richard Mead, physician of George II, must have been the child, not of his Bolton days, but of his old age. ‘There were several Ains- worths among the school feoffees from 1801 onwards. On Bateman’s retirement through ill-health a pension was provided at the expense of his suc- cessor, Richard Ashburne, who died after nine- teen years’ service in 1744. Joseph Hooley, the first to be called ‘Reverend,’ was appointed at £40 a year, but after two years resigned. ‘Thomas Shaw, B.A., from Blackrod, was appointed in 1747, and acted also as treasurer for forty-one years. His salary was at first £50 a year, ad- vanced in 1775 by £10, the usher also receiving £10 more on condition of teaching such boys as are recommended by any two trustees and the master writing and accounts, which subjects were not to be taught in school hours, The usher at the time was Thomas Boardman, jun., whose father, Thomas Boardman, sen., had pre- ceded him from 1736 to 1771. In 1784, while the head-mastership was vacant after the death of Shaw, the trustees obtained a Private Act of Parliament to enable them to develop the estates. ‘The Act states that the income was then £150 a year, and on dropping in of leases would amount to £200 a year. The Act incorporated the governors, and in the narrow spirit then prevailing provided that only freeholders of £100 a year, part of which should be in Bolton, who were members of the Church of England, should be governors. On the other hand the Act enlarged the curriculum, providing that the master and usher, who were to have not less than £80 and £40 4 year re- spectively, were to teach not only ‘in grammar and classical learning, but also in writing, arith- metic, geography, navigation, mathematics, the modern languages.’ An additional estate was bought under the Act, and according to the report of the Com- mission of 1828 the income had risen to £485 a year. ‘The first master appointed after the Act in 1790 was the Rev. John Lempriere, the famous author of the Classical Dictionary, ‘ with £84 a year and the house in Churchgate, late in the occupation of Mr. Shaw.’ But the governors took to interfering in the management of the school, and in 1792 passed a rule that when the masters had any charge or complaint to make against any of the schoolboys then such masters shall call in 4 of the Trustees who shall hear and determine upon such complaint. The effect of this appears soon after in a minute :— The behaviour of Thomas Smallwood having been extremely impudent and atrocious to the head master and usher, we do direct his expulsion, But this divided jurisdiction could not last, and Lempriere resigned in 1793. The gover- 598 SCHOOLS nors appear to have used the school as a Sunday school, as under the next master, John Atkinson, B.A., it was resolved in 1796 ‘that the Sunday School which has been kept there be removed.’ In 1802, on Atkinson’s death, his post was ad- vertised as worth £90 a year. The Rev. John Wilson was appointed, and in 1808 the salary was raised to £120 and the head master was given sole charge of the school, with the usher under him, and a French master to attend three days a week. But the freedom of the school was insisted on, while the pay of the masters was “not raised proportionately. We thus find a constant succession of new masters, the Revs. . Henry Johnson (1813), Robert Heath (1813-16), William Allen (1816-21), and John Stoddart (1821-3), following one another at short intervals. William Allen, indeed, was an absentee, living at the Old Hall, Peel, and his successor, accord- ing to the usher Lowther Guisdale, planted all the care of the school on him. In 1823 Lowther Guisdale, usher since 1811, was pro- moted to the head-mastership and held office for seventeen years. At the visit of the commis- sioners of inquiry * in 1828 the school was in decay. There were only three masters, the head master receiving £160, the usher £100, and the writing master £75, and the head master and usher eked out their incomes by clerical duty. Thirty boys alone were learning classics, the French master had been discontinued, and there had been no Speech Day since 1824. In 1829 the school received a new endowment in the Popplewell exhibitions, founded by ‘ John Popplewell, a native of this town, but late of Woodford in Essex.’ This endowment was increased by his two sisters, Ann and Rebecca Popplewell, in 1831. The trusts were for university exhibitions at Oxford or Cambridge, and might have been of great benefit to the school if they had been less restricted by con- ditions. The exhibitions were confined to boys who had been three years in the school, ‘ whose parents if living should have resided at least three years in the parish of Bolton,’ which formed a small part of the borough, ‘and who proposed to take a degree . . . in either divinity or law or physics . . . and were members of the church of England.’ This last restriction, in a place which had for centuries been a stronghold of Nonconformity, and in which the great majority of the better class were Nonconformists, proved especially harmful. Only seven boys enjoyed the benefit of the fund, which produced £120 a year in the forty years from 1842 to 1882. An opportunity was offered in 1878, when a new scheme was proposed, of removing these cramping and out-of-date restrictions, but the four governors refused to avail themselves of it. * Char. Com. Rep. xix, 155. In 1844 the Rev. Wentworth Bird and the Rev. Thomas Ireland, usher, both resigned in con- sequence of the examiner’s report. From 1844 to 1882 under the Rev. Diston Stanley Hodgson the school was in a somewhat moribund con- dition. The governors had made new rules in 1858 restricting the number of boys to 80, of whom 36 were free boys, and of boarders to four, and requiring strict observance of Church of England demands, including attendance at church on week days in Lent. This innovation was not authorized by anything in the original foundation. Curiously enough, in 1848, a proprietary school, called the Church of Eng- land Educational Institution, but enforcing no dogmas or attendances at church, had been opened. Being on a better site and in new and ampler buildings, it for some years entirely eclipsed the ancient foundation, all the ‘best people,’ Dissenters as well as Churchmen, send- ing their children there, because it was more select, owing to the absence of free boys. The grammar school site, buildings, rules and education were strongly condemned by Mr. James Bryce in his visit for the Schools Inquiry Commission in 1865. There were only 25 boys in the upper school, and of these 15 alone learnt Latin, and the lower school was practically elementary. Efforts were made by the Charity Com- missioners in 1878 to improve matters by a scheme under the Endowed Schools Acts, but owing to the governors’ opposition to the elimi- nation of the religious disabilities and other pro- visions it was not approved by Queen Victoria in Council till 29 June, 1882. Mr. Hodgson resigned in 1878, and the school was wholly closed in 1880. The old corporation of self- elective governors was dissolved, and a new governing body provided for, including four representatives of the town council and school board. But at first it was dominated by the old governors. Instead of moving the school to an adequate site they merely replaced the old build- ings by new ones at a cost of £4,000. The school was reopened in September, 1883, under the Rev. J. E. Hewison, M.A., of St. John’s College, Cambridge. But it was never a suc- cess. In 1889 there were only 39 boys, though the population was now 115,000. In 1892 a visit by Mr. A. F. Leach as assistant commis- sioner resulted in a new scheme, a new master, the bringing in of new endowment from Na- thaniel Hutton’s Charity, the removal of the school to a new and ample site and the acquisition of new buildings. The new scheme became law 3 March, 1894. Representatives of the Lancashire County Council and the Hutton Charity Trustees were introduced on the governing body. The reorganization of the Hutton Charity, founded (4 February, 1691) by Nathaniel Hutton, 599 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE a Bolton boy, citizen and salter of London, for Protestant lecturers, and the surplus for ‘deeds or works of charity,’ took effect on the same day and was even more beneficial. It had been practically in the hands of Unitarians and had maintained an undenominational elementary school, no longer needed. The scheme now applied three-quarters of the net income to education. Of this sum one-half, ‘not being more than £150 a year,’ was to provide open university exhibitions of not less than £50 a year, tenable at any university, and for which persons disqualified from the Pop- plewell exhibitions were eligible. One-fourth was assigned to the Bolton High School for girls, and the remaining fourth made partly applicable for scholarships in the grammar school. Among the new governors brought in by these schemes was Mr. John Robert Barlow of Greenthorne, Edgeworth, who promptly raised a subscription of £12,100 towards new buildings, Mr. Thomas- son and Mr. William Henry Lever, of Port Sunlight fame, each contributing £5,000, and he himself £1,000. With this sum the new site of g acres in Chorley New Road and the new school building were acquired. On 4 April, 1902, Mr. Lever further gave Broomfield House as a residence for the head master, and Heath Bank as a boarding-house for another master, and by the same deed eight houses in Bolton and two houses in Birkenhead, producing about £400 a year, by way of endowment. He also paid off an overdraft on the school account of over £2,000 and has made large contributions towards equip- ping and furnishing the school. ‘Thus for the second time, probably for the third time, in the history of the school a Lever has come forward as its chief benefactor. The old school was sold to the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Com- pany for the enlargement of their premises for £2,850. Mr. F. H. Matthews was the head master from 1892 to 1899, and, after junction with a private school called the High School in 1897, left about eighty-two boys. Under Mr. Lionel W. Lyde, of Queen’s College, Oxford, assistant master at the Glasgow Academy, the school grew to 153. He passed on to be Professor of Geography at University College, London, in1g03. Mr. William Gull Lipscomb, the present head master, was educated at St. Albans and Norwich Grammar Schools and Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, taking his degree in 1885. He was an assistant master at University College School, London, for twelve years, and head master of the Isleworth County High School from 1901 to 1903. There are now 185 boys in the school under nine assistant masters, including special masters for art, modern languages, and manual training. The tuition fees are from eight to ten guineas, There is now every reason to expect that the school will establish itself permanently in the position it occupied of old. THE CHURCH INSTITUTE SCHOOL, BOLTON LE MOORS Meanwhile the Church Institute, as it is commonly called, has also been financially assisted by Mr. Lever. Under a scheme of the Board of Education in 1906 it was converted from a proprietary into an endowed school, with a governing body on which are representatives of the local education authority and subscribers. It isa dual school for boys and girls at fees of 74 to 10 guineas. The Rev. J. E. Kent, B.A., B.Sc., London, is the head master. There are 200 children and five masters and six mis- tresses. LEYLAND GRAMMAR SCHOOL On g April, 1524,’ Sir Henry Farington de- clared trusts of certain lands, including half- yearly payments out of them to an able and well-disposed priest daily to say and do masses ‘at the awter in St. Nicholas chapell within Leyland church.’ T’wenty-two years later the Chantry Commissioners of Henry VIII found? Thurstane Taylour incumbent of the foundation, ‘by which foundacion the incumbents hereof are bounde to kepe one fre gramer skoyle in the church biforsayde.” The endowment is given as worth £4 5s. gd. clear. The incumbent is reported to ‘kepe a Fre Skoyle accorddinglye.’ The Chantry Commissioners of Edward VI reported in similar terms, adding that Thurstane Taylour was then fifty-two years old. By war- rant 11 August, 1548,° of the Commissioners under the Chantries Act for continuance of schools, &c., the school was continued, and it was ordered that ‘Tristram Taylor scolemaster there shall bee and remayne still in the same roome, and have for his wages yerely £ 3 175. 10d.’ out of the revenues of the Duchy of Lancaster, to which the endowments were confiscated by the Act, and that sum was guaranteed to his successors in the office. This payment was after- wards wrongly attributed to Queen Elizabeth, who got the credit of being the founder of the school.* Why the net value of the endowment as stated by the Chantry Commissioners was not as usual paid to this master does not appear. But it is probable that part of the property was copyhold. Copyholds did not pass to the crown, but reverted to the lord of the manor; and the crown only paid the net income of what it received, The £3 17s. 10d. was further re- duced by office fees to £3 10s. in 1826. But the slender stipend served to keep the institution alive. ’ Raines, Lancs. Chant. (Chet. Soc.). * Leach, Engl. Sch. at the Reform. 117, 121. * Ibid. 124. * Carlisle, End. Gram. Sch. i, 670 ; Char. Com. Rep. xv, 164. 600 SCHOOLS In 1627 Peter Burscough added {100 to the school stock, and other benefactors £130 more. In 1718 the Rev. Thomas Armetridding, for- merly vicar, gave £200, and his widow in 1728 £50, the whole sum amounting in 1746 to £413 lent on bonds. John Brastin by will 19 July, 1792, gave £200. In 1826 the school had become purely elementary and so remained in 1867,° ‘though a boy or two may generally be found learning Latin.’ In 1892 Mr. Arthur Leach visited the school as Assistant Charity Commissioner, and in the result by a scheme under the Endowed Schools Acts, 19 May, 1898, the endowment, including £3 175. 10d. ‘from the Duchy, was made applicable to exhibi- tions tenable at Balshaw’s School, Leyland. This was originally a charity school founded by Richard Balshaw, of Golden Hill in Leyland, by deed of 14 June, 1782, and further endowed by Ellen Fisher by deed 10 July, 1829. Bya scheme of 19 May, 1898, this school, with an endowment of about £375, was made a second- ary school for boys, and, if the governors think fit, for girls also. The disastrous experiment of setting up an independent girls’ school was tried by the governors, against the advice of the commissioners. It proved a failure and a loss, and was discontinued after about three years. The grammar school now flourishes as a mixed school, with 116 scholars—63 boys and 53 girls —paying tuition fees of £4 a year, under Mr. F. Jackson, an elementary schoolmaster, with two assistant masters and two assistant mistresses. THE BOTELER GRAMMAR SCHOOL, WARRINGTON ! Warrington Grammar School was founded by Sir Thomas Boteler, knt., of Bewsey, whose family had held lands near Warrington from a date very shortly after the Norman Conquest, while he himself fought at Flodden. His will, dated 16 August, 1520, states that he had ‘delyverit into the custody and kepyng of the righte reverende Father in God John Abbotte of Whalley fyve hundrethe markes in golde,’ and continues :— It is my full will and mynde that my executors should have the disposicion and orderyng of the said sume to purchase and obteyne lands tenements or rentes to the yerely value of ten pounds above all charges or as myche thereof as should be unprovidett and purchasede by him and therewith to found a fre gramer scole in Weryington to endure for ever and to susteyne and beire the charges of the same and the residue . . . to dispose for his soule and his wyffe’s soule. My executors durying theire severall lyves and after theire decease my heires from tyme to tyme shall ° Schools Ing. Rep. xviii, 306. ' Trans, Hist. Soc. Lancs. and Ches. viii (Lond. 1856), 515; Baines, Hist. of Lancs. iii, 674 ; Char. Com. Rep. xx, 166. denominate name and appoynt an honeste preste, groundely lernede in gramer, to be maister of the said scole, whiche shall say masse pray and do dyvine ser- vice at the paroche churche of Weryngton for [the souls of him and his family], and all statuts and ordinaunces concernyng the fundacion of the saide scole shall be made and stablysshede by [him and his executors]. A codicil, 27 February, 1522, recites that his trusty servaunts, Sir William Plumtre and Rauf Alyn, at his costs and charges to his use and to the performance of his last will had purchased certen messuages lands and tenements in Tyldesley and Weryngton. Sir Thomas died 27 April, 1522. The foun- dation of the school was effected by an indenture of 16 April, 1526, to which the schoolmaster, Sir? Richard Taylor, among others, was a party. After a preamble to the effect that there was a scarcity of schools in Lancashire, where men’s sons might learn grammar and to live godly and virtuous lives, that perchance they might happen to be the very clear lanthorn of good example in virtuous living to all the country thereabouts to the good encrease and use of vertue and expulsion of all vices, the indenture grants a house in Warrington and an adjoining croft as the schoolhouse of War- rington, and lands in Lancashire and Cheshire are vested in the feoffees to the use of the school- master. ‘Statutes and Ordinances of the said Free School’ were then set out :— First it is ordeynd that the said schoolmaister shall teach any scholar coming to the said school after Wittington’s Grammar® and making or after such Form and Grammar which shall be most used to be taught hereafter in Free Grammar Schools and the same to be taught freely and quietly without taking any Reward Stipend or Schole-hire or any other thing by Promise grant or covenant before made, any‘ Feriall day, except three Feriall days next before the Feasts of the Nativity of our Lord God, Easter and Pentecost, and other three Feriall days next after the said Feasts, except the school-master shall happen to have any reasonable let or impedi- ment. Provided alwais that it shall be lawfull to the school-master and any other school-master for the time being to take of any scholar of the said school learning grammar four pennys by year that is to say in the Quarter next after Christmas A cock penney and in any of the three other Quarters in the year one Pota- tion Penny and for the same Potation pennys that the said schoolmaster for the time being shall make A Drinking for all the said Scholars in any of the said three Quarters in the year. 2 Sir. of course, translates dominus, the clerical title. 3 Robert Whittington, head master of Magdalen College School, author of numerous grammatical works printed by Wynkyn de Worde and Pynson from 1513 to 1522. ; ‘Any,’ probably ‘every’ as is noted in the Trans. 58. 2 601 76 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Apart from the above-mentioned holidays, the scholars were allowed to play on Thursday after- noons except in weeks when a holy day occurred, but on other days only ‘at the Request or Desire of A great Worshipfull man.’ The school- master was to help in the services of Warrington church on Sundays, and scholars were to attend the church on Sundays, Wednesdays, and Fridays, to join in the Litany or other services of the day. All were to attend the church between six and seven of the clock in the morning and there shall say such Prayers as shall be lymyted and written on A table to be hanged in Botelers’ Chappell within the said Church: then immediately after that they shall go to the said school house and shall depart thence at five of the clock in the afternoon or by four at the discretion of the said schoolmaster. These were the winter hours : the summer hours began ‘between five and six of the clock,’ and attendance at the church was enjoined in the evening upon dismissal. The schoolmaster was daily to appoint one of his most advanced scholars to teach the beginners. No scholar was allowed to ‘wear any Dagger, Hangar or other weapon invasive other than his knife to cut his meat with ;’ all were to be gener- ally obedient to the master, and when called upon ‘to give their help and Assistance to the correction of every scholar of the said Free School.’ Scholars were to speak Latin and no English to one another after twelve months’ attendance at the school, and were forbidden to ‘use Diceing or Carding or any other unlawful games.’ Directions follow for an obit or anniversary of the founder on 27 April ‘at the cost of the scoolemasters for the tyme being,’ with eight priests and £ 10 singing clerks or schollers,’ and the bellman to announce it with peals of bells and to ‘deal an alms,’ and for a whole trental of masses yearly. In 1546° the Chantry Commissioners of Henry VIII reported ‘Butler Chauntrie . Robert Halle prest incumbent . . . to celebrate there for the sowles of him [Sir Thomas Butler] and his ancestors,’ and in 1548 the Commissioners of Edward VI® followed suit, adding that Robert Halle was ‘70 yeres, a man decrepit and lame of his lymmes,’ receiving £4 10s. 5d. a year. This chantry was confiscated and Robert Halle pensioned, The chantry held by Hall was not the school foundation, as appears from the will of ‘Sir William Plumtre, priest,’ Butler’s executor (15 September, 1545),’ by which he gave ‘To maister Boteler’s chappell within the parish church . . , 6s. 8d. and that to be disposede by the skolemaister ° Raines, Lancs. Chant. (Chet. Soc. 1862), i, 57. * Leach, Engl. Schools at the Reformation, 119, from Duchy of Lanc. Div. xviii, vol. 26, B, fol. $. ” Raines, Lancs. Chant. (Chet. Soc.), i, 60 2. there and Sir Robert Hall.’ In spite of the elaborate chantry provisions in the foundation deed the school escaped inclusion in the Chantry Certificates and confiscation as a chantry, and Sir Richard Taylor, who appeared in 1547 at Bishop Bird’s visitation as curate, is said to have held the mastership of the school till 20 December, 1569 at least. But in Elizabeth's reign Margaret, wife of John Mainwaring, one of the co-heiresses of the founder, secured possession of nearly all the school lands, partly undera grant from Queen Elizabeth as chantry lands concealed from the crown, partly under a lease from Sir Thomas Gerard, the last surviving feoffee, and partly by collusion with the master. In 1602 Sir Peter Warburton, a judge of the Common Pleas, who had married the other co-heiress, began a suit for the recovery of the property, with the result that arbitrators were appointed who arranged that the Mainwarings during the life of the said Margaret, and after her decease Thomas Ireland, the owner of the manor of Warrington, and his heirs should appoint the master, ‘in consideration whereof Treland shall pay and bestow to and for the repairs of the said school the sum of {10 and to the said John Mainwaring £20.’ From the future ad- ministration of the trust estates the master was excluded. In 1610 new statutes were made which reduced the school hours to ‘three hours att the least in the forenoon and three hours att the least in the afternoon.’ Sir Peter Warburton further granted a rent-charge of {5 per annum from a messuage in Chester, which is still received by the trustees. In 1677 proceedings were taken against the tenants of the school lands, who claimed a re- newal of their leases at the almost nominal rents they were then paying. Most of them submitted to take leases at rack rent. Samuel Shaw, who succeeded to the master- ship, in 1687 made improvements to the master’s house, and recovered some lands for the school which had been regarded as lost. He held the rectory of Warrington with the head-master- ship, and was afterwards king’s preacher in Lan- cashire. After John Tatlock’s licence had been refused by the bishop in March, 1719-20, the Rev. Thomas Hayward was appointed. He held for thirty-seven years. In 1757 came the Rev. Edward Owen, usher of Great Crosby School. Owen made the house fit for boarders. A trans- lation of Juvenal and Persius and a Latin Gram- mar brought him some reputation. He held for no less than half a century. On his death in 1807 the Rev. Robert Rawstorne was appointed. Becoming also rector, he left his usher, the Rev. William Boardman, in entire charge of the school. The inhabitants of Warrington objected and procured a decree from the Court of Chancery in 1810, declaring that the offices of rector and head master were incompatible, and that Mr. Raw- storne had vacated the school on becoming rector. 602 SCHOOLS The usher, Mr. Boardman, was appointed in his lace. : Under his successor, the Rev. Thomas Bayne, the school recovered its prestige. In 1829 anew school was built with accommodation for 120 boys. Mr. Bayne was, in 1842, succeeded by the Rev. Henry Bostock. In 1862 further rebuilding took place. The Rev. O. H. Cary next held the ‘ post for nearly twenty years (1863-80). He resigned on the coming into operation of a new ' scheme under the Endowed Schools Acts (6 Sep- tember, 1880). The present head master, the Rev. E. J. Willcocks, of St. Catharine’s College, Cambridge, 39th Wrangler in 1869, who had, since 1871, been second master, was appointed in 1881. Much enlargement has taken place during his tenure of office. With five assistant masters, he has over 120 boys. “The tuition fees are {12 ayear. There are two exhibitions of £30 and one of £50 a year tenable at Oxford or Cambridge, and eight scholarships tenable in the school. ST. MICHAELS-UPON-WYRE : GRAMMAR SCHOOL A school which was cut off in the flower of its youth was that of St. Michaels-upon-Wyre, a parish which stretches for rz miles north of Preston and east of Kirkham. This wasa chantry school, thus reported by the Chantry Commis- sioners+ of Henry VIII: The Chauntrie in the paroch church of St. Myghell upon Wyre. Willyam Harrison, preist, Incumbent there, of the foundacion of John Butler, to celebrate there in the saide church for his sowle and all chrysten sowles and the incumbent thereof to teache gramer skole. The same is at the altar of Saynt Katherine and the same preyst doth celebrate there and kepe gramer skole accordinglie. Sum totall of the rentall £5 15s. 8d. Reprises 55,7 and so remanyth over £5 10s. 82. The Certificate of the Commissioners of Ed- ward VI is to the same effect. The John Butler who founded this chantry seems to have been the one who died 28 April, 1533. The Butlers had been settled since at least the early fourteenth century at Rawcliffe Hall. By deed,’ 3 December, 1528, John But- ler had enfeoffed Sir Alexander Osbaldeston, knt., Sir Henry Farrington, knt., and others of his estates in Out Rawcliffe and elsewhere to the uses of his will, in which he says : Whereas I the said John Butler have afore this tyme begon to make and estable a chauntry and servyce at Leach, Engl. Schools at the Reformation, 118. * It appears from the Ministers’ Accounts in 1549 that this 5s. was for the jointure of the wife of Robert Stannal from land at Stannal forming part of the endowments. * Henry Fishwick, Hist. of Parish of St. Michaels-on- Wyre (Chet. Soc. New Ser. 1891), 54. the church of Seynt Michel upon Wyre and have appropriated the same chauntry to the altar of Saynt Katheryn within the said church, which chauntry and servyce is not yet fully fynysshed according to the fundaccons of the said chauntry, therefore I the said John Butler will and declare that the foresaid feoffees shall stand and be seised of after my decease certain parts of the said premises of the yerely value of 5 marks above all charges. The feoffees were to accumulate the income till they had 40 marks and then to buy land worth £1 65. 8d. a year, if he did not during his life finish the said chantry. It may be doubted whether the testator was not merely augmenting an existing chantry, as £1 6s. 8d. would have been only a quarter of the endowment. Mr. Fishwick conjectures* that the chantry was in honour of Katherine, second wife of Nicholas Boteler, living in 1440, great-great-great-grand- father of John. But as she died sine prole this is not probable. The dedication to St. Katherine was a very common one for a grammar school chantry, as she was the mediaeval equivalent of Lady Jane Grey, and supposed to have been past mistress of the ‘seven liberal sciences.’ The chantry is at the east end of the north aisle. Mr. Fishwick says ‘the latter part of his [the chantry priest’s] duties could hardly have been per- formed, as there was no school of that description then in the parish, or if there was, all subsequent trace of it is lost.’ But in view of the express finding by the two sets of commissioners that the foundation was duly observed, it is idle to assert that it was not. Moreover, the Schools Contin- uance Commissioners, finding that ‘a Grammer scole hathe beene continually kept in the parish .. with the revenues of the chauntry of St. Katherine,’ directed by a warrant of 11 August, 1548, that the Grammer scole in the said parish . . . shall continue. And that William Harrison, scolemaster there, shall continue in the same rowme and have for his wages yearly {5 10s. The chantry lands were leased by Queen Elizabeth in 1595 to the then owner of Raw- cliffe, Henry Butler, a recusant, and in 1606 the fee simple was acquired by him. In 1641-2, among those who refused to sign the solemn declaration to maintain the Protestant religion against all Popish innovations was ‘Richard Fletcher, schoolmaster.’ WINWICK SCHOOL? The Free Grammar School here was founded by Gwalter Legh, in the time of Henry VII, who gave {10 a year. Sir Peter Legh, in 1619, added a like sum, having previously pro- vided a building. A hundred years later another Peter Legh, of Lyme, substituted an annual pay- * Ibid. 53 2. 1 Char. Com. Rep. 603 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE ment of £24 for the two earlier benefactions. This £24, with another £10, made the income in 1828 £34. The school in the seventeenth century sent boys to the universities. In 1865 it was asmall boarding-school, but it came to an end in 1890, and the endowment has been com- bined with that of the Dean School in Newton erected in 1699 and endowed by John Stirrup, which also received part of the endowment of Lowton School, founded in 1751. Out of the funds exhibitions tenable at secondary or tech- nical schools have been established. WHALLEY GRAMMAR SCHOOL? The grammar school which had long existed in Whalley was continued in 1548 by warrant of the Commissioners under the Chantries Act of Edward VI dated 20 July, 1548, and the master, William Thurlow, was also continued with a stipend of £13 16s. 8d. to be paid out of the crown revenues of the Duchy, the endow- ments of the school as a chantry school being confiscated. The payment, which had ceased during Queen Mary’s reign, was revived by a decree of the Exchequer in Michaelmas term, 1571, for the benefit of Peter Carter, then master, and his successors. The master was appointed by the inhabitants of the parish of Whalley, but in later years the seven townships of the parish other than that of Whalley came to be excluded. Whalley was one of the three Lancashire grammar schools (Middleton and Burnley being the others) to which Dean Nowell left an en- dowment, since lapsed, for thirteen scholarships of 5 marks apiece (£3 65. 8d.) at Brasenose Col- lege, Oxford. John Chewe, about 1629, gave {10 and Sir Edmund Assheton £70, which sums were in 1771 invested in land at Great Harwood. In 1825, under the Rev. Richard Noble, the school was still a grammar school, though there were only 12 boys. The present buildings were erected in 1725. By three schemes under the Endowed Schools Act, 3 August 1886, certain other charities contributed some £700 to im- proving the buildings, and a representative govern- ing body was constituted. The average number of boys in attendance is 25. The endowment is now £55 15. 8d. KIRKHAM GRAMMAR SCHOOL ® This school was already in existence in 1551, when Thomas Clifton of Westby left ‘towards the grammar scole xxs,’? On 19 September, Char. Com. Rep. xv, 52. © Baines, Hist. of Lancs. iv, 389 ; Fishwick, Hist. of ae (Chet. Soc. xcii), 135 ; Char. Com. Rep. xi, 236. * Piccope, Lancs. Wills (Chet. Soc. liv), 76. 1551, at a meeting of the ‘thirty men,’ a kind of select vestry, it was agreed that 40s. taken out of the [parish] clerk’s wages should be paid to the schoolmaster, and that four of the thirty men, in the name of the rest, take possession of the schoolhouse in right of the whole parish. One Richard Wilkins, ‘now schoolmaster,’ was placed in the house ‘ for one whole year and longer, at his and their liking.’ A manuscript entitled ‘A brief relation touch- ing the Free School lately erected at Kirkham, its beginning, progress and miscarrying, truly related,’ now lost, but a copy of which was taken by William Langton about 1798, is a chief source of information. It tells how ‘Isabell Bireley (sic), wife of Thomas Birley, born in Kirkham, daughter of John Coulbron, an ale house keeper all her life and through that imployment attayned to a good personall estait, being moved with a naturall compassion to pore children,. . . in the yeare 1621, having gotten a good stock of money into her hands,’ repaired to the church where ‘the thirty men of the parish being assembled with £30 in her aporon, telling them that she had brought that money to give it towards the erecting of a free schole for pore children, to be taught gratis, . . . wishing them to take it and consider of it, [as] they were . . . the most like persons to move their several townshipps to contribute everyone something ’ towards the accomplishment of so charitable a work, ‘and not doubting but their good ex- amples in their contributions would be a strong motive to excite others. This was thankfully accepted and. .. everyone was forward to promote it, especially Mr. John Parker, of Bredkirk, one of that companie, being at that tyme one of the earl of Derbie’s gentlemen and somewhat alyed to the said Isabell. He forwarded it very much, sparing neither his paynes of body nor his purse ; for that end he traveled all the parish over to every particular towne and house, earnestly persuading them to contribuit’ to so good a use. ‘Sir Cuthbert Clifton gave [20’; other gentlemen £26, and altogether a total amount of £170 145. was secured. With this sum either a new school was built or the old one altered and enlarged. Thomas Armestead was elected schoolmaster, chiefly through the influence of Isabell Birley. About 1628 he was succeeded by one Sokell. Hitherto the school had been controlled by the ‘thirty men ;’ but now the above-mentioned subscribers, who were Romanists, thought that they ought to take a share in the management. The ‘thirty men,’ being in some way depend- ent on them, retired from the management with one exception : ‘only Mr. Parker he joined in with them.’ Isabell Birley and her friends accordingly appealed to the bishop, who made the follow- ing order for the future election of feoffees : Apud Wigan, 31 July, 1628. That the whole parish or so many as shall appear at some day prefixed. . . shall elect six or nine lawful 604 SCHOOLS and honest men feofees,. . . whereof a third part to be chosen by the towne of Kirkham and the other two parts by the parishioners generally, of which feofees Isabell Wilding’s* husband and her heirs, because she gave 30/, to the schole maister, shall be one. The next few years are noteworthy only for petty disputes between the Romanist and Pro- testant sections of the governing body. In 1636 the head master, Hugh Whaley, was locked out of the school by the vicar, Mr. Fleetwood, who suspected him of Papistry. The vicar incurred a sharp rebuke from his bishop, who characterized him as a ‘sillie wilful man.’ During the Civil Wars the school was closed for three years ; Mr. Whaley declined to continue teaching. When Prince Rupert and ‘the rear of his army was gone out of the county,’ new feoffees were chosen and the school was reopened. The feoffees purchased the rents of the king’s revenue, called the chantry rents of the parish of Kirkham and St. Michael’s, which came to {11 8s. a year... anda {10 rent out of the Eaglford parish in Blackburn. When the king came to the throne again this investment was lost, and on 19 September, 1661, a subscription was begun among the parishioners to replace it. Ata metropolitical visitation (date unknown) held at Kirkham the churchwardens presented that there is a school in Kirkham which in former years was free, but now is not, for the pension and stipend due to it was not well and godly used, according to the foundation and true intent of the founders of it : £280 was given by the parishioners and the interest thereof was for ever to go towards the schoolmaster’s wages; but the feoffees. . . goeth and layeth out £220 of the school stock in purchasing the king’s rent and so lost it. In 1655 Henry Colbourne of London, scrivener, a native of Kirkham, directed his trustees to purchase a lease of the rectory of Kirkham and to invest the profits of the first six- teen years in lands to maintain schools, &c ; these were eventually purchased in London in 1673, were settled on the Drapers’ Company in accordance with the terms of the will, and £69 10s. was secured for the school, of which £45 went to the head master, £16 105. to the second master, and £8 to the usher. The head master was to be ‘a university man and obliged to preach once a month at least in the parish church or insome of the chapels.’ A decree in Chancery of this date provided that the township of Kirk- ham should keep the buildings in repair and that the Drapers’ Company should have the appoint- ment of the masters. The Rev. James Barker in 1670 left some £500 to be laid out in the purchase of land 5 Isabell Birley had married a second time. yielding an annual rental of £30, of which the master was to have £10 ‘ for his better encourage- ment,’ while the sum of £12 a year was to be paid as an ‘exhibition or allowance to such a poor scholar of the towneas shall then be admitted to the university.’ In 1725 William Grimbaldson, M.D., left £400 for the benefit of the head master, provided he were ‘ascholar bred at West- minster, Winchester or Eton and a master of arts :’ otherwise the money was to be expended in binding apprentices. Dr. Grimbaldson also left the interest upon £50 to the school for the purchase of classical books. These bequests and the prudence of the trustees restored the endow- ment to a condition of comparative opulence. At the present time the school is administered under a scheme approved by Queen Victoria in Council 19 May, 1898, as a second-grade grammar school. ‘There are some 50 boys in attendance. The present head master, the Rev. J. C. Walton, M.A., is the twenty-third occupant of the post. PENWORTHAM ENDOWED SCHOOL On 22 September, 1552, Christopher Walton of Little Hoole granted to thirteen trustees all his property in Kirkham, Kellamergh, and Pres- ton, to the intent that all the rents and profits should be applied to the maintenance of a person to keep a grammar school for all the poor child- ren in the parish of Penwortham, who should teach both young children in the ‘ Absay (A B C), catechism, primer, accidence,’ and others in grammar without school hire, except cockpence to be paid twice a year. This school is situate in the township of Hutton, and is called Hutton School. The original annual income was £2 135. 6d., now by increased value of land £635 155. 1d. The Court of Chancery in 1823 sanctioned a scheme allowing three mas- ters. Previously the trustees had supported an elementary school at Farington; this was con- tinued, a new elementary school was built at Cop Lane in Penwortham, and assistance was also extended to free schools in Longton and Howick. By a scheme of the Charity Commis- sioners of 1876 the Hutton School was to be called the Middle School, and to be open to scholars between the ages of 7 and 16. The curriculum was to include Latin, at least one modern language, and science. The buildings were extended in 1880 and 1892. CLITHEROE GRAMMAR SCHOOL The Free Grammar School, standing in the churchyard, was founded by Queen Mary, 29 August, 1554. The endowment, consisting of lands and the rectorial tithes of the parish of Almondbury in York, and of certain messuages, burgages, and lands in the district of Craven in the same county, yielded the clear annual rent of 605 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE ‘xx/, and xxd.’ In 1829 the school was removed from the churchyard and rebuilt stone for stone on its present site. About 50 boys attend the school, and the present endowment amounts to £433 per annum, There is a project on foot for the erection of new buildings. ROCHDALE GRAMMAR SCHOOL? The rectories of ‘Blacborne, Rachedale, and Whalley,’ formerly appropriated to the abbey of Whalley, together with the chapels annexed, having come to Matthew [Parker], afterwards archbishop of Canterbury, the rectorial tithes were leased to Sir John Byron, who, amongst other conditions, engaged to pay an annual sti- pend to each of the ministers performing divine service in the chapels of the said parishes. As he failed to fulfil this part of the agreement, the archbishop brought him into court. After a protracted and costly litigation, Sir John Byron cast himself upon the clemency of the archbishop, who adjudged that he should, over and above his rent and the stipends to be paid to the ministers, pay £17 a year for the maintenance of school- masters of a free grammar school to be founded in Rochdale in the archbishop’s name. The £17 a year was to be charged upon the tithes of the parish in perpetuity. The school was accordingly founded by deed of the archbishop, (1 January, 1564-5), covenanting with Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, and the vicar and churchwardens of Rochdale, the vicar having on 4 November, 1462, already given a plot of vicar- age land for the schoolhouse. It was required that not fewer than 50 nor more than 150 boys should be taught by the masterand usher. The endowment was augmented by Dr. Chadwick in 1682 (£3), Jeremy Hargreaves in 1696 (£20), James Holt in 1712 (£100), and also by Mary Shepherd (part of £120). Dr. Samuel Radcliffe in 1648 left {40 a year in land at Harrowden, Bedfordshire, to two scholars of the schools of Steeple Aston in Oxfordshire, of Rochdale or of Middleton in Lancashire, or to any of the undergraduates of Brasenose College who were unpreferred,° In 1814, when the rectory of Rochdale was sold under an Act of Parliament obtained by Arch- bishop Manners Sutton, £1,300 consols were purchased for the benefit of the schoolmaster and usher, and for other pyrposes. In 18254 the whole endowment amounted to £36 145. a year, and the Rev. William Hodgson was master with 16 boys and some girls. In 1866° Mr. James * Baines, Hist. of Lancs. iii, 49; F. R. Raines, Memorials of Rochdale Grammar School (Rochdale, 1845). ? Harl. MS. cod. 7049, fol. 271. * Carlisle, Endowed Schools, i, 719. ‘ Char. Com. Rep. xix, 267. ® Schesis Ing. Rep. xvil, 390. Bryce, as assistant commissioner to the Schools Inquiry Commission, reported that the school consisted of 40 boys receiving a commercial education, which meant elementary mathematics, bad Latin, and some geography and _ history. The school had been rebuilt in 1864 and had room for 80 or 100. It has now seemingly disappeared, while the funds of the Free English School, founded by Jane Hardman, 12 April, 1769, to give ele- mentary education to poor children, was by a scheme under the Endowed Schools Acts, (16 May, 1893) converted into an endowment for exhibitions tenable at secondary schools, Manchester Grammar School being specially mentioned. RIVINGTON AND BLACKROD GRAM- MAR SCHOOL? Rivington Grammar School was founded in 1566 by James Pilkington, bishop of Durham, who obtained letters patent from Queen Elizabeth for the school to be called the Free Grammar School of Queen Elizabeth, with licence in mortmain up to £30 a year. Bishop Pilkington drew up elaborate statutes. The meetings of the governors were to open with prayer, and absentees were to be fined 25. They promised not to suffer the teaching of popery, superstition or false doctrine in the school, but ‘only of that which is contained in the Holy Bible and agreeing therewith.’ When any learned man cometh to the Church or near hand, the governors shall desire him to examine the Schoolmaster and Usher in learning and religion, . and also to try and appose the Scholars .. . One day of the first week of every quarter . . . the Governors all shall. . . come jointly to the School there to learn and examine what Scholars have best profited in learning ; and them that have done well they shall praise and set him above his fellows in the same form . . . orelse, if they find it meet, they shall remove him higher by the master’s consent to another form ; and he that is found to have done best of all the school, shall have authority to get his fellows licence to play once in the term . . . the meaner sort they exhort and encourage to ply their books. . . but those that be dulards, unthrifts, runaways, negligent . . thesethey shall see corrected with the rod, as the faults shall deserve, if the offender be under sixteen years old, or else with some open punishment to make him ashamed, as to sit in the midst of the school alone, . . . where his fellows may finger and point at him; or to keep him in school when others do play or to get rods for correcting of other his fellows or holding them up that shall be beaten or bear the rods on high before his fellows to the Church at service time. . . But if he be above correcting with the rod, then shall they, with the advice of the : Baines, Hist. of Lanes. iii, §9. School Statutes, ed. Septimus Tebay (Preston, 1864.) A large number of documents relating to the two schools are still unread. 606 SCHOOLS schoolmaster, appoint him to declare and confess his faults in English openly first before all the school and afterwards to write a declaration in Latin against such faults as he is found guilty in ; and he that is too sturdy to take these corrections shall be banished without any further bearing with him. The governors were to see that a register containing the names of the scholars was kept as well as a record of their after careers. As to the scholars : No kind of staff dagger nor weapon shall they wear, except a penknife ; nor go tothe fencing school ; but their chief pastime shall be shooting and that in honest company and small game or none for money. At meat they should not be full of talk, but rather hear what their elders and betters say: if they be asked a question they shall reverently take off their cap and answer with as few words as may be ; they shall not eat greedily nor lye on the table slovenly. The school hours were of the length usual, from 6 to 12 a.m. and from 1 to6 p.m. The terms were from the first Monday after Easter week to the Saturday before Midsummer Day ; then, after a break of ten days, until the Saturday before Michaelmas Day ; after a further interval of ten days until St. Thomas’s Even, before Christmas Day ; and from the day following Twelfth Day until the Wednesday next before Easter. Some few days in these terms were special holidays. The master and usher were to divide their scholars into forms: ‘commonly either of them may teach three forms and ten or twelve in every form.’ Great stress is laid upon oral Latin teaching. Erasmus’s and Petrarch’s Dialogues are recommended, with continual practice in the formation of sentences. After this your scholars may be brought to the reading of Terence his Adephi or Selectae Epistolae Ciceronis, and then to some verse as Psalmi Buchannini, Epistolae Ovidii or Ode Horatii. Verse writing is to be practised. The Greek Grammar is then to be begun and the first texts prescribed are Tabula Cebetis, Isocrates and Euripides. Latin was to be spoken on all occasions, In 1577, Rye Barnes, appoynted Bysshoppe of Dureham, did deteyne and with-hold from the feoffees suche copi- holde landes within his diosseces as was geven by his late predecessor, and the feoffees in defence thereof weare urged to suche expenses as followeth. In 1612 commissioners appointed by the court in a Chancery suit reported that the number of scholars had greatly diminished, ‘and alsoe the accompts shewed unto us are kepte looselie in scatteringe papers and not entered as they ought to be.? In 1616 investigations showed that the master, John Ainsworthe, and the usher had been guilty of embezzling the school income by means of forged letters of attorney. They were dismissed. In 1626 the school was repaired, and in 1639 a lawsuit concerning the payment of a rent-charge was so costly that, as stated by counsel, ‘the school was utterly ruined and deserted both by master and scholars.’ In 1714 the governors were able to rebuild the school out of surplus income. In 1789 they built houses for the masters from the same source. In 1827 some of the original school property in Durham was sold and an estate purchased at Wheelton near Rivington. The income at that date was £308 gs. 8d. In 1873 the school was united with the Blackrod Gram- mar School and in 1881 the endowment was re-organized by a scheme under the Endowed Schools Acts, the old building being converted into an elementary school and the existing school erected at the Horwich end of the township. The present head master, Mr. E. J. Bonnor, was appointed in 1904, and the numbers in attendance, about thirty, have been increased by the re-organization of the school as a dual school with the support of the Lancashire County Council. BLACKROD SCHOOL By will dated 18 September 1568 ‘John Homes, cytyzen and weyver’ of London, left certain tenements in London and a rent-charge of £8 on these to be employed by trustees upon a lerned and dyscrete Scolemaster which shall Teache affree gramar Scole within the Towne of Blackrode in the churche there or as nere unto yt as they shall thynk mete. He also left £5 for a scholarship to Pembroke Hall, Cambridge ; in 1829 this had accumulated to £2,574 6s. 6d. in 3 per cent. consols. Elizabeth Tyldesley left rents to the school in 1627 amounting to £140 4s. It was united with Rivington School in 1873. BURNLEY SCHOOL! There was a chantry of St. Peter in Burnley church endowed with copyhold lands of which in 1548 the Chantry Commissioners found ‘Summe totall of the rentall . . . . iitj 4. xitjs. iiijd. Reprisez none. Gilbert Fayrbank, incum- bent,’ who had held at least from 1535, when he was assessed to a subsidy, ‘of the age 66 years.” ‘These lands were confirmed by the manorial courts of Higham in 6 Edward VI and of Ightenhill in 5 Elizabeth, with the consent of royal commissioners, for the use of Gilbert Fairbank for life, and after his death for the use of a schoolmaster and the support of a free grammar school in Burnley. It is pretty certain therefore ? that under him the chantry was not a 1 Lancs. Chant. (Chet. Soc. lix), 150. ? Baines, Hist. of Lancs. ili, 373. 607 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE school. After his death (January, 1566) a parva aula belonging to the chantry priest of St. Mary’s altar, on the west side of the churchyard, now taken down, was used for the schoolhouse tll 1693, when a new school was erected on a site in North Parade given by Robert Parker of Entwisle. In 1872 the school was again rebuilt. Gifts were made to the school in 1558 by Richard Woodruffe and John Ingham; a farm in Yorkshire was bequeathed by the Rev. Oates Sagar before the close of the sixteenth century. In the seventeenth century the brothers Towne- ley were benefactors. In 1862 the income was £276. The school had a claim to Dean Nowell’s exhibitions at Brasenose College, Oxford, ? now lapsed. The school possesses a valuable library, the bequest of the Rev. Henry Halsted, rector of Stansfield in Suffolk, probably a former pupil, by his will dated 5 August, 1728. At the present time the school is in course of being ‘ municipalized’ by a scheme of the Board of Education. URSWICK GRAMMAR SCHOOL? (NEAR ULVERSTON) Urswick Grammar School was founded by William Marshall of Lambeth, of the ancient family of Marshall, by his will dated 15 July, 1579, and proved 20 January, 1579-80. I geve to the saide Christofer Mershall the occupacion of my personage of Blewbery in the countie of Berk for the terme of five yeres next after my decease and payenge yearelie duringe the saide tearme tenne poundes to Edmond Sargeant And after thende of the saide tearme of fyve years I will thoccupacion of the saide personage to the same Christofer Mershall for the terme of tenne yeres more payenge yearelie to my sisters Margarett and Agnes £20 to eyther of them The reasidue of the proffitts of the saide personage to be ymployed towardes the makinge findinge and erectinge of a freescole eyther in Little Urswicke in the countie of Lancaster or in Morchehadm aforesaid at his discreation with the consent of the said nowe Archebisshoppe of Canter- burye and of my Supervisors hereafter in this will mencioned, the stipende of the Scholemaster to be yerelie fiftene poundes, as also of three scollershipps in the uniuersitie of Cambridge, that is to saye Pembroke Hall, Clarehall and Jesue Colledge to everye of them fyue markes yerelie for ever The maintenance of the saide scole and the schollershipps to be also taken out of the yssues and proffitts of all that moyetie of the manor of Brantingthorp in the countie of Leicester which I latelie purchased in the saide Christofer’s name to the use afore expressed and the saide Scollershippes to be for Lancashire, ° See supra, 576-7, 604. : Baines, Hist. of Lancs. iv, 654 will and letters patent in the possession of the school authorities. Cumberland, Hertfordshier, and Essex, and that those scollers shalbe alwayes admitted to the saide Scoller- shipps which shall come out of thaforeproposed scole yf they be apte thereto. Letters patent were granted six years later by Queen Elizabeth for a grammar school in the parish for the education, institution, and instruction of boys and youths, to be called the Free Gram- mar School of Queen Elizabeth of the foundation of William Marshall. The vicars of Urswick seem generally to have acted as masters of the grammar school. Apart from this fact little or nothing is known of the early history of the school; no records or registers were kept until its re-organization under the Charity Commissioners about sixty years ago, when the school became a public elementary school, though it retains the old title of Urswick Grammar School. HAWKSHEAD GRAMMAR SCHOOL? This school was founded by Edwin Sandys, archbishop of York and a native of the parish, under letters patent 10 April, 1585, as the Free Grammar School of Edwin, archbishop of York. The master’s salary was originally {20 and the usher’s £3 6s. 8d. The endowment consisted of a house and land for the master in Hawkshead and of lands and houses near Wake- field and Doncaster, and some ground-rents near Kendal. A suit in Chancery begun in 1832 for the recovery of some property at Hawkshead came to a successful issue in 1835, and on 6 July, 1838, a new scheme approved by the Master of the Rolls was established. In 1863 the Charity Commissioners divided the school into the gram- mar or upper school and the English or lower school, the latter to be carried on in the National School in course of erection. In 1891 the endowment of the lower school was severed by a further scheme of the Commissioners. “The poet Wordsworth and Lord Brougham, with other eminent men, received their early training at the school. ‘There are now six boys in at- tendance. The school possesses a library consisting of books given by the will (19 August, 1719) of the Rev. Thomas Sandys, together with others pur- chased with the interest of a bequest of £1,000 made by him, and with gifts by Daniel Rawlinson (21 June, 1669) and William Wilson (1817). HALSALL ENDOWED SCHOOL Edward Halsall, in 1593, gave a rent-charge of £13 6s. 8d. on his estate at Eccleston for the maintenance of a free grammar school at Halsall. The school building was erected in the church- yard, to the south-west of the church, and isstill * Baines, Hist. of Lancs. iv, 706; School docu- ments. 608 SCHOOLS standing. The place was repaired by the parish, and in 1827, 12 boys were taught free in return for the endowment, and there were about 42 other boys paying a quarterage. ‘The rent-charge is still paid, but the scholars have been transferred to the National School, erected in 1860. The old building is used as a kind of vestry to the church. WARTON SCHOOL 3 Matthew Hutton, bishop of Durham, after- wards archbishop of York, founded a school and hospital of Jesus at Warton in 1594, by letters patent dated 15 November, 37 Elizabeth, ‘ for the promotion of good literature and the relief and sustentation of poor people of the said parish.” The nomination to the mastership was placed in the hands of the Huttons of Marske, as heirs of the archbishop, who paid a rent-charge of £46 135. 4d. to the school until November 1815, when the payments were withheld. After the resignation of Richard Knagg in 1808 no appointment to the head-mastership had been made and the school was carried on by the usher as an elementary school. After a suit in Chancery the school was revived as a grammar school in 1830 with head master and usher. In 1874 under a scheme of the Endowed Schools Commission the school was organized as ele- mentary with an upper department where more advanced subjects might be taught. The elementary character of the school was confirmed by a scheme of the Charity Commissioners in 1891. WIGAN GRAMMAR SCHOOL The date of the earliest of the surviving endowments of the school is 1596; hence the school was probably in existence before that date. In 1619 James Leigh bequeathed rent- charges of some £25 for the benefit of the school, to which were added tenements in Aspull. In 1723 Sir John Bridgman, bart., having given £100 towards a new schoolhouse, the inhabitants and corporation subscribed £100 and purchased Cockerham’s house and croft in the Millgate, which were mortgaged for a sum of £193 9s. 9d. with interest. In 1816 the Aspull estate was sold for £3,796 and an estate at Appleton was purchased. In 1879 the school was rebuilt on a design by Waterhouse at a cost of £17,000. The endowment now yields about £300 per annum, with a Powell exhibition of £150 a year tenable for three years at any of the universities. The school is being reorganized and largely financed by the borough education authority. “There are now 142 boys in attendance. 3 Baines, Hist. General v. Hutton. of Lancs. iv, Attorney- 5773 HESKIN ENDOWED SCHOOL! This was founded in 1597 by Sir James Pemberton, a native of the parish, who became a citizen and alderman of London, as a ‘free grammar school for the education of children and young men in grammar.’ Brasenose College, the Goldsmiths’ Company, and others were to be governors. An endowment of £50 was given by a rent-charge, and lands of the value of £70 might be held for the trust. Other gifts followed, but though some of the scholars were sent to the university in the seventeenth century——its build- ings were then ‘a tall and stately structure of hewn stone ’—it sank by 1865 to be an elementary school of a humble order. . . . The master did not know Latin, and it is probable that for many years before that date the school had given nothing beyond elementary education. Official interference resulted in some improve- ment, but the school is conducted as a public elementary school. New buildings were erected in 1896. CHURCHTOWN (OR KIRKLAND) FREE SCHOOL, GARSTANG? This school was founded in 1602, as appears from an agreement of the administrators of Walter Rig- mayden of Wedacre Esq. to bestowe 100 marks (as a commemoration for theire comodities receaved of the deceased) to bee the firste foundation of a Free Schoole to be erected in the Parishe Churche Yard of Garstang * dated 9 March 1602. By indenture dated 12 October, 1635, certain of the demesne lands of Catterall were sold to the trustees, the sale to become void upon the payment of £100 upon any second day of February before 1 March, 1640, and a yearly sum of £8. In 1709 the mortgaged premises were released to the owner of Catterall on payment of the £100. Other bequests were made from time to time and in 1861 the total sum invested was £785 16s. 7d. The present school buildings, opened in 1876, were erected at the cost of Mr. Edward Moon of Aigburth, Liverpool, an old pupil. STANDISH GRAMMAR SCHOOL The free Grammar School was founded by Mrs. Mary Langton, who left £300 in 1603 to Edward Standish esq. and other trustees ; they obtained a yearly rent-charge of £18 out 1 Char. Com. Rep. under Eccleston ; Earwaker, Loc. Glean. ii, 105. ? Baines, Hist. of Lancs. iv, 463; Char. Com. Rep. xi, 223 ; Hist. of Garstang (Chet. Soc. lv), 201; Lancs. and Ches. Wills (Chet. Soc. li), 201. ® Harl. MSS. 2176, fol. 464. 2 609 77 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE of Troughton Hall estate in Furness in 1625. In 1633 a second endowment was given for the benefit of an usher consisting of rents in Goosnargh amounting to £4 45. reserved upon leases which were to be improved to £12. This was increased in 1794 with the interest on £270 left by Mrs. Mary Smalley. The income of the school, now elementary, is about £100. ORMSKIRK GRAMMAR SCHOOL By an inquisition taken at Ormskirk 27 September, 1610, it was found that Henry Ascroft and others had given £136 115. 8d. for the use and maintenance of a free grammar school ; this with other benefactions in 1772 amounted to £583 6s. 8d. The school pro- perty consists of houses and land which yield in annual rents £138 155. besides a dwell- ing house and school under the same roof. In accordance with the most recent scheme the school is a mixed grammar school. Under Mr. J. R. Bate, B.A., B.Sc., appointed in 1901, there are about 70 boys and 80 girls. New buildings are contemplated. OLDHAM GRAMMAR SCHOOL The free grammar school founded by James Assheton, esq., of Chadderton Hall, in 1606, was endowed with a statute acre of land in the centre of the town, By provisions of the trust deed dated 15 May, 1606, the children were ‘to be freely instructed in the English, Greek, and Latin tongues and initiated in good manners.’ An inquisition (no date) quoted in the Kuerden MS. (fol. 619) orders that the ‘ ten feoffees being dead, a new deed shall be executed.” The com- missoners report that James Ashton of Chadderton dec: did by deed made to Law(rence) Chaderton and other feoffees grant a rent- charge of 40s. for ever to the schoole of Oldham out ofa messuage in Oldham there in occ(upation) of Rog. Taylor and of James Rodes and not payd for 52 y(ears). The original endowment was increased by legacies from George Scholes, 13 August, 1686, and Thomas Nuttall, 14 March, 1726. The school property, being required for the purpose of street widening, was purchased by the corporation in 1869 for £1,010, which sum with other invest- ments brings the school endowment up to a capi- tal value of £2,000. By a scheme under the Endowed Schools Acts of 28 November, 1887, £18,000 and £2,050 a year out of the Hulme Trust estates were united with this endowment, and Hulme Grammar Schools for boys and girls established on a spacious site, and in fine build- ings, above the town. Under Mr. A. G. Pick- ford, M1.A., B.Sc., appointed head master in 1903, and five assistant masters there are 150 boys. CHORLEY GRAMMAR SCHOOL: The history of this school begins with a certi- ficate in the register book of the parish dated 1634, which states ‘that the chapelry having experienced many inconve- niences by reason of its being utterly destitute of a schoolhouse, the inhabitants in the year 1611 agreed that one should forthwith be erected, partly within the churchyard and partly within the Tythe Barn yard, at the cost of the parish ;” further ‘ that no schoolmaster should inhabit therein with his wife neither minister with his wife, but that every such wife must be kept out of the same for divers great causes—and especially that such wives or their children begotten in such habitation might become chargeable to the parish of Chorley . ... For the perfecting of the said build- ing, Robert Charnock of Astley gave the bricks and £6 in money ; and every inhabitant in Chorley that was liable toa 15 th. gave and paid 20-15 ths thereto.’ The school received various small legacies, but the endowment was practically nil. The scholars paid quarterage. In 1823-4 the school was re- built in the Tythe Barn yard. This building again has been superseded by a schoolroom erected in 1868 with accommodation for 60 boys. Some 20 boys attend the school, ‘There are no free places. LEIGH GRAMMAR SCHOOL? The date of the foundation of this school is not exactly known. A chancery decree of the county palatine of Lancaster recited in an indenture of 1770 refers to it in the following terms : There is and from the time whereof the memory of man is not to the contrary hath been a grammar school in the parish of Leigh for teaching and instructing children of the poor and other inhabitants within the parish and other children sent thither. William Crompton, a local celebrity, baptized in October, 1598, is said ‘to have been educated in grammar in the parish of Leigh, near Wigan, in Lancashire,’ a phrase which may be taken to imply that he was in attendance at the school. The will (9 January, 1613) of James Starkie of Penning- ton, tailor, contains the following bequest : To Mr. Lowe vycar of Leigh, the sum of ffourtye shillings for and towards a free Grammar Schole which I pray God may be in good tyme att Leigh afforesaide, or in defaulte thereof for the hyreinge ofa preachear there. William Crompton matriculated at Brasenose College, Oxford, in 1617, and the school must have been in existence before that date, assuming him to have been a scholar. Hence the founda- tion may be assigned to the years 1614-15. No Baines, Hist. of Lancs. iv, 148. ? From a series of articles contributed to the Leigh Chronicle in Dec. 1897, by W. D. Pink, which contain references to such information as has been published elsewhere concerning the school. 610 SCHOOLS trust deeds or early records are in existence. In 1641-2 a Mr. Worthington was master : he was perhaps succeeded by Symon Karsley or Kearsley, who left Leigh in 1656 for a similar post at Stratford, and was followed by John Battersbie. In January, 1655-6, he styled himself ‘ Scholae Leighensis Praefectus’ in a Latin elegy written by him upon the death of John Atherton, esq., high sheriff of the county. Mr. John Ranicars, of Atherton, by will dated 16 August, 1655, left a rent-charge of £5 upon two pieces of land in Leigh to ‘the trustees of the school at Leigh .. . and towards the maintenance of a free school at Leigh, to continue for ever for the use of the said free school.’ A further endowment of £6 per annum from his landed property in Pennington was added in 1681 by Mr. Richard Bradshaw of Pennington, who had also given a house ‘to keepe the scoole in.’ Other small bequests in sub- sequent years increased the school endowments. In 1719 Ralph Pilling, educated at Heskin School near Chorley andat Manchester Grammar School, appointed master of Leigh School about 24 June, 1699, proposed rebuilding the school. Sixty subscribers contributed about £80 among them, of which Pilling’s share was £10." Mr. Pilling left to the school a library of which some six score volumes still remain, the most in- teresting of which is Melancthon’s Proverbs of Solomon (1525), bearing on the title page the autograph of Archbishop Cranmer. Mr. Pilling’s schoolhouse, after serving its purpose for two centuries, was superseded by a new house bought in 1889 by means of a legacy of £600 by Mr. E. H. Heaton of Wigan. In 1895 the present head master, Mr. W. H. Leek, was appointed. In 1898 the school had outgrown its building. It is now conducted in the Tech- nical Schools erected in 1894. It isa dual school, with some 220 boys and girls in attendance. In 1904 Mr. E. Marsh, an old pupil, bequeathed £3,000 for the provision of scholarships tenable at the universities of Liverpool or Manchester. The Lancashire County Council propose to take over the financial responsibilities of the school. CARTMEL GRAMMAR SCHOOL ? The grammar school had no formal founda- tion that can be discovered : it was a parochial school under the control of the churchwardens and sidesmen of the parish who engaged a mas- ter and paid his salary with the interest on small benefactions and quarterage from all but very poor scholars. For the history of the school we 1 This is commemorated in an inscription above the school porch in which the line of Martial, ‘ Sint Maece- nates non deerunt esse Marones’ is quoted not inappro- priately. The line (with ‘ecce’ for ‘ esse’) appears on the school arms. ? Baines, Hist. of Lancs. v, 638. are dependent on the parish accounts, the trust deeds having disappeared. In 1619 the school was called the free school in the parish accounts. In 1635 the quarterage was 8d. for grammarians and 4d. for petties. In 1664 the master’s stipend was £20. In 1711 the quarterage was raised to 1s. 6d. for Latin, and 1s. for English, poor scholars still being taught free. ‘These moneys formed the usual cockpence payable at Shrove- tide ; they might be increased by special gratui- ties. In 1714 the school seems to have become entirely free. The bequests made to the school from time to time were invested in land near Cartmel. In 1862 a considerable sum was spent in erecting the head master’s house and in alterations to the school buildings. An inscription upon the monument of Thomas Preston, esq., states: ‘Ecclesiae pauperibus et pauperum filiis in Schola Cartmellensi Collegioque Sti. Johannis Cantab. educandis legavit.’? At- tempts to discover to what this inscription refers have hitherto proved fruitless. Edward Law, sometime bishop of Carlisle, was partly educated at Cartmel. The school is now carried on under a scheme of the Charity Commissioners as a dual school, with 15 boys and 13 girlsin attendance. ‘The present income from endowment amounts to £125, and the school receives some support from the Lancashire County Council. MERCHANT TAYLORS’ SCHOOL, CROSBY ! In 1618 John Harrison, a native of Great Crosby and a member of the Merchant Taylors’ Company, London, left £500 by will to the master and wardens of the company for the erection of a grammar school in Great Crosby : certain houses in London were also left to the company, the income from which was to be applied in part to the upkeep of the school. The school started in 1620 with one master and one usher at salaries of £30 and £20 per annum respectively. The first head master was one John Kidd, M.A., who ‘applying himself to the ministry’ of Sefton parish neglected the school. A committee of the court in 1648 conse- quently found the boys very unready and raw in their answers and in their grammar rules, and not above two scholars in the school which could perfectly read a chapter of the Bible. Mr. Kidd complained of the situation of the school in the most desolate and obscure angle of the country . . . the rude behaviour of the people, their almost incorrigible and incurable 1C, M. Clode, Memorials of the Guild of Merchant Taylors (Lond. 1875). 611 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE conditions, so that men of quality will not send their children hither, neither is there any fit to give enter- tainment to such and for myself have tabled some and could never get payment. In spite of this complaint he was dismissed. ‘The great fire of London created a crisis in the school history ; the London property was destroyed and salaries were cut off until it could be rebuilt. For the following two centuries the foundation was nothing more than an obscure village gram- mar school. ‘The London property gradually increased in value, and in 1847 produced an in- come of £775, the savings on which in 1874 amounted to £3,500. In 1861 the company limited the school to 70 boys and made it strictly Church of England, compelling the 28 foundationers to attend church on Sun- days. In 1867, when the Schools Inquiry Commission visited, there were no boys in the school above fourteen. The rapid extension of Liverpool and the suburbs of Waterloo and Crosby created a demand for educational facilities, and under the advice of the late head master, the Rev. Canon Armour, to whom the present development of the school is chicfhy due, the trustees bought a site and advanced or borrowed the capital for the erection of the present buildings, the old school beinz used as a girls’ high school. The average number attending the boys’ school is about 280, and under the present head master, H. Cradock-Wat- son, esq., who was appointed in 1903, the prosperity of the school has been well main- tained. BISPHAM FREE SCHOOL} There was a school in Bispham in 1621-2, as the schoolmaster, Mr. Bamber, contributed to a fund raised in the diocese of Chester in February of that year. A deed concerning the sale of a piece of land also gives evidence of another schoolmaster thirty-three years later. The free school was founded by Richard Higginson of London, probably a native. He built the school and bequeathed by will, dated 25 July, 1659, £30 a year for the master and usher out of two messuages in Paternoster Row, London, belong- ing to the dean and chapter of St. Paul’s, which had been bought from the Commissioners for the Sale of Dean and Chapter Lands. On the Restora- tion this was lost. The testator’s widow then gave £200, with which 14 acres situate in Layton were bought. In 1824 the rent amounted to £70 a year and the school was free to all children of the parish of Bispham, who were taught reading, writing, accounts, and Latin "Baines, Hist. of Lancs. iv, 422 3 Char. Com. Rep. xi, 222 ; Fishwick, Hist. of Bispham (Chet. Soc. New Ser. x), 67. grammar if required. The attendance varied, according to the time ot the year, from 30 to 60. In 1865 the Endowed Schools Commissioners found the school buildings in a very dilapidated condition. Eventually the school was transferred to a neighbouring temperance hall pending the erection of a new building. The school is now elementary. BURY GRAMMAR SCHOOL? A free grammar school was founded in Bury by Henry Bury in 1625. The school was re- endowed by the Rev. Roger Kay, rector of Fittleton in Wiltshire, ‘ for the glory of God, and for good litterature and ingenious education,’ by an indenture dated 6 May, 1726. This in- strument settled on the trustees and neighbouring persons various estates and rent-charges in the parishes of Rochdale and Whalley. The income was to provide a salary of £50 for the master, and £20 for the usher, and exhibitions to St. John’s College, Cambridge, and Brasenose College, Oxford. The statutes provided that— the master shall, upon his being elected . . . actually seal, execute, and deliver, to the Trustees and governors of the school, a Bond of five hundred pounds, not to serve the curacy of the Church of Bury while he con- tinues Master of the School, nor do any Church-offices for the Rector or Curate there within schole hours except administering The Holy Sacrament to a sick person or private Baptisme to a child in danger of death, and this only and at no other time but in the absence or sickness of the Rector and Curate. The usher was similarly bound over in £,200. Yet . . . these bonds shall extend to the Curacy of the Parish Church of Bury only, and not to the chapels within the Parish ; neither if the Master or Usher officiate at a Chapel within the said Parish or elsewhere, shall a Sunday’s exchange with the Rector or Curate of Bury upon occasion be deemed or taken for a forfeiture of their Bond. School hours were to be from 7 till 11 a.m., and from 1 till ’5 p.m. in the summer, and from 8 till 11 a.m., and 1 to 4 p.m. in the winter. Saturday was a half holiday, and on Thursday school ended at 3 o’clock. ‘During all which time I order the Master to be present in the Schole with the Usher.’ The scholars were not to “use any unlawful games, nor frequent ale-houses,’ and if refractory were to be solemnly expelled after three warnings. Roger Kay regarded the school exhibitioners asa possible source of income. Whenever a scholar is chosen into either of my Exhi- bitions, I desire . . . that whenever it shall pleas God to bless him with good Preferment in the world, by which I mean a hundred pound a year or upwards, that then within seven years... (or sooner) he woud .. . make a handsome Present in money to ” School Statutes, Bury 1863. 612 SCHOOLS the Trustees and Governours for the use of the Schole. Such a promis I require every Exhibitioner to make in a very solemn manner in the presence of the ‘Trustees. Dr. Word, dean of Ely, and formerly master of St. John’s College, Cambridge, an old pupil, left £500 by will dated 24 November, 1838, to augment the exhibitions. The school was free, i.e. there were to be no tuition fees. But, the founder adds, my intent and meaning is not to debar the Master and Usher ftom that common priviledg in all free Scholes of receiving Presents, Benevolences, Gratuities, etc., from their Scholars, their Parents and Friends. I am so far from putting so hard a thing upon the Master and Usher, that I do require the Parents of all such youths as have the Benefit of Education at my free Schole to be kind to the Master. Twice a year each scholar was to present the master and usher with not more than §5., or less than 2s. 6d. Each scholar also paid ‘the usual Cockmony at Shrovetide,’ and 6d. a year ‘to keep the Glass windows of the Schole in good repaire.’ In 1899 it was obvious that the old foundation was inadequate to meet the requirements of the neighbourhood, and a new scheme was formed under the sanction of the Charity Commis- sioners. The local girls’ school company merged their interests with those of the grammar school. By a scheme under the Endowed Schools Acts of 7 October, 1899, £18,000 and £2,050 a year were added to the endowment of the school, then about £700 a year, out of the Hulme Trust estates, referred to under Manchester Grammar School. The new buildings were erected under the present head master, the Rev. W. H. Howlett, who has held office since 1879, and has about 190 boys at fees of 9 guineas a year. BOLTON LE SANDS SCHOOL The free grammar school was founded in 1625 in accordance with the will (5 May, 1619) of Thomas Assheton, who devised a tenement in Hest to Thomas Assheton the younger, on condition of paying a yearly rent of 80s. towards the maintenance of a school. A sum of £60, being arrears of rent from parish property, was employed for the same purpose. The site was conveyed in January, 1638. The building was enlarged in 1857, and the income from endowment is about £50. In 1865, on the occasion of Mr. Bryce’s visit, the school was, as at present, elementary. UPHOLLAND SCHOOL This grammar school, founded in 1668 by Robert Wathew, was reconstituted by the En- dowed Schools Commissioners in 1877. The endowment amounts to about h Sege, per annum. The numbers now in attendance are 52, and the school is to be financed by the Lancashire County Council. OVER KELLET SCHOOL A free grammar school was founded in 1677 by Thomas Wilson, then of Kirkby Kendal, yeoman, afterwards of Hall Garth in Over Kellet, ‘for the better propagating of learning and good literature within the township of Over Kellet.’ He deposited £200 in the hands of nineteen trustees or governors for an endow- ment. In 1717 this capital, with £63 belong- ing to the churchwardens and overseers, was invested in real estate in Borwick, the interest of which was acquired in 1866 by the school trustees. The school premises, standing on a parcel of waste ground, have been rebuilt and enlarged at various times by the inhabitants of the township. The clear yearly income is about £60. The school has long been elementary. COCKERHAM SCHOOL (GARSTANG) A licence for building the school was granted by the bishop of Chester, 9 August, 1679, and the school was erected at the cost of the parish- ioners in the north-east corner of the churchyard in 1681. It was moved to its present site in 1829. An endowment of two fields and a con- tribution from the lords of the manor bring in some {54ayear. There is no evidence that the education was at any time other than elementary. NEWCHURCH GRAMMAR SCHOOL (In RossENDALE) This grammar school was founded in 1701 by John Kershaw for instruction in Latin and English subjects free; other subjects were to be charged for. The endowment amounted to about {60 per annum. Kershaw’s tombstone bears the following inscription— In memory of John Kershaw of Wolfenden Boote Fold, the beneficent donor of the estates situated in Heald, Bacup, Booth, for the benefit of New Church School. He was buried 1 February, 1701, aged eighty-five years. Anne Kershaw, his wife, was buried 4 January, 1709. They lived long beloved, And dyed bewailed, And two estates Upon one school entailed. In 1880 the old building was abandoned, and eventually the present building was erected. Some 100 boys are now in attendance. A large municipal school is in course of erection at Waterfoot—half a mile away—into which the old grammar school will be absorbed under a scheme of the Lancashire County Council. 613 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE ULVERSTON GRAMMAR SCHOOL A grammar school on the Town Bank was founded in 1736 by John Woodburn, who left £3. year for the use of the schoolmaster, as well as land with a rental of about £30. The school had an average attendance of 60 boys and girls, some few boys learning classics. Sir John Barrow, sometime Secretary to the Admiralty, was educated here. In 1896, by a scheme under the Endowed Schools Acts, the endowment, then producing an income of £70, was applied for the erection of the Victoria Higher Grade and Technical School, opened in October, 1900, and now styled ‘The Victoria Secondary School and Pupil Teacher Centre.’ TUNSTALL SCHOOL Above the school door is the following inscrip- tion in honour of the two founders : Johanni Farrer Gen® et Johanni Fenwick Armig® qui, ut adolescentiae virtutis decus et literarum lumen accederent, huic scholae benefecerunt, hoc saxum honoris et gratitudinis ergo lubenter poni curavit parochia de Tunstal, 1753. An old parish book dated 1751 contains an account of moneys belonging to the school and amounting to £65 and a bequest of £200 for the purchase of land. The school seems to have been almost entirely conducted as an elementary school. ROSSALL SCHOOL Of all the schools of Lancashire Rossall alone lays claim to be one of the ‘great Public Schools’ in virtue of being a boarding school open to all, but serving for the upper middle classes. It has a most singular origin, for it was founded, with the title of the Northern Church of England School, on the initiative of a Roman Catholic Corsican-French hotel-keeper. Rossall Hall was from the thirteenth century a grange of Diculacres Abbey. In 1838 it was the mansion-house of Sir Peter Hesketh-Fleet- wood, who had been tempted to embark and had sunk his estate in laying out Fleetwood as a port and watering place. A large hotel was built, and one Vantini, a Corsican ex-courier, was appointed manager. As an_ additional attraction he proposed to establish a public school for 500 boys on one side of the Wyre and another for 500 girls on the other. At a public meeting convened to inaugurate the scheme, with Mr. St. Vincent Beechey, the in- cumbent of the church, as chairman, the proposal was restricted to a great North of England Public School for Boys, and Sir Peter Hesketh- Fleetwood headed the subscription list with £500. Rossall Hall was leased for twenty-one years with the option of purchase for £7,000. The site consisted of 40 acres adjoining the sea beach, and was then wholly in the country some 3 miles from Fleetwood. A council of fourteen clergymen and ten laymen was got together, and a limited company formed to provide capital, On 22 August, 1844, a year later than Marl- borough, the school was opened with 70 boys under the head-mastership of the Rev. John Wool- ley, D.C.L., fellow of University College, Oxford. The beginnings were exceedingly rough. On the first night there were not enough beds and Dr. Woolley’s family went without. The fees were £30 a year for sons of clergymen nomi- nated by governors, £ 40 a year for sons of laymen or of unnominated clergymen. In spite of an outbreak of scarlet fever in the latter half of the year, the second year opened with 150 boys. The poet Wordsworth attended the Speech Day in 1846 and sent two grandsons to the school. In 1847 some 200 boys received Queen Victoria at Fleetwood with a Latin address written by T. W. Sharpe, first captain of the school, who became a scholar of Trinity, Cambridge, and afterwards Chief Inspector of Elementary Schools and last of the clerical inspectors. After this, however, the numbers began to decline, Dr. Woolley proving deficient in powers of disci- pline over an unruly horde. He resigned in 1849 to become head master of Norwich Grammar School. Subsequently he went to Sydney, as first principal of Sydney University, and was drowned in the sinking of the London on his way back to England in 1866. The Rev. William Alexander Osborne, Craven Scholar and senior classic at Cambridge, head master of Macclesfield Grammar School, succeeded Dr, Woolley. He found 140 boys. In a year the number had risen to 170. He aimed at 300 boys. With this view the free- hold of Rossall Hall was acquired from Sir Peter Hesketh-Fleetwood in 1852 and promptly mortgaged for £10,000 to provide further build- ings. Two leaving exhibitions were founded, the Beechey Exhibition, named after Mr. St. Vincent Beechey, who collected £1,000 for it, and the Osborne Exhibition, the endowment of which the head master got together ; while Mr. George Swainson was the founder of six scholar- ships of £20 each in the school. An archery club, and in 1860 arifle corps, enrolled as the 65th Lancashire, were started. A swimming bath was built also, the cross tides making the open sea dangerous for bathing. The present cha- pel, which cost £7,000, was erected the same year. The school paper, the Rossallian, and the debat- ing society date from 1867. Mr. Osborne’s success is said to have been largely due to his tact and geniality, coupled with an extraordinary power of perception of what was going on around him, and a fine discrimination in the choice of assistant masters. Conspicuous among these was the Rev. Samuel John Phillips, for 614 SCHOOLS many years vice-master, and master from 1854 to 1878. When, owing to ill-health, Osborne left in 1870, there were 297 boys in the school and its position as a great public school was firmly established. He was to Rossall what Bradley was to Marlborough and Thring to Uppingham. Under the Rev. Robert Henniker, Brough scholar of Trinity College, Oxford, a first class man in classics and a second class man in science, second master at Rochester School, there was a reaction. He trusted too entirely to the monitors and is said to have been generally slack. At the same time, however, he reduced the bullying and the excessive monitorial canings. After five years, during which the school had fallen to‘244, Mr. Henniker resigned. The Rev. Herbert Armitage James, educated at Abergavenny Grammar School, scholar of Lincoln College, first class classics in 1867, fellow of St. John’s College, Oxford, and assistant master at Marlborough, quickly revived the school, as he has since revived two other great public schools. He introduced the Marl- borough system of dividing up the school into ‘houses,’ under which, though the whole was in one building round a single great quadrangle, special parts were assigned to the care of single masters. Each house had its own monitors, its own library, and competed against the others in games. He also introduced from Marlborough the head master’s quarterly review of all forms. He ruled by directness and force. When on one occasion there was an attempt at hissing him, it is reported that he told the boys: ‘There are three kinds of animals that hiss, snakes, geese, and cads.” He greatly increased the number of scholarships and raised their standard. His last sixth form contained twenty-six boys who won scholarships or exhibitions at Oxford and Cambridge, including four scholars of Balliol and four of King’s. He raised the num- bers from 251 in 1875 to 331 in 1886, when he retired to the deanery of St. Asaph. He has ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS, Watton on THE Hi1rt.—An endowed school existed here in the seventeenth century, but all records have perished; it is supposed to have originated in a legacy of £120 by Thomas Harrison in 1613. In 1828 it was free to all the boys of the parish for reading, writing, and arithmetic, but small fees were charged for other subjects. The national school, built in 1871, has the endowment, but the old building exists at a corner of the churchyard. Asrizey.—Adam Mort, by his will 19 March, 1630, gave all his lands in Pennington towards the maintenance of a schoolmaster who should teach all children repairing to the chapel which subsequently returned to the scholastic profession to be principal of Cheltenham and head master of Rugby. The Rev. Charles Coverdale Tancock, scho- lar of Exeter College and first class in classics at Oxford, for eleven years an assistant master at Charterhouse, came in 1887. Change of master and commercial depression at first sent down the numbers to 287. But they soon rose again to 309, and four years later to 391. The establishment of two new ‘houses,’ a sanatorium, and a science department marked his reign. The increase in numbers led to improved finances, and by 1894 all debt had been paid off. The success of the ‘ hostel system,’ under which the school and not the individual house-master takes the profits of boarders, and after payment of a liberal salary to the house-master, the profits return to the school in the shape of improve- ments and the creation of a reserve fund, instead of contributing to found a family fortune, has nowhere been more marked than at Rossall. In 1896 Mr. Tancock’s health broke down and he retired. Afterwards he recovered and became head master of Tonbridge School, from which he has just retired (1907). The Rev. James Pearce Way from Warwick, where he had built up a considerable school, was appointed in 1896. Educated at Bath College, he became a scholar of Brasenose, stroked the University Eight and obtained a first class in classics in Moderations and a second in the Final Schools. He went to Warwick in 1885 from a mastership at Marlborough. He has maintained the school at a steady level. There are now, with 23 assistant masters, 330 boys. The fees are nearly double what they were sixty years ago, 70 guineas a year. In 1904 the school shooting eight won the Ash- burton shield at Bisley. At cricket Rossall plays Loretto and Shrewsbury Schools. In football it follows the Association rules, and its chief match is against Shrewsbury. Dr. Way is retiring at Easter, 1908. FOUNDED BEFORE 1800 he had built in Astley. Thomas Guest, by will 1731, bequeathed an annuity of 20s., derived from cottages in Spotland. In 1732 Thomas Mort gave one-sixth of the corn tithes of Astley; £5 6s. a year was also paid by Thomas Worsley of Westleigh. There was a schoolroom in the chapel-yard, but no master’s house. Originally there were 80 to go scholars, but in 1828 not more than 12 or 13. Hinpizy.—There was in the township of Hindley a school bearing the following inscrip- tion—‘ This school was built by the gift of Mrs. Mary Abram, widow, whose soul I trust trium- pheth now amongst the Just, a.D. 1632.’ A 615 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE master’s house adjoined, and there were three small closes let to him rent free. A sum of #150, with interest at 4} per cent., was given by the Corporation of Liverpool, 12 May, 1787, to ‘trustees of the Low School in Hindley.’ No deeds relating to the foundation or endow- ment of this school have been discovered. All the children of the township were admitted upon the payment of 2s, 6d., and taught reading free. For instruction in writing and arithmetic, and in Latin, if required, the master made his own charge. ‘There were upwards of 30 scholars on an average. Haicu.—Miles Turner, by will 15 October, 1634, directed that the residue of his estate should be bestowed according to the direction of his master, Roger Bradshaigh, esq. A deed of 1 May, 1767, recites that Roger Bradshaigh had purchased out of the estate a messuage, with lands, in Billinge, which was conveyed by in- denture, 14 August, 1739 (intended for 1639), to Roger Bradshaigh, and that the yearly rents and profits had been applied to the maintenance of a schoolmaster for Haigh. It was agreed that after paying for repairs, the residue should be given to the schoolmaster. The endowment was increased by £100 by Dame Dorothy Bradshaigh, 9 June, 1792, with interest at 44 per cent. The master taught all the children of the township reading free. The average number in 1827 was 70, in 1867 over 100. Ovtwoop: RincLey ScHoot.—Nathan Wal- worth by indenture, 23 June, 1635, reciting that he had lately built a house near Ringley chapel, then used as a schoolhouse, devised it, upon trust, to be employed as a school and as the residence of a schoolmaster for ever. He further gave the trustees a messuage with appur- tenances, in Flamborough, Yorkshire, upon trust, for the necessary repairing of the house, and for the maintenance of an able and honest schoolmaster. He directed that all children born in Ringley chapelry should be taught freely, and that the children of all others should pay moderate and indifferent rates. In 1798, the old building having fallen down, a new one, with accommo- dation for more than 100 scholars, was built by subscription on the old site. Before 1820 the number of scholars had been from 80 to 100; but in 1826 there were only 55; and in 1867, 64. All poor children, boys and girls, of Out- wood hamlet, of the township of Kearsley, were admitted when more than six years old. They were taught reading free, but paid for writing and arithmetic. William Baguley, by will 14 April, 1725, gave £40 for purchasing land or a rent-charge, the profits to be paid to the schoolmaster at Ringley School for teaching such four poor children of Kearsley, and such four poor children of Outwood, as the preaching minister of Ringley should nominate. £1 125, 8d. was paid to the schoolmaster out of the rent. RumwortH.—f100 was given by will of James Crompton, 3 August, 1636, towards the maintenance of the school at Dean church in Rumworth. By a Chancery Decree, 16 October, 1660, it was ordered that William Hulton and twenty-three others should be trustees for the disposing of £100 for the benefit of the school- master and school of Dean. In 1820 this school was rebuilt by subscription. ‘There was no residence for the master. All the children of the township of Rumworth were admitted, each paying Is. at Christmas, 1s. at Shrovetide, and 6d. at Michaelmas for instruction in reading ; if, besides reading, they learnt writing or accounts, 3d. a week was charged. The other scholars paid 23d. for reading, and 4d. for reading, writ- ing, and accounts. The number of children of Rumworth in the school in 1827 averaged about 80, and there were between 30 and 40 paying scholars. Mucu Wootton.—An entry of 1641 in an old parish book states that the schoolhouse was built, and a stock raised, at the common charge. This stock amounted to £157 in 1690, to which £100 was added by will of Sir William Norris. The school was open to all children, recom- mended by subscribers, on payment of Id. or 2d. a week, according to the subjects of instruc- tion. In 1867 there were 350 at weekly fees of 2d. or 3d. Woopp_LumPTon.—Alice Nicholson, of Bar- tel, by deed 4 January, 1661, gave £100 for the maintenance of a free school within the manor of Woodplumpton, and by will, 1 Feb- ruary, 1664, £10 more; John Hudson, by will 22 February, 1676, gave £20 on condition that the heirs of the house in which he lived should be free to the school; John Hall, of Catforth, 28 June, 1732, gave £30; James Hall, by will 19 April, 1741, £10; Richard Eccles, by will 30 July, 1762, £100; and at some time before 1813, Elizabeth Bell gave #100, and Richard Threlfall £20. All these sums were invested, and the interest paid to the schoolmaster, who taught reading free to all the children of Woodplumpton applying, but charged 4d. a week for writing and 4d. for accounts. He had generally about 60 scholars. West Dersy.—The earliest known mention of this school is that at a court held for the manor of West Derby, 9 January, 1667, Ann Dwerrihouse surrendered a messuage and tene- ment and two acres of land to trustees, for the use of the free school. Ann Molyneux, by will 19 January, 1727, gave to the schoolmaster £10, the interest to be laid out in Church Catechisms and other good books for the poor children of the school. The school was formerly held in an old house. About 1820 this was converted into a cottage, and let by the schoolmaster at £54 year, and a new schoolhouse was built. The schoolmaster received the whole of the rents, 616 SCHOOLS amounting to £36 35. 3d. He and his wife taught 60 children in 1828, boys and girls of the township, free. There were also paying scholars. In 1867 the numbers had increased to over 400, with eight teachers. BiLuincE : CHaPeL Enp.—John Eddleston, by will 14 June, 1672, devised all his lands in Billinge to trustees, among other purposes for the maintenance of a schoolmaster at Billinge. In 1819 aschool was built by subscription for the chapelry of Billinge, comprising the town- ship of Billinge, Chapel End, or Lower End, and part of the township of Winstanley. About the same time the use of an old school was given up to the master. The schoolmaster in addition received from Eddleston’s Charity the yearly sum of £10 10s., for which he instructed ro children free, and seven others at half the usual charge. ButuincE : H1GHER Enp.—There wasa school with a dwelling-house and garden at a place called Brownlow in this township. The school- master had the liberty of letting for his own benefit a cottage, supposed formerly to have been the schoolhouse, with a garden and small croft, worth together about £5 a year; and the sum of 10 10s. per annum was paid to him from Eddleston’s Charity. For these sums he taught 10 children of the township free. The number of scholars averaged about 40 or 50. Watton LE Date.—‘ The school here (which is free only to the children of the town) was built by the inhabitants on ground given by Sir Richard Houghton, 1672 (the children being taught in the church before). The endowment consists chiefly of interest of money ; £100 given by Mr. Peter Burscough, 1624; £100 by Mr. Andrew Dandy, citizen of London; £20 by Thomas Hesketh of Walton.’ The school property in 1827 consisted of a good dwelling- house, containing a schoolroom and occupied by the master rent free. There was a sum of money in the hands of Sir Henry Houghton, for which he paid to the schoolmaster £14 15. 6d. yearly as interest at 5 per cent. The school- master took all the children of Walton who applied, and taught them reading for 4d. a week each; but for writing and accounts and for teaching other children to read, he made his own charge. Currpen.—Andrew Dandy, citizen of Lon- don, by will 20 March, 1673, gave his house and lands called Lostock, with appurtenances, out of which the yearly sum of £5 was to be applied, either for teaching or for apprenticing the children of Cuerden. In 1689 the money provided a schoolmaster who instructed the poor children of the town without fee, but £3 5s. being deducted as land-tax it was very difficult to con- tinue the school by reason of the smallness of the 1 Char. Com. Rep. quotation from Bishop Gastrell’s Notitia of Chester Diocese. salary, and the few scholars that attended paid fees. Payment of the annuity ceased after 1714. Daniel Dandy, the eldest son of Andrew, by indenture 14 October, 1740, gave to trustees £126 15s., the interest to be applied for the benefit of the poor. This interest, £6, was paid to the schoolmaster, who occupied the school- house, supposed to have been erected by Andrew Dandy. He taught five children free, and for his other scholars, about 20, he received a small weekly payment. Instruction was given in reading and writing, and a few of the older children learnt arithmetic. Curprinc.—John Brabin, by will g April, 1683, gave a messuage and tenement in Chipp- ing, with all lands belonging, the profits to be applied for putting the house into repair, and £13 6s. 8d. for the stipend of a schoolmaster to teach children of the township of Chipping or neighbourhood for such payment as the parents liked to give; any residue was to provide books and clothes. Such clothes were to be either violet or liver colour, with caps of the same cloth and colour. Out of the rest of his personal estate a schoolhouse was to be erected. 16 boys were selected by the trustees to be clothed. They were taught writing and arithmetic free ; other scholars paid fees. Christopher Parkinson, by will 8 July, 1702, gave the profits of a tenement in Goosnargh for the use of an under master, who was to receive the annual sum of £4 from this charity for teaching reading to all the children of Chipping, Thornley, Leagrim, and Little Bowland, sent to him (usually about 80). About one-third of the scholars paid an optional fee of 1d. per week. Uprer Horxer.—By will 18 May, 1685, George Bigland devised to trustees a close called Bradell, in Furness Fell, and his house at Grange, for the maintenance of a schoolmaster near Brow Edge. He directed that his heir should have the mesne profits of the premises until the inhabitants of Brow Edge built a new school. Henry Bigland, by will 9 December, 1689, gave £100 to buy land, half the rent to be given to the school of Brow Edge. In 1817 the estate was let for £30 a year, which rent was received by the schoolmaster. Dipssury.—There was in this township a school for the inhabitants of the four townships constituting the chapelry. The building used for the school was supposed to have been erected many years ago by subscription ; it stood ona part of the waste of the lord of the manor of Withington. By indenture 30 December, 1685, Edward Mosley, in performance of the will of Sir Edward Mosley, bart., conveyed to trustees several closes, with appurtenances, lying south of the Mersey, in the township of Didsbury, for the maintenance of a schoolmaster at Didsbury for ever. In 1826 there were 40 children, boys and girls, in the school, who were taught the 2 617 78 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE 3 R’s; in 1867 there were 225 paying a small fee. CARLETON. —This school is endowed by several benefactions. The earliest is that of Elizabeth Wilson, who, by indenture 17 May, 1697, 1s recited to have declared her mind in her will, 22 September, 1680, to be that a fourth of her goods should be bestowed in land and the profits employed for teaching the poorest children of the town of Carleton ; so Richard Singleton enfeoffed John Wilson with a close in Bispham called the Carr Hey, the rentsto be devoted to the purposes of the will. William Bamber, by will 13 Octo- ber, 1688, gave £40 for the benefit of the poor inhabitants and children of the township of Carleton, called Great Carleton, directing it to be placed out at interest, or invested in lands, of the yearly value of 40s., of which 20s. was to provide books or school wages for teaching poor children. By indenture 11 May, 1689, it was witnessed that John Gaulter, in consideration of £40, conveyed to Richard Harrison and Margaret Bamber various lands in Blackpool. By inden- ture 4 February, 1718, reciting that Margaret Bickerstaffe had by will 19 April, 1716, be- queathed to her executors £20 for the education of children of Carleton, and that Laurence Smithson and his wife Margaret had placed the legacy out and had disposed of the interest to those uses, it is witnessed that Laurence and Margaret Smithson assigned the legacy to trustees, who should apply the interest to the said uses, and to purchase an estate of the value of £20, the rents and profits to go to the schoolmaster of Carleton for his teaching so many of the children of the poor as the trustees should think fit. The children were taught reading, writing, and accounts, free. There were about 40 in winter, about 20 in summer. A few not belonging to the township paid quarterage. LirrLEBOoROUGH.—by indentures of lease and release, 4 and 5 May, 1692, it was recited that Theophilus Halliwell, by will 6 September, 1688, gave his lands in Sowerby, Yorkshire, for the use of the inhabitants of Littleborough, the profits to be paid to the schoolmaster at the chapel of Littleborough, or some other place near. Richard Halliwell, by will 18 December, 1699, gave a yearly rent-charge of £6, issuing out of two messuages and tenements in Walsden, within Hundersfield, for the maintenance of a school- master to teach and instruct poor children to read and write in the school then lately by him erected in Littleborough. The schoolmaster instructed in 1827 11 and in 1867 14 poor children of Littleborough in reading, writing, accounts, and mensuration without charge, al- though the privilege of free instruction was considered as limited to reading and writing. Rissy wiTtH WRea.— James Thistleton, of Wrea, by will 10 January, 1693-4, gave the residue of his personal estate towards making and maintaining a free school in Ribby with Wrea, The residue amounted to £180. Nicholas Sharples, by will 10 September, 1716, lett the residue of his estate to be applied at the discre- tion of his executors towards building or finishing a schoolhouse for boys and girls in Ribby cum Wrea; and he directed that they should with the overplus purchase some freehold of inherit- ance for the benefit of the school, the rents to be paid to the master for educating such a number of boys and girls as the governors should think fit. Upwards of £350 was received by this bequest. There was also a girls’ school on Wrea Green, built in 1818, and a small house for the schoolmistress adjoining. All the boys belong- ing to Ribby with Wrea were instructed in reading, writing, and accounts without charge, and the girls of the township who applied in writing and accounts. No children under the age of four, or unable to read letters, were ad- mitted. ‘The number of scholars varied with the season from 30 to 50. ‘The poorest were pro- vided with books and paper. The mistress was paid a salary of £20, and instructed the girls of the township in reading, sewing, and knitting, free. She had from 30 to 40 children. All the children between 4 and 12 who belonged to the township and attended regularly were clothed. There were 66 children in 1867, but only 29 were clothed. AvucHtTon.—Robert Burton, by will 20 August, 1697, gave a messuage and land in Halton parish, under the annual fee-farm rent of 18s. 13d, with all his lands in Halton, in trust, to provide a Church of England curate for Aughton chapel, who would also industriously perform the office of schoolmaster within the chapel, instructing freely such youth, of Aughton and elsewhere, in literature, the rudiments of grammar, and school learning as the trustees should appoint, and re- ceiving the whole rents and profits of the endow- ment. ‘The property consisted of a house, barn, and outbuildings, and about 55 acres of land. This farm was let in 1827 at a good annual rent of £68, for which the curate, besides officiating at Aughton chapel, kept school in a building adjoining, and gave instruction in reading with- out charge. He also taught writing, arithmetic, and the classics at a fee. The schoolroom was kept in repair by the township. In 1867 there were 14 boys receiving an elementary education. GoosnaRGH : WHITECHAPEL, — William Lancaster, by will 12 October, 1705, devised to trustees lands in Guosnargh and the residue of his personal estate, to be employed for providing a schoolmaster to teach a school at Whitechapel, in Goosnargh. William Higham, by will 17 February, 1713, devised lands in Goosnargh for the same object, and directed that {£120 should be put out to interest, which was to be paid to a schoolmaster to teach the children of Goosnargh for such fee or gratuity as their 618 SCHOOLS parents might choose to give. He also left £20, the profits to be employed in buying necessary books for the poorer children. “Thomas Adamson, by will 7 January, 1730, bequeathed the interest on {£40 for the schoolmaster of Whitechapel. All the children of Goosnargh who applied were taught reading, writing, and accounts free of charge, except for pens and paper. ‘There were about 70 scholars, boys and girls. Warrincton : Brug Coar ScHoor.—Peter Legh, by deed 19 September, 1709, conveyed houses and ground adjoining, on trust, to be em- ployed for an elementary school. The school was started in 1711 with 24 boys, 12 of whom were clothed yearly ; at fourteen they were ap- prenticed out of the proceeds of a legacy of £180 given by John Allen, of Westminster, in 1677, and gifts of lands from Dame Ann Edge- worth, 1 January, 1705, and ‘Thomas and Margaret Sherwin, 3 May, 1692. Alexander Radcliffe, 28 October, 1717, conveyed a close in Westleigh to trustees for the school. Eliza- beth Dannett, 21 August, 1792, and John Watkins, 23 February, 1797, also gave lands. About 1780 a new building was erected. Till 1814 only day scholars were admitted, but in that year six boys and four girls were appointed to be maintained in the house and clothed. In 1829 14 boys and 10 girls were so kept, and there were 120 boys and 30 girls as day scholars. In 1867 there were 24 boys and 16 girls, all boarded and clothed. Worstey: Row GREEN ScHoot.—Thomas Collier, by will 25 December, 1710, gave a rent-charge of £5 to be paid to a schoolmaster for teaching 20 children of the poor of Worsley to read English. By indentures of lease and re- lease 21 and 22 March, 1727, the Most Noble Scroop, duke of Bridgewater, lord of the manor of Worsley, granted to trustees a plot of waste land on which a schoolhouse might be erected by voluntary contributions. In 1828 the master taught 12 poor children in respect of the £5 rent-charge ; other scholars paid. In 1867 there were about 60 children, 10 of them free. TopmMorpen anD WatspEeNn.—By indentures of lease and release, 3 and 4 August, 1713, Richard Clegg granted to Henry Pigott and others, on trust, a newly-erected building in Todmorden to be used as a school by such schoolmaster as the major part of the freeholders in Todmorden and Walsden should nominate. By indenture 5 August, 1713, reciting that Richard Clegg had collected £50, which, with £100 which had been advanced, had been paid into the hands of Henry Pigott, the latter declared that he would put out the £150 to the best advantage, the profits to provide for repairs of the school and the salary of a schoolmaster, who was to instruct gratis four children. The school premises in 1827 consisted of a dwelling-house, with a schoolroom, outbuildings, and a small garden. ‘They were occupied rent free by the schoolmaster, who kept them in repair. He also received £6 15s. per annum, the interest of the £150. For this he instructed without charge four children in reading, writing, and accounts ; other scholars paid. The average number in attendance was about 40. Winbiz.—Sarah Cowley, by will 25 Febru- ary, 1714, devised a messuage to Joseph Gilli- brand, clerk, on trust, the clear yearly rents and the residue of her estate to be used for bringing up poor children in the schools at St. Helens, and she directed that an annuity of £5 should be added for providing books, as the Love Book, the Primer, the Psalter, Testament, and the Bible, till they should be able to read the Bible. By indentures of lease and release, 13 and 14 April, 1724, Joseph Gillibrand conveyed to him- self and others the messuage in Windle, on trust, the residue of the profits to be employed for the purposes of the will. A school was built by subscription in 1793, when the old school in the chapel yard, supposed to have been built by John Lyon, was pulled down. ‘There was a further endowment of the yearly sum of £1 10s., charged by will of John Lyon on an estate in Widnes, and a legacy of £45 left about 1817 by Thomas Barker. From 1816 the interest of these sums was paid to the schoolmaster, who instructed at least 25 poor children without payment. There were also some paying scholars, Great Botron.—The interest of £150, given by Thomas Marsden, by will, 1714, was to be employed in setting up and maintaining a charity school, for as many poor children as possible, within the town of Bolton, who were to be clothed, and educated, and instructed in the prin- ciples of religion. “They were to attend public prayers in Bolton church at all times when Morning and Evening Service should be read. By indentures of lease and release, 16 and 17 Octo- ber, 1752, between Elizabeth Tire, and John Parker, and others, reciting that out of the £150 a charity school had been set up, called Mr. Marsden’s Charity School, where six poor children of Bolton were clothed and educated ; Elizabeth Tire conveyed to John Parker all her messuages and shops in Bolton, for the purposes mentioned in Thomas Marsden’s will. Susannah Brookes, by will 10 August, 1744, gave £100, the interest to be used for teaching poor and orphan children to read the Holy Bible, in the towns of Great Bolton, Tonge with Haulgh, ard Breightmet. A salary of £10 10s., arising from lands in Bolton, given in 1788 by Marsden’s trus- tees, was paid to the schoolmaster, for which he taught 20 children of Great Bolton, boys and girls, reading and the Church Catechism without charge, and writing or accounts at half the usual fee. The master was allowed to take other chil- dren, and in 1827 had about go scholars, and 135 in 1867. 619 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Tottincton: Lower Enp. — In 1715 Thomas Nuttall built a schoolhouse in Tot- tington and endowed it with an annuity of £3 from a messuaze in Oldham. By will 14 March, 1726, he devised all his copyhold premises in Oldham, the profits to be used for teaching eight poor children appointed by trustees. “The school was enlarged by subscription in 1773. Ann Baron, by deed 13 January, 1798, assigned to trustees £326 16s. 84., of which £200 was to be applied to the use of the schoolmaster. In 1827 15 children were learning the three R’s gratuitously, and there were about 50 paying children. FarnwortH: Drxon Green ScHoor.—By indentures of lease and release, 28 and 29 March, 1715, James and John Roscoe conveyed to trustees a parcel of land, lying near the waste called Dixon Green, on which a school had been erected at the expense of James Roscoe and others, where the children of inhabitants of Farnworth might be taught to read and under- stand the English and Latin tongues, or either of them, and be instructed in the principles of the Protestant religion by a person able to teach. Nathan Dorning, by will 22 May, 1728, be- queathed £300 to buy land, the income to go, half for the instruction of poor children in Farn- worth in the English and Latin tongues, one- fourth for the use of the schoolmaster, and the other fourth for buying English Bibles, the Assembly’s Catechism, and the Scripture Cate- chism, to be distributed yearly among poor chil- dren of Farnworth. In 1828 there were 22 children in the school besides the free scholars. NEWBURGH IN LatHom.—The Rev. Thomas Crane in 1717, having already in 1714 erected a school in his native village, gave it to trustees for the instruction of children, endowing it with £15 ayear. This was supplemented by other gifts, and in 1828 the income was £52. In 1826 six or seven boys were learning Latin, and the master had had pupils learning Greek. The school is now a public elementary school. The old building has been converted into a public reading-room. WaLMsLey : BaLpINGsTONE ScHooL. — By indenture 27 August, 1716, Miles Lonsdale, for encouraging the erecting of a school in Walms- . ley, conveyed to trustees a piece of ground on which a school should be built ; as soon as it was ready, some fit person, being a Protestant, was to be appointed master. James Lancashire, by will 30 July, 1737, gave £50 for teaching not more than 10 children. In 1828 there was a school and schoolhouse in this township which had been enlarged by subscription about forty years before. There was also a school stock of £68 18s. 4d., the interest of which, at 4 per cent., was paid to the schoolmaster. HarRDHORN WITH NEWTON.—James Baines ot Poulton, by will 6 January, 1717, bequeathed to trustees the schoolhouse by him lately erected in Hardhorn cum Newton, to remain a free school for ever; and he gave lands, to the intent that the clear rents, over and beside 10s. a year to be allowed the trustees for a dinner and all necessary repairs, should be paid to a schoolmaster who should teach and instruct in writing, reading, and other school-learning all such children of Poulton and Hardhorn cum Newton as should be sent and behave themselves with care and good man- ners, for such fee as their parents might give voluntarily. The rent of the land was divided between the upper and under master ; the upper master received two-thirds, and the under master one-third. All children paid a very small gra- tuity at Shrovetide and Christmas. There were, on an average, from 80 to 120 in the school who were taught the three R’s. Tuorntron.—James Baines, by will 6 Janu- ary, 1717, devised to trustees the schoolhouse by him lately erected in Thornton Marsh, with its site, to continue for ever as a free school ; and also several closes in Castleton, the clear yearly rents to supportaschoolmaster. ‘These premises, in 1827, were let at £31 10s. a year, which was paid to the schoolmaster. ‘The master taught all the children of the township, boys and girls, free. The number in winter was sometimes as high as 150; and in summer, generally up to 100, except during harvest. There were Latin and English dictionaries in the school. In 1824 there were no boys learning Latin, but the master had had classical scholars. Small gratuities were given at Shrovetide and Christmas. SCARISBRICK.—By indenture 28 August, 1719, reciting that Henry Harrison alias Hill and Thomas Hill, by deed 20 April, 1648, con- veyed a piece of land in Scarisbrick to certain inhabitants of Scarisbrick for erecting a chapel or school, Henry Smith sold to William Smith and others the piece of land, with the building erected on it, for the use of the inhabitants of Scarisbrick. James Carr, by will 19 October, 1720, gave £,100 to the chapel-school, the stock to remain for ever towards bringing it on to be a free school, and the interest to pay for the learning of the poorest children of Snape and Scarisbrick. About 1819 a school, with a small schoolhouse adjoining, was built on the old site. The master received f5 as the interest of £100 left by James Carr, and £5 interest from lands given by Ann Palmer, by will 5 July, 1782, in respect of which he instructed in reading eight children, appointed by trustees, free. There were on an average about 30 children, boys and girls, in 1827, increased to 120 in 1867. Mancuester: Hinpe’s ScHoor.—Anne Hinde, by will 11 February, 1723, gave to John Moss and five others, all of Manchester, all her messu- ages and tenements in Fennel Street, Manchester, upon trust, the rents and profits to provide for the instruction of 20 poor children (10 to be 620 SCHOOLS inhabitants of Manchester, and the other 10 of Stretford, five boys and five girls in each 10) in writing and reading, until they could read per- fectly any chapter in the Bible, and also in the Church Catechism ; and during the time of their learning, to furnish green clothes for the boys and girls, as well as prayer books and other books. The children were to publicly say their catechism in the collegiate church of Manchester and chapel of Stretford. Twenty-eight children, boys and girls of Manchester, and 29 of Stretford were clothed and educated free of expense in 1827. STRETFORD.—The school at Stretford, like Hinde’s School in Manchester, was founded 11 February, 1723, by the will of Anne Hinde, and endowed in the same terms and from the same source. Out of the endowment 29 chil- dren, boys and girls, of the township of Stretford were clothed in green clothes, and educated free of expense for three years. The boys were taught reading, writing, and accounts, and the girls were also instructed in sewing. WuirwortH.—By indenture of 6 January, 1724, James Starkey granted to trustees six cot- tages in Spotland, of about the yearly rent of £6 145. £4 of which was for the use of a Pro- testant schoolmaster at Whitworth chapel, or some place near, who was to teach freely the children of poor settled inhabitants, not exceeding 12 in number, to spell and read English. The school was at first held in the room of a house, but in 1824 a new school was built on land given for the poor by James Brearly in 1692. In 1828 there were 50 paying and 12 free scholars. BrEIGHTMET.—By will 14 April, 1725, Wil- liam Baguley gave a sum of £200 for founding a charity school in Breightmet, scholars appointed by the trustees to be taught gratis. By indentures 12 and 13 June, 1729, William Baguley’s execu- tors granted an ancient messuage in Roscow Fold in Breightmet and the adjoining land, upon trust, that a school or schoolhouse might be erected, and a schoolmaster appointed to teach gratis chil- dren of Breightmet whose parents were not worth £40 of personal estate. The master took all the children of Breightmet whose parents were not worth £100, and taught them reading without charge: if they learnt writing, and accounts also, they paid the usual fee. He received two-fifths of the produce of Susannah Brookes’s charity for teaching free 6 poor children of Tonge-with- Haulgh. In 1867 there were 175 children, paying 2d. to 4d. a week. FazakeRLEy.—Samuel Turner gave a small schoolhouse in 1725. A schoolmistress taught there till about 1820. The house afterwards fell into decay. There was also a school-stock of £100 (a supposed legacy of Samuel Turner) in the hands of Henry Lawrence, interest on which at 5 per cent. used to be paid to the schoolmistress.) When Mr. Lawrence became bankrupt, the mistress received {£5 from the township rate. Ormskirk.—The English school was built in 1725 by subscription, and received a gift of £200 from the then earl of Derby ; this was increased by other gifts, till there was an income of £32 from endowments, in 1828, with about £60 from subscriptions. This school is now combined with others under the designation of the United Charity Schools. BurrerwortH : Mitnrow Scuoor.—By in- dentures 18 and 19 August, 1726, reciting that Alexandra Butterworth had theretofore purposed to erect and found a school at or near the village of Milnrow, within Butterworth ; and that Rich- ard ‘Townley had erected two bays of good stone building in Milnrow, for a schoolhouse; Rich- ard Townley granted to Alexandra Butterworth and others various messuages and tenements in Butterworth, upon trust, as to the newly erected house, that it should be for ever used as a school- house wherein youth should be taught English, writing, and arithmetic by a Protestant school- master. Out of the lands an annuity of £20 was to be paid to the master, on condition that he taught the children of settled inhabitants in Butterworth in the said subjects without other wages or reward. The master taught 20 poor children of Butterworth the three R’s, without charge. He had other scholars, who paid for their instruction. Lyruam.—This school is now secondary. John Harrison by his will 17 February, 1728, gave the residue of his personal estate, in trust, for charitable uses for the benefit of inhabi- tants of Lytham. In 1729 the trustees elected a schoolmaster, to teach a free school. Wil- liam Gualter gave to Lytham School on 9 July, 1745, several securities for money, amount- ing to £99, the interest to be yearly paid to the schoolmaster. He also by will 1 April, 1748, bequeathed the residue of his personal estate in trust for the same purpose, upon condi- tion that the schoolmaster would teach and in- struct without other gratuity or reward all such poor children within Lytham parish as should be appointed by the trustees. The number of scholars varied from 70 to 120, according to the time of year, in 1826, increased to 190 in 1867. The schoolmaster received a salary of £60 and taught all the children resident in the parish reading, writing, and accounts without charge. SKELMERSDALE.—By indenture 2 October, 1732, Thomas Henry Ashurst, lord of the manor of Skelmersdale, granted to trustees a build- ing lately erected, called The School, with the ground adjoining, for the instruction of youth. By indenture 19 September, 1774, Roger Topping sold to Richard Wilbraham Bootle and others a messuage in Skelmersdale for the increase of the schoolmaster’s salary on condition that he should teach without fee the children of in- 621 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE habitants of Skelmersdale that should not have or rent an estate of {10. Evan Swift, by will 8 September, 1726, devised a closein Skelmersdale, on trust, the clear yearly rents to be used for paying the school wages of such or so many poor children of Skelmersdale as the trustees should appoint. Richard Ashcroft by will (no date) gave {100 for the increase of the schoolmaster’s salary at the school lately set up in Skelmersdale. There was also belonging to the school a sum of about £422 stock, in three per cent consoli- dated bank annuities. In 1867 there were over 200 children in the school, of whom 50 were free. Burscoucu.—By will 21 March, 1732, John Houghton gave amongst other things {10 to- wards erecting a public school on the Brow or vacant piece of land near the Pinfold, and £100, the interest to be paid yearly to the schoolmaster for teaching children within Burscough whose parents should not have an estate of the yearly value of £10 within Burscough. The children taught in accordance with the terms of the will varied in number from 15 to 25. They learnt reading free, but for writing they paid the usual fee. In 1867 there were 70 children, of whom 15 were free, Poutton.—Francis Bowes devised, 4 July, 1732, all his lands in Poulton to trustees, to be employed in building a chapel and a school for the township of Poulton. The schoolmaster was to take the subsequent rents and profits for teaching and instructing freely youth belonging to Poulton, Bare, and Torrisholme. A chapel and schoolhouse appear to have been built about 1745. The schoolmaster instructed the poor children of the township in reading, writing and accounts with- out any charge ; and there were seldom less than 60 scholars in 1827, and as many as 180 about 40 years later. SKERTON.— Jane Jepson, late the wife of Robert Jepson, deposited 25 March, 1734, in the hands of John Housman the sum of £100,—{60 for building or purchasing a schoolhouse in Skerton, and the yearly produce of the rest for a schoolmaster for poor children. A house was bought and conveyed by deed 1 March, 1733. Henry Williamson, by will 10 February, 1767, bequeathed £100, the yearly profits to be applied for teaching young children belonging to the township to read the Bible, write, knit, or sew ; any overplus was to be laid out in clothing indigent children. With this legacy Back-Long Riggs was bought and the rent of £12 was paid to a schoolmaster, who taught 20 poor children with- out charge ; when the rent was higher, a greater number was nominated to be taught free. In 1867 there were about 100 children, paying a weekly fee of 1d. or 2d. Unswortu.—James Lancashire, by will 30 July, 1737, gave £50 for a school at or near Unsworth chapel, to be paid to such and so many of the principal inhabitants as should advance and raise £50 within three years after his death for the school, for teaching children to read English and for their better education in the principles of the Church of England. He directed that the master or dame of the school should in consideration teach so many poor children, not exceeding 10 in number, as should be nominated by the churchwardens and overseers. A school was bought and a house for the master built in 1742. On 3 March, 1809, the earl of Derby demised a plot of land at the yearly rent of £1 135. 6d. for a new schocl which was erected by subscription. ‘The rent was paid by the schoolmaster to the earl of Derby. The master instructed in reading ro poor children of Unsworth and the immediate neighbourhood appointed by the minister. He also had paying scholars. Hare.—William Part in 1737, chiefly at his own charges, erected a convenient building for a school, and inclosed and improved the remaining part of a piece of waste land, given by the lord of the manor, and made it convenient for the habitation of the master. By indentures 16 and 17 April, 1742, William Part conveyed the premises to Isaac Green and others, but as he had not obtained a sufficient title they descended to Ireland and Mary Green, co-heiresses of the lord of the manor. They, by William Part’s direction, conveyed the school to Caryl Fleet- wood and others, upon trust, for a schoolmaster to be appointed from time to time. Annexed to the indenture of 1742 are the regulations, which directed that no person in holy orders who had accepted any benefice should be elected master or usher, and that if any master should accept a benefice his office should be judged vacant. It was also directed that the children of inhabitants of Hale should be taught gratis, and as soon as the clear income of the master amounted to £20 the school should be free to all children, on condition that every scholar, except children of the poor settled in Hale, should on entrance pay 5s. and at Shrovetide 1s, 6d, and that every scholar should pay 1s. for fuel. William Part by will 22 August, 1753, added £200, and Ellen Bushell left £80. The schoolmaster taught twelve children, boys and girls of Hale, free of charge. SpoTLaNnD: Toap Lang ScHoot.—By inden- tures 9 and 10 February, 1740, Samuel Taylor and Robert Jacques conveyed to James Hardman and others a messuage, consisting of two dwell- ing-houses, a shippon and garden, in a close at Brownhill, and a messuage or dwelling-house, then used for a petty school, situate in Spotland, on trust, to let the premises for the most rent, and to bestow the clear yearly sum of £6 fora schoolmaster teaching school at the schoolhouse. From 1808 to 1819 there was no schoolmaster and the income was applied towards rebuilding the school. In 1819 a schoolmistress was 622 SCHOOLS appointed with a salary of £20 per annum, for which she taught twenty girls, eight from Faling, three from Healey, in Spotland township, six from Wardleworth, and three from Middle Hundersfield, reading, knitting, and sewing, without any charge. She was allowed to take ten other scholars on her own terms. WEsTHOUGHTON.—A_ school was built at Westhoughton in 1742 by subscription, and on 12 September Richard Garnett gave £5, Robert Harvey £10, and another trustee £50, which sums were invested for the use of the school- master. Mary Harvey, by deed 1 May, 1756, conveyed land to trustees for the benefit of the school, and by will 7 June, 1767, gave the residue of her husband’s estate to be applied to the wages of the schoolmaster for teaching as many children as possible at the rate of 6s. 84d. a child. In 1784 the school was enlarged by subscription. In 1828 thirteen children of the township were taught reading free. There were 80 to 100 children in the school. Reap.—Edmund Dickinson, by will 19 August, 1763, bequeathed £120 to Alexander Nowell, the interest to be paid to some proper person to teach and instruct so many poor boys and girls in reading and writing within the town- ship of Read as Alexander Nowell should think fit. By lease 1 July, 1798, James Hilton, esq., . demised a plot of waste land in Read and a building erected thereon, on trust, that the building should be used as a school for the encouragement of learning ; and that the master should be of unblemished moral character, professing the Protestant religion and a member of the Church of England. Noscholar was to be admitted into the school unless his parents resided in the township. ‘The children were to be taught the Church Catechism, to read the Bible and to say prayers, writing and arithmetic. Five poor children were taught free ; for the in- struction of other scholars the master was paid by their parents; he had, on the whole, about 30 scholars in 1827, increased to 50 in 1867. Turron.—The earliest known gift to this school was a bequest of £1,000 from Humphrey Chetham, by will 1 December, 1746, for the augmentation of the salaries of the curate and schoolmaster. A school had been in existence for many years before with an endowment of £105. Abigail Chetham, by will 1690, left money the interest of which was to be applied in clothing four poor boys. ‘The master received all the rents and taught and clothed six poor boys freely. Newton tn MakerFigLp.—John Stirrup had, by indentures of lease and release 20 and 21 November, 1699, conveyed to Peter Legh and others a messuage called Dean School and a close of land belonging in Newton without declaring any trusts, but intending that they should be held in trust for the schoolmaster of Dean School, to whom he gave an annuity of £3, issuing out of a messuage in Newton. Peter Legh of Lyme by deed 17 February, 1752, conveyed a close called Leylands Common, on trust, that the master should for it yearly teach and instruct in English any number of poor, necessitous children of Newton, not exceeding ten. In 1818 the number of children averaged from 70 to 100 who were chiefly from Newton. ‘They were taught reading, writing, and accounts without charge. In 1867 there were 35 boys, of whom 10 were free. Firxron.—A memorandum entered in an overseer’s book for this township states that Peter Warburton de Brook gave to the overseers of Flixton 60, half the interest to be paid to the schoolmaster officiating at Shawtown School, within Flixton, towards the education of four or five poor children belonging to that township. A tablet in Flixton church to the same effect is dated 1768. In the overseer’s account for 1777 £1 10s. is charged as paid to a person for teaching poor children. John Wood, by a codicil to his will g November, 1779, gave £30 out of his personal estate to his executors, the interest to be devoted to the education of four or five poor children legally settled in Flixton. Shaw- town School wassold about 1860, and the proceeds given to the Church schools by the Charity Com- missioners, as well as the interest on {60 in- vested in government securities. Heaton Norris.—There were in the township of Heaton Norris certain premises, consisting of two cottages and a garden, adjoining an estate called the Tithe Barn House, which were given for the support of a school by J. Holling, priest, in 1785. In 1816 Thomas Higson was appointed schoolmaster, and had one of the cottages as his residence. As long as the annual meetings of the trustees were held, the rents were paid to the schoolmaster, and for them he was required to teach a few children of the township or neigh- bourhood without any further charge. From 1818 there were no scholars. ScoTFoRTH.—In 1827 there was a house, occupied by the schoolmaster and containing a schoolroom ; but it was not known how it be- came appropriated to this purpose. It was kept - in good repair at the township’s expense. In 1806 a piece of land, two acres, was allotted to the use of the schoolmaster ; of this, part was reserved by him as his own garden, and the re- mainder let every year for the best rent obtain- able. In 1825 it produced 50s. The master taught eight poor children of the township with- out charge. For other children he made his own terms, and had generally between 20 and 30 scholars, who were instructed in reading, writing, and arithmetic. In 1867 there were about 50. Thomas Parkinson, by will 12 March, 1799, bequeathed £300 in the 3 per cent. annuities, the interest to be applied for instructing the 623 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE poor children in the township. John Taylor, by will 29 November, 1814, gave £50 to the churchwardens and overseers of Scotforth, the interest to be paid yearly to the school- master. CuxcHEeTH.—lIn the parish register there is an entry stating that John Guest of Abram gave enough money to build the school at Twiss Green, and also £10 towards a stock for the school; and that Adam Shaw and Christopher Boardman gave {10 each for the same purpose. This school, supposed to have been erected by John Guest, formed part of an old building. In 1808 a dwelling for the master having been erected, by indentures of lease and release, 2 and 3 October, 1808, reciting that the dwelling- house and schoolhouse were some time before built for Culcheth and its immediate neighbour- hood for teaching the English language and the precepts of the Christian religion, the inhabitants conveyed the schoolhouse to trustees. In 1820 a subscription was raised and applied in erecting a new schoolhouse. The schoolmaster had the use of this, and instructed in reading four poor girls. He also had paying scholars. Henry Johnson, by will 29 July, 1727, gave the inter- estof £221 35. 3d. South Sea Stock to his widow, and, after her death or marriage, for the free schooling at Twiss Green School, within Cul- cheth, of as many as possible of the poorest Protes- tant children, with books and clothes for each of them. Sixteen boys of Culcheth were taught by the master, who received on this account a salary of £9 per annum. The boys were gen- erally appointed when about eight years of age, and were allowed to remain three years ; they were taught reading free, but paid for 624 writing or accounts. In 1867 there were 138 children, of whom eight boys were free. SAMLESBURY.— The property of this school consisted of a dwelling-house in which the school- master resided and a croft adjoining, and another piece of land given by Mr. Petre. The master also received £8 yearly in pursuance of a resolu- tion passed at a public meeting of the inhabitants, when it was agreed that a piece of the waste, about 2 acres, which had been given to the town- ship by Mr. Braddyll for building a poorhouse, should be let, and a portion of the rent paid to the schoolmaster. There were 28 children in the school in 1867, paying 2d. a week. TatHam.—An endowed school, reputed to have been intended for the benefit of the lower division of this parish, has existed for a long period. The property, consisting of houses and lands, was let for a total rent of £25 4s. in 1826. The rents were paid over to the schoolmaster, who taught all the poor children of the lower division of Tatham whose parents chose to send them. Reading was taught gratuitously, but a quarteraze was charged for writing and arithmetic. For child- ren not of the lower division of the parish the master made his own terms. Huyton.—There was a schoolroom in the village of Huyton, built and kept in repair by the inhabitants. The only endowment consisted of a sum of £200 secured, with interest at 5 per cent., by two bonds given by the Corporation of Liver- pool, bearing date 24 January, 1786, and 12 January, 1789. The interest, amounting to £10, was paid to the schoolmaster, for which he instructed four boys, one from each of the town- ships of Huyton, Roby, Tarbock, and Knowsley, in reading, writing, and arithmetic. INDEX to VOLS. I Abbeystead (in Over Wyresdale), 48a, 67a, 68a, 714, 84a, 850 ; ii, 1314, 443, 452, 482a; Fell, i, 72 Abbotts, R. W., ii, 475 2 Abercrombie, Dr. D., 11, 4994 Abergavenny, see Hastings Abingdon, monks of, i, 367 Abisstide, see Abbeystead Abram, i, 3667, 3703 ii, 347, 349, 3592, 548 ; Hall, ii, 548 Abram, Mary, ii, "6158 ; Ric. de, i, 370 ; Rob. de, i, 370; ‘family of, i, 68 ‘AGealok prior of Cartmel, ii, 148@ Aca, theclerk, i, 329 Acclome, Laur. of, li, 1300 Accrington, i, 318 ; ii, 251, 268, 269, 280 n, 282, 287 m, 335, 349, 3564, 3604, 37024, 3744, 3914, 3924, 4086, 454, 455, 457, 460 %, 461, 4984 ; chap. il, 37%; Forest, il, 460 ; manor, 1, 318 ; mill at, ii, 275 ; Nonconformity ‘in, ii, 74, 75, 76%, 87, 90 : Ackers, mills at, 11, 295 Ackers, —, ii, 4764 ; Col. ii, 247 Acton Grange, ii, 1310 Acton (Ches.) manor, ii, 138 Adamson, Thom., ii, 6192 Adburgham, see Abram Addindale, ii, 273 Addingham, 1, 814 Adelard, i, 337% Adelphi, brotherhood called, ii, 94 Adlington, i, 335 #; ii. 179 2, 338, 349, 3986 Aelfwine, ii, 2 Aelfwold, ii, 5 # Aethelweard, ii, 178 % Affetside, ii, 458 Affleck, Admiral, ii, 4062 ; 4056. Agard, Clement, ii, 98; 98 Agbrigg wapentake (Yorks.), ii, 345 #% Agecroft, i, 1154, 122@, 1250, 1314, 138a Agmund the Hold, i, 258 Agnew, W., ii, 256 Aigburth, i, 46a, 644, 704, 1142, 116a, 1194, 1200, 1250, 1340; ii, 491a Aighton, i, 304, 335; i, 57, 184, 272%, 337 ; Manor, 1, 314 Aigueblanch, Peter d’, ii, 118 Aikton (Cumb.), Hodgson’s School at, li, 5934 Aincurt, Ralph de, i, 363 Ainsdale, i, 552, 56a, 73a, 4, 74a, 756, 76a, 119a, 1244 Ainsdale, Dan. John, ii, 112%; Will, 1i, 4030 Ainslie,—, ii, 464, and see Anesley Ainstable (Cumb.), i, 320 2 Phil., ii, Raf, ii, Ainsworth, i, 694, 319”; Cockey Moor, 1, 231, 237, 251, 3443 Unitarian Church at, ii, 69 Ainsworth, Gilb. ey li 1596 ; J., ii, 248; J. L, i, 4920; John, ii, 463, 6074; Rich. Son & Co.,, ii, 3986 5 Rob., ii, 598a Aintree, i, 434, 44, 450, 484, 494, 56a, 57a, 58a, 610, 63a, 646, 65a, 68a, 70a, 71a, 745, 75a, 796, 168 ; li, 346, 4084, 432, 472a, 0, 4744, 4804, 6, 4814, 6 Aitken, J., 1,14 Aire, Valley of, ii, 3510 Airedale, i, 317 ; ii, 201, 456 Akerington, see Accrington Akerman, —, ii, 542 Agriculture, ti, 419 Alan, i, 359 #3; ii, 280, and see Son of Jordan Alban of Alt, ii, 113 Albemarle, duke of, ii, 241 # ; earl of, i, 307 Albert, Prince Consort, ii, 253 Albini, Nigel de, i, 362 ; Oliver de, i, 323; Will. de, i, 320, 321 Albrighton (Staffs.), i, 334% Aldborough (Yorks.), ii, 261, 281 Aldcliffe, ii, 341, 563a, 564”; manor of, li, 1674, 5640, 1724 Alden, ii, 455, 458 Aldeparc and Litheak, see Aldport Alder, i, 984 Alderley Edge, i, 218 x Aldingham, i, 246, 254 ; ii, 8, 64, 78, 79 #, 100, IOI, 119@, 4, 1204, 122 2, 184 2, 339, 555, 556, 5575 558; barony of, il, 214; church of, iil, 6, 23, 24, 1236, 558; manor, ii, 1194, 557, and see Baycliffe Aldport Park, ii, 463 Alengon, Alench, John de, ii, 1720 Alexander, abbot of Furness, ii, 1204, 1214, 6, 1234, b, 1276 Alexander, king of Scotland, i, 308 Alexander III, Pope, ii, 28 2, 1036 Alexander IV, ii, 22, 118@ Alexander VI, ii, 1454 Alexander, —, il, 71; G. T,, il, 475 #, 4774 ; Mr. ii, 256 Algae, i, 79 ; Marine, i i, 81 Alien Priories, ii, 167 Alison, —, ii, 4744 Alkborough, manor of, i, 308 Alkinson, Mr., ii, 3604 Alkrington, i, 319 2; il, 200 ”, 344 Allan, Brewer, ii, 4764 Allanson, —, ii, 476a Allcroft, Mr., ii, 5914 Allen, —, ii, 54, 55; Cardinal, ii, 222; Isaac, ii, 64%; John, ii, 6192 ; Will., ii, 599@ ; Mrs., ii, 56 Allerdale, barony of, ii, 1266 Allerton, i, 562, 4, 590, 674, 326% ; ii, 157 7, 345, 349 ; Hall, i, 46d 625 and II Allington, i, 60a Allison, E., ii, 4764 ; T., ii, 4764 Allithwaite, 1, 244, 246, 254; ii, 1470 ; Lower, i, 46a, 474, 0, 66a, ii, 339; Upper, i li, 339 Alluvial deposits, i i, 29, 30 Almesburn (Suff.), 1, 326, 331 Almondbury, i, 308; castle of, i, 317 ; rectorial tithes in, ii, 6052 Alnwick, ii, 188 ; Priory, ii, 158% Alston, i, 49a, 61a, 644 ; ii, 334 Alt, River, i, 60a, 62a, 6,656, 1120, 114a, 118a, 2086 Altcar, i 130, 424, 44a, 484, 494, 592, 61a, 6, 62a, 6; ii, 92, 102, 345, 4724, 3, 4734, 4746, 475 2, 4774, 4780, 4834 Altham, i, 304: ii, 335, 455, 4573 advowson of, i, 1334 ; chap. of, il, 18, 19; church of, ji, 134a; manor, i, 318; Nonconformity in, ii, 70 ; Old Hall, ii, 548 Altham, lord of, ii, 133¢ Altham, Hugh de, i, 304; Rich. de, i, 304 ; Simon of, ii, 134 Altmouth, i, 114@ Alvanley, Lord, ii, 588¢ Alverstone, Lord, ii, 5012 Alvetham, John de, ii, 457; Rich. de, ii, 457; Simon de, ii, 457; Thom. de, ii, 457; fam. ii, 455 Alvred, i, 370 Alyn, Raut, ii, 6014 Ambleside, i, 2, 59a, 365 ; deanery of, ii, 101 Amblevill, Ernald de, i, 305 Ambrose, Elizaeus, ii, 50, 54; Isaac, 11, 67 Amesbury, li, 4752 Amounderness, i, 291, 294, 326, 335, 340, 352, 354, 3593 ll, 3,5, 7, 8, II, 12, 126, 1520, 1540, 1576, 177, 178, 179”, 180, 181, 185, IQT, 200, 304, 437, 445; 446, 456; churches of, ii, 17 ; deanery of, ii, 6, 29, 40%, 100, 184%, 205; Forest of, ii, 439, 440, 441 7, 443%, 444, 452, 453, 456; hun- dred and wapentake of, i, 304, 313) 314, 335, 350%, 352, 353 ; lly 52, 71, 93%, 94, 176, 220, 223, 231, 264, 284, 332, 333, 334, 349, 350, 439, 446, 454; lordship of, ii, 16846; population of, il, 286 Amounderness, lord of, ii, 1314 Amounderness, Adam, dean of, ii, 32 #, 99 Anchor Bridge, ii, 480a Ancoats, i, 326”, 3293 ; » 89, 3724, 3764, 3992, 5812, 6, 5834 Ancoats (Ancotes), Henry de, ii, 3984, 399@ ; Ralph de, i, 329 Andely, Drogo de, 1, 367 Anderton, 1, 330, 335 #3 ii, 199 7, 338, 438 # 79 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Anderton, Chris., ii, 98; Sir Fras., ii, 245 ; Hugh, ii, 97; James, }, 463; Peter, 1i, 98; R., , 4752 Andrew, G., 11, 476a. Andrews, Capt, ii, 243%; Mr., il, 5978 . Anesley, Nich., ii, 56 Anfield, i, 1254 Angerton, ii, 339 ”; Moss, il, 1214, 1276, 289 Angier, John, ii, 62, 63, 65, 67 Anglesey, Isle of, i, 184@, 1954, 1966 ; ii, 57, 58. Anglezark, i, II, 242, 251, 326%, 328” ; ii, 177, 342; Moor, i, 8, 10; li, 4824, b Angling, ii, 4670, 487 Anglo-Saxon Remains, i, 257, 260; il, 518, 542 ; weapons, i, 261, 262, and see Coins Angram-Green (nr. Worston) i, 7 Anjou, Hen. of, i, 294, 295 ; i, 186, 187, and see Hen. II, King Anlaf, the Black, i, 258 Annan, ii, 4120 Anne, Queen, ii, 244 Anscombe, A., ii, 175 Ansdell, i, 554; ii, 4964 Anston (Yorks.’, i, 292, 293 Anstruther, Sir W. C., 1, 4758 Anteley, ii, 460 Apodes, i, 186 Appleby (Westmld.), i, 364 Appleby (Leics.), i, 367 #; churchof, i, 368 ; ii, 1074, 1094; manorof, i, 368 Appleby (Lincs.), i, 323 ; manor, i, 325% Appleby Bridge, i, 1154 Appleby, A., ii, 4892, 6, 4900 ; family of, ii, 1076 Applethwaite Common, i, 4 Appleton, i, 298, 301 #, 303; ii, 3544, 3664, 455, 609a : manor of, i, 298, Appleton, Rob. of, ii, 1066; Will. ll, 407@ Appletree, ii, 443 Appletreeworth Beck, i, 2 Appuldrum, ii, 273 7 Arachnida, i, 145-156 Araneae, 1, 145-155 ae 1, 366”, 370, 371, 374; ii, 34 Archdale, Capt., ii, 475 7 Archdeaconries, ii, 8, 9, 10 Archer, F., i, 111, 112; James, ii, 5774 . Arches, Court of, ii, 31, 1344, 1364 Arches, Roger de, i, 303 ; Will. de, i, 303, 318; family of, il, 455 Arden, Rob. de, 11, 1654 Arderne, Rich. Pepper, ii, 588@ Ardwick, i, 19, 326%; ii, 279, 349, 356a, 371a; deanery, li, 100; Green, ii, 408@; villeins of, ii, 2782 Argarmeols, i, 303 Argenteles, Emery de, ii, 1724 Argyll, Nich. of, see Sodor and Man, bp. of Argyll, earl of, ii, 216 Arkholme (with Cawood), i, 38, 46a, 646, 685, 72a, 786, 84a, 319 2: il, 340, 520, 521, 543; Chapel Hill, ti, 521, 522, 527, 529, 536; church’. of, 1, 52%, -§22'; Moor, i, 464, 554, 572, 684, 776 Arkwright, Rich., ii, 302, 306, 3794, 3854, 4, 3864, 3874, 6, 3882 Arley in Blackrod, li, 359¢, 547; Hall, ii, 4984, 548 Arlington, Lord, ii, 241% Armada, Spanish, the, 11, 227 Armagh, archbp. of, ii, 1294 Armestead, Thom., ii, 6044 Armetridding, Thom., ii, 601@ Armitage, Leonard Lockhart, 1, 4716 Armour, Canon, ii, 612@ Armstrong, Sir W. G. Whitworth & Co., ii, 3532, 3724, 3744 Arnold, Dr., ii, 5884 Arnset, see Arnside Arnside, i, 42a, 105; Moss, ii, 362@ Amulf, a chaplain, ii, 21 Arpley Fields (nr. Warrington), i, 250 Arreton (I. of Wight), i, 235 Arrowsmith, Mr., li, 587a Arscott, John, ii, 45, 96, 97 Arthropods, i, 23 Arthur, King, ii, 175; Prince, ii, 21 Hennitel (Suss.), honour of, i, 340% Arundel, Will. de, i, 364 Asbestos, i, 408 Ascroft, Hen., ii, 6102; R.L., i, 93, 161, 171, 175 Ashall, Thom., ii, 98 Ashburne, Rich. ti, 5986 Ashburner, Miss, 1, 444, 58a Ashcroft, Richard, ii, 622@ ; Major, i, 247 Ashdown Park, ii, 475a, 4762, 4786 Ashfield, ii, 554 Ashgill quarry, i, 2 Ashley mill, i, 984 Ashton, i, 38, 434, 444, 474, 494,50 M, 694, 704, 732, 6, 74a, 198a, 292 n, 359”, 366%, 372; ii, 249, 252, 255, 299, 313, 315, 320, 321, 334, 3564, 536, 554,555 ; manor of, i, 364; li, 147@; Nonconfor- mity in, ti, 79, 82 Ashton (Ches.), manor of, ii, 138 Ashton in Makerfeld, ii, 348, 349, 548; manor-house of, ii, 93 # Ashton on Mersey, i, 1304, 134a, 2034 Ashton on Ribble, i, 514, 1414 Ashton with Stodday, i, 357%; ii, li, 412@; 341 Ashton under Lyne, i, 16, 20, 69a, 736, 79, 214, 218%, 227, 229, 251, 327, 335%; i, 6, 17, 48, 99, ToT, 1134, 251, 307, 319, 342, 2447, 3564, 3736, 3924, 586a ; cress of, ii, 89; moss, i, 16, 424, 454, 51a, 62a; ii, 554; advow- son of chap. of i, 332 ; church of, li, 6”, 7, 23, 286m”; deanery of, ii, 100; manor of, ii, 280; Nonconformist sects at, ii, 86, 89, go ; rectory of, ii, 38, 64; rector of, ii, 32, 63 Ashton Edge, ii, 502@ Ashton Hall, ii, 240 Ashton, Sir Edw., ii, 591a@ ; Gilb. de, i, 359%; Luke, ii, 3654; Ralph, ii, 3654 ; Sir Ralph, i, 207 ; Robt., ii, 65 ; Sir Thom., ii, 297 ; W., ii, 247 ; Lord, ii, 569@; Mr., ii, 52, and see Assheton Ashurst, Hen. (of Ashurst), ii, 62 ; Thom. Hen., ii, 6214 ; Will., ii, 232, 233; Major, ii, 240 Ashworth, i, 694; ii, 344, 427; chap., ii, 37%; Common, ii, 289 ; Moor, i, 232, 251 626 Ashworth, James, ii, 61 #; J. D., ii, 248; Percy, ii, 5o1a; family of, li, 3614 Askam in Furness, 11, 4974 Aske, Rob., ii, 44, 1374, 217, 218, 288 Aslackby, Will. of, ii, r10é Aspinall, J., ii, 4804 ; John, ii, 1064; Ralph John, il, 4714 Aspull, i, 326”, 330; ii, 288, 289, 345, 349, 548, 6094 . Assheton, Asshton, Edm., ti, 97, 234; Sir Edw., ii, 6044 ; James, ii, 228, 6102; Ralph, il, 97, 232, 234, 235, 237, 239,461 ; Rich., ii, 1384, 220, 583a; Sir Rob. de, i, 345 ; Thom., ii, 98, 613@ ; family of, ii, 233, ad see Ashton Asshpotts Wood, li, 447 Astley, i, 23, 303 ; 11, 64@, 346, 4762, 548 ; chap. at, ii, 6154; Moss, i, 1346; school at, ii, 5614, 615¢; tithes of, ii, 6150 Astley, John, ii, s91a; Capt., il, 243% Aston Munslow, Shropshire, i, 367, 368 Aston, Sir Edw,, ii, 98 Athelstan, King, ii, 5, 177, 178 Atherton, i, 340; il, 346, 3658 Atherton, Hen., i, 340; John, ii, 611a; Sir John, il, 97, 98, 220; Will. de, i, 340 Atiscros, hundred of (Flintshire), ii, 179” Atkinson, Geo., ii, 450 ; John, ii, 43, 5986; Thom,, ii, 5916; Will, it, 3676; Mr., ii, 366a Attercliffe, Elias, ii, 161” Audenshaw, ii, 1134, 3594, 3984 Aughton, i, 514, 77a, 836, 84a; ii, 71 991 345, 3664, 3674, 456, 553 ; chap. of, ii, 6184; church of, ii, 6”, 7, 23, 50; manor of, i, 368 ; rectors of, ii, 31 ; school at, il, 6185 Augustine, St., ii, 4 Aumale, Will. of, i, 305, 324 Aundernesse, see Amounderness Austin Canons, i, 298, 314; ii, 102, 140-153; Friars, ii, 21, 29, 102, 162 Austwick, i, 3; ii, 180” Avenham Institution, Preston, ii, 5746 Avranches, de Abrincis, Ewan d’, li, 130a Axon, Ernest, ii, 400” Ayeside, i, 3, 227, 229, 254 Aynsome (Cartmel), i, 245, 254 Aynwine Lake, i, 246 Aysterby, John de, i, 323 Back Cowm, i, 11 Backbarrow, i, 46a, 50a ; ii, 3634, 364a Backbarrow Forge, ii, 3636 Backhouse, —, ii. 566a Backston Bank, ii, 451 Bacon, Alex., i, 325; Sir. Nich. house of, 349 ‘ Bacopbothe,’ see Herleyhead Bacstanden, see Baxtonden Bacun, Agnes, i, 356 Bacup, i, 12, 14; ii, 73) 74, 252, 321, 3564, 3782, 3862, 3924, 458, 6134, 76 a, 336”, 460”; non- a at, lM, 73, 74, 75, 77, 76m, Baelines, Randle de, i, 369 Baerlein, E. M., ii, Sora Bagley, Thom., son of Thom,, ii, 4054 Bagshaw, John, ii, 402 Bagslate, ii, 497 Baguley, Will., ii, 586a, 6162, 6214 ; Sir Will. de, ii, 200 % Bailiff, office of, ii, 267 Bailey, ii, 3H chantry chap. of, ii, 37, 4 Bailey, De. Harold, i, 105, 111 Bailrigg, manor of, ii, "66a Baines, Edw., priest, ii, 1660 ; Jas. il, 620a, 6; John, ii, 595a, and see Baynes Bake, James, ii, 4762, 477a ; T., ii, 4726 Bakehouse, Rich., ii, 146 2 Baker (cricketer), ii, 489@, 4900, 4916, 4920 Bakewell, Mr., ii, 426 Balcarres, earl of, ii, 248 Balderstone, ii, 336, 5960 Baldwin, see Canterbury, archbp. of Baldwin, Will, ii, 597 Balestro, or Banastre, the, i, 366 Balfour, Arth. Jas., li, 259, 50la Balistarius, Balistor, _ Balaster, Helpo, i, 366% ; Rich., i, 367, and see Banaster Ball, John, jun., ii, 495 2; 496a Ballard, Rob., ii, 50; Will, ii, 30 Ballaster, see Banastre Ballymaden, chap. of, ii, 1440 Ballysax (Ireland), ch. ii, 1446 Balmain & Parnell, ii, ora Balshaw, Rich., ti, 6014 Balshaw’s School, Leyland, ii, 6014 Bamber Bridge (nr. Preston), ii, 3035 ; Bamber, —, ii, 612@; Margt., ii, 6184; Will, ii, 6182 Bamborough, Ambrose of, ii, 1104 Bamford, i, 46a, 694, 70a, 73a, 4, 744, 6,776, 78a, 6 ; ni, 382@ Bamford, Chas., ii, 74 Bamfurlong (in Abram), ii, Hall, ii, 548 Banaster, Banastre, Ballaster,Adam, i, 366 2, 371 7, 373; li, 1714, 198, oe Alan,i, 367 ; ’Alesia, dau. of James, 1, 373 5 Alice, w.of Rob. 1, 372, 373%; Amuria, dau. of Mar- gery, i, 368; Avice, dau. of Mar- gery,i, 368; Cecilia, w. of Thurstan, 1,371 ; Clemence, "dau. of Rob. i, 3733 Clementina, w. of Rob., i, 371; Ellen, w. of James, i, 37323 Godfrey, i, 368 ; Geoffrey, 11, 1630; James, i, 3733 ‘John, i, 371, 372; ii, 136%; Laur., li, 571a@; Mar- garet, ii, 1070; Margery, i, 367, 368 ; Maud, i, 367, 368; Nich., li, 517, 228, 570a, b, 5714, 5; Quenilda, dau. of Margery, 1, 368 ; Rich., i, 303, 366 #, 367, 368, 369, 370; Rob., i, 303, 304, 318, 366, 367, 368, 369, 370, 371, 372, 375 3 li, 19%, 189, 442%; Roger, i, 366%; Sarah, wife of Warin, i, 371; Sibil, dau. of Rob., i, 373; Thom, ii, 201 ; Sir Thom., ii, 199, 456; Thurstan, i, 303, 304, 367, 368, 369, 370, 371; i, 155a; Warin, i, 368, 369, 370, 371; Will., i, 3717; ii, 1366; Mr. li, 242 ; family of, i, 367 ; ii, 18, 213, and See Balistarius Tae 5473 INDEX Banaster of Bank, family of, i, 371 Banbury (Oxf.), school, li, 5814, 5830 Bancroft., see Canterbury, archbp. of Bangor, i it »414n Bangor, John Bird, bp. of, ii, 40, and see Chester, bp. of Banke, Adam, ii, 3640; Alex., ii, 1224, 131a; Humph., li, 3646, 365@; Rich., ii, r24@; Thom,, ii, 365¢ ; Will., ii, 365 Banner, Nathan, i il, 4054 Bannisdale Foot, i, 4 Bannishead Moor, i ii, 558 Baptists, sect of, ii, 73-7 Barbon Beck, i, 38 Barborne, Edw. ii, 146d Barcroft, Nich., i, 453 Bardtield, Little (Essex), i, 346” Bardney Abbey, i, 298 Bardoule, Conan de, ii, 130d Bardsey, Bardsea, i, 542, 245 ; ii, 1266, 1420, 412a@ ; Island, i, 1834 Bardsey, Chris., ii, 122 2; john, ii, 142a ; Thom. of, ii, 1208 ; Will. de, ii, 1400; family of, ii, 1192, 1420 Bardsley, i, 33, 694, 90, 98a, 994 Bare, i, 454, 484, 49a, 626, 654; il, 341, 622a Barington (Cambs.), 366 Barker, —, ii, 289 ; James, ii, 6054; Thom. ti, 6188 Barkstead, John, ii, 3844 Barley Booth, ii, 269”, 335, 458, 459; John, ii, 1100 Barlings Abbey, ii, 1580 Barlow, i, 98a, 4, 1326, 1330 Barlow, —, ii, 4890, 4904, 4, 4914; Alex., ii, 50%; Edw., ii, 3694; John Rob., ii, 600a; Thom., ii, 1636, 1640 Barnacre, i, 484, 49a, 73a, 770, 840, 85a, 5, 222, 229, 251, 357%; li, 332, 4724, 550 Barnby, John of, ii, 1104, 1126 Barnes, —, ii, 4892, 490, 0, 4934 ; Rich., see Durham, bp. of ; Thom. li, 3864 ; Will.,ii,79 ; Zacariah, ii, 4046 Barnetby (Lincs.), i, 328 Barnett, Nehemiah, ii, 64 2 Barnoldswick, i, 317 7 ; ii, 454, 524; abbey of, i, 317; Baptist church of, ii, 76 Baron, Ann, ii, 6204 Barrington, manor (Cambs.), i, 365 Barrow, i, 39, 420, 430, 534, 540, 550, 58a, 72a, 76a, 173, 176, 1864, 188; ii, 353@,6, 364 4, 3764, 412a, 4140, 4974 Barrow in Burtonwood, ii, 547, 548 Barrow in Furness, i, 6, 81, 228, 229, 2543 li, 258n, 339, 3742, 3754,6 " Barrow Island, Old, ii, 3754 Barrow, Sir John, ii, 6142@ ; Will, ii, 5726, 5864 Barrowford, ii, 290”, 308%, 311, 335, 458, 459, 4607 Barrows (burial), i, 211, 212, 213, 214, 216, 218, 225, 234, 235, 238, 261; ii, S11, 532; and see Interments avd Burial Urns Barry, Hon. J. S., li, 4794 Bartle Hall, ii, 4700 Barton, i, 434, 442, 52a, 59a, 600, 1354, 340, 358, 365, 306; ii, 334, 472a; manor of, i, 332, 334, 366 627 manor of, i, Barton, nr. Halsall, i, 338 Barton Moss, i, 674, 684, 69a, 770, 78a, 120a, 1226, 1464 Barton upon Irwell, i, 1354, 212, 249, 251, 326 2, 3303 ii, 343, 548 Barton (Westmld, ), church of, i, 365 Barton, Edith, lady of, i, 330 Barton, Gilb. de, i, 322, 330, 332 Barton, B. T., il, 596a@; John, Be 1514, 152a; Thom. li,97; W.R li, 4024 Bartonhead, i, 359, 360 Barwick, in Elmet, castle of, i, 317 Barytes, i, 29 Bashall, ii, 458 Basingwerk, abbey of, i, 369; castle of, i, 369 Basset, Alan, i, 329; Gilb., i, 329 ; Isabel, i, 328; Rich., i, 3203 Thom. as 329, 3533 Will. +) li, 444 Basset- Smith, P. W., i, 175, 176 Basset & Smith, ii, 3680 Bate, J. R., ii, 6104 Bateman, James, ti, 3682, 5984 Bath, Rob., bp. of, i, 316 Bath and Wells , John Drokensford, bp. of, ii, 22, 27; Will. Knight, bp. of, ii, 41 ‘ Batherarghes,’ see Batterax Bathson, James, ii, 5854 Bathurst, Col., ii, 4757 Bathwood, i, 564 Battlefield, chantry or college, ii, 35 Batterax, ii, 4587, 460 Battersbie, John, ii, 611@ Baugh Fell, West, i, 38 Baugham, Josiah & Co., ii, 3940 Baund, John, ii, 452 Bauwens, Liévin, ii, 3540 Baxsterden, Will, ii, 5624, 563@ Baxter, T., ii, 4112 Baxtonden, ii, 460 # Bayeux, Rich. of, ii, 1154, 1300 Bayeux, bp. of, i, 313 ; Odo, bp. of, i, 315 ; Phil., bp. of, 313 2 Baycliffe (Aldingham), 1, 245, 254; ii, 78, 412a Bayley, Thom., ti, 394@; Mr., ii, 424 a Bayly, J., il, 4720, 475 ” Bayne, Chris., ii, 109@; Thom., ii, 6034 Baynes, Thom., ii, 565, and see Baines Bayrlegh, ii, 460 2 Baysbrown in Langdale (Westmld)., li, 1420 Beacon Fell, i, 48a; covert, ii, 484a Beadle Hill, ii, 553 Bealey J., ii, 248 Beams (Wilts.), manor of, ii, 150a Beasley, H. C., i, 32 Beattie, Dr., ii, 4980 Beatty, Geo., ii, 5o1a Beaubec, abbot and convent of, ii, 126% Beauchamp, Paynde,i, 300%; Simon de, i, 300 7 Beauford, J. S., ii, 496a Beaufort, Marg., see Richmond, countess of Beaumes (nr. Reading), manor of, ii, 204 Beaumont, ii, 4373 manor, li, 444; grange of, ii, 1148, 121@, 126a, 1274, 1286 ; tithes of, ii, 1704 Beaumont, Dame Joan, w. of Sir Hen., ii, 283 ; John ii, 98 ; Lady, ii, 4998 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Beaver, Alfred, ii, 5742 Becconsall, i, 337, 340 ; chap. ii, 37 ” Beche, Margery de la, ii, 150a, 204, 112 ” Becher, Capt., ii, 480a, 4 Beck, Conrad, i, 168 Bedall, Nich. of Coventry, ii, 109a@ Bede, the Venerable, 1, 4, 263 Bedford, i, 324, 329, 363 #5 Ui, 346, 548; castle, 1, 305; Grammar School, ii, 5740 Beechey, St. Vincent, ii, 6144, 4 Beeston Castle, i, 306 Beetham, ii, 180 ; manor of, ii, 181 Beetham, Thom. de, i, 303, 304, 368 ; Ralph de, ii, 1574, 2, 1440; family of, ii, 26, 368 Beethams of Bryning and Kella- mergh, family of, ii, ro8a Beethom, Rev. John, ii, 5672, 5682, 0 Beetles, see Coleoptera Bekanesgill, Vale of, ii, 1144 Belaugh (Norfolk), i, 350, 351; manor of, i, 355 Belfield John of, 11, 1392 Bell —, ii, 3844 ; Elizabeth, ii, 6164 ; John ii, 478a; Roger, ii, 1208; Thom., ii, 3964, 3974; W., ii, 4944 ; Will. of Huyton, ti, 67 Bell a/ias Burton, John, ii, 58 Belléme, Lelehem, Belesme, Rob. de, i, 315; il, 184, 196” Bell-foundries, ii, 364, 365 Bellhouse —, ii, 4674 Belmeis, Rich. de, see London, bp. of, i, 367 Belmont, Bellmount, i, 11; ii, 498@ Benedictines, the order of, ii, 27, 102, 104, 1664 Benesing the Hold, i, 258 Bentham, ii, 43, 462, 180” Bentham, Will, ti, 1564 Bentinck, Lord Geo., ii, 4808 Bennet —, ii, 70; Job, ii, 81 ; John, li, 82, 84 Bent Hall, li, 3932 Berdeshaw, ii, 458, 460 ” ‘Berdeshagh,’ see Berdeshaw ‘ Berdeswurthgrave,’ il, 419 Berdshaw Booth, ii, 459 Beri, seé Bury Berkhampstead, ii, 201 ; castle, ii, 203” Bernevill, Hawise, dau. of Emery de, i,371 2; Maud, dau. of Emery de, i, 371” Beron, see Byron Bersham Iron Works (nr. Wrex- ham), ti, 3634 Berthollet (a French chemist), ii, $520,508) Bertwistle, James, ii, 4974 Beshe (Beck), Stephen, ii, 50 Besom Hill, i, 215, 228, 251 Bessemer,—, li, 3534, 3734 Beswick, 1, 3267, li, 349 Beswick, Chas., ii, 5864 ; Rich., ii, 37 Beverley, ii, 115a, 127a@; precentor of, ii, 145@ Bewsey, i, 346, 347; ii, 283, 298, 502a, 528, 547; manor of, i, 348; Tudor house at, ii, 548; Valley, i, 32 Bexley, monastery of, ii, 139a, 7 Bexwyk, Alex., ii, 5792, 5812; Hugh, ii, 5780, 579@, 5804, 5812, 582a, 5844¢; Joan, ii, 5804, 5812, 582, 5842 ; John ii, 5784, 5796 ; Rich., 1, 5794, 5800, 5814; Rob, ii, 5814 Beyer, Chas., F. ii, 3734 Beyer, Peacock & Co., 1i, 373@ Bibby, J. H., ii, 4734, 4, 4746 Bibby-Hesketh, C. H., 1, 4972 Bickershaw Hall, i, 251; ii, 548 Bickerstaffe, ii, 346, 3660, 4042, 4724, 4776 ; Moss, i, 440 7 Bickerstaffe, Bickerstath, Marg., ii, 6184 ; fam. ii, 456 Biddle, John, ii, 68 Bidston church, 1, 347 ‘ Biestorp,’ i, 321 Bigby (Lincs.), i, 328 Biggar Bank, 1, 474 Bigland, Geo., ii, 6176; Hen., ii, 6176; James, il, 463 Bigod, Roger, i, 305 Bilion, Ranulf, i, 337 Billingahoth, nr. Whalley, ii, 176 Billinge, i, 56, 366; 1, 176, 349, 356a, 616a, 617a; chap. il; 48; Chapel End, ii, 347, 6174 ; Higher End, ii, 1126, 347, 6174 ; school at, li, 617a Billington, i, 304; ii, 1384, 176”, 336, 462, 463, 464; manor, 1, 318; ii, 138%; Moor, i, 8 Billington, Adam de, i, 304; Elias de, 1, 303; Geo., il, 1594; Nich. ii, 1394; Will, ii, 1398 Billston, James, ii, 3794. Bilsborrow, ii, 332 Bilsborrow, John, see Salford, bp. of Bilsthorpe (Notts.), 1, 328 Binning, S. J., i, 475 # Birch, 1, 984, 155a@; ii, 65 ; House, 4, 554 : Birch, Thom., ii, 234; Capt., ii, 243 2; Col., ii, 235, 237 Birchcliffe (Yorks.), Baptist church of, li, 77 Birchin, John de, i, 319% Bird, John, ii, 3654; Wentworth, ii, 5998 Birds, i, 189 Birely, Isabel, w. of Thom., ii, 6044, 6054 Birkdale, i, 30, 534, 55a, , 60a, 610, 626, 64a, 65a, 666, 67a, 720, 734, 4, 74a, 6, 754, 6, 76a, 79a, b, 82a, 108, 1124, 1134, 1144, 4, 1154, 116a, 6, 118a, 6, 119a, 4, 120a, 6, 121a, 6, 124a, 6, 1252, 126a, 1284, 1294, 1354, 1492, 303, 335.7; il, 346, 349, 4764, 4960 ; Park, i, 1468, 1520 Birkenhead i, 1104, 347; ii, 4140, 6004 ; priory, ll, 102 Birkett, Edw., ii, 3674 payee Common, i, 245, 246, 254, 5 Birewith, i, 360; ii, 1274 Birley, Chas. Addison, ii, 4700; Joseph, ii, 402a; Hugh Hornby, li, 402a Birmingham, ii, 250, 3077, 308, 3524, 3854, 4000 Birmingham, Peter de, i, 355 Birtle cum Bamford, i, 319 7 ; ii, 344 Birtlees, J. E., ii, 499a Birtley, Rich. of, ii, 110 Biscopham, see Bispham Biscuit-making, ii, 408 Bishop, Will., see Chalcedon, bp. of Bishop’s Wood, ii, 465 Bispham, i, 714, 319 #, 340; ii, 5 2, II, 1682, , 288, 332, 338, 4994; chap., ii, 18, 16846, 1694, 10%, 29%, 37”; church, ii, 11, 353; school at, ii, 5612, 6124 628 Bispham, Little, i, 242 Bispham, Hen. de, i, 370 ; family of, ii, 368 Bitherarghis, see Batterax Black Brow’s Coppice, ii, 465 Black Clough, i, 11, 554 Black Death, the, ii, 25, 29, 30, 31, 1534, 1554, 1634, 199, 204, 205, 285, 286 Black Friars, the, ii, 21, 102, 161 Black Hall Quarry, i, 7 Blackstone Edge, i, 215, 216, 228, 251; 1,553. Black Prince, the, ii, 33 Black (Niger), William, ii, 1308 Blackburn, i, 1974 ; ii, 7, 15%, 25 , 66n, 72m, 18, 52, 540, 564, 604, 64, 71a, 74, 99, 212, 217, 237, 250, 251, 252, 281, 299, 301, 30°, 312, 313, 317, 319, 320, 325, 336, 356a, 3706, 371a, 373, 376%, 3774, 3834, 3914,3924, 3962, 4974, 593; archdeaconry of, ii, 100; chantries in, ii, 37, 38, 590@; chap. of, ii, 606a; chapter of, ii, 99; church of, i, 307, 319; ii, 6, 7, 13 #, 14 2,18, 23 2, 1384; deanery of, ii, 6,99, 100, 29 m, 40” ; grammar school at, ii, 37, 298, 5614, 5692, 590,591; hundred or wapentake of, 1, 257, 265, 303, 313, 317, 326, 369; i, 8, 71, 94, 1614, 184, 193, 202, 220, 223, 231, 298, 334, 335, 336, 337, 349, 350 }. Moor, ii, 291 ; Nonconformity in, ii, 71, 75, 80, 86, 87, 90, 76”; Park, i, 11, 1954, 196a; rectory, ii, 7, 13, 18, 132a, 6, 606a; rector of, ii, 17, 18, 50; Roman Catholic deanery, il, 95 ; vicarage, ii, 15; vicar of, li, 15, 16”, 28, 31,135", and see Blakeburnshire Blackburn, Adam de, i, 303, 319; Hen. de, i, 303; ii, 274; J., ii, 248 ; Joan, ii, 198; John de, ii, 198 2; Richard de, i, 319, and see Blakeburn Blackburne, —, ii, 472a, 4854; Col. Ireland, ii, 483a, 6, 485a, 486a Blackburnshire, ii, 136”, 186 7, 455, 456; chase of, ii, 454-466; Forest of, ii, 263, 268, 269, 278 x ; hundred, ii, 454; manor of, ii, 211n Blackley, i, 694, 714, 72a, 73, 74a, 207, 326 2, 329; ii, 61, 343, 3982; chap. ii, 63; manor of, ii, 293; Nonconformity in, ii, 69; Park, li, 463 Blackpool, i, 26, 32, 39, 44a, 45a, 694, 70a, 716, 73a, 79a, 80, 88, 90, 91, I10a, 116a, 130a, 132/, 145, 147, 1484, 6, 1514, 152a, 6, 153a, 156a, 162, 164, 172, 175, 182d, 1834, 184a, 1856, 1862, 3, 224, 228, 229, 251 ; ii, 4124, 4134, 4156, aoe, 4, 4724, 4966, 5008, 6, 18a; deanery, ii and see Shore, sou Blackrod, i, 224, 229, 251, 292 ; ii, 184%, 342, 349, 553; grammar school, li, 5614, 6064, 6075 Blackwall, Ric., ii, 98 oo —, ii, 4804 Blainscough Hall (Coppull), ii, 548 Blake, Adam de, i reste wanes Blakeburn, Adam de, i, 372”; John de, ii, 419, and see Blackburn Blakenham ‘Suff.\, i, 326”; Little, 1, 3267, 331 Blakey Close, ii, 460 Blanchard, Rich., i, 322, 323 ; Will., 1, 322, 323 “ Blanghesbi’ (Derb.), i, 292 Blanshard, G., ii, 475 2 Blatchinworth, ii, 345, 553 Blauncheland, John de, il, 110 # Blawith, i, 56a; il, 142, 340 Blaxton, Ralph, ii, r10é Blaze Moss, 1, 552, 744 Bleaberry Haws, Torver, i, 245 ; ii, 559 Bleaching industry, ii, 398 Bleasdale, i, 56a, 68a, 754, 76d, 211, 215, 228, 243, 244, 246, 251 ; ii, 263 2, 284, 333, 420, 437, 441 2, 443, 445,446, 454, 4824, 0; Fell, i, 754; Forest of, ii, 269, ‘287 #, 438, 445, 446, 455, 456, 4674 ; Moor, i, Blegham, John of, ii, 562a ; Sigred, li, 5624 Blelham Tarn, i, 40, 614, 636 Blestale, see Bleasdale Blewbury (Berks.), parsonage of, ii, 6084 Blindhurst, ii, 443 Blockley, Thom. of, ii, 1064 Blois, Chas. of, i, 345 ; Stephen of, i, 292, 293, 337; ii, Io, 163%, 170a, 184, and see Stephen, King ; Will. de, i, 336, 359, azd see Boulogne, count of, and War- enne, earl of Blore Heath, battle of, ii, 214 Blount, Father, ii, 60 % Bloxham, i, 328 Bloxholme (Lincs.), i, 326 #, 331 Blundell, i, 338 Blundell, —, ii, 4724, 475a; Nich., ii, 4794; Rich., i, 340 ; ii, 53, 58; Rob. of Ince, i ii, 53; W,, li, 4806 ; Will, i, 3405 ii, 58, 243; "Mr. of Crosby, ii, 421 Blundellsands, i, 30, 44a, 52a, 584, 655, 664, 1974, 4964 Blundeville, Agnes, sister of Ranulf de, i, 296 ; ii, 194 ; Ranulf de, see Chester, earl of Blyth, honour of, i, 294 Blyton (Lincs.), 319 2, 320 Boardman, Chris., li, 6244 ; Thom., ii, 4022, 5982 3 Will, ii, 5974, 5982, 6026 Boarshaw (in Middleton), ii, 576 Boggart Hole Clough, i, 692, 726 Bohun, house of, i, 297 Bohun, Will. de) i ii, 1720 Bold, i, 191, 341, 346; ; ii, 288, 548 ; Cranshaw Hall in, il, 548 ; Bold House in, ii, 57 on 547, 548; moat house in, ii, 548 Bolde (Bold), Fras., ii, 97, 98; Geoffrey, ii, 212; Sir John, ii, 1632 ; Rich., ii, 98, 216 ; Sir Rich., ii, 5024, 0 Bolebeck, Philippa, dau. of Hugh de, i, 365 Bolingbroke, ii, 197 # Bolland, Baptist church, ii, 75 Bollin, i, 110@, 1224 Bollin River, i, 114@, 118a, 1192, 1214, 6 Bollin Valley, i, 105, 1208, 122a, 4, 1236, 1244, 1254, 1264 Bollyng, John, ii, 36 Bolton, i, 16, 21, 23, 424, 49a, 692, 706, 72a, é, 744, 105, 106, Io9ga, I10a, 112a, 6, 1134, 1142, b, i, 115@, 1162, 1224, d, 1234, 0, 128, INDEX Bolton (conz.) 1294, 1314, 132a, 133a, 4, 143, 144a, b, 211, 212, 224, 226, 229, 231, 234, 241, 251, 252; il, 4, 37%, 48, 64, 70, 72%, 99, 127%, 1724, 195 ny, 237, 238, 240, 250, 251, 252, 258 ny 299, 300, 307, 308, 309, 310, 313, 317, 319, 324, 338 7, 3526, 3562, 6, 3574, 0, 3694, 3734, 3742, 3764, d, 3770, 3794, 3834, 3854, 4, 3870, 3910, 3924, 398, 399@, 407a, 564%, 4764, 4956, 4982, 6, 4990, 596, 600a, 6184 ; church Of; li, 6, 7 1, 6186’; deanery of, ii, 100} manor of, ii, 127@, 194; marketat, ii, 281; Nonconformity i in, li, 69, 75, 80, 82, 83, 84, 86, 87, ’89, go ; priory, ji, 3514, 3574, 3814; Roman Catholic deanery, ti, 95 ; schools, ii, 298, 500a, 5614; vicar of, ii, In Bolton by Bowland (Yorks.), i, 353 Bolton, Great, ii, 342, 6184; school at, ii, 6180 Bolton in Lonsdale, 40n Bolton le Moors, i, 212, 214, 215, 228, 264, 296m; ii, 296, 342; church of, ii, 10 2, 13, 22; Church Institute school, ii, 6006; gram- mar school, ii, S612, 5962 ; mar- kets and fairs at, ii, 292 Bolton le Sands, i, 628, 266 ; il, 4, 8 x, 100, 147a, 183 2, 280%, 340, 412a, 561a ; advowson of, ii, 1674, 168a, 169a; church, ti, 6%, 87, Io”, 13, 18, 22; rectory, li, 21, 32; school of, ii, 613@ Bolton, Little, ii, 342, 456 Bolton, H., i, 32, 33, 34, 35 ; Hen. de, ii, 43875 John of, i, 1182, 1314; Rich. of, li, 1434 ; Roger de, ii, 456; ; Will. yli, 1500; ‘Lieut. -Colonel, li, 247 ; family of, ii, 119d Bonetable, Agnes, 1, 301 7 Boniface VIII, Pope, ii, 1334, 134a, 1496 Boniface IX, ii, 141”, 1458, 150d, 1554, 6 Bonnor, E. J., ii, 6074 Bononia (Bologna), Pascal de, ii, 1640 Bonville, Lord, ii, 214 Booth, ii, 6134 Booth, Capt., ii, 243 Booth, John, of Barton, ii, 33, see Exeter, bp. of ; Sir John, ii, 216; Sir George, ii, 234, 240, 2422; Laur., see Durham, bp. of, and York, archbp. of; Will., ii, 65, 88, see Coventry and Lichfield, bp. of; Sir Will., of Dunham, i, 349; family of, 11, 33 Booth or Shepherd, Agnes, ii, 103 Boothby, ch.,i, 291 ; man.,i, 292 Booths, Higher, ii, 335 ; Lower, ii, rectory, ii, 5 Bos iuian, John, ii, 477a; Tom, ii, 4774, 4784 Bootle, i, 32, 424, 44a, 524, 594, 62a, b, 65a, 736, 1194; il, 349, 3666; Baptist church, ii, 75 ; deanery of, ii, 1or Bootle cum Linacre, ii, 347 Bootle, Rich. Wilbraham, ii, 6214 Boradalle, Gawyne, ii, 1184 Bordley, ii, 5654 Borough Hall Park, i, 602 Boroughbridge, ii, 201 629 Borradailes and Atkinson, Messrs., ii, 3946 Borron, —, ti, 4744, 4754, 476a ; ii, 4780; Wr. G,, ii, 4754 Borrowdale, i ii, 1264, 1284, 1294 Borwick, i, 514, 52a, 0, 64a, 6, 710, 76a, 79a, 84a, 85a, 6, 357%; 1, 341, 6130 Bosedon, Jordan of, ii, 1592 Bostock, Hen., ii, 6034 Boston, ii, 1272 Boston, Will. of, ii, 159@ Boswell, Sir James, ii, 475@ Botany, i, 37 Boteler Grammar School, Warring- ton, ii, 6012-603 Boteler, see Butler Botton, i, 74a; Head Fell, i, 720, 82a; Mill, i, 48a Boulers, Reginald, see Lichfield, bp. of Boulogne, Stephen, count of, ii, 1144, 537, and see Stephen, King ; Will. de Blois, count of, i, 320, 335; ii, 160¢; Will. de Warenne, count of, li, 187, 444” Boulsworth, ii, 454, 482@ Boult, Benjamin, ii, 79 2 Boulton, ii, 3522 Boulton, Geoffrey de, ii, 122 ; Hen. de, i, 330; Rob. ii, 5974 ; Boulton & Watt, ii, 3862 Bourne, —, li, 5874; Hugh, ii, 88, 89; John, il, 61 2 Bowden, i, 109%, I10a, 1174, 1380, 1424; ii, 4820 Bowes, Francis, li, 6224 Bowet, Hen., ii, 171 Bowker, John, ti, 394¢ Bowland, i, 313, 314; li, 5”, 1367, 181, 184, 202%, 221, 226, 220, 251, 281, 454, 455, 456, 4840; Chase, ii, 204, 454, 456, 457, 458, 462; Forest of i, 6, 8,207; li, 97, 1374, 291, 293%, 438, 445, 446, 4531.454, 455, 463, 4674; liberty of, i, 300; trough of, ii, 438; Little, ii, 182, 184”, 337, 454, 6175 ha John, ii, 1594; Will, ii, I ioen game of, ii, 468a, 500 Bowman, James, i li, 371a Bowth Park, li, 451 Boxley Abbey (Kent), ii, 139 7 Boxstede (Suff.), i, 351; manor of, 1, 350 7: Boyton Hall, ii, 5760 Boyvill, family of, ii, 119 % Boyville (Boyvel), Godard de, ii, 126a; John, li, 563a; Rob. de, ii, 1262 Brabazon, Roger, ii, 442 Brabin, John, ii, 6170 Bracebridge ( (Lincs. ), 1, 326 2, 331 Bracebridge, Rob. de, i, 328 Brackenthwaite, ii, 3612 Brackley (N orthants), li, 198 2 Bracqueville, Hen. de, ii, 168 Bradbury, i, 734 Bradbury & Co., ii, 3740 ‘ Braddyll,’ ii, 463, 464 Pea a close in Furness Fell, ii, I co ene Priory (Wilts.), ii, 14 36 Bradford, i, 14, 19, 41, 326%; il, 762, 237, 238, 325, 349, 3574, 359%, 3784, 457%; Baptist church at, li, 76; market at, i, 307; mill at, il, 294, 295 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Bradford on Avon (Wilts.), i, 264 Bradford, John, i, 48 ; Will, ui, 5810 Bradgate, Francis, i, 452; Wioll., i, 452 Sinus in Burtonwood, ii, 547, 548 Bradley, Ellis, ii, 213; Hen., ii, 213 Bradshaigh, Dame Dorothy, ii,616a; Rich., ii, 585@; Roger, ii, 6162 Bradshaw, 1, 326%; i, 66%, 3425 mill at, ii, 294 # Bradshaw, Betsy Jane, ii, 5694; Eliz. ii, 112@ ; Ellis, ii, 399@; Hen., i, 3242; John, ii, 228, 234, 248; Rich., ii, 399@, 611a ; Sir Roger, ii, 338a@; Will, ii, 569@¢; Sir Will, ii, 198, 199, 201, 202, 203; Miss, ii, 5614 ; Mr., ii, 3574, 5974 Brady, Dr., ii, 4984 Bradyll, Bradell, Bradill, John, i, 97, 98, 1384, 6; Mr., ii, 463, 6246 Brakesmere, ii, 4710 Bramall, H., il, 359% Brancher, Major, ii, 247 Brandon, Lord, ii, 242 Brandwood Moor, 1, I!, 12, 251 Brann, —, ii, 4924 Brantingthorp (Leics.), manor of, il, 6084 Braose, Will. de, i, 353 Brasenose College, il, 576.2, 5772, 6, 5784, 6, 5894, 6044, 6060 Brastin, John, ii, 6012 Irathay, i, 4, 564, 450 Brathay, River, i, 39; ii, 488 Braund, —, ii, 4904 Bray, —, li, $976 Braybroc, Hen. de, i, 332 Bread riots, ii, 247, 249 Brearly, James, 11, 6214; 4900, 4934,0 Breauté, Falkes de, i, 305 Breche, Rich., ii, 97 Breedon, Hen., ii, 91 Breightmet, ii, 342, 618%; school at, il, 6214 Bremetennacum, i, 260 Bbrendwood, in Spotland, manor of, li, 458 Brennan, Rich., ii, 398.7 Brennand, ii, 458, 460 2 Brereton, Sir Will., il, 45, 96, 234, 238 Breteuil, Rob. de, see Leicester, earl of Bretherton, i, 303, 335 7”; iti, 272”, 33 Breton, Bretoun, Alan le, ii, 22, 32; Alice, sister of Ralph le, 1, 361 7% ; Rob. le, i, 331, 340 Brettargh, Will., i, 5874 Brewing industry, ii, 408 Brewster, Dr., ii, 3874 Brexes, Will. de, i, 303 Brian (or Byrom), Martin, ii, 3824 Briar butts, land called, ii, 562. brice, R. A., 11, 478@ Bricks, manufacture of, i, 28 Brideoak, Ralph, ii, 64 7, 5854 Bridgeman, John, see Ches.er, bp. of ; Orlando, ii. 232, 234 Bridgenorth, i, 337 Bridges, building of, ii, 282 Bridges, Col. Tobias, ii, 240 Bridget, Saint, ii, 171 2 215, W,, ii, Bridgewater Canal, the, ii, 306, 3520, 3584 ; Bridgewater, duke of, ii, 304; Scroop, duke of, ii, 1692 Bridgman, Sir John, ti, 6094 bridlington Abbey, i, 316 _ Lriercliffe, i, 239, 319; ii, 280%, 3351 454, 455+ 553 Brierfield, ii, 4980 Brierley, W., 11, 494@ ‘ Brigbanck’ Wood, ii, 448 Brigge, Thom., ii, 146% Briggs, —, ii, 47745 J. ty 475%, 4894, 4904, 4, 4914, 4924, 6, 4934; John, ii, 93 #; Thom., ii, 78 Bngham, Parliament of, i, 309 Bright, John, ii, 254, 255, 318 Brighton, ii, 490 . Brighton, New, i, 91,1242; il, 4134, b, 4158 Brighton House Colleze, ii, 4952 Brigittines, the, order of, i, 35, 5624 Brindle, i, 335 #5; ii, 25, 92, 99, 338; rectory of, ii, 25; chantry priest of, il, 97 Brinscall, ii, 397@ Brisco, A., il, 473@ Bristald, Gerard, ii, 1308 Bristol, i, 352; il, 190, IQI 7, 215 #, 265, 305, 307% Brittany, honour of, 1, 337 Briwere, Rich., i, 362, Bruer Broadoak, ii, 3978 Lroad Oak Park, ii, 498@ liroadbent, —, i, 1860 Broadgreen, i, 71a Broadhead, ii, 291 Broadhurst, —, li, 4764 Broadwood Moor, i, 228 Brock, the, i, 74a Brock, R., ii, 4884 Brockhall, i, 261 ; ii, 463, 464 Brockhole, —, ii, 4754 Brockholes, i, 326, 330, 334 Brockholes, W. Fitzherbert, i, 260 Brocklebank, H., ii, 473a, 5010; Harold, ii, 465; T., ii, 4750, 6; Sir Thom., ii, 4742, 6, 478a, 6 Brodeshagh, see Bradshaw Brodie, M’Niven and Ormrod, firm of, ii, 3686 Brogden, Henry, ii, 3692 Broghton, Sir Thom., ui, 5634 Bro-rave, John, ii, 122@ Brokemilne, the, ii, 275 Brokhurst Manor, 11, 289 Bromborough, i, 454 Brome, —, li, 5954 Bromley pastures, i, 10 Bromley, Sir Hen., ii, 4726 Brongniart, —, i, 21 Bronze Age, i, 212, 213, 216, 218, 238, 239, 240, 241, 242, 244, 250, 260; implements, i, 212, 221, 225, 229, 240, 245 Brooke, —, schoolmaster, ii, 5874; Hen., ii, 5872; Humphrey, ii, 226; Jane dau. of Rich., i, 349 Brooks, Hen. Cribb, ii, 574a; Sam- uel, ii, 3704 ; Susannah, ii, 618d, 621a; & Doxey, ii, 3706 Brookside, 1i, 3974 Broomfield House, ii, 6004 Brougham, Lord, ii, 6086 Broughton, i, 39, 474, 714, 730, 1454, 215, 228, 244, 246, 257, 295, 296 #; Ii, I13@, 293, 334, 33% 343, 3974, 3984, % 451, 4714, 4944, 548; Castle Hill, ii, 553; chap. il, 18 Broughton, Adam le Reve of, ii, 114”; John, clerk of, ii, 5704 630 and see Broughton-in-Furness, i, 654, 188a, 216, 228, 254; Il, 339 Broughton in Craven (Yorks.), i, 316"; li, 4776 Broughton, Nether (Leics.’, i, 335, 336; ch., i, 336 Broughton, John, ii, 124a, 6; Sir Thom., ii, 216 Brow Edge, ii, 6176 Browe, Little, Wood, ii, 447 Browett, Lindley & Co., Messrs., ii, 3736 ' Brown Edge, i, 251 Brown Hill, i, 11 Brown Wardle Hill, i, 215, 228, 251 Brown, Browne, Chiis., ii, 124a; David, ti, 473; Geo., ii, 45, 50, 96, 97, 98, and see Liverpool, bp. of; Hugh, ii,123@; W., li, 256; Capt., ii, 243%; Dr., ii, 3624, 3634 Brownhill (Spotland), ii, 6225 Brownlow (Billinge), Higher End, ii, 617a Browsholme, ii, 454, 455 , 458, 462 Bruce, Edw., i, 357; Heloise de, ii, 1406; Rob., ii, 1174, 199, 443, and see Brus Bruch Hall (Poulton with Fearn- head), ii, 550 Bruche, Katherine, i, 346 Bruer, Brue, Ralph de la, i, 361; Rob., ii, 4030 Brugére, Jean B., ii, 4056 Brun, Efward, i, 318 ; Hugh le, ii, 1304, and see Brown Brunanburgh, battle of, ii, 178 Brundrit, J., li, 475 #, 4756 Brunner, Mond & Co., Messrs., ii, 4006 Brunshaw, ii, 453 Brus, Agnes de, 1, 364; Marg. de, i, 365; Peter de, i, 364, 365, and see Bruce Bruscowe, ti, 449 Bryant & May, Messrs., ii, 4086 Bryce, James, li, 569a, 5994, 6066 ; Mr., i, 5734, 5742, 5776, 6134 Brydson, —, ii, 476a LBryning with Kellamergh, ii, 332 Brynn, nr. Warrington, Sir Will. Gerard’s house, ii, 240 Brynn, Old, in Ashton in Maker- field, 11, 547, 548 Buccleuch, duke of, ii, 3552 Bucheshead Wood, it, 449 Buckingham, duke of, ii, 241 Buckingham and Chandos, duke of, 1, 355 Buckley, Geoffrey de, ii, 99”; and Taylor, Messrs., ii, 3736 Buckton Castle, ii, 516; Moor, ii, 516 Budiford (Warwick), i, 338 Budworth, Rich., ii, 3942 Bugs, see Hemiptera Heteroptera Builth, castle of, ii, 195 Bulk, ii, 167, 341, 563a, 5647; manor of, ii, 564 2 Bulkeley, Sir R. W., ii, 4804 Bull Hill (nr. Bury), i, 215, 216, 228, 251 Bulling, Gilbert de, ii, 456 Bullock, Stanley, ii, 248 Bullough, Sir Geo., ii, 370a ; James, li, 370@; John, ii, 370a Bulteel, J. G., ii, 4812 Bultham (Lincs.), i, 340 Bunkers Hill, i, 12 Bunting, Jabez, ii, 85 ; Dr., ii, 91 Burbo Bank, i, 90 Burdon, Will, i ii, 1106 Burges, John, ii, 3662; ‘priest, ii, 590d Burgh by Sands, i i, 310 Burgh, Hawise, dau. of John de, i, 326, 332; Hubert de, i, 322; ii, 1604, 6, 193, 194, and see Kent, earl of ; John de, i, 325, 326; Margt., widow of Hubert, ii, 1604 } Margery, dau. of Rich. de, i, 354%, 355 ; Rich. de, i, 354, 355 ; Roger de, ii, 456; Serlo de, i, 327; Thom. of, ii, 1592 Burghley, Lord, li, 3764 Burgoyn, Thom,, ii, 143@ Burholme, ii, 458 Burnage, 1, 3267 ; ii, 343 Burnbarrowe, ii, 451 Burnell, John, il, 157@ Burnhull, Thom. de, i, 3303 ii, 438 2 Burnley, i, 13, 18, 20, 494, 52a, 694, 714, 6, 746, 76a, 83a, 97, 98a, 4, 195, 207, 214, 265, 291; il, 252, 255, 275, 277, 278, 280%, 289, 290, 291, 292, 311, 335, 3514, 3562, 3714, 3764, 6, 3776, 3784, 3914, 3922, 419, 453, 454, 455, 457; 498a, 5042 ; chantries in, il, 6074, 6084; chap., ii, 10 , 15, 18; church of, i, 315; deanery of, ii, 100; market and fair at, i, 309; mill at, ii, 274, 275, 294 ; Nonconformity, ii, 77, 79, 86, 90; Roman Catholic deanery of St. Gregory, ii, 95; school, ii, 5612, 5762, 604a, 6076. Burnley, bp. of, ii, 96 Burnt Wood, i, 103 Buron, Hugh de, ii, 1:34 Burr, Burre, Malcolm, i, 108, 1090 ; Miles, ii, 146a, 1485 Burrow, i, 83a, 840, 1862; ii, 519 Burrow with Burrow, ii, 341 Burscough, i, 752; ii, 1484, I51a, 293, 346, 350, 472@; priory, ii, 10 #, 13%, 14, 17 2, 20%, 27, 28, 29, 39, 102, 103, 112a, 148-52; school at, li, 6222 Burscough, canons and monks of, ii, 27, 36, 249 Burscough, prior of, ii, 36; Benedict, prior of, ii, 1514, Geoffrey, prior of, ii 1515; Hen., prior of, ti, 1510; Nich., prior of, ii, 152@; Rich, prior of, ii, 152a; Warin, prior of, ii, 152@; Will, prior of, ii, I 514, 152a Burscough, Peter, ii, 6012, 6174 Burtons, see Bell Burton, Black, ii, 520 Burton, Marshes, 1, 600 Burton in Kendal, i, 6; ii, § 7, 340, 426 Burton in Lonsdale, chase of, ii, 462; manor of, ii, 181 Burton on Trent (Staffs.), ii, 200 Burton, Rob., ii, 1564, 6184; Rob. de, ii, 32 Burtonwood, i, 296 #, 341, 347, 349, 438; ti, 548 Burwell Fen (Nortf.), i, 235 Bury, i, 12, 13,16, 21, 192@, 214, 319%, 322; ti, 37, 48, 507, 59, 66, 73, 99, 1304, 1332, 235, 251, 289, 290, 303, 307; 321, 334, 342, 343, 3704, 3714, 3764, 3774, 3780, 3922, ii, 3964, 3974, 3984, 424 2, 426, 427, 438 2, 497, 499; church, Thom., 221, 224, 228, INDEX Bury (covz.) ii, 6 2, 7 2, 23 2, 6126 ; deanery of, ii, 100 ; grammar school, ii, 561a, 6126; manor of, ii, 215, 292; mills at, ii, 296, 297, 4076; Non- conformity in, ii, 69, 79, 86, 90; Roman Catholic deanery of Mount Carmel, ii, 95 ; rectory, ii, 64; rector of, ii, 586a, 6126 Bury, Adam, clerk of, ii, 456 ; Rich., parson of ii, 456 Bury, Adam de, i, 322; ii, 456; Hen, ii, 6126 Bushell, see Bussel Bussel, “Albert, i 1, 335, 3363 ii, 1044, 262 ”; Antigonia, w. of Hugh, i, 336; Ellen, ii, 622d ; Geoffrey, i, 335, 336; ii, 1064 } Hen., i, 336 ; Hugh, i, 336; ii, 1044, 106a, 192; Leticia, w. of Albert, i, 336; Letitia, w. of Geoffrey, li, 106a; Marg., w. of Rich., i, 336; Maud, sister of Rich., i, 335 3 Maud, w. of Warin, i, 335 5 Rich., i, 335, 3365 ii, 107, 1044, 1060 : 3 Rob., i, 303, 324%, 3365 li, 106a; Sibil, sister of Rich., i, 335; ‘Thom., i, 336; Warin, i, 314, 3355 ii, 107, Ioga, 0, 263 ; Will. +y 1, 3363 "family of, 1, 313 Bussey, Bussay, Lambert de, i, 363; Will. de, ii, 441 Butler, office of, to earl of Chester, nu Butler of Warrington, Rich., the Butler, Chris., ii, 97; Edm., see Carrick, earl of ; Hen., ii, 6930 ; James, li, 3570, and see Ormonde, earl of ; Joan, i, 357%; John, ii, 603a, 6; Katherine, wife of Nich., ii, 6030; Thom., ii, 97, 5022, 0; Sir Thom. (of Bewsey), ti, 6012, &; Mr,, ti, 53, 245 Butler of Amounderness, barony of, 1, 350 Butler (of Amounderness), Edm., i, 355%, 356, 357; Theobald, i, wee 352, 354, 355, 356, 357%; li, 197 Butler (of Marton), Rich., the, dau. of, i, 343 Butler (of Rawcliffe Hall), the family of, ii, 6034 Butler, barons of Warrington, i, 337 Butler (of Warrington), Alina, w. of Emery, i, 340, 341; Beatrice, w. of Rich., 1, 339; Edw.,i, 349; ii, 293; Emery, the, i, 340, 341 ; Dionesia, w. of Will., i, 339; Elena, dau. of WilL, i, 373 ; Eliz., dau. of Sir Thom., i, 349 ; Eliz., w. of Will, the, i, 344; Hen., the, i, 343; Isabel, w. of Hen., i, 343; Hugh, brother of Rich., i, 339; Isabel, w. of John, i, 346 | ii, 213 7, 233; Ivetta, w. of Rob., the, i, 338; John, the (Sir John), i, 344, 345; Sir John, i, 344, 345, 346, 347, 3485 ii, 445 ; Matt., son of Will, the, i, 344; Rich., the, i, 294%, 303, 338, 339, 342, 356, 372”; Rich., son of Will., the, i, 344; Rob., the, i, 338, 341; Sibyl, w. of Will., the, i, 343, 344 ; Sir Thom., i, 3445 347, 348, 3493 ii, 293, 297 23 Thomasina, w. of Sir Thom., i, 369; Will., the, i, 329, 339) 341, 342, 343, 344, 345, 348, 631 Butler (of Warrington) (cont.) 356, 372 #; il, 1624, 190, 192, 197, 212, 274, 4393 Sir Will., i, 346, 347; il, 212; family of, ii, 190, 281 , 438 Butler (of. Warton), Rob., 262; fam., ii, 1094 Butlers, of Layton, family of, ii, 1090 Butlers, of Lytham, family of, ii, 108a Butley Priory, i, 350, 351 Butterflies and moths, see Lepi- doptera Butterworth, Alexandra, ii, 6214; Edwin, ii, 3672, 3770, 3852, 3870, 3940 Butterworth, ii, 345, 3684, 382a, 4 ; Milnrow School, at, ii, 6214 Button, Edmund, priest, ii, 590a Buxton, i, 250 Buxton, John, ii, 3682 Byland, ii, 1154; Abbey, ii, 186 7 ; abbot of, ii, 115 2 Byron, Alesia, w. of John de, i, 373 ; Dame Joan, ii, 213 ; John, i, 373; ii, 228; Sir John de, 1, 373415 1144, 213, 227, 287, 5834, 606a, Rich. de, i, 330; 11, 287; Rob. de, i, 328 2, 329, 330; Will, i, 332; Lord, ii, 238 Bytham Castle, i, 329 the, ii, Cabus, i, 794, 0, 357%; ti, 332 Cadebury (Notts.), manor of, i, 332 Cadishead, ii, 87 Cadley, ii, 437 Cadley, Little, ii, 446 ‘Cadshaybrowe’ Wood, ii, 448 Caerlaverock, i, 310, 333 Caetlaevum, ii, 3, 4 Caffin, Matthew, ii, 77 Calder Abbey, il, 1154, 1262, 129a, 140” Gaiier Bridge (nr. Garstang), ii, 80 Calder, River, i, 10; ii, 443, 446 462, 520, 558 Calder, valley of, i, 67a, 4, 694, 75, 764, 774 ; ii, 3514, 454 Calderbrook, ii, 345, 553 Calderstones, the, i, 240 Caldicott, John Will., ii, 5732 Calet, Thom., ii, 1562 Calico-printing, li, 310, 315, 395 Calixtus II, Pope, i, 315 Calk Priory, i, 339 Callipolis, James Smith, bp. of, ii, 93% Calthorpe, Lord, ii, 475 ” Caluintone (Ches.), i, 338 Calunio (entrenchments so-called), ii, 516 Calvelegh, see Caw Calvert, John, ii, 1534; Dr. F. Grace, ii, 401d Calverton (Notts.), i, 337, 340 Calway, Rob., ii, 96. Calwich, manor of, ii, 1064 Cam, River, i, 161 Camboe, Rob. of, ii, 110d Cambridge, i, 259, 433 Camelford, Gabriel, 1i, 74 Cameron, Messrs. John, ii, 3742 Campbell, F. W. H., ii, 4964 Campbell-Bannerman, Sir Henry, ii, 301 2 Campden, Walt., ii, 1640 Campels, Hervey de, i, 350” Campion, —, a Jesuit, ii, 55, 56, 225 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Cancefield, John of, i, 342; il, 127@, 128”, 1306; Will. of, il, 119%, 1204 ; family of, ii, 1194 Cannington Shaw & Co., Messrs., ii, 4066 Canoes, i, 212, 248-251 Cant Beck, ii, 551 Cant Clough, i, 232, 251 Canterbury Cathedral, i, 351 Canterbury, see of, i, 351; li, 22, 40, 41, 99 : . Canterbury, archbp. of, i, 322; 1, 33, 51, 608¢; Baldwin, archbp. of, ii, 105@; Rich. Bancroft, arch- bp. of, ti, 5894; Hubt. Walter, archbp. of, i, 353; ii, 190; John Whitgift, archbp. of, 11, 60 ; Matt. Parker, archbp. of, ii, 6062 ; Rob. Winchelsey, archbp. of, ii, 1334 Cantsfield, i, 319 ”, 321, 322; li, 341, 551 Cantsfield, see Cancefield Canwick (Lincs.), i, 326 , 331 Capernway, Thom. of, ii, 1724, 441 Car Brook, ii, 516 Carboniferous, see Coal Carewes, Thom., ii, 96; Sir Thom., N, 45 Carford, Baptist church of, ii, 75 Cark (in Cartmel), 46a, 55a, 58a, 592, 228, 229, 2543 U, 411 7, 4i2za 4140 Carleton, ii, 1074, 1ogé ; sch. ii, 6184 Carleton, Great, i, 357%; ii, 334, 6184 Carleton, Little, i, 357; li, 334 Carlisle (Cumb,), 1, 294, 295, 310, 363; il, 2, 78, 116a, #, 177, 182, 184 #, 185, 186, 187 2, 196, 200, 202, 204, 246, 272, 281, 232; diocese of, ti, 49, 100, 101, 1410; earldom of, ii, 202; parliament of, ii, 1552; statute of, ii, 1584 Carlisle, Peter, abbot of, ii, 116 ” Carlisle, bp. of, ii, 54, 224; Edw. Law., bp. of, ii, 6116; Hugh —, bp. of ui, 1414 ; Ralph Ireton, bp. of, il, 141.” Carlisle, Nich., li, 595¢ Carlton, Rob. of, i1, 1554, 1594 Carnforth, i, 6, 474, 524, 554, 56a, 574, 614, 714, S42, 6, 98a, 4, 994, 131a, 1344, 1474, 2006, 2024, 6, 2034, 2044, 357 7, 35973 ii, 3047, 341, 349) 429.5545 manor, i, 364 ; marshes, 1, 2030 Carnforth, Geo., 11, 1438 Carnivora, i, 208 Carpenter, General, ii, 245 Carr, nr. Netherton, 1, 772 Carr Hey (in Bispham), ii, 6182@ Carr Mill dam, ii, 4532 Cart, James, li, 6206 Carick, earldom of, i, 357 Carrick, Edm. Butler, earl of, i, 350” Carrington moss, i, 105, 113@ Carrington, Will., u, 398a Carter, John, ii, 4994; Peter, ii, 5714, 6042; Randall, ii, 5632, 5674; Rob. ii, 5654; Saml., 1, 102; family of, ii, 146 # Carterhouse, the, at Kent’s Bank, ii, 1462 Cartmel, i, 1, 3, 6, 46a, 6, 49a, 50a, 522, 547, 584, 61a, 984, 207, 219, 228, 229, 237, 238, 244, 246, 255, 257, 791; Uy, 3, 45 82, 37%, 43, i, 44, 73, 100, IOI, 114, 118a, 1434, I44a, 6, 1476, 176, 182, Cartmel (con?) 189, 196, 199, 200, 339) 451, 6116; church, li, 6”, 10”, 13%, 14, 23 #, 24, 28 1, 39, 1434, 1484 ; deanery of, ii, 40”, ol; grammar school of, ii, 561a, 611@; manor, ii, 1474; priory, li, 10”, 13%, 20”, 39, 102, 103, 1436-148; rectory, 11, 1454, 147a, 6; Sands, ii, 1466; tithes of, ii, 1474; Wells, i, 44, 46a, 562 Cartmel, curate of, ii, 39 ” ; priest of, ii, 1468 Cartmel, priors of, ii, 30, 43, 196; Daniel, prior of, ii, 1484 ; John, prior of, ii, 148a, 360a; Rich., prior of, ii, 148a@ ; Simon, prior of, li, 148a; Will, prior of, ii, 1484 Cartmell Fell, i, 604, 1954, 2084 ; ii, 290; 339, 4513; chap, i, 37%, 79% Cartwright, —, ii, 384a@, 4, 391¢ Carus,Charus,Chris., li, 452; Thom., ii, 96, 97, 98, 161 # Cary, O. H., 11, 603@ Casartelli, Louis Chas., bp. of Sal- ford, 11, 95 Cassidy, G. A., ii, 4976 Caster Cliff, ii, 512, 514 Casterton (Rut.), i, 328 Castille, king of, i, 318 Castle Baldwin, 1, 308 Castle Donington (Leics.), church of, i, 298; hospital of, i, 299 Castle Irwell, ii, 4794 Castlehead, nr. Grange, i, 259 Castleshaw, i, 228, 251 Castleton, li, 1327, 345, 537; 538, 6206 Catforth, i, 684, 746 Catherton, Will. de, ii, 442 Catholicism, ii, 54, 55, 56,57, 58, 59 Caton, i, 38, 424, 452, 474, 524, 692, 714, 724, 734, 740, 774,836, 84a, 6, 85a, 6, 992; 11,341, 442; chap. of, il, 17, 18, 35 #, 16ga; Moor, i, 494, 67a, 784 ; moss, i, 79a Caton, John de, ii, 442 Catshaw, Greaves, 1, 694 Catterall, i, 357 #5; li, 332, 6096 Catterall, John de, ti, 1552 Cattle-breeding, ii, 263, and see Vaccaries Causey Wood, li, 465 Cavendish, see Devonshire, duke of Cawood, i, 321 ; li, 462 Cawstye, il, 452 Cecil, Sir Will, ii, 53, 57”, 221 Celestine, III, Pope, ii, 1274, 1652, 1684, 1694, 1704 Celtic period, see Bronze and Stone Ages, implements of Ceseye, Rich. de, ii, 1650 Cetacea, i, 209 Chadderton, 1, 319”, 320”, 322; li, 288, 307, 344, 3922, 554, 5746 Chaddock, in Tydesley, i, 348 Chaderton (Chadderton), Hen. de, ii, 209; Lawr. ii, 610a, and see Chester, bp. of ced nr. Stockport (Ches.), ii, 395 Chadwick, i, 624, 724 Chadwick, James, ii, 402@; Rob., ll, 39345 Dr., ii, 6062 Chaigley, i, 830; ii, 337 Chalcedon, Will. Bishop, bp. of, Ny 93 Chalkwell (Essex), manor of, i, 344, 346" 632 Challoner, Thom., ii, 223 # Chamber, Thom., ii, 1314 Chambers, Cuthbert, li, 451 Chance, A. M., ii, 4008 Chantries, foundation of, ii, 26, 33, 34, 37; suppression of, il, 44, 45, 46, 47, 96, 97, 98 7 Chapel-en-le-Frith (Derb.), 11, 3654 ‘ Chappelhouse,’ 11, 4674 Chappell, Jos., i, 102 Characeae, 1, 79 Charcoal-burning, li, 363 Charles I, ii, 62, 230, 232, 234, 235, 238, 298, 3576 Charles II, il, 200, 239, 240, 292, 330 Charles Edward, Prince, ii, 245 Charles, H., ii, 4734 Charlton, Archdeacon, ii, 110” Charnels, John, ii, 32 Charnock, ii, 199 Charnock Richard, i, 303, 335 #, 371; ii, 198, 338 Charnock, John, ii, 97, 3694; Peter, ii, 98; Rob., ii, 6106; Roger, ii, 97, 98; Thom., ii, 98; Will, Nn, 97 Chartley, ii, 195 2; Castle, i, 308 Chatburn, i, 71a, 6, 74a, 98a; ii, 289, 290, 335, 453, 455; Hermi- tage of chap. of St. Martin, ii, 103 ; mills at, ii, 294 7 Chat moss (Chatmoss), i, 51@, 64a, 726, 776, 104, 112a, 1134, 6, 115a, 117a, 6, 1194, 122a, 1230, 1242, 126a, 6, 127, 1294, 1316, 132a, 4, 1334, 6, 1344, 0b, 1354, 1414, 0; li, 428, 429 Chatsworth, ii, 4770 Chavasse, Dr., bp. of Liverpool, ii, 96 Cheadle (Chesh.), ii, 82 Cheadle (Staffs.), ii, 82, 355@ Cheeseden Brook, i, 11 Cheetham, i, 23, 784, 1396, 2084, 215, 228, 251; li, 293, 349, 3982, 494a, 5854; deanery of, ii, 100; manor of, 1i, 215 ; mills at, ii, 295 Cheetham, Mr., ii, 256, and see Chetham Cheetwood (nr. Manchester), i, 220, 229, 251 Chemical industries, ii, 399 Cheney, Lord, ii, 5760 Chercaloncastre, see Kirk Lancas- ter Cherchebi, the, see Kirkby in Cart- mel Chernetes, i, 155, 156 Chester, 1, 82a, 106, 112, 367; ii, 45, 1310, 175, 179”, 183, 192, 226, 240, 245, 261, 282, 296, 303, 3654, 3794, 441, 6026; abbey, i, 336, 367 ; il, 40, 102 ” ; abbot of, ii, 1500, 281; archdeaconry of, ii, 10, 13, 40, 41, 42 , 99, 1626 ; bishop- ric Of, ii, 2, 5, 6, 8, 40, 41, 45, 48, 49, 51, 52, 56, 58, 98, 100, 1482, 224, 612a; dean and chapter of, i, 40, 41; Holy Trinity Church, rector of, ii, 1624, 2; mayor and citizens of, ii, 5894; militia of, ii, 242; sheriff of, ii, 210; visitation of diocese of, ii, 49 Chester Brook, ii, 290 Chester, archdeacons of, ii, 9, 41, 99, 1334, 262”, 439; Halmar, archdeacon of, ii, 9; Rob., arch- deacon of, ii, 9, 148”; Will. archdeacon of, ii, 9 Chester, bp. of, ii, 41, 45, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 61 %, 63, 93%, 225, 5714, 5874, 6136; Cuthbert Scott, bp. of, ii, 49, 51; Geo. Coates, bp. of, ii, 41, 49%; Geo. Lloyd, bp. of, ii, 61, 62; John Bird, bp. of, ii, 39, 49, 41, 49, 6020; John Bridgeman, bp. of, ii, 61, 62, 63, 358@ ; Lawr. Chadderton, bp. of, li, 56, 577%, 58, 595 Rich. Peche, bp. of, ii, 9; Rich. Vaughan, bp. of, ii, 60, 61; Thom. Morton, bp. of, il, 61, 62; Will. Downham, bp. of, ii, 51, 53, 221, 222, 2243 Will. Gibson, bp. "of, ii, 358a Chester (within the Lyme), barony of Constable of, i, 297 Chester, constable of, i, 299 7, 322, 324, 368; ii, 1314, 1486; Ed- mund de Lacy, constable of, i, 307, 312; Eustace Fitz John, constable of, i, 298, 299, 367; Hen. de Lacy, constable of, i, 307, 308, 312, and see Lincoln, earl of ; Hugh Lupus, constable of, i, 297, and see Chester, earl of; John de Lacy, constable of, i, 303, 304, 3125 li, 438%; John Fitz Richard, constable of, i, 299, 300, 301%, 319; li, 1310; Nigel, constable of, i, 297; Rich. Fitz Eustace, constable of, i, 299, 319 ; ii, 188 ; Roger de Lacy, con- stable of, i, 300, 301, 302, 313, 319, 336; ii, 1314, 132a, 190; Thom. Molyneux (of Cuerdale), constable of, il, 210; Will, constable of, i, 295; Will. Fitz Nigel, constable of, i, 297 2, 298, 299, 367; il, 180 7, 183; Will. Fitz William, con- stable of, i, 298, 299 Chester, earls of, i, 339, 366; ii, 137 2, 183, 189, 1902, 206; Edw., earl of, ii, 194; Ermentrude, Countess, i, 367 ; Hugh, earl of, i, 312; ii, 1316; Hugh de Lupus, earl of, 1, 297, 3385 li, 183, 3542 ; Ranulf de Blundeville, earl of, i, 304, 305, 306, 312, 322, 329, 339, 363, 371 7 5 il, 1318, 193, 194 5 Ra- nulf Gernons, earl of, i, 292, 293, 294, 296, 298, 299, 320, 335, 339, 367, 369 2; ii, 104a, 113a, 1684, 186, 187, 194%; Ranulf Meschin, earl of, i, 3662 : li, 1264, 184 72; Rich., earl of, i, 367; Anthony, ii, 5974; Rich. ‘de, i ii, 1360 ; Rob. de, li, 1, 304; Peter of, ii, 1324, 1334, 6, 1364 Chester, Philip, clerk of, i, 372 2 Chester, Sir Will. de Vernon, justi- ciar of, ii, 194 # Chetham, Abigail, ii, 623¢; Hum- phrey, ii, 231, 298, 3007, 6234 ; James, il, 5864 ; John, ii, 50%; Rob., ti, 5814, and see ‘Cheetham Chew Mill Ford, ii, 512 Chewe, John, ii, 604a Cheylsmore, manor of, i, 347 7 Chichester, Adam Molyneux, bp. of, ii, 214; Ashurst Turner Gilbert, bp. of, ii, 588¢; John Langton, bp. of, i, 3735 ; Ralph Brideoak, bp. of, li, 5852 Chil or Childe, fishery so-called, see Lune, River Childwall, i, 714, 1214, 123@, 326%, 330; ii, 64 2, 99, 1122, 345, 349, 481a, 482a, 6; advowson of, i, 2 INDEX Childwall (cozz.) 3325 il, 27, 1662, 6, 1676, 1682, 169@; church, ii, 6n, 7, 10M, Ig, 23, 12a; deanery of, ii, IOI ; manor of, ii, 169@ ; rectory of, ii, 21, 22, Illa, I12@; vicarage of, ii, 27, 29 Childwall, priest of, ii, 6; rector of, li, 54%, 166%, 169% Childwall, Hen., vicar of, ii, 280 Chingle Hall, Whittingham, ii, 550 Chipping, i, 39, 62a, 71a, 215, 224. 228, 229, 251, 3135 il, 8, 17, 30, 100, 284%, 337, 438, 454, 458, 4706; church, li, 6%, 17 2, 23 7; school at, ii, 6170 Chipping, rector of, ii, 36 Chipping Brook, ii, 454 Chippingdale, i, 335; 1i, 184; manor, 1, 314 Chircheton, see Tickhill Cho, Le, manor of, ii, 1384 Cholmeley, Sir Hugh, ii, 45, 96 Chondropterygians, i, 187 Chorley, i, 129a, 1334, 296%”; ii, 25 2, 179 2, 195 2, 226, 284, 312, 338, 349, 3562, 3744, 3914, 3924, 3982, 4024, 425, 4762, 4820, 548 ; Astley Old Hall, ii, 548 ; chap. of, ii, 30 2; grammar school of, ii, 561a, 610a; manor of, ii, 194; Nonconformity in, ii, 69, 86, 90 Chorley, chantry priest of, ii, 97 Chorley, James, 1i, 402@; Rich., ii, 245; Will., ii, 98 Chorlton, i, 434, 454, ae 47a, 48a, 592, 64a, 799, 80a, b, 1256, 1934; 1, 293, 499@ Chorlton-cum-Hardy, i, 218, 251, 326%; ii, 343, 4985 Chorlton-upon-Medlock, i, 215, 228, 251; il, 89, 349. Chowbent, chap., ii, 68 7, 69 Church, i, 97, 349, 3964, 3974, 9 ; ii, 337; chap. of, li, 15, 19 Church Coniston, ii, 340 Church of England, the, ii, 95, 96 Churchill, Winston, ii, 259, 325 7, 326 Churchtown, i, 79@, 122a, 124@; ii, 476a ; school, ii, 561a, 6094 Cinder Hill, nr. Ramsbottom, ii, 3614 Cistercian monks, i, 317, 353, 360; Nl, 29, 102, 1o9a, 114-39, 537 Civil War, the, ii, 237-9, 298, 299 Claife, ii, 339 Clapham (Yorks.), i, 8 120% Clapham (Yorks.), Alan son of the parson of, ii, 1220 Clare, Alice de, i, 300%; Roesia de, i, 3162; Rich. de, i, 306; Dr.,, ii, 642 Clare (alas Fairfax), Bevis de, i, 304 Clarence, duke of, ii, 204, 215 Clark, C. W. H., ii, 495@ Clarkson, Elisha, ii, 572@ Claughton, i, 221, 225, 229, 251, 261, 335%; ii, 8, 92, 100, 332, 340, 427, 465, 482a,526; advow- son of, ii, 155@; church, ii, 6%, 10”, 23%, 566a; rectory, ii, 16; rector of, ii, 36 Claughton, Lieut.-Col., ii, 248 Clawthorpe Fell, ii, 426 Clay, mining of, i, 28, 29 Claydon, ii, 289 Clayton, i, 14, 19, 3267, 329, 330; ii, 293, 3746 633 228, ; tithes in, ii, Clayton Bridge, i, 644 Clayton in Droylsden, ii, 547, 548 Clayton-le-Dale, ii, 336 Clayton-le-Moors, i, 982, 304 ; ii, 3379 349, 455 4575; Hall, i, 98a ; manor of, i, 318 Clayton-le- Woods, i, 303, 335%3 ii, 338, 548; Clayton Hall, ii, 8 4 Eley, Edward, ii, 3954, 585¢; Gerald de, i, 303; Hen. de, i i, 304; John, ii, 3952 ; Nich. +) li, 5754, 0; Ralph, ii, 3950; Ralph de, i, 304; Rob. de, 1, 303 ; Will., ii, 5714 ; ne & Brothers, ti, 3954; Capt., li, 2432; fam. ii, 396a Clegg (Klege), —, ii, 456 ; Abraham, ii, 393¢, 6; Edm., ti, 75; John, son of Abraham, iil, 3932, 0; Rich,, ii, 619a ; Thom., li, 3934 Clement III., Pope, ii, 154a, 4 Clement V., i, 310; 1i, 1340 Clement VII., ii, 142@ Clerfait, Will. de, i, 299%; Sibil, dau. of Will., i, 299 Clerkhill Wood, i, 98a, 4 Cleveley, i, 357%: li, 332 Cleveleys, i, 1394, 140a Cliffe, Benjamin, ii, 3944 Clifford, Matilda, dau. of Walt., i, 312; Robert de, ii, 196; Tlom., lord, i, 347 Clifton, Clifton-with-Salwick, i, 454, 718, 726, 73a, 76a, 98a, 1144, 0, 1206, 1214, 1220, 1230, 244, 246, 252; li, 94, 332, 343, 3564, 459, 548; hall, ii, 465; manor of, ii, 3578 ; moss, i, 51a; Junction, i, 706, 724, 734, 6, 776, 78a, 6; li, 374a, 4046; Viaduct, i, 73a Clifton, Sir Cuthb., ii, 230, 6044 ; Hen., ii, 570a@; John Talbot, ii, 4836; T. H., li, 475%, 4752, 4766; Thom., ii, 293, 604@ ; Sir Thom., ii, 243; Will. de, ii, 108a; Sir Will. de, ii, 33, 202; Mr., ii, 4714, 472a; family of, ii, 1082, 1094, 484a Clisby, see Clixby Clitheroe, i, 5, 6, 23, 37, 492, 608, 694, 71a, 72a, 740, 76, 84a, 2, 854, 984, 6, 1144, 131a, 132a, b, 215, 226, 228, 229, 252, 291, 301, 303, 317; ii, 86, 89, 136%, 1374, 180, 1817, 184, 185, 192, 197, 251, 258 2, 272, 276, 310 2, 335, 349, 3559, 3600, 3770, 453, 454, 455, 457, 458, 459, 461, 469@, 471a, 4884, 520, 523 ; barony of, i, 312; borough of, ii, 250; castle, ii, 198, 211 2, 523, 524; Castle, chap. of, ii, Io”, 17, 18, I9%, 1332, 1356, 136a, 0, 137a, 315; chap. of, ii, 7”, 10”, 18, 37; church of St. Mary Magdalene at, i, 315; fair and toll at, i, 301; ii, 281; grammar school at, li, 298, 5o04a, 5614, 6054 ; honour of, i, 300, 301, 313, 314, 316, 318, 319, 369, 3713 it Io#, 17, 132a, 1350, 136a, 190, 202, "263, 268, 270, 278, 287 2, 419, 420, 454, $23 ; lordship of, i, 302, 309 ; manor of, ii, 282, 293 ; mill at, 11, 274, 275, 295 ; moor, ii, 43, 453 Clitheroe, lord of, i, 369 Clitheroe ’ Adam de, i il, 456 ; Rob. de, ii, 31, 201 Clitheroe (or Slater), Ralph, ii, 139 Clivachre, see Cliviger 80 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Clive, Forest of, i, 329 Cliviger, i, 218, 246, 252, 309; ii, 275, 280 7, 335, 355%, 3574, 3600, 454, 456, 555 ; coal mines in, ll, 291 ; waste, li, 290 Clixby (Lincs.), i, 292 7, 3197, 320, 22 Ceinalaas, ii, 272, 296, 299 Clough, Black, i, 844 Clough Fold, Baptist church at, ii, 73) 74, 76 2 ; Clough Foot, in Dulesgate, i, 11 Clough, Great, i, 78a, 826, 854 Clough, Jas., li, 40142 Clougha, i, 654, 676, 684, 70a, 4, 716, 726, 73a, 6, 74, 6, 762, 774, b, 78a, 82a, 6, 83a, 6, 846, 854 ; ii, 438; Pike, i, 78a, 83a; Scar, i, 676 Clowes, WiIL, ii, 88, 89, 90 Cluniac friars, ii, 102, monks, ii, 113, 114 Cluny Abbey, i, 316 Clyde, River, i, 170 Clyde, Firth of, i, 94 Clyde Locomotive Company, ii, 3710 Clyp, Rob., ii, 5814 Coal, i, 5, 27, 325 il, 3544, 5553 mining and industry of, j, 13, 29; ii, 291, 242, 3514, 3524, 356 Coates, Geo., sce Chester, bp. of Cobden, Rich., ii, 254, 318, 3974 Cock-fighting, ii, 46%a, 502 Cocken, High, i, 23 Cocken-in-Furness, i, 2094 Cocker Hill, i, 10 Cocker, River, the, i, 359 ; ii, 3 Cockerham, i, 594, 357 #, 3593 ii, 8, 20, 100, 1§4a, 285, 332%, 340, 444, 472@ ; church of, i, 359; li, 6, lom, 12, 13 2, 14, 18, 20, 21, 23”, 28”, 48, 1524, 1546; manor, i, 359; il, 20, 1524, 1532, 154a, 6; moss,i, 452, 484, 51a, 4, 606, 63a, 6, 67a, 68a, 69a, 70a, 726, 756, 774, 6, 784, 189, 2042 ; priory, il, 20”, 102, 152, 153; school, ii, 5614, 6134; tithes of, ii, 20, 1534; value of vicarage of, ii, 1 cee Hen., prior of, ii, 1530 ; John, prior of, ii, 120@, 1214, 1300; Will, prior of, ii, 1306 Cockermouth, ii, 419 ; Castle, i, 324, 363 Cockermouth, —, il, 49 Cockersand, i, 357 # ; Abbey, i, 321, 344, 350 353) 357% 302, 371, 3725 i, 9%, 10 7, 13%, 15, 28, 36, 39%, 102, 103, 154, 1§9, 1704, 1714, 340”; chantry in abbey church of, ii, 26, 158@ ; hospital, i, 360 ; ii, 20, 1526 Cockersand, abbot of, i, 303, 364; li, 103; Hen., abbot of, ii, 1584, 1592; Hereward, abbot of, ii, 110%, 1594; Rich., abbot of, ii, 159@; Roger, abbot of, i, 321; li, 1574, 1584, 1594; Thom., abbot of, ii, 1584, 159a Cockersand, canons of, i, 353, 370; ii, 20; prior of, ii, 110 #, 1530 Cockey, see Ainsworth Cockin —, ii, 5660 Cockleach, i, 722 Cockley, i, 444; Beck, i, 500, 60a Coddington, rectory, ii, 22 Cogan, John de, i, 354%, 3557; Thom., ii, 5854 133%; Coins, i, 260 ; ii, 543 ; Anglo-Saxon, i, 257, 258; Roman, ii, 516 Cokan, John of, ii, 1314 ; Coke, Archie, ii, 478a@; John, ii, 78a Colborn, Colbourne, Thom. , ii, 5864; Hen., li, 6054 Colchester, i, 353 Coldcoats, i, 7, 304 Cold-Hatch-Bank, nr. Haslingden, , 3554 . x Coldingham Priory, ii, 110 % Coldingham, Reginald of, ii, 1074@ Coldwell quarry, i, 4 Cole Beck, valley of, ii, 525 Cole, Rob., 11, 385 7 Coleham, John of, ii, 1644 Coleoptera, i, 111-126 Colet, John, Dean, ii, 580a, 4, 5842 Collesham, John of, ii, 1216 Collier, Thom., ii, 619@ Collyhurst, ii, 398@, 4072 Colne, i, 8, 11, 14, 834, 234, 238, 252, 291; ii, 76, 252, 277, 278, 280, 289, 291, 292, 295, 303, 312, 335, 3514, 356, 4, 3574, 0, 376a, 6, 3776, 378a, 3916, 3924, 453, 455, 516; benefice of, ii, 647; chap. of, ii, 1o#, 18; church of, i, 315; Emmott’s Moor, ii, 288; manor of, ii, 358a@; mills at, ii, 274, 275, 295 ; Noncon- formity in, ii, 74, 767, 86, 90; water, il, 454 Colswainchepyn, ii, 458 Colton or Coulton, ii, 101, 339, 524 3 Hall, ii, 450 Colwick (Notts.), ii, 213 Colwith (Westmld.), i, 45a Colwyn Bay, ii, 4130 Combermere Abbey, ii, 1314, 1354; abbot of, ii, 1352@, 0 Compton, Sir W., ii, 129 2; execu- tors of, ii, 123 7 Conan, ‘ the archdeacon,’ ii, 9 Congregationalists, ii, 69 Conishead, i, 40, 229, 255 ; il, 1404; Bank, ii, 556; chantry in priory church, ii, 26; priory of, ii, 10”, II, 13 %, 20%, 39, 102, 103, 115 2, 1206, 126”, 1276, 128”, 140-3 Conishead, canons of, i, 360, 364 ; il, 28 Conishead, John, prior of, ii, 143, 6; Robt. prior of, ii, 143; Thom., prior of, ii, 1434 Coniston, i, 39, 424, 454, 46a, 4, 476, 48a, 506, 514, 56a, 6, 574, b, 60a, 6, 62a, 66a, 67a, 694, 700, 726, 746, 78a, 836, 98a, I10a, 1194, 143, 14524, 4, 1462, 6, 1474, 1484, 6, 149a, 1504, 1514, 4, 152a, 153a, 154a, 1564, 169, 171 ; ii, 3542, 3554, 4, 3604, 450; Fells, i, 52a, 85a, 1484, 149a, 6; forge at, ii, 3634 ; hills, i, 208@ ; Moor, 514, 52a; Wood, ii, 450, and see Monk Coniston and Church Con- iston Coniston Old Man, i, 2, 39, 454, 4, 504, 656, 66a, 674, 68a, 4, 69a, 70a, 6, 72a, 776, 80a, 82a, 4, 83a, 84a, 6, 85a, 86a, 6, 136a, 171 Coniston water or lake, 1, 4, 40, 46a, 51a, 54a, 61a, 6, 64a, 171, 189, 2044, 228, 229, 255, 364 ; ii, 1214, 1264, 464, 4674, 488a Connaught, duke of, ii, 495 ” Conservative party, the, ii, 250, 254, 255, 256 634 Constable Lee, ii, 458, 459, 460 ” Constable, Sir Marmaduke, 1i, 216 Constantine, a chamberlain, ii, 104” Consyll, John, ii, 1604, 1616 Convocation of York, the, ii, 42 Conyers, John, ii, 1434 Cooke, Benjamin, i, 103, 106, 107 109, 111, 127; G. A, ti, 463; G. E., ii, 4754, 4766; G. F., 1, 4734, 474a; Nath., i, 103, 105, 127; Lieut.-Colonel, ii, 248 Co-operative movement, ii, 316, 317, 318, 320, 321, 322 Cope, Thom., ii, 3944 Copeland, i, 293; il, 9,49, 114%, 126, 127a, 141@, 1426, 182, 184 », 185 #2, 199; barony of, i, 358; ii, 1266 ; deanery of, ii, 6 #, 100 Copeland, Alan of, ii, 127; John de, ii, 1276, 1406, 1426, 1640; Peter de, ii, 1474; Rich. de, ii, 1426, 438 Copemanwray, see Capernway Copland, Rich. de, i, 330 Copledyke, Sir John, ii, 98 Coplow quarry, i, 6 Coppage, John, ii, 50 Copper, i, 2; mining of, ii, 354a ; smelting of, ii, 355 Coppock, Thom., il, 587a Coppull, i, 326 7, 330; li, 338, 548 Corbett, Mr., ii, 595@ Corbridge, Thom. of, ii, 1108 Corcumruadh (Ireland), religious house at, ii, 129@ Corfe Castle (Dorset), i, 310, 363 Corn Laws, the, ii, 318, 319 Cornage or cattle rent, ii, 176 Corneclose Wood, ii, 447 Cornewayll, John, ii, 112 Cornhill, Reginald de, ii, 193 #; see Will. de, see Coventry and Lich- field, bp. of Cornwall, Edmund, earl of, i, 308 ; Piers Gaveston, earl of, i, 310, 311; Rich., Earl of, i, 306, 355 Cornwall, Duchy of, ii, 207 ” Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, ii, 582, 606a ; president of, ii, 5822, 5830, 5850 Cort, Hen., ti, 352 Cosin, Dr. ii, 63 Cotes (Notts.), i, 321 # Cotgrave (Notts.), i, 326%, 330; church of, i, 291, 327; ii, 167 Cottam, i, 694; ii, 334; Hall, ii, 57% Cotton famine, ii, 253, 319, 320, 321 Cotton industry, i, 13 ; ii, 296, 297, 300, 301, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 307, 325, 3530, 379-93 Cotton, John, ti, 3654 ; Sir Lynch, ii, 503@ ; Sir Rich. ii, 41 Coucy, Couci, or de Guines, En- querand, brother of Will. de, ii, 1276 ; Philippa de, i, 153a@ ; Will. de, ii, 1276, 1406; family of, ii, 1276, 1406 Coudray, Will. de, i, 303 ceules (de Coudreto), John de, ii, 172 Coulbron, Isabel dau. of John, ii, 6046 Coulter (Colton), ii, 79 ” Coulthurst, J., ii, 475 Coulton, ii, 450 Council of London, ii, 12 Counsylth, nr. Basingwerk, i, 299 County Palatine (Lancashire created into), ii, 205, 206 Coupe, Adam, ii, 5974 Coupland, see Copeland Courait, Ralph, prior of Lancaster Priory, ii, 171@, 1726 Coursing, il, 472 Coventry and Lichfield, chap. of, ii, 1334 ; dean and chap. of, ii, 41 Coventry and Lichfield, diocese of, ii, 29, 99, 5754; manor of, i, 341 Coventry and Lichfield, bp. of, ii, 32, 150a@; Alex. de Stavenby, bp. of, ii, 149 @ ; Geoff. de Muschamp, bp. of, 1i, 149@ ; Hugh de Nonant, bp. of, ii, 1484; Rowland, bp. of, ii, 41%; Walter de Langton, bp. of, ii, 134a, 6; Will. Booth, bp. of, ii, 33 ; Will. de Cornhill, bp. of, ii, 132@, 1494 Coverham (Yorks.), i, 352 Cow Ark, in Bowland, i, 221 Cow Heys, i, 215, 228, 252 Coward, —, ii, 4894 Cowford Bridge, ii, 438 ‘Cowhope,’ ii, 455, 458, 460 Cowhouse, ii, 458, 450, 460 Cowley Hill, ii, 74 Cowley, Sarah, li, 6198 Cowling Hill, Baptist church of, ii, 74, 75, 76% Cowpe Moor, 1, 12; moss, i, II Cowper Tench, ii, 334 Cowper, John, ii, 97, 146” Cradock-Watson, H., ii, 612@ Crag Wood, i, 76a, 82a Crags, vachery, ii, 459 Crake River, 1, 40; fishery in, ii, 1426 Crake Valley, i, 1884 Crallen, Thom., ii, 4024 Cranborough, ii, 45 Crane, Rev. Thom., ii, 6204 Crankyshaw, ii, 4714 Craven (Yorks.), i, 313 ; li, 43, 116a, 1374, 201, 306, 455, 6056 Crawford, Earl of, ii, 361a, 3644 Crawshaw Booth (Crawshawbooth), li, 269%, 458, 460; Noncon- formity in, ii, 75, 80 Crecy, Adam de, li, 1580 Creetby Mill, ii, 294 # Creevy, —, ti, 4754 Creon, Guy, son of Maurice de, i, 2 Greppiiaes, John de, ii, 462 Crevequer, Alex. de, i, 301 Crewe, John, Lord, ii, 588@ Cribb, Rob., i, 140d Cribden, i, 12 Crick, rector of, ii, 5854 Cricket, ii, 489 Criggleston, John de, i, 304 Crimbles, i, 359; ii, 153a ; ; Great, ii, 1520 ; Little, ii, 1526 Crivelton, ii, 1260 Croft, i, 366 # ; ii, 69 Croft, —, ii, 456; Adam de, ii, 204 ; Hen. de, i, 365; Roger de, ii, Io”, 155a; Thom., ii, 1614; family of, ii, 155@ Crofton (Yorks.), i, 320 Crofton, H. T., ti, 555 ‘ Crombewalholme,’ ii, 458 Cromford (Derb.), ii, 3854 Crompton, i, 320; Hi, 344, 349, 3854 Crompton, Adam, ii, 4074 ; Ellis, ii, 407a; James, ii, 407a, 6160 ; Messrs. James, R.,and brothers, ii, INDEX Crompton (conz.) 4076; Rob., ii, 407@; Samuel, ii, 302, 387a ; Thom. Bonsor, ii, 4076; Will., ii, 6106; Capt, ii, 243% Cromwell, Oliver, ii, 239, 299, 250 Cromwell, Rich., li, 241 Cromwell, Thom., ii, 1134, 123a, 0, 1244, 125, 126a, 1376, 1382, 142a, 1464, 157a, 162% Cromwell’s Bank, Cuerdley, nr. Warrington, li, 554 Cronshaw reservoir, i, 79a Cronton, i, 303, 307 ; ii, 1324, 138%, 346, 455; man., i, 298 ; ii, 138% Crook, A. M., ii, 494@, 4954, 498@ Crophill (Notts.), i, 338; chap. of, i, 338 ; church of, i, 291 Cropper, ae: ii, 3996 Cropwell or Cropwell-Butler (Notts.), i, 3371 339) 340, 341, 3425 chap. of, 1, 339; church of, ii, 1676 ; manor of, i, 344, 348 Crosby, i, 426, 434, 454, 6, 490, 516, 52a, 530, 544, 55a, 560, 58a, 4, 60a, 62a, 6, 654, 68a, 694, 712, 726, 736, 746, 780, 79a, II1Ca, 6, 1126, 1134, I14a, 115a, 1174, 119a, 6, 1206, 1214, 1244, 127a, 1294, 1302, 1314, 6, 132a, 6, 1332, 1364, 1376, I40a, 1930; ii, 288 4108, 413@ ; channel, i, 88 ; chap. ii, 372; marsh, i, 576, 620; ii, 479a ; Merchant Taylors’ School, ii, 561a, 6116; Great, i, 42a, 296%; ii, 346, 479@; Little, i, 42a, b, 446, 566, 616, 62a, 5, 303; ii, 346, 350 Crosby, Ravensworth, church of, ii, 141d Crosby, David, ii, 73, 74 Cross Crake Chapel, in Heversham (Westmld.), ii, 147 # Cross Hall Mill, ii, 294 # Cross, Crosse, —, rector of Chil!- wall, ii, 54%; Humphrey, ii, 5934, 5944, 5; John, ii, 59345, b; Rich., Ai, 5934, 6 R. A,, Vis- count, ii, 256 ; Will. son of Rich., ii, 5698 ; Capt., ii, 243 % ; Lieut.- Col. J., ii, 247 ; fam. 11, 5930 Crossens, i, 464, 654, 740, 79a, 1144, 169, 249, 250, 252, 253 Crosses, sculptured, 1, 262; ii, 4 Crossfield, Joseph, ii, 403@ ; Messrs. Joseph & Sons, li, 403a, 0; Messrs. Joseph and James, ii, 4008 ; George, ii, 403a@ ; S. M., ii, 4914, 6; Simon, ii, 4005 Crossington (Leics.), i, 339 Crossland, —, ii, 4894, 4904, 4914 Crosslane, ii, 398@ Crossley, J. W., ii, 4982 Crossley Bros., ii, 3734, 374 Crossmoor, i, 262 Crosthwaite (Westmld.), manor, i, 364 Crosthwaite, —, ii, 49; R., ii, 5894 Croston, i, 319 #, 322 ; ii, 6 2, 25 #, 37 2, 39, 64, 99, 2722, 288, 338, 349 ; advowson of, ii, 35, 1674, 169a, 6, 171”; church, ii, 6%, 7 1, 10M, 12M, 23M, 35,37 My 503 appropriation of church ae ii, 35, 171 2 ; lordship of, i, 321 ; manor of, 320, 3237; rectory of, ii, 22 ; vicarage, ii, 35 ; rector of, i, 3497; ii, 307, 153, 169% Croston of Croston Hall, fam. of, 1, 349% 635 Croune, John, ii, 159¢ Crouseley, John of, ii, 1634 Crow Knoll, i, 215, 228, 252 Crow Park, ii, 462 ‘Crowebrowe ’ Wood, ii, 448 Crowther, James, i, 102 Croxden Abbey, 1, 361 ” Croxteth, i, 135@, 138a, 140¢ ; ii, 93%, 4375 444, 4846, 4982 ; forest and chase of, i, 348 ; Park, i, 345; ii, ya 445) 446, 456; Wood, ii, Phoslon Abbey (Leics.), i, 321, 336; ii, 13 #, 27, 102, 154a, 1564, 158%, 160a, 4 ; abbot of, ii, 154 #, 1604, 6; canon of, ii, 36 Croxton (Leics. ), manor of, ii, 1606 Croxton (Lincs.), manor of, i, 3375 340 Croxton, Hugh de, i, 337; Rich., ii, 5726; Rich. of, ii, 160 " 1615; Rich., sun of Rob. de, i, 340 Croydon (Surrey), ii, 53 Crozier, Geo., i, 102 Crumbleholme, John, ii, 453 Crumpsall, i, 326%; ii, 278%, 279, 343, 4984; Hall, i, 1522, 154a Crustaceans, i, 22, 157-78 Cryptogamia cellularia, i, 67; Vas- cularii-pteridophyta, i, 65-7 Cuerdale, i, 233, 236, 258, 259; ii, 178, 336. Cuerden, i, 3737; school at, ii, 617a Cuerden, Roger, son of Hen. de, i, ii, 289, 338; 373 Cuerdley, i, 298, 299; ii, 287, 346, 3542, 554; manor of, 1, 298, 328, 332, 334 Culbert Clough, i, 215, 228, 252 Culcheth, i, 340 ; ii, 348, 548 ; school at, li, 624a Culcheth, Gilbert de, i, 340 ; Hugh, son of Gilbert, i, 340 Cumberland, duke of, ii, 246 Cumberland, earl of, ii, 123a, 4, 1294 Cume, John de, i, 324 # ‘ Cundeclif,’ ii, 457 Cunliffe, Capt. P. G., i, 73 Curcy, Will. de, i, 369 Curteney, Sir Will. (of Ilton), ii, 5834 Curtis, Will., ii, 572a Curwen, family, of Workington, i, 358 Curzen, Asheton, ii, 4064 Cust, Peregrine, ii, 4054 ; Thom., ii, 5026 Cuthbert, John, ii, 3944; Will. ii, 109ga, 1108 Cuthbert, St., ii, 2, 4, 176 Cuttell, —, ii, 489@, 492a, 6, 4934 Cuxwold (Lincs. ), 1, 319 ”, 323 Cyclostomes, i, 187 Daas, Will., i, 346 D’Abetot, Urse, i, 313 Dacre, nr. Ullswater, ii, 178 Dacre, Isabel, i, 347; Joan de, ii, 461; Ralph de, ii, 442, 444; Ranulf de, i, 366 2 ; Lord Thom. of, i, 347; family of, ii, 456 Datt, —, li, 489d Dagge, Hen.,, il, 406 Daill Park, ii, 450 D’Aincurt, see Aincurt A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Dakyn, John, ii, 147@; Dr., ti, 124é Dale Gill, i, 734, 844 Dale Park, Low, 11, 465 Dale Park, Middle, ii, 465 Dale, David, ii, 388¢; Hen. de, ii, 1646; Capt., 1, 248 Dallam, i, 724, 746, 341 Dalton, i, 524, 57a, 644, 317, 326”, 327, 330; ll, 5 #, 100, IOI, 103, 1124, I1ga, 1208, 1218, I24a, 128”, 51a, 1817, 340, 347, 4846; assessment of tithes at, il, 24; bailiff of, ii, 1244, 1254; chase of, ii, 1206; church of, ii, 6, 10”, 13”, 18, 23”, 1278, 128”, 1414; Crag, i, 42a, 604, 716, 72a, 74a, 766, 77a, 792, $24, 834, 846, 85a; deanery of, ii, 1o1; Hall, i, 7oa, 844; Hill, ii, 484a; Goose Green, at, i, 572; mills at, ii, 294, 295; park, ii, 3610 ; school at, ii, 124 2; wapen- take of, ii, 187 2 Dalton, lord of manor of, ii, 1194; priest of, ii, 124%; vicar of, il, 1246 Dalton in Furness, i, 2, 6, 40, 229, 237, 238, 255 ; il, 8, 339, 537) 553 Dalton in the Isle of Walney, ii, 73 Dalton, John, 11, 123 ”, 131a, 204, 245; Sir John de, il, 150a; Michael of, ii, 1304 ; Rich., ii, 245; Rob., ii, 1574, 172a, 20g, 5640 ; Will, ii, 1104, 1294, 1314a, 1652, 6; W.H., ti, 128 # Daltre, Will., ii, 457 Dalzell, i', 478@ Damas Gill, i, 67a, 684, 70d Danby Hill, ii, 5024 Danby Andrew, 1i,617@, 6; Daniel, il, 6178 Danes Dyke (Yorks.), ii, 555 Daniel, prior of Cartmel, ii, 148@ Dannet, Elizabeth, ii,619@ ; Thom., li, 1096 Darcy Lever, see Lever, Darcy Darcy, D’Arcy, John, wi, 202; Thom., i, 321 2; Lord, a corre- spondent of, ii, 1674 Daresbury (Ches.), i, 299, 328 Daresbury, Matthew de, 1, 303; Will, de, i, 303 Dailey, Lower, ii, 4074 Darlington, Hugh of, ii, 1084 Darnell, Rich., ii, 3574, 3582 Darnley, earl of, ii, 221 Darrington, i, 301 2 Dartmouth, il, 242 Darwen River, i, 10; ii, 464 Darwen, i, 242; il, 176, 3552, 3644, 3910, 3924, 4034, 4076, 4976; chapel at, 11, 68 2; Moor, i, 12; ii, 290; Nonconformist church at, ii, 70; Lower, i, 1974; ii, 336; Nether, i, 318, 369 ; Over, i, 212, 234, 238, 242, 246, 252, 318, 369; ii, 336; manor of, ul, 290 Davenport (Ches.), ii, 178 2 Davenport, Agnes dau. of Jno. de, i, 374; Thom., ii, 406a David (a hatter), ii, 393a, David, king of Scotland, i, 293, 360; ii, 116a, 6, 1684, 185, 186, 187, I9I, 444 : Davies, —, i, 1984; Wil. ii, 5734 Davis & Sons, Messrs., ii, 3744 Davison, E. C., i, 169 Dawnay, Will, i, 323 Dawson, R. A., il, 4116, 4134, 4164; Taylor & Co., il, 3704 Deacon, Dr., ii, 95, 245 ‘ Deadwenclough,’ Dedeq enclough, ii, 458, 459, 460 Dean, nr. Bolton, i, 224, 229, 252 Dean Brook, i, 10, amd see Dene River Dean Dam Moor, ii, 497¢ Dean, —, ii, 4934 Deanchurch, Rumworth, ii, 6160 Deane, ii, 377, 48, 343 ; chapel, ii, 19; Moor, ii, 289 Deans, J., ii, 478@ Debdale Clough, ii, 554 Dee River, i, 1214, 163, 1842, 1992, 206, 2106 Dee, Dr., ii, 297 Deepdale, ii, 199 Deer Clough, i, 82a, 6 Deighton, W. D., ii, 475 7 Delamere, i, 115@, 121@; Forest, i, Io el wee Lord, ii, 242 Delves, Margaret, dau. of Sir John, i, 348 Dempster, Moor & Co., Messrs., ii, 3736 Denbigh, castle of, i, 308, 309; lordship of, i, 309 Dendron, i, 228, 229, 2 Dene, River, valley of, ii, 531, avd see Dean Brook Denewell, i, 356 Denham, Edw., ii, 5720 Denton, i, 326%; 11, 62, 66%, 67, 343, 349, 3934, 554 Denton, Rob. of, il, 1304 Denys, Sir Thom., ii, 583@ Depzestal, fishery of, ii, 141@ Derby, ii, 4894 ; mills at, ti, 295 Derby, earldom of, ii, 195 7, 208, 214 Derby, countess of, ii, 238 ; earl of, li, 35, 38, 43) 44, 49%, 51, 52, 53, 56,57”, 58, 97, 98, 106a, 1094, I12a, 123%, 1246, 129”, 138a, 1394, 147”, 51a, 162”, 204”, 218, 219, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226; 297; 231, 232,236, 237, 239, 240, 254, 257, 258, 287, 25y, 304, 426, 428, 431, 4682, 472a, 4764, 4774, 479a, 4724, 476a, 480a, 6, 502a, 503a, 6210, 6226; Charles, Earl of, ii, 241 ; Edw., Earl of, 53; Edw. Stanley, 3rd Earl of, ii, 217”; Hen. Earl of, ii, 55, 195, 223; Rob. de Ferrers, Earl of, i, 341; ii, 194, 4412; Thom., Earl of, ii, 217, 502m", 570a, 590a, &; Thom. Stanley, Earl of, ii, 215, 551; Will, Earl of, ii, 230, 242, 441; Will. de Ferrers, Earl of, i, 292, 296, 371 # ; ii, 193, 194 Derby, West, i, 63a, 704, 79a, 112a, 1136, I114a, 1196, 296”; ii, 177, 1867, 265, 276, 280, 347, 348, 3662, 6, 528, 543; castle of, ii, 191, 193 #, 266, 520, 529, 543, 544, 545; chapel of, ii, 25 2; deanery of, li, Io1 ; elementary school at, ii, 6164; forest of, ii, 444 2 ; hundred or wapentake of, i, 295, 298, 303, 326%, 335%, 337%, 339, 3413 N, 7, 71, 93%, 94, 176, 178, 179, 1807, 183, 189, 193, 209, 214, 215%, 220, 223, 285, 304, 345, 346, 347, 348, 349, 350; manor of, ii, 7, 194, 198 2, 6164 ; new church of, ii, 543 ; woods of, ii, 437, 438 636 Derby, Rob., ii, 160d Dercham, West (Norf.), i, 351; Abbey of, i, 352; canons of, i, 351 fic went (Cumb.), ti, 176 Derwent (Cumb.), River, the, ii, 3 Derwentwater, earl of, ii, 244, 245 Despencer, Baroness le, i, 355; Hugh, i, 310; family of, il, 457 Devil’s Gallop, ti, 465 Devizes, Wilts, i, 295 Devonshire House, ti, 79 Devonshire, duke of, ii, 472a; Spencer Compton Cavendish, duke of, ii, 256 Dewhurst, —, 1i, 5976 Dewsbury, Will., 11, 79 Deysbrook Park, ii, 4980 Dicconson, Edw., ii, 93 #; Will., ii, 243 Dick, Kerr & Co., ii, 3534, 374@ Dickinson, Edm., ii, 623@ ; Messrs. Will. & Sons ii, 3714 Dickson Carr Wood, ii, 447 Didsbury, i, 98a, 1214, 326%; ii, 66, 80, 285 7, 293, 343, 4974, 6176 ; chapel of, ii, 19, 30; elementary school at, ii, 6176 Dieulacies, Deulacres, abbey of, 338; ii, 1027, 1356, 614a ; abbot of, i, 342; ii, 271 Digby, Rob., ii, 405 Diggle, Juer, Hodgson & Hall, Messrs., ii, 3700 Dill, Sam., ii, 5884, 589a Dilworth, ii, 1664, 337 Dinckley, i, 337, 463 Dingle, i, 534, 700, 716, 1326 Dingle Rocks, 1, 46a, 66a Dingley Wood, i, 606 Dingley, Rob., ii, 64 7 Dinwiddie, Rob., ii, 72 ‘ Dionise,’ ii, 405a Disraeli, Benjamin, ii, 254, 255 Ditchburn, Rob. of, ii, 1104 Ditton, i, 57a; ii, 346; Marsh, i, 656 Dixon Green, Farnworth, ii, 6202 Dixon, John, ii, 398@; Messrs. Dixon & Nuttall, it, 4060 Dobby Shaw, i, 504 Dobson, Benjamin, ii, 369@ ; Isaac, ii, 369@¢; Timothy, ii, 5976; & Barlow, Messrs., ii, 369a Dochergh. See Docker Docker, i, 474, 60a, 634, 67a, 68a, 6, 72a, 76a, 360 Dodgson, Mrs., ii, 5910 Dodsworth, Roger, i, 348 ; ii, 243 Dodworth, i, 314 Dodyngton, John, ii, 164@ Dolben, John, ii, 4062 Doleman, A. H., ii, 496 Dolphinholme, i, 49a, 534, 60a, 65a, 706, 79a, 834, 856 Dolvorwyn, castle of, i, 308 Dominicans, see Black Friars Domkitt, Nich., ii, 452 Donasthorpe (Derby), i, 339 Doncaster (Yorks.), i, 294 ; ii, 1474, 217, 281, 6086 Doncaster, Thom. of, ii, 111 #, 1120; Will. of, ii, 111a, 112” Donington, John of, ii, 152.4 Donnington, castle of, i, 304, 305 Donoghue, Capt. O., li, 247 Donovan, —, ii, 488@ Dorchester, i, 352 Dore (Hereford), abbey of, i, 334 # Dorford Bridge, 1i, 4882 Dorneinge, Capt., ii, 243 7 Dorning, Nathan, ii, 620@ Dorset, marquis of, ii, 123 ” Douay, college of, ii, 54 Douglas, i, 113@; chapel, ii, 18, 112” Douglas, River, i, 1120, I14a@, 115a; li, 471, 488a Douglas, Lord James, ii, 199 Douglas - Crompton, Sydney, ii, 407 1 Doulton, Messrs., ii, 4046 Dover, ii, 201 Dover, Rich., bp. of, ii, 162 Dow, Lorenzo, 1i, 89 Down, bp. of, ii, 116@ Downham, i, 304; ii, 276%, 277, 278, 290, 335, 4553 chap. of, ii, 7,19; mill at, li, 274, 275 Downham, Will., see Chester, bp. of Downholland, ii, 345, 4724, 6 Downlitherland, i, 293 Dracup, John, il, 74 Drake, Sir Fras., ii, 226 Drakelow (Derby. ), 1, 292 Drayton Manor, ii, 3974 Drigg, chap. of, li, 1400, 141 2, 1434; manor Of, ii, 140 Drinkwater, ii, 388@ ; park, i, 116a, 1184, 119@, 6, 121a, 1266 Drinkwater, Mr., ii, 3863 Drokensford, John de, ii, 27 Droylsden, i, 97, 992, 326%, 329, 3303 ii, 343, 398¢, 548; manor of, ii, 293; in the Moss, i, 218, 228, 252; Clayton Hall, ii, 548 Druids’ Cross Road, i, 240 Druids’ Temple, the, i, 245 Dryburgh, abbey of, i, 360 Dublin, prior and canons of, ii, 1440 Duckworth, Canon, ii, 5952 ; Rich., ii,5975 Duddon Bridge, i, 474 Duddon, River, the, i, 2, 3, 30, 39, 604, 634, 114a, 4, 169, 172, 173, 189, 2044, 359 ; il, 3, 1210 ; sands, i, 189; li, 199, 4972; Vale or Valley, i, 48a, 536, 145, 1462, 1476, 148a,6, 149a,0, 1502, 4, I51a,5, 152a, 5, 154a, 1554, J, 156a, 0 Duddondale, ii, 3, awd see Dunner- dale Dugdale, Messrs., ii, 3974 Duglas, River, ii, 175 Dukinfield (Ches.), i, 65, 78, 81, 82, 321 Dulesgate, i, 12 ; Clough Foot in, i, II Duncan, John, see Sodor and Man, bp. of ; W. M., ii, 4994 Dundas, ‘Thom., li, 4056 Dundrum Bay, i, 88 Dungeon, i, 474 ; marsh, i, 634 Dunham Park, i, 105, 1246 Dunham Massey (Ches.), baron of, ii, 188 Dunkenhalgh, ii, 461, 464 Dunkinshaw, ii, 443 ; wood, ii, 448 Dunkirk, ii, 463 Dunn, Martin, ii, 502a; Saml., ii, I Teaeauinias i, 2; ii, 339; Fells, i, 624, 189 ; ii, 558; and see Dud- dondale Dunnington (Berks.), i, 362 Dunnockshaw, ii, 335 Dunnokshagh, see Dunkinshaw Dunstall (Lincs.), i, 319 #, 320, 323 16, 19; ii, INDEX Dunutinga see Duddondale Durandesthorp, see Donasthorpe (Derby) Durell, Thom., ii, 406a Durham, ii, 219, 6075; chantry school at, ii, 575@, 4,; church of St. Cuthbert, i, 314 ; convent of, ii, 108a, 4, 1094; diocese, visita- tion of, ii, 49; priory, li, Ioz, 1o7a i) 1o08a@ ; prior of, ii, 108a, 1oga, 6, 196 ; treaty of, i, 294 Durham, ’bp. of, i, 321; ii, 52, 189, 206 ; "Hugh Pudsey, bp. of, ii, 1687 ; James Pilkington, bp. of, ii, 6064 ; Laurence Booth, bp. of, ii, 33% Matthew Hulton, ’bp. of, ii, 6092 ; Thom. Langley, p of, i, 374 3 il, 33, 167@, 5752, 6 ; Rich. Barnes, bp. of, ti, 607a Durham, Roger, monk of, ii, 1084 Durham, Stephen of, ii, 110 Dutton, i, 335; ii, 1664, 184, 337; manor of, i, 314 Dutton, Adam de, ii, 1574 ; Geoffrey de, ii, 157 ; Joan, dau, of Thom. de, i, 3443 Sir Thom., ii, 1634 Duuan, ii, 8 Duxbery, i, 335 7 5 ii, 338 Dwellings, ancient, ii, 535, 536, 543 Dwerrihouse, Ann, i ii, 61 Dyeing, ii, 398, 399 Dykes, ii, 554, 555 Eaglford parish in Blackburn, ii, 6052 Eanred, King, i, 259 Eardwulf, King, ii, 176 Earle, —, ii, 4804; Lieut.-Colonel, ii, 248 Earl-Marshal, the, i, 306 Earl’s-gate, the, ii, 438 Early Man, i, 27, 211 Earthenware, manufacture of, i, 28 Earthworks, ancient, ii, 507 Earwaker, Mr., ii, 365a, 2 Ease Gill, i, 444, 50a, 6, 51a, 530, 65a, 664, 674, 682, 694, 700, 714, 4, 72a, b, 734, 6, 74a, 6,754, 76a, d, 772, , 78a, }, 82a, 83a, 4, 84a, b, 85a, 6; Kirk, i, 834; Lower, i, 734, 744, 83a, d, 84a, 6, 85a, o; Upper, i, 524, 534, 676 Easterby, —, ii, 4764 Eastgate, John, ii, 138%; Rich,, ii, 138” Eastham, i, 24, 1854, 1860 ; ii, 1310; mills at, ii, 295 Eastwitton, John of, ii, 25 Eaton, —, ii, 3870; J. M., ii, 497 ; Saml., ii, 65 Eaves Wood, i, 84a Eavesbrook, ii, 440 Ebsworth, —, ii, 474@ Eccles, i, 23, 566, 62a, 730, 780, 264; li, 7, 347, 37%, 48, 80, 99, 343, 3984, 4684, 4950; advowson, i, 132@; chantries, ii, 33, 34; church of, i, 307, 328%; i, 62, 72, 13%, 19, 23%, 33, 13805 deanery of, li, 100; vicarage, ii, 29, 36; Will., clerk of, i, 328 2 Eccles, John, i li, 133 %, 1390} Jy ” 4916; Rich, ii, 6160; Capt., 1866 Eccleshall (Warw.), i, 318, 342 Eccleshil, i, 369 ; 1i, 337 Ecclesiastical History, ii, 1 637 Eccleston, i, 63a, 303; ii, 93%, 99, 338, 346, 3664, 4o4a, 4osa, 406d, 425, 548, 5784, 6086 ; advowson, il, 35, 1676, 1694, 4, 1710; bene- fice, ll, 32 2, 64 # ; church, li, 6, 7M, 107, 18, 23%, 35, 36%, 50; manor, 1, 298 ; ll, 333 Eccleston, rector or parson of, ii, 25”, 38 Eccleston, Great, i, 357 2, 360 Eccleston, Little, i, 434, 357 7, 360 ; Nl, 79%, 333 Eccleston Hall, nr. St. Helens, i, 24 Eccleston in the Fylde, i, 102 Eccleston, Basil, ii, 503@; Basil Thom., ii, 5784; Edw., ii, 5780; Hen., ii, 5784; Roger de, ii, 456 ; Thom., il, 98; Will. de, ii, 456 Eckett, Rob., ii, 91 Ecgfrith, King, ii, 2, 4, 176 Eddi, ii, 2, 3, 4, 176 Eddleston, John, ii, 617@ Eden, River, the, ii, 3 Eden, —, ii, 476a; Eden & Thwaites, Messrs., ii, 398d Edenfield, chap., ii, 37 7 Edge Green, i, 23 Edge Hill (Wavertree), i, 489@ ; bat- tle of, ii, 237 Edge, Capt., ii, 240 Edgeley, Nathaniel, ii, 394 @ Edgworth, ii, 342 Edgworth, Dame Ann, ii, 6194 Edison, Mr., ii, 3734 Edlington (Yorks.), i, 356; manor, 1, 353 Edmund, son of King Henry, i, 296, 326, 373 #3 li, 194, 195, 196; and see Edmund, earl of Lancaster Edmunds, Hen. , ii, 374a Edward the Confessor, i ui, 6 Edward the Elder, ii, 5, 177, 178 Edward I, i, 310; ii, 21, 22, 27, 1184, 130a, 1494, 189 m, 196, 266, 281, 286, 442, 444, 455, 456, 457 7, 462 Edward II, i, 310, 373; li, 25, 111a, 1350, 41a, I50a, 1552, 197, 199, 201, 202, 282, 286 Edward II], ii, 24, 32, 1184, 1192, 127, 1356, 1364, 203, 205, 206, 208, 209, 270, 284, 3574, 376a, 381 2, 444 Edward IV, i, 347; ii, 137a, 215, 3934 Edward VI, ii, 45, 46, 47, 1642, 291, 376, 3774, 422 Edward VII, ii, 258 Edward, Prince of Wales (afterwards Edw. II), i, 309, 310, 333 Edward the Black Prince, ii, 457 Edwin, earl, ii, 180 Edwin, King, i ii, 175 Edwinstowe, Thom., ii, 161@ Egbert Dean, i, 232 Egerton, Capt., il, 243%; Hon. A. F., ii, 256 ; Lord F., li, 256 Eggergarth, i, 339, 340 Eglinton, earl of, ii, 4808 Egremont, ii, 413@ Egremont, Elias of, ii, 1215 ; Rob., li, 1590 Egton, Egton-cum-Newland, i, 364 ; li, 340 Elcock, Ralph, ii, 5624, 5634 Eleanor, Queen, 1 1, 309, 359 Elinore, Mr., ii, 480d Elizabeth, Queen, li, 46, 53, 54, 1210, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, ai, 228, 250, 287 ", 297, 330, 576a, by 6008, 6024, 6034, 6064, 6084 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Elkes Wocd, ii, 462 Ellastone (Staffs.), rectory of, 11, 1064 Ellel, i, 357 #, 359”; li, 127", 1514, 340; chap., i, 359; ii, ton, 18, 1525 Ellel, Grimbald de, i, 359 # Ellenbrook, ii, 488a Ellerbeck, Thom. of, ii, 1524 Ellesmere, earl of, ii, 429, 4724 Elliot, G., ii, 4018 Elliscales, ii, 127% ; man. ii, 127a Ellison, Rob., ii, 392 Elmet, King, ii, 175, 176% Elsdale, Robinson, ii, 5884 Elsham (Lincs.), i, 319 #, 320, 340 Elson, Edm. and Saml., ii, 3684 Elston, i, 335 #; ii, 334; Wood, i, 6 46a Elswick, i, 304, 335 #5 ii, 333, 37265 independent church of, li, 70 Elterside Mosses, i, 446 Elterwater, i, 39, 364; Park, li, 450 Elton, i, 319”; i, oa Elton, Mr., ii, 5944, 6 Eltonhead, Will, ii, 1636 Elwin, i, 338 Ely, bp. of, ii, 502 # ; James Stanley, bp. of, ii, 38, 216; Rich. Redman, bp. of, ii, 156a, 6; Phil. Morgan, bp. of, ii, 36 Embleton, —, ii, 49 Emerich Wood, ii, 447 Emley, (Yorks.), lord of, see Fitz- Godric, Will. Emma, Queen, ii, 272 Emmett, —, ii, 4894 Emmetts, i, 484: 11, 443; Lower, 1, 83a, 84a; Moor, ii, 288 Emodes, see Emmets Emotts, More, ii, 460, and see Colne Endmoor, ii, 4704 Enfurlong, Hen. de, ii, 199 Engineering, il, 367 Englefeld, (Flint), i, 367 Entwistle, ii, 342; Moor, i, 11 Entwistle, Mr., ii, 256 Eowils, King, i, 258 _ Erdbury (Warw.), Austin canons of, Nl, 35 Ergham, Ralph de, ii, 445 Erghum (Arkholme), Ralph de, ii, 1646 Erlond, see Ireland Ermyte, John, ii, 445 Ernulf, ii, 557 Errington, Hen., ii, 4064 Escow Brook, ii, 438 Escow Wood, ii, 447 Eshton, ii, 127a; John of, ii, 120” Esk, Rob., ti, 1296 Eskrigge, Eskenge, James, ii, 146 , 1474 Essex, Alice, dau. of Rob. de, i, 299 ; Alice, w. of Rob. de, see Vere Alice de; Rob. de, i. 299, 300; Roger of, li, 119” Essex, earl of, i, 318; Goff. de Mandevill, earl of, i, 300”; Will. de Mandevill, earl of, i, 300” Esthwaite, i, 592; Water, i, 40, 43a, 189 ; ii, 4884 Estrigge, see Eskrigge Ethelfrith, King, ii, 2, 175 Ethelred, King, i 1; 239; il, 179 Eton College, i li, 5820; provost of, ii, 582” Eugenius III, Pope, ii, 1084, 114”, 115a Euxton, i, 303, 335 #5 ii, chap., il, 37 #, 93% 338, 4255 Evans, Sir John, i, 220, 221, 229, 235 Everett, James, ii, 91 Everton, i, 296”; 437 : Evesham, ii, 1044; Abbey, i, 335, 336; li, 10”, 12, 13 #, 27, 104a, 6, 1054, 1064, 1074, 1084 ; battle of, i, 356 Evesham, abbot of, ii, 1054, 1084, 263; Rob., abbot of, i i, 335 ; Roger, abbot of, ii, 1084; Rich, Norris, abbot of, ii, 1054 Evesham, ‘monks of, i, 292 ; 1044, 1084, 536 Evesham, John de, ii, 1644, Ewart, Peter, ii, 3874; and Rutson, Messrs., ii, 3920 Ewcross, ii, 184; wapentake of, i, 358, 360, 362; ii, 180, 181, 335, 337) 341% Ewood Bridge, ii, 454, 4994 Ewyas, John de, ii, 197 ‘ Exanforda,’ ii, 4 Exeter, Hugh Oldham, bp. of, ii, 37, 5784, 5792, 580a, 6, 5814, d, 582a, 6, 583a, 6, 5844; John Booth, bp. of, ii, 33; Rich. Red- man, bp. of, ii, 1562, 4 Exeter (Devon), i, 259 Exhall (Warw.), i, 341 ; manor of, i, 347 1, 348 Extwistle, i, ii, 205 m, 348, ii, 29, 211, 242, 3045 Ml, 454, 553 . Eyton, Mr., i, 367 Fabius, Dr. Daniel, ii, 75 Faceby (Faysceby) Hen. of, ii, 1104 Facit valley, i, 11 Facyde (Facit), ii, 393@, 4 Failsworth, 1, 329, 330 5 11, 343, 3495 3944, 3984, 4984; chap., ii, 68”, 69 ; manor of, il, 293 Fairbairn, Thom., i, 372@; Will. Andrew, ii, 372a; Sir Will, ii, 3724 ; Messrs. Fairbairn & Lillie, li, 3724 Fairbank, Gilb., ii, 6074 Fairfax, Bevis, de, sce Clare, Bevis de ; lord, ii, 238 ; Dr., ii, 64” Fairfield, nr. Manchester, ii, 81, 82 Fairhaven, i, 734, 746 Fairs, ii, 281, 282, 292, 293, and see under place-names Fairwise, Thom., ii, 1506 Falconer, Hen., i, 336” Fairsnape, li, 443; Clough, i, 674, 74a; Fell, i, 684 ; ii, 438, 454 Faling (‘ Falinge’ )) li, 292, 623@ Fallow, family of, ii, 3944 Fallowfield, i, 1184, 1264 ; ii, 374@ Fallows, John, ii, 3674 Fanshaw, Thom., ii, 232; Mr. Auditor, ii, 460 Far Naze, i, 514 Farleton, i, 321, 322; ii, 340, 526, 554, and see Hornby with Farle- ton Farlington, ii, 104@ Farmer, Sir James & Sons, ii, 3714; Will, ii, 5774 Farnworth, i, 326”; ii, 343, 349, 3926, 407a, 6; chap., ii, 19, 98; chantry, ii, 98; Grammar school, ii, 5614, 5896 ; Dixon Green School at, ii, 6204 638 Farrer, John, ii, 6144 Farrington (Farington), i, 984, 3353 : ii, 338, 548; school at, ti, 6054; Lower Farington Hall, ti, 548 Farrington, G., il, 5o01a; ii, Sir Hen., ii, 6006, 6034 ; Rich., son of Warn, i, 303; Ww pe ii, 231, 234, 452; family of, i, 336 Farquhar, Lord, il, 480a Faucet, Ralph, ii, 562 n Faukner, Edw., ii, 247 Faunte, Will., ii, 98 Faweett, —, li, 4734, 4756, A774, 478a; G. F., ii, 4766; a Fx ii, 4788 ; Dr., ii, 75 Fawle, ii, 452 Fayrigge, ii, 451 Fazackerley, Mr., ii, 5066 Fazakerley, i, 495, 524, 726, iil, 347 ; school at, ii, 621a Fazakerley, Rob. of, ii, 1116, 1126 Featherston, priest of, i, 314 Feildon, —, ii, 5014 Fell, John, ii, 4164 ; mistress, ii, 78 Fellgate, ii, 498a Felt-hat making, ii, 393 Felton, John, ii, 54 Feniscliffe, ii, 74 Fenny, Thom., ii, 4054 Fenton, Mr., ii, 256 Fenwick, John, ii, 6144 Fermor-Hesketh, Sir T. G., ii, 4724 Fermoy (Ireland), religious house at, ii, 1294 Fermoy, Lord, ii, 475 # Fernhead, i, 366 # Fernyslacke, ii, 357@ Ferrers, earldom of, ii, 195 Ferrers, earl of, i, 339 2, 340, 341, 371 ; Thom., earl of, il, 195” ; Will, earl of, i, 292 m, and see Derby, Will. de Ferrers, earl of Ferrers, Eliz., i, 347; Rob. de, see Derby, earls of; Will. de, see Derby, earls of; Sir Will. de, baron of Groby, i, 346%, 347; ii, 195 # Ferry, New, ii, 4134 Ferry, Rock, i, 186 ; ii, 413@ Ferryman, Rich., ii, 152a Feudal Baronage, i, 291 Fiddler’s Ferry, i, 656 Fillingham (Lincs.), i, 340 ; manor, 120a ; 1, 337 eee Hen. de, i, 340; Simon e,1 Filly Chess (Fillyclose), ii, 336, 457, 458, 459, 460” Filton Hill, i, 79 Finch, Hen. of Walton, ii, 67 Finchale, nr. Durham, ii, 4; prior of, ii, 110” Findlay, W., ii, 4936 Finsthwaite, i il, 450 Firbank, i, 364 Fireclay, i i, 28; li, 355 Firmin, Thom. “9 ii, 68 Fisher, Ellen, il, 6014 Fisheries, Sea, i li, 409 Fishes, i, 23, 179 Fishwick, il, 334 Fishwick, Colonel, ii, 5704, gy Lieut. -Colonel, il, 3530; . Hy ii, 539; Mr., li, 6036 Fithler, John, li, 32 Fitton, Sir Edw., li, 53; Hugh, i, 304; Rich., i, 304, 318, 336, 372; Sir Rich. of Gawsworth, ii, 112@ Fitun, Rich., i, 372 # Fitzadam, Will, ii, 5930 Fitz Bernard, Ralph, i, 339; ii, 188 Fitz Count, Rob, see Chester, con- stable of Fitz Duncan, Will, nephew of David, King of Scotland, ii, 116a, 1264, 185 n Fitz Eustace, Rich., see Chester, constable of Fitz Geoffrey, John, i, 355, 356 Fitz Gilbert, Roger, i, 359 #; Rich., dau. of, see Clare, Roesia de: ; Will, i, 294 #, ad see Lancaster, Will. de Fitz Godric, Will., i, 299 2, 301 Fitz Helgod, Beatrice, i, 338; Rob., i, 338 a Fitz Henry, Hen., ii, 127 Fitzherbert, Sir Anthony, ii, 583¢ ; Will. see York, archbp. of ; Mr., ii, 1254; Mr. Justice, il, 1424 Fitzherbert-Brockholes, Thom., ii, 465 ; W., li, 465 * Fitz Hubert, Ralph, i, 339 # Fitz John, Eustace, i, 317, and see Chester, constable of; Joan, sister of John, i, 356; Joan, sister of Rich., i, 350%; John, i, 3562; Rich., i, 350 7, 356 Fitz Nigel, Will., i, 297 2, 328, 367, and see Chester, constable of Fitz Norman, Hugh, i, 367 Fitz Peter, Geoff., i, 356 # Fitz Ralph, of Middleham, Ranulf, son of Rob., i, 351%; Waleran, son of Rob., i, 351%; Ralph, son of Rob., i, 351 # Fitz Randolf, Raulf le, i, 356% Fitz Reinfred, Gilbert, 1, 354, 358 2, 361, 362, 3633 i il, 126 1, 141 4, 193 ; Gilbert, son of Roger, i; 361; ; li, 117”, 153a, 1554, 1576, 263 ; , Helewise, i, 358%, 362; Ralph. See Bruere, Ralph dela; Rein- fred, i, 361; Reinfred, son of Roger, i, 361 #, 362; Roger, i, 361 2; Will, ii, 126% Fitz Richard, Rob., prior of the English Hospitallers, i, 299 # ; John, i, 300%, and see Chester, constable of ; Roger, of Wark- worth, i, 300” Fitz Robert, Ralph, i, 351; Ranulf, i, 351 Fitz ae Amuria, dau. of Rich.,i, 368 ; Avice, dau. "of Rich, ri 368; Margery or Margaret, w. of Rich., i, 367, 368 ; Margery, dau. of Rich., i, 368 ; Quenilda, dau. of Rich., i, 368; Rich., i, 367, 368 ; Rob., i, 300 7, 354 Fitzroy, Major-General, Hon. Chas., ii, 405 Fitz-Swain, Maud, dau. of Adam, i, 20 Fiz Thomas, Fitz Gerald, Joan, dau. of John, i, 357 Fitz Warin, Fulk, 1, 354, 356% Fitz William, Agnes, sister of Will., 1, 299 ; Will., i, 298, 299 %, 301, 319, 328 ; earls of, i, 299 # Fitz, see Son of Flag-stones, quarries of, ii, 355@ Flamborough (Yorks.), ii, 6164; constable of, i, 304 # Flaynsburgh, Rob. de, i, 302 Fleet (Lincs.), i, 319 7, 322. Fleet, New Prison, Manchester, ii, 57 #, 225 INDEX Fleetwood, i, 26, 464, 5546, 58a, 65a, 88, 90, 994, 1364, 1382, 140a, 1410, 1426, 173, 185a, 19848; ii, 3548, a 4126, 4135, 4156, 4724, 4776, 4566 a, 6144, b; dock, i, eyo ee Fleetwood, —, ii, 475a@; Caryll, ii, 6226; Edm. . ll, 228; Edw., rector of Wigan, i ii, 57 #2, 59, 227, 293; Sir Hesketh, ii, 4760 : John, i, 375 ; ii, 1050, 1064 ; Sir P. H. pli, 472a3 Sir Rich.,, i, 374, 375; Thom., i, 375 3 li, 45, 96, 164a, 4o2a, 5730} Mr., vicar of Kirkham, ii, 605¢ ; family of, ii, 399 # Fleming, Michael le, i, 294”, 295, 297, 320; ii, 19a, 1264, 1274, 1406, 184 #, 187 n, 262, 439) 5573 Sir Thom, i, 366 ; Will, prior of Conishead, ii, 1434; family, i, 297 ; i, 119d, 214, 557 Fletcher, Edm. ii, 367a, 6; James, ii, 79 ; John, ii, 1604, 1614, 3930; I. W., ii, 4956; M., ii, 4757; Phoebe, 1i, 3684 ; Rich., ii, 6030 ; Lieut.-Colonel, ii, 248° ; ’archd., li, 4070 Fletham, Ralph of, ii, 1300 Flitton, Will. ii, 1246 Flixton, i, 216, 228, 252, 328 # ; ii, 7, 66 7, 99, 343, 3984, 4982 ; advow- son of, ii, 1484; church, ii, 6 7, 7M, 10M, 12, 13, 23, 149a, 6230 ; school at, ii, 623d Flixton, recor of, ii, 16 Flodden Field, battle of, i, 348 ; ii, 216 Flookborough, i, 434, 44a, 46a, 474, 564, 626, 228, 229, 237, 238, 255 ; li, 412a@ ; chap., ll, 37% Flora, the, of coal measures, i, 21, and see Botany Flower Scar Hill, i, 12, 215, 228, 252 Fo Edge, i, 704, 72a Foe Bank, ii, 342 2 Fog & Hughes, Messrs., ii, 386a Folds, Rich., ii, 453 Foleshill (Warw.), i, 341, 342, 343 Folkard, ii, 404@ Football, i, 493 Foots Cray (Kent), rector of, ii, 585 4 Force Forge (ironworks), ii, 3630 Ford, i, 42, 50a ; ii, 346%, 347 Ford, Old, nr. London, ii, 396a Ford, Rawlinson, ii, 363 #; Messrs., Ul, 3974 Fordbottle, ii, 1264 Forest laws, the, ii, 231 Forester, Rob. le, ii, 458” Forestry, ii, 437 Formby, i, 26, 442, 4, 454, 46a, 47, 48a, 52a, 544, 55a, d, 56a, 574, 0, 584, 60a, 6, 614, 624, 65a, 664, 67a, 726, 734, >, 746, 76a, 6, 776, 786,794, 6, 112a, 11Sa, 1184, 1194, 125, 1324, 1814, 1860, 1882, 1948, 1994, 2036; il, 347, 413@, 4694, 472a; chap., ii, 37%; church, old, i, 424; market and stallage at, ii, 281; marsh, i, 615; moss, ii, 288 Formby Point, i, 89 ; ii, 4104, 4960 Formby Sands, i, 1994 Formby, —, ii, 474@, 475@; Adam de, il, 456; Rob. of, ii, 159@ Forster, Mr., ii, 244, 245 Fort & Taylor, Messrs., ii, 3978 Forth, Richard (of Wigan), 11, 3654 Forton, i, 357% 5 li, 127%, 1576, 3323 N oncontormity in, li, 70 639 Forz, Isabella of, ii, 118 Foss, in eee li, 126a, 0 Fossils, i, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 16, 21, 22, 23, 30, and see Palaeontology’ Foster, H., ii, 4962 ; Thom., ii, 5654; Col. Will. Hen. vy li, 4710 Foucher, Rob., ii, 203 Foudrey, Fouldrey, peel of, i, 176, 177; li, 114%, 118a, 227 Foulney Island, i, 163, 2030 Foulridge, i, 10, 11, 304; ii, 335, 392% Foulshaw Moss, i, 2034, 2044 Fountains Abbey, i, 317, 3593 ii, 115@, 1286 ; abbot of, ti, 1157 Fox, Geo., ii, 78, 79; Rich., see Winchester, bp. of Foxdale Head, i, 84a Foxdenton, i, 322; ii, 307 Foxhill Bank, ii, 3972, 6; Noncon- formity at, ii, 90 Foxton Edge, i, 252 Franchise, the, ii, 251, 252, 253, 254, 215, 216, 228, 255 ; Franks, Mr., i, 235 Fraser, James, ii, 247 Fraser, Dr., see Manchester, bp. of Freckleton, i, 304, 335% ; ii, 107 #, 333 Freckleton, Adam de, vicar of Wigan, li, 16%; Rich. de, i, 304 Freeman —, ii, 489¢ Freemantle (Hants.), i, 302 ; ii, 441 Frerehill, ii, 459 Freshfield, 1, 44a, 46a, 52a, 6, 534, 542, 552, 614, 64a, 726, 73a, 6, 112a@; li, 496a Freston, Anthony, li, 3574, 358@ Freyne, Hugh de, i, 311 Friaries, the, ii, 161 Friars, the, see Black Friars, Grey Friars, and Friars Minor Friars Minor, the ii, 102, 441 Friskney, ii, 4852@ Frobisher, Fras., ii, 97 Frodsham, i, 24 Frog - hoppers, see Homoptera Fryer, Thom., ii, 3964, 397a Fulclough, ii, 460 Fulneck, il, 81 Fulwood, i, 684; ii, 333, 349, 437, 443, 444 ; forest of, li, 267 2, 437, 438, 440, 445, 446, 456; Hall, ii, 4984 Fungi, i, 85, 86 Furness, 1, 23, 29, 43a, 1304, 188, 189, 2008, 2014, 2044, 2084, 219, 237, 238, 255, 257, 291, 292, 293, 297, 360, 361, 362, 364, 439, 465 ; i, 8, 44, 49, 78, 102, I14d, 1164, 1174, 119, 124, 126a, d, 127, 6; 1404, 1414, 1426, 177, 180, 182, 184, 199, 200, 202, 216, 217 #, 238, 262, 273, 3532, 3544, 3554, 3614, 3634, 3644, 4, 419, 431, 556; church, ii, 107, 24; deanery o', ii, 407, 50, 100; Fells, i, 45a, 80a, 189, 292, 327, 328, 359, 362; ii, 1176, 1264, 6, 446, 450, 555; Forest of, ii, 437; Hills, i, 55 a; wapentake of, ii, 187% Fumess, lord of, see Fleming, Michael le Furness Abbey, i, 23, 542, 1972, 219, 229, 255, 327) 335) 353) 359s 365 ; li, 82, lo”, II, 13, 39, 102, 103, 114, 126 7, 1404, 14a, 1446, 185, 187 2, 200, 263, 270, 271, 275, Hemiptera, A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Fumess Abbey (con. ii, 283, 289, 295. 305 # ris 360a, 6, 443, 4451 44» 537) 556, 5573 grammar and song school, in, ij, 1224 Furness Abbey, abbot of, 1, 365 ; il, 1344, 145a@, 148 2, 170a, 192, 196, 263, aa, 203, 4443 Ewan, abbot of, i, 295, amd see D’Avranches, Ewan ; John, abbot of, ii, 117 7 ; Laurence, abbot of, ii, 131a@; Rob., abbot of, ii, 131@; R: ver, abbot of, ii, 1188 Furness Abbey, monks of, i, 320, 359, 360, 362, 364; li, II, I41a, 185, 437, 462 Furness, High, i, 43a, 452, 207, 2090; ii, 121a, 5, 178, 360@ Furness, Low, 1, 510 ; li, 1214, 129%, 176, 289, 451, 453, 555; mills at, li, 294 Furness, Aline, w. of Will. de, i, 3393 "Anselm, son of Michael de, i, 1406 ; Will. de, lord of Thurn- ham, li, 154a Furnival, Gerard de, wife of, see Ledet, Christiana Fylde, the, i, 39: ii, 299, 419, 426. 429, 430, 431,47 7ob, 471a; deanery of, ii, 100 ; Noncontormity in, il, go Gaddesby, Rob. of, ii, 1614 Gaedyne, see Gilling Gaetani, Francesco, archdeacon of Richmond, ii, 33 Gainsborough, castle of, i, 316 7 Gaits Wood, ii, 447 Galey, Nich., ii, 5804; 5804, 5816 Galgate, 11, 438 Galilee, John, ii, 3932 Gallant, John, ii, 3942 Galloway-gate, see Galgate Galloway, Will, ii, 371@; ii, 371a, 8 Galsterdale, see Glasterdale Galwey, i, 321 Gamble, Sir David, ii, 488@ ; Josias, Chris., ii, 4004, 4o1a Gambleside ‘Gamelsheud), ii, 460 Gamston (Notts.), 1, 293 Gannoc, i, 332 Gannow, i, 97 Ganoids, i, 186 Gant, Agnes de, i, 298 ; Gilbert de, i, 361 2; Will. de, i, 298, and see Gaunt Gardiner, Isabel, w. of John, ii, 564a; John, il, 34 7, 166a, 1716, 562a, 4, 5634, 6, 5642; Nich., li, 562%, 3634; Rob., il, 157@ Gardiner’s Hospital, Lancaster, ii, 166 Gardner, Rob. of Preston, ii, 315 7, 383 2 Garforth, i, 313 Gargrave, in Craven, tithes of, ii, 120%” Gargrave, Thom., ti, 49 Garner, prior of Lancaster, ii, 1724 ; Brian, prior of Dalton, ii, 1240; Dr. J. E., ii, 498a Gamett —, ii, 482@; H. G., ii, 49042, 493@; John, ii, 3685; Rich., ii, 623¢; Will, ii, 451, 4824 Will, ii, Messs., Garstang, i, 44a, 486, Sia, ?, aK 534, 570, 59a, 634, 644, ra : qia, 6, 72a, 6, 73a, 756, 766 774, 6, 78a, 79, 1454, 1462, 149%, 1554, 1994, 357 % 360, 364; ii, 84, 15 #, 17, 86, 100, 153 %, 1576, 159%, 285, 332 422, 423, 427 448, 465, 4824 , 6096 ; advowson of, ii, 155¢ ; chap., li, 345.35 $ church, i, 362; il, 6%, 8,137, 17”, 18, 23, 29, 1574; deanery of, ii, 100; lordship of, i, 3593 lords of, i, 3573; manor, i, 364; rectory, ii, 22, 1554. 157@, 158% ; rector of, ii, 99; vicarage of, ii, 155a@; vicar of, ii, 15, 28, 36 Garstang, curate of, ii, 5724 Garstang, Paulin de, i i, 360 Garstang, Will. the clerk of, i, 360 Garston, i, 542, 57a, 706, I14a, 1406, 166, 182a; ii, 345, 349; advowson of chap., i, 332; chap., ii, 19; dock, i, 1860 manor, il, IIIa Garston, Thom. de, i, 303 Garswood, ii, 93 #, 488a Garth, Hugh, ii, 103, 154@, 158d Gartside, Mr., ii, 384a Gascoigne —, lord of the manor of West Derby, ii, 545 ; chief justice, ii, 211% Gascon, i, 360, 364 ; ii, 140 % Gaskell, Holsbrook, ii, 3734 ; ii, 72 2, 3656 Gasking, 1, 68a, 71 Gastropoda, i, 98 Gatacre, Nonconformist church, ii, 69 Gatebartow, i, 764; Wood, i, 43a, 596,69@ Gates, Hen., ii, 49 Gaudin, P. J., ti, 4978 Gaulter, John, 11, 618a@ Gaunt, Alice, dau. of Will. de, i, 316; Blanch, w. of John of, i, 296 ; ii, 207, 208%; Gilbert de, seé Lincoln earl of ; John of, ii, 35%, 103, 1364, 164 2, 207, 208, 210, 211, 326 Gaucholme in Dulesgate, i, 11 Gaveston, Peter de, i, 310, 311, 343 ; ii, 197 Gcdleng, Hen., i, 304 Gee, Edw., ii, 64 n; Geo., ii, 3984 Gellibrand, Will, + li, 5710 Gennes, Monsieur de, ll, 384a Gentil, Will. le, ii, 197 Geoffrey, brother of Hen. III, i, 307 Geology, i, 1 George III, ti, 246 George IV, ii, 249 George, Dan, li, 1oga@ Gerard (Gerrard } sll, 4694, 4700 ; Isabel, dau. of Sir Thom., i, 374 ; John, ti, 356”, 359”; Sir John, li, 480d ; Margaret, dau. of Peter, i, 3473 Miles (Milles), ii, 58 7, 97, 98; Rich., ii, 98; Hon. R., ii, 4716; Sir Thom., ii, 97, 216%, 220, 230, 5024, 4, 6028 ; Sir Will., li, 243, 247; Lord, see Brandon, Lord Gerard-Dicconson, Hon. Rob. Jos., ii, 4704 Gerards Bridge, ii, 400d Gernet, Benedict, i, 336 ; li, 441 7 ; John, i, 324”; Ralph, ii, 1694 ; Roger, i, 294 %, 303, 324%, 368, 438 2, 439, 440; Vivian, i, 338 ; li, 438 2; Will, i, 338 ; family of, i, 297; il, 1274, 190 640 Will, Gernon, Ralph, i, 329 Gernons, Ranulf, see Chester, earl of Giants’ Graves, the, 1, 245 Gibson, A. S., il, 495@; Matt., ii, 93%; Saml., i, 102; Will, ii, 93% 94, 3584 Gidlow in Aspull, ii, 547, 548 Giggleswick (Yorks.), i, 8; school, i, 161 Gilbert, i, 360, 358; (the smith), ii, 3608 ; priest, ul, 1536 Gilbert, Ashurst Turner, see Chi- chester, bp. of Gilbertholme, see Gilberton Gilberton, Little, i, 443 ; Over, ii, 443 ; a Gildersome, Baptist church, ii, 75, 6 7 Gilds, ii, 37, 38 , 1676, 5798 Gill Moss, 1, 634 Gillibrand Old Hall, 548 7 Gillibrand, Jos., li, 6194 Gilling (Yorks.), ii, 3 Gillingham (Kent), rectory, ii, 5768 Gilliver —, ii, 5030 Gilpin —, ii, 124a Girlington, Sir John, ii, 235, Mr., ii, 242 Gisburn Park, ii, 463 # Gisors, office of Castellan of, i, 350” Gisors, Hervey of, i, 350 Gladstone, Hugh, ii, 481a; R. F., ii, 4754; Will. ii, 254, 255, 256 Glanvill, Bertha, 1, 350; Geva, sister of Ranulf, i, 336%; Hele- wise, dau. of Ranulf, i, 351 2; Hervey de, i, 336; Ranulf de, i, 350) 351, 352, 361 ; ii, 188 Glasgow, ii, 3546, 3710, 3864, 4o1d Glasgow, bp. of, il, 1296 Glasgow, Will, ii, 3714@ Glass industry, ii, 261, 3544, 404, 405, 406 Glasson, i, 65a, 75a; Dock, ii, 4126 Glasterdale, ii, 458, 460 7 Glaze, River, i li, 4716 Glazebrook, i, 340 Gleaston, 11, 73; Castle, i, 228, 237, 238, 255 5 li, 557 Gleave, Matt., ii, 3662 Glodwick, ii, 3686 Glossop, li, 392@ Gloucester, 1, 342 ; ii, 3656, 382 Gloucester, duke of, ii, 215, 248; Rich., duke of, ii, 563a ; Thom., duke of, ii, 210 Gloucester, earl of, 355; Rich. de Clare, earl of, i, 306: Rob. earl of, i, 313 7 Gloucester, John of, ii, 1064 ; Thom. of, ii, 1060 Glover & Co., Messrs. W. T., ii, 3744 Goathwaite Moor, i, 66a Goats Water, i, 40, 171 Gode, Will. le, ii, 1662, 4 Godfrey, i, 337; the sheriff, i i, 295; li, 8, 10 #, 11, 167 ”, 1684, 183” Godith, i, 358 Godmanchester Manor sli, 195 ‘ Godshaugh,’ see Goodshaw Golborne, i, 366 7, 370, 374 ; ii, 348, 349; church, ii, 370% ; heath, ii, 4794 ; manor, i, 374 Goldbourne, Rich, de, 372%; brother Rich, de, ii, 103 ; Thom. de, i, 370 Chorley, ii, 2383 Goldshaw Booth, i, 252; ii, 335, 458, 459, 460 # Goldsmiths’ Company, London, ii, 5802, 6095 Golf, ii, 4692, 495 Goltho in Lindsey, i, 327 Goodair, John, ii, 574@ ; Will. Hen., li, $744 Goodber Common, i, 755 Gooden, Thom., ii, 3574 Goodier, Saml., ii, 4024 Goodlake, Col., ii, 475 ” Goodshaw, ii, 458, 460; Baptist church at, li, 74, 75; chap., ii, 37% Goodwin, Rich., of Bolton, ii, 67 Gooseleach, i, 984 Goosnargh, i, 594, 60a, 98%, 220, 226, 252; ii, 333, 610a, 6174, 6184 ; chap. of, li, 25 #, 29 ”, 37 ”; chantry priest of, ii, 38; school at Whitechapel in, ii, 6184 Gordon-Hay, il, 495¢ Gore Brook, the, ii, 554 Gore, Mr,, ii, 587a Goring, Joshua, ii, 394@ Gormanston, Lord, ii, 162a@; Vis- count, ii, 162 ” Gorple River, i, 54a Gorpley Clough, i, 78 Gosnall, Jas., ti, 61%, 62, 5962; John, ii, 5960 Gospatric, lord of Samlesbury, ii, 18 Goss, Alex., see Liverpool, bp. of Gossage, Will., ii, ora, 6; Messrs. Will. & Sons, i, 4030 Gorton, i, 59a, 97, 326%; ii, 65, 66%, 258", 278%, 286”, 343, 3708, 3734, 4, 3840, 394a, 3982, 554; chap. of, li, 63,68 2 ; manor of, ii, 293 ; Nonconformity in, ii, 6 9 Gorton, Hen. of, ii, 279 Gough, Rich., ii, 355@, 4, 365@ Gould, I. Chalkley, ii, 520 Gowran, i, 357 Grace, Pilgrimage of, ii, 39, 43, 44 Grace, Dr. W. G., ii, 4924 Grafton, battle of, i, 347 Grafton, East (Wilts.), manor of, i, 346% Graham, A, ii, 4732, 4752; Sir Bellingham, ii, 4760 ; J., 1, 4962 ; John, ii, 3952, 3960, 0, 3974; Thom., ii, 395 ” Grain, raising of and crops, ii, 272, 273 Grand, Mons. le, ii, 3624 Grange, i, 39, 40, 432, 442, 454, 0, 462, 474, 6, 48a, 492, 5, 50a, 580, 63a, 640, 65a, 6, 662, 69a, 70d, 716, 72a, 746, 776, 842, 982, 4, 994, 104, 105, 117a, 128a, 4, 1294, 1316, 1324, 6, 133a, 6, 1344, 0, 135@, 6, 1364, d, 1374, 6, 1384, 0, 139a, 6, 1404, 6, 141 a,b, 1422, 6, 1454, 1462, b, 1474, 4, 148a, 149a, I50a, 1520, 54a; 201a, 216, 228, 255; ii, 5170; Brook, nr. Belmont, i, 10 ; Park, san ne - Grant, Sandy, ii, 478a@; Messrs., ii, 3974 " Grass Yard Moor, ii, 482a Grassmere, ii, 4994; manor of, i, 364 ‘ Grathwayt,’ ii, 451 Gravel, mining of, i, 29 Gravell’s Clough, i, 424, 694, 70a, 4, 726, 786, 79a, 82a, 84a, 85a 2 Greenheys (Manchester), INDEX Gravesend, ii, 489d Gray, Walter de, archbp. of York, li, 117”, 1284; constitution of, ii, 19 ee (Westmld.), manor of, i, 360 Graystonlegh, ii, 458 Graythwaite, see Sandys, Myles Great Fire of London, ii, 612@ Great Winning Gulf, i, 215, 216, 228, 252 Greavebrook, ii, 443 Green, Edm., ii, 1614; Ireland, ii, 6226; Isaac, ii, 6225; J., ii, 501a; John, ii, 1246; Mary, ii, 6226; Nich. ii, 1634, 1664, 563a; Thom,, li, 1594 Greenacres, ii, 82, 3694; Noncon- formity in, ii, 70 Greenacres, Rauf., ii, 97, and see Grenacres Greenbank, i, 550; ii, 3520, 443 ; Fell, i, 7 6b: Wood, i ii, et Greenbank, Messrs. Hughes, Wil- liams & Co. at, li, 3550 Greenfield, i, 10, 454, 143@ Greenhalgh, i, 350; ii, 333; castle of, ii, 550, and see Grenehaugh Greenhalgh, D., ii, sora i, 98a, 1264, 219, 220, 229, 253 Greenhow, Thom., ii, 3964, 3974 Greenhurst, ii, 463 Greening, Noah, i, 103, 106, 127 Greenwich (Kent), i, 348 Greenwood, Abraham, ii, 75 ; Thom., ii, 74; L., ti, 489d Greesco, ii, 451 Gregory IX, ii, 144a, 145a, 1492, 155a Gregory X, ii, 108@ Gregory XVI, ii, 94 Gregory, John, ii, 368¢ Gregson, C. H.,i, 102, 103; C.S., i, 127; R., ii, 499¢ Greig, R., 1i, 4998 Greindeorge, Will., ii, 126a Grelley, barony of, i, 313, 326 Grelley, Grelle, Grelet, Albert, i, 291 2, 326, 327, 328, 3355 ii, 167%; Bernard, i, 328”; Emma, dau. of Albert, i, 327; Hawise, i, 332; Joan, i, 334; John, i, 332; Margaret, i, 329, 331; Maud, i, 328; Peter, i, 332; Thom., i, 331, 332, 333, 3343 ii, 21, 166a, 1694, 195, 197 ; Sir Thom., ii, 287; Rob., i, 323, 326, 327, 329, 330, 331, 332, 3353 li, 23, 190, 192, 3764, 4382; Seifred, Seffray, i, 328 7; family of, ii, 34, 1692, 183, 213, 265 Grenacres, Rich., ii, 97, and see Greenacres ‘ Grenehaugh,’ Greenhalgh Grenhal, Phil. de, ii, 28 x Gresleys, family, see Grelley Gressingham, i, 824, 84a, 4; ii, 1724, 290 ”, 341 ; chap. of, i, 321 ; li, 18, 35%, 1604, 1684, 1694 ; cemetery in, ii, 169%; manor, ii, 289 ; Moor, i, 670 Gressom, family of, ii, 122a, ” Greta, River, 1, 38, 530, 600, 624, 698 ; li, 551 Gretna Green, ii, 4992 Greves, John Herman, ii, 4074 Grey Friars, i, 2; ii, 21, 162 641 li, 446, and see Grey, Albert, ii, 569¢; Sir Edw., ii, so1a,5; John, ii, 569a; W. R,, ti, 31475 W.R., it, 391 Grey, de Ruthin, Lord, ii, 145 Grey, family of, earls of Kent, ii, 145 #2; Earl, li, 250, 251 Greygarth, i, 38; Fell, i, 38, 634, 664, 67a, 6, 68a, b, 69a, 6, 704, 4, 716, 726, 73, 756, 776, 78a, 0, 79/, 80a, 824, 83a, 6, 84a, 85a, 866 Greysdale, see Grizedale Greystone Heath, i, 474 Greystoneley, i, 82a, 84a Greythwaite, i, 430 Griffith, Will, ii, 91 Grigg, James, ii, 146a, 1486 Grimbaldson, Will., ii, 6054 Grimsargh, i, 61a, 646 ; 438 Grimsby, i, 308 Grimshaw, James, ii, 3037, 311, 316, 394a@; John, 11,394@; Lieut. Colonel, it 248 ; Messrs. ny 3846 Grimsthorpe, manor of (Lincs.), i, 328 2 Grindleton, i, 317; ti, 4572; mills at, ii, 294” Grizedale, i, 594, 674, 5, 68a, 77a, 6, 83a; ii, 438, 443, 446; Hall, ii, 464, 665 ; Head, i, 724, 83a, 84a; Park, il, 450; reservoir, i, 790; Wood, il, 448 Grobroke, see Greavebrook Groby, baron of, see Ferrers, Sir Will. de Grosmont (Wales), manor of, ii, I Ga creat Hen. of, ii, 206 Grosnell, James, ii, 58 Grosvenor, Earl, ii, 475 7, 4800 Grundy, —, li, 489@; James, il, 407@, 5865 Grymediche, John, ii, 97 Grysdall, see Grizedale Gualter, Will., ii, 6216 Guest, —, ii, 382a, 3834; John, of Abram, ii, 624a; Thom., ii, 6150 Guide Bridge (Guidebridge), i, 79a ; ii, 3740 Guines, see Coucy Guisdale, Lowther, ii, 599@ Guise, John de, i, 333 Guisnes, Euguerrand de, lord of Coucy, ii, 153a, awd see Coucy Guiz, Rich., i, 315 Gully, J., ii, 499@ Gunther, Dr., ii, 4884 Guthferth the Hold, i, 258 Gwynedd, Owen, lord of Wales, i, 369 ; ti, 189 Gymnosperme, i, 65 Gynes, Sir Baldwin de, ii, 202 ii, 334, Habberthwaite bailiwick, ii, 450 Habergham Eaves, ii, 335, 453 Habrigham, Mr.,, ii, 453 Hackensall, in "Amounderness, ii, 190” Hackney, London, boarding-school at, ii, 598a Hackthorpe, i, 358 Hacmundernes, see Amounderness Haddes, Over, ii, 459 Haddington, earl of, ii, 4752, 4, , 477@ Hades Hill, i, 215, 228, 238, 252 81 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Hacking & Co., Messrs., il, 3714 ‘Haghebothe,’ see Hawbooth Haigh, ii, 347, 3574, 3584, 5503 collieries of Lord Crawford at, 11, 3646; iron smelting at, li, 3614 ; moat house, ii, 550; school at, ii, 5614, 6164 Haigh, WilL, ui, 5962 Haighton, ii, 334 Hailes, abbot of, ii, 1384 Hainton (Lincs. a i, 326 2, 327, 328, 33! Hale, i, 474, 564, 594, 60a, 61a, 636, 654, 66a, 6, 766, 1334, 1374, 1414, 172, 173, 191, 1994, 2004 ; ii, 1424, 280 7, 345, 436, 437, 443, 4674, 4724, 4834, 4, 4852, 4864 ; advowson of chap. of, i, 332; chap., ii, 19 ; church of, ii, 1424; Hall, ii, 4854 ; manor ‘of, li, 272, 273; a7 nN; Moss, 1, 616 ; Park, ii, 456; school at, ii, 6 6226; "Wood, i, 474 Hale Point, i, 452 Hale, Geo., li, §70a; Simon de, i i? 323; Thom, de, ii, 457; Will, 1454, 1484 Halebank, Hale Bank, i, 1354; il, 366a, 6 Halewood, i, 1374; li, 345, 429, 433) 437%, 550; Hutt, the, in, ii, 547, 550, and see Lovel’s Hall Halfdene, King, see Healfdene Halhead, Miles, 11, 78 Halifax, Baptist church at, ii, 76% Hall Carr, ii, 334 Hall Hey, New, i, 334 Hall, Old, ii, 463 Hall-in-the-Wood (nr. Bolton), ii, 3872” Hall, —, ii, 245 ; E. J., ti, 499@; Jas., il, "616 : John, ii, 6166 ; Jos., il, 5894 ; Rob. & Sons, ii, 3700 Hallam, —, ii, 4°92, 492a, 6 Halle, Rob. , priest, li, 602a, 3 Hallecarre, ii, 460 Halliday, Will, ii, 1604, 1614 Halliwell, i, 326; $a, 343, 555 Halliwell, Rich., ii, 618@ ; Theophi- lus, ii, 618@ Hallows, — 1i, 4934, 4 Halsall, i, 46a, 48a, 50a, 1182, 338, 3405 UM, 17, 25%, 92, 99s 3455 437, 472a; church, il, 6%, 7”, 237, 50; manor of, i, 341; Moss, 1, 2096 ; ii, 4245 rectury and rec- tors of, ii, 31%, 64%; school, ii, 5614, 6086 Halsall, Alan de, i, 303, 340; Bene- dict de, i, 340; Edw., il, 6086 ; Hen., rector of Halsall, ti, 31 ; Hen., curate of Halsall, u, 50; Hen., son of Rich., ii, 3574; Rich., vicar of Halsall, ii, 50; Rich., of Whiston, ii, 3574; Simon de, i, 303, 340; family of, ii, 31, 38 Halsnead, i, 452 Halsted, Halstead, Hen., rector of Stansfield (Suff.), 11, 608@ ; Hugh, ii, 453; John, ii, 453 Nich., ii, 5900 Halton, i, 38, 454, 464, 47a, 52a, 534, 574, 664, 70a, 75a, 78a, 267, 300; ii, 4, 8, 100, 1274, 180, 202, 340, 3600, $20, $24) 534s, 564 6184; benefice, ii, 64%; barony of, ii, 419; Castle, ii, 198, 211%, ii, 354¢@ ; Castle Hill, ii, 524, 525 ; church, ii, 6%, 23 #2, 526; Moor, Halton (con?.) i, 259, 260; manor of, ii, 181, 4373 Nonconformity in, ii, go; prison of, ii, 56 ; rector of, 11, 99 Halton (Ches.), i, 308 ; ii, 282”; honour or lordship of, i, 298, 299, 309 5 ii, 183 Halton, Will. y ll, 79 Ham, East (Essex), manor of, 1, 36 Hambledon Hill, ii, 454; moor, ii, 554 ” Hambleton, ii, 333 Hameldon Hill, Black (Worsthorne), i, 252 Hameline (illegitimate brother of Hen. 11), 1, 295 ; ii, 187 Hamesden, Rob. de, i, 324 7 Hamilton, manor of, i, 313 Hamilton, duke of, ii, 475 Hammerton, Mich., ii, 124@ Hamond, Rob.,, ii, 1392 Hampsfell, i, 454, 520, 706, 726, 84a, 856 Hampsfield, i, 49a Hampsfield Fell, i, 664 Hampton Court Conference, the, 1i, 60 Hamson, John, ii, 50 Hancock, Thom., 1, 4o1@, 402a Handle Hill, nr. Rochdale, i, 247 Hanford, Thom., ii, 10646 Hanging Ditch, Manchester, ii, 4025 Hankey, Rob., ii, 3674 Hansard, Gilb., i, 321, 323; John, 1, 323 Hanson, 248 Hanworth, Cold (Lincs.), i, 340 Hapton, i, 303, 318; 1, 335, 455; 464, 554; mill at, ii, 204 Hapton, family of, 1i, 455 Harapultre, see Appletree Harbarrow, nr. Dalton, i, 228, 229, 255 Harcla, Andrew de, ii, 202 Harcourt, John, Lord, ii, 212 Hardcastle & Co., Messrs. James, il, 3984; Major W. M., ii, 4706 Harden, ii, 458; Moor, i, 11 Hardhorn, i, 307; ii, 1324, 1708 Hardhorn with Newton, ii, 334, 620a Harding, Dr., ii, 52 Hardman, —, li, 4766; James, ii, 6226 ; Jane, ii, 6066 Hardshaw, East and West, ii, 80 Hardware and allied trades, ii, 364 Hardwick, 1, 314 Hardy, Thom., ii, 566a Hargreaves, James, inventor of the spinning-jenny, ii, 301, 306, 3692, 3854, 3872, 6, 3884 ; James, rector of Blackburn, 11, 50; Jeremy, ii, 6064; John, ii, 369@; Stephen, ii, 453; Mr. of Bolton, ii, 372a; Dugdale & Thompson, ii, S07, Harkirke, i, 259. Harland, John, i, 334 ”; ii, 398 # Harling & Todd, Messrs., ii, 3714 Harmer, John, i, 75 Harold, King, i li, 117 2, 180 Harper, John, ii, 5974 Harpurhey, Manchester, i, 326 # ; ii, 349 Harrington Chantry, in Upholland Priory, ii, 112 Harrington, Anne, li, 215 ; Sir Hugh, li, 1612; Isabel dau. of Sir Will, of Hornby, i, 346; James, ii, 212, 642 Lieut.-Colonel, ii, 247, 221, Harrington (cont.) ii, 216; John de, i, 366; ii, 1194, 202, 444; Sir John ( (of Hornby), il, 214; Sir Rich., ii, 1116 ; Thom., ii, 109a, 216; Will., ii, 446; Sir Will, i, 347%; Lord, it, 214; family of, 11, 1276 Harris End Fell, i, 674, 685 Harris Institute, Preston, ii, 5734, 5746 Haris, Edm. Rob., 574a, 6; Rich. curate of Hawkshead, ii, 50; Kob., ii, 5734; Lord, ii, 4900 Harrison, ‘Harryson,’ —, ti, 292; Hen,, ii, 6208 ; John, 11, 63, 64%, 65, 5652, 6112, 6216; Sir John, ii, 232; Rich., il, 6184 ; _ Thom., ii, 5854, 615@; Will., , 446”, 6034, b; Ainslie & Ca, it 3644 Harrop, ti, 455 %, 458 Harrop Edge, i, 10 Harrops, Thom., ii, 3654 Harrow, ii, 203 #; schuol, ii, 492a Harrowden (Beds.), ii, 606a Harry, —, ii, 4934 " Hart, Rich., 11, 50, 51 ; Tom, il, 01a Harter Beck, i, 69a Hartington, marquis of, see Devon- shire, Spencer Compton Caven- dish, duke of Hartley, Bernard, ii, 2932; C. R., ii, 4926; John, ii, 142%; W. P., ii, 4080 Hartlib, Simon, ii, 421 Hartsop in Patterdale, i, 359”; manor of, 1, 361 Harvey, Hen., ii, 49, 50; Mary, ii, 6234; Rob., ii, 152a, 6234 Harwood, i, 544, 606, 984, 3262, 330; il, 342, 5962, 5974; Com- mon, ii, 291 Harwood, Great, i, 304, 318; ii, 337, 350, 3924, 498a, 550, 604a ; chapel of, ii, 25 2 Harwood, Little, 1, 318, 369 ; ii, 337, 292 Harwood, Alex., de, i, 330; John de, i, 330 ‘ Haselheved,’ ii, 443 ‘Hasell Rigge,’ li, 451 Haskayne, li, 472a, 6 Haskell’s Brook, ii, 438 Haslingden, ii, 289, 290, 337, 3552, 3600, 3922, 453, 454, 455, 4992 ; chap., ii, 19; mill at, li, 275; Nonconformity in, ii, 79”, 86, go Hen barons of Abergavenny, i, 36: Hastings, Hen., ii, 406a ; John de, ii, 148%; Lord John, ii, 145 7 ; Maud, wife of Will. de, i, 367, 368 ; Will. de, i, 368 Hasty Knoll, Blackrod, i, 261 Hatherall, see Hothersall Hathersage, Hatersatage, Ellis or Helias, il, 161 a; Matthew de, i, 330; Roger, i, 330; Will. de, i, 330; Will. son of Wulfric de, i, 3282; family of, i, 328 2 Hatherthwaite, i ii, 452 Hatton, Rob., ii, 293 Haughton, i, 326%; ii, 344, 3676, 4046, 4052 Haulgh, i, 215, 228, 234, 238, 246, 252 Haume, High, i, 228, 255 ; ti, 558 Hauxhead, see eae me Haverbrack, in Beetham parish, manor Of, ii, 1426 Haverhill, Will., ii, 21 Haverholme (Lincs.), nuns of, i, 327, 328 Havering, Rich., son of Nich. de, i, 344 Haverthwaite, i, 51a, 580, ii, 450 Hawbooth, ii, 458, 459 7, 460 Hawcoat, 1, 23; i ii, 1224 Hawes Waste, i ii, 288 Hawes Water, Haweswater, i, 43a, 61a, 754, 76a, 4, 85a, 5; fishery in, li, 1472 Hawes Water, Little, i, 612 Hawes Water Moss, i, 624 Hawkesbury, Rich., ii, 1054, 106, 5 Hawksdean, ii, 438 Hawkshead, i, 424, 434, 482, 560, 59a, Tio@, 216, 228, 255; ti, 79 #, Tor, 295, 3554, 339, 354@, 436, 464, 6684 ; Bailiwick, ii, 450; Baptist church, li, 75; chap. of, ii, 11, 18, 118%, 1276, 1414; “church, ii, 50, 128%; Fields, ii, 450; Grange, ii, 1214; Hall Park, i, 245; ii, 559; Hill, i, 57a; manor, ti,119d, 121d, 1266; parsonage, ii, 1234; school, ii, 5044, 561a, 6084 Haworth, ti, 76 2 Haworth, —, ii, 456; Hen., ii, 449 ; Rob., ti, 132 #, 1334, 139@; Mr., li, 396a; Peel & Yates, ii, 396a Hawthorn Riggs, ii, 465 Hawthornthwaite, i, 69a; ii, 443; Fells, i, 50a Hay, nr. Kirkby Kendal, i, 364 Hay, the, a wood in Accrington, i, 318 Hay, the, of Pilling, i, 353, 370 # Hay, the, of Wirisvalle, Wyresdale, 1, 353 Hay, —,, ii, 479@ Haydock, i, 227, 229, 252, 366% ; ii, 198, 348, 350, 3524, 358a, 4762, 550; Piele Hall at, ii, 550; Park, li, 4682, 4772, 4796 Haydock, Gilb. de, i, 346, 372% ; ii, 197, 446; Hen. de, parson of Eccleston, ii, 25%; Hugh de, i, 372” ; ii, 463 ; Rich., ii, 55,577; Sim., ii, 453; Will, ii, 44, 138¢ Haylot Fell, i, 78@ Hayshay Wood, ii, 448 Haythornthwaite Wood, ii, 448 Hayward, Thom., ii, 6024 Hazlegrove, i, 1104, 3 Heald, ii, 6130 Healey, ii, 6232; Park, ii, 456; Thrutch, i, 70a Healfdene, King, i, 258 ; ii, 176, 177 Heap, i, 319% ; li, 342, 4074; mills at, ii, 297 Heap, Benjn., ii, 4715; & Cowper, Messrs., ii, 3680 Heapey, nr. Chorley, ii, 338, 554; ii, 37 7% Heath Bank, ii, 6004 Heath Charnock, i, 335 7; ii, 3393; Old Hall, ii, 550 Heath, Rob., ii, 5994 ‘Heaths,’ the, Manchester, ii, 5800 Heathwaite, i, 245, 255; Fell, ii, 1883 ; 55 Heatley, ii, 464 Heatley, Wid., ii, 463 Heaton, i, 484, 226, 229, 326”; ii, 343 Heaton Chapel, i, 223, 252 Heaton, Great, ii, 344 Heaton in Lonsdale, i i, 327, 335 7% INDEX Heaton, Little, i ii, 176 7, 344 Heaton Mersey, ti, 3984 Heaton Moss, i i, 492 Heaton Norris, i, 324 x, 328%; ii, 343, 550, 586a; manor, i, 334; school at, ii, 6234 Heaton Park, i, 1975; 4794 Heaton under Horwich, i, 330; wood and moor of, iy 438 n Heaton with Oxcliffe, i li, 341, Heaton, —, ii, 456; E. H., ii, 6114; Roger de, i, 350 Hebden Bridge, i, 102; formity in, ii, 74, 76 Hebden Bridge, valleys i, 6 Hebden, J., i, 79d Hedley, —, ii, 478a ‘Heghokes,’ ii, 453 #, 460 Heightham, see Heysham Heights, in Cartmel, ii, 79 2, 80, 4034 Heights Wood, i, 78a Heley, Hen., ii, 109 #, 110d Helkes Wood, i, 60a Hell Crag, i 1, 774, 78a, 836 Hellclough, i, 239 Hellifield, i, 37 Helm, Elijah, ii, 388 2, 3910 Helmshore, il, 499@ Helpet Edge, i, 215, 228, 252 Helton, John de, i, 366 Hemiptera Heteroptera, i, 142 Hemiptera Homoptera, i, 144 Henderson, T., ii, 475%; W.,, ii, 4974 Henheads, ii, 335 Henley, nr. Windsor, ii, 203 # Henneheedes, see Haddes, Over Henniker, Rob., ii, 6154 Henridden, i, 824 Henry I, i, 292, 293, 298, 313, 314, 315, 317, 320, 327, 358; ii, 1682, 169 2, 184, 272 Henry II, i, 293, 295, 298, 317, 328, 351, 359, 361, 362, 366, 369, 3705 li, 113@, 1184, 119a, 1430, 1520, 187, 188, 266, 438, 520 Henry 111, i, 305, 308, 326, 328, 329, 341, 356, 363, 364; ii, 12, 21, 22, 1184, 1264, 162a, 165a@, 193, 194, 267 n, 437% in Henry IV, i, 296, 297; ii, 35, 1182, 1534, 156a, 171@, 207, 211, 212 Henry V, i, 297; ti, 35, 36, 1714, 4, 211, 212 Henry VI, ii, 35, 1374, 153@, 211 #, 214, 215 Henry VII, ii, 1374, 215, 282, 287, 3574, 440, 551 Henry VIII, il, 5, 37, 38, 41, 42, 45, 46, 47, 99, 1254, 211 2, 216, 2197, 289, 294 iz Henry, Ellis, ii, 573¢; J. S., ii, 256; Thom., ti, 3524, 3984 Henshaw & Co., Messrs., li, 3934 Hensingham, i, 358, 359” Hepaym, Walt. de, i, 343 % Heptonstall, i, 54@ ; il, 74 Herd, Alec., ii, 4964, 4974 Herdhouse, ii, 339 Herdman, Laur., ti, 5654; & Daw- son, Messts., ii, 4170 Hereford, earldom of, ii, 211 # Hereford, Rich., bp. of, i, 315 2 Hereford, Henry, duke of, ii, 210 Hereford, Thom. de, i, 354 7 Herle, Chas., ii, 65; Will. de, i, 366 2; ii, 202% Herleberga, Roger de, ii, 188 643 ii, 4674, Noncon- Herleyhead, see Horleyhead Hertford, castle and honour of, ii, 207 # Hertford, earl of, ii, 218 Hervey, Will., i, 351 Hesketh, Hesketh with Becconsall, i, 1214; ii, 338; Lane, Noncon- formity in, li, 70 Hesketh Bank, ii, 472@ Hesketh, —, ii, 475; Barth., ii, 56 ; Rev. C., ii, 472@; Gabriel, ii, 245; Thom.,ii,617a@ ; Sir Thom., ii, 220; Sir T., ii, 476a Hesketh-Fleetwood, Sir Peter, ii, 6144, b Heskin, i ii, 338 ; school, ii, 561a, 609 Heslum Brook, ii, 458 Hest, ii, 1472, 286 n, 6134 Heswall, i, 476 Heswell, Rich. of, ii, 110 Heterocera, i, 129-42 Heton, Rich. de, ii, 356 Hetton, ii, 1274 Heversham, (Westmld.), manor of, i, 360 Heversham, —, ii, 49 Hewison, J. E., ii, 5994 Hewitt, Joshua, ii, 3664; T. P., ii, 3676 Hexham, i, 145 ; diocese of, ii, 2 Hexham, Thom.. ii, 1104 ; Will. de, ii, 32 2 Heyhouses, ii, 335 Heyrick, Warden, ii, 65 Heysham, i, 8, 30, 42, 514, 54a, 654, 714, b, 83a, 850, 90, 173, 2673 ii, 4, 8, 797, 100, 170%, 172a, 176.n, 340, 350, 4114, 4122, 6, 4724; advowson of, ii, 1674, 1682, 169a, 6, 1710; chap. at, ii, 1; church, i, 8, 291; ii, 6%, 8, lon, 232, 24; manor of, ii, 1716 Heysham Lake, i, 162 Heysham, Lower, i, 703 Heysham Peninsula, i, 64 Heysham, Giles, ii, 5650 Heyton Moss, ii, 290 Heyton, —, ii, 98 Heywood, i, 20, 232; ii, 313, 321, 3714, 3924, 4084 ; chap., li, 37 7 ; Nonconformity in, ii, 86 Heywood, —, ii, 475a; Jonathan, ii, 89 ; Nath., ii, 67 ; Oliver, ii, 62 Heywood & Belshaw, ii, 3682 Heyworth, Will., see Lichfield, bp. of Hibbert, Thom., ii, 3934 Hibbert-Ware, Dr., i, 334 Hick, Hargreaves & Co., ii, 3734 Hickton, —, ii, 4894 Higginson, A., i, 32; Hen., ii, 3662; Rich., ii, 6124 High Cross Tarn, i, 169 High Park, ii, 437 High Peak, see Peak High Pike Haw, i, 2 High Rise, ii, 4846 Higham, Higham Booth & Higham with West Close Booth, ii, 269 , 335, 4575 458, 459, 460%, 6076 Higham Ferrers, rectory of, ii, 164 2 Higham, Will., 1i, 6184 Highfield, i, 630 Highs, Thom., ii, 385 7, 387 2 Highton, John, ii, 4050 Hightown, i, 424, 454, 0, 47a, 6, 49a 51a, 544, 552, 58a, 6, 60a, 62a, 71a, 73a, 6, 74a, 8206, 1084, 1132, 6, 114a, 6, 115a, 6, 1164, 1174, 1184, 1194, 1204, 6, 1246, 1250, 1334, 1404 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Hignett, F. C., i, 494¢ Hi-son, Thom., ii, 6236 Hilbre Island, 1, 2106 Hill Cliffe, .Ches.) Baptist church at, li, 73, 75 n Hill, James, ti, 369@; Rich., il, 449; Thom., ii, 6204; Will, ii, 3944@ Hilton Lane, nr. Prestwich, ii, 4994 Hilton, H. H., ii, 495 7, 4964, 4986 ; James, ii, 6232; Rob. of, ii, 1556 Hindburn, i, 48¢, 664, 67a, 69a, 4, 724, 734, 744, 764, 6, 774, 6, 784, 6, 836, 844, 85a; Dale Gill, i, 734; Middle Gill, i, 72a, 826; White Moss, i, 510, 754 Hindburn River, 1, 38 ; ii, 456 Hinde, Anne, ii, 6204, 621@ ; Rich., ii, 5664; Thom., mayor of Lan- caster, ii, 566; Will, ii, 585¢ Hindeburnschagh, ii, 457 Hindle, Chris., ii, 6472 Hindley, i, 366%, 373%; ti, 288, 289, 347) 350, 550; Chap., ii, 68 2; Low Hall, ii, 548, 550; manor, i, 374; ii, 291; Nonconformity at, li, 69 ; school, ii, 5614, 6154 Hindshaw, ii, 443 Hipperholme, Agnes, dau. of John de, i, 302 Hirst, Geo., ii, 4934; John, ii, 75 Hobart, John, ii, 3574, 3582 Hobson, Edw., i, 102; Mr., il, §87@ Hoby, Sir Edw., ii, 5772 Hodder Banks, 1, 66a Hodder, High, Brid:e nr. Clitheroe, i, 252 Hodder, river, i, 6, 572, 82a ; ii, 37 7, 454, 4874, 488a Hodder Valley, i, 44a, 4, 51a, 564, 74a, 856 Hoddlesden, ii, 455, 457, 458, 460 Hoddlesden Brook, ii, 454 Hodgkinson, J. B., i, 103, 104, 105, 203a Hodgson, Diston Stanley, ii, 5992 ; Will, ii, 6062@ Hoghton, see Houghton Hovhtons, a mess. called, i, 346 7 Holbech, tl, 457 Holborn, London, i, 311 Holcombe, Holcome, i, 321, 322; li, 454, 4700; chap., il, 377; moor, i, 12 Holcroft, ii, 4824 ; Moss, ii, 482a Holcroft, Capt., ii, 235 ; John, ii, 45, 1126; Sir John, 11,97, 98, 220; Thom., ii. 123@, 1474, 1614, 1624, 163a, 6; Sir Thom., ii, 45, 1094, 138% Holden Clough, i, 784, 984 Holden Wood, i, 11 Holden, —, ii, 565@ ; Adam, it, 74 ; Lawr., ii, 569a@; Ralph, ii, 1394; Rob. de, il, 456% Holebeck, Old, 1, 23 Holgate, —, ii, 489@ Holker, i, 56a. 584, 614; ii, 472a Holker Lower, 11, 339 Holker Old Park, i, 31 Holker, Upper, i, 986; ii, 339 ; school at, 1, 6174 Holland, see Upholland Holland, Great (Essex), manor of, i, 365 Holland (Lincs.), i, 306 Holland Meadow, ii, 338 Holland Moor House, ii, 554 Holland, —, ii, 48; Adam de, i, 372”; Edw., ii, 222; Margaret de, li, 198; Margaret dau. of Holland /coe?.) Rob., i, 334; Maud w. of Rob. de, see Zouche; Rich., ii, 5834; Rich. de, i, 372; ii, 457 ; Sir Rich. de, ii, 200”, 201; Rob. de, ii, 196, 198, 201, 202, 203, 443, 444 + Sir Rob. de, ii, 25, 27, 111@, 129 ”, 166a, 6; Thom., see Surrey, duke of ; Thom. de, ii, 203 # ; Thurstan de, i, 372"; ii, 444; Sir Will, ii, 198, 199; family, ii, 35, 213, 6 4 Hotteth, i, 357 #3 ii, 332 Hollinfare, ii, 34 7 Holling, J., a priest, ii, 6230 Hollingworth Lake, i, 78a, 215, 227, 228, 252 Hollinhead Wood, ii, 447, 448, 452 Hollinwood, Nonconformity at, 11, 90 Hollinworth, —, ii, 48; Andrew, ii, 3654; Rich,, ii, 65 Holme, ii, 3994 ; chap., ii, 34 Holme (Norf.), Abbey of St. Benet of, i, 328 Holme (Notts.), i, 293 Holme Island, i, 58a, 65a, 664; ii, 339 #% " Holme Well Wood, ii, 465 Holme, Edm., ii, 53; Geo., ii, 50; Leonard, ii, 453; Thom, u, 566a, 6 Holmes, Clement, ii, 450; Will., 11, 791 459 Holster Hill, i, 10 Holt Town, see Oldham Holt, Holte, Jas., ii, 606@; John, ti, 398a ; Rob., ii, 231, 234; Thom., Ui, 97, 3934; Sir Thom., ii, 97, 220, 256 Holton le Moor (Lincs.), i, 304, 319 7, 320, 322, 323 ; manor of, i, 308 Holy Cross (Ireland), religious house of, ii, 1294 Holyhead, i, 174,179 3 ii, 4134 Holywell, ii, 355@ Homes, John, ii, 6078 Honorius, see Richmond, arch- deacon of Honorius III., Pope, ii, 118 #, 132a, 1416 Hoole, i, 1142, 4, 338, 340; ii, 338 ; Nonconformity in, ii, 90 Hoole, lord of, see Vilers, Warin de Hoole, Little, i, 321 ; ii, 338 Hoole Moss, i, 113@ Hoole, Much, ii, 338; benefice of, ii, 64 7 Hoole, Walt. de, i, 303 ; ii, 106 Hooley, Joseph, ii, 5984 Hooper, Capt., ii, 243 # Hope, manor of, ii, 276 # Hope, W. H. St. John, ii, 115 2 Hopecar Hall, Bedford, ii, 548 Hopkins, —, ii, 5662 Hopkinson, Dr. Edw., ii, 370a ; Dr. E., ii, 3734 ; Dr. J., ii, 3730 Hopton, nr. Mirfield (Yorks.), i, 301 Hopwood, i, 226, 229, 252, 319 ; ii, 307; 344 Hopwood, —, ii, 4754 ; Edm., ii, 228 Horbling, Sim. of, ii, 141 ” Horelowe, ii, 290 Horkheimer, H.C. R., ii, 4974 Horleyhead, or High Ryley, ii, 460 Horman, —, ii, 5904 Horn, Andrew, ii, 277 Hormby, i, 38, 82a, 84a, 6, 267, 319 M, 321, 325, 326; ti, 4, 102”, 178, 183, 196m, 340, 439, 462, 644 Hornby (cont?.) ii, 471; Castle, i, 322, 324, 325 ; ii, 123 #, 1604, 161a, 190, 215, 462, 465, 4714, 472a, §28, 529 ; honour of, i, 325 ; ti, 214; hospital at, ii, 38 ; lordship of, i, 321, 324, 437%, 462, 463 ; manor, 1, 324, 325, 326; priory, i, 321, 325; li, 20”, 102, 154a, 160; soke of, i, 325 Hornby, N—, prior of, il, 1614; Rob., prior of, ii, 1616 Hornby, baron of, see Montbegon, Roger de Hornby Hay, ii, 443 Hornby Holmes, ii, 526 Hornby with Farleton, i, 319%; ii. 520, 526, 547, 550, 555; Castle- stede, the, ii, 526, 528 Hornby, —, i, 475@; A. N., ii, 4894, 4904, 4, 491 a, 6, 495 a, 6; E,, ii, 248 ; E. G., ti, 4734, 4744, 4800; E. G. S., ii, 475 ” ; Edw. J. S., i, 202@ ; Hugh, i, 2054 ; H., ii, 4714, 4740 ; T. D., ti, 4736, 4748, 475”, 4756, 4766; John de, ii, 443; Will. de, ii, 443, 445 Horridge, T. G., ii, 259 Horrocks, —, ii, 64%, 307, 3844, 4754; Chnis. li, 366a ; James, ii, 5984 ; John, ii, 386a; Mr., ii, 62 Horrocksford, quarry, i, 6 Horrox, S., ii, 476@ Horrum in Copeland, ii, 1264 Horsefield, i, 724, 73a Horseholm Wood, ii, 448 Horston, Thom., ii, 1644 Horton, in Ribblesdale, i, 358 ; ii, 1204 Horton Castle in Lathom, ii, 547, 548, 550 Horwich, i, 326%; ii, 343, 350, 3984, 498a ; chap. ii, 687; ase, i, 329, 334 ; forest of, ii, 269, 463 ; nonconformity in, ii, 70 Hospitallers, the, i, 299, 337, 340; li, 20 7, 102, 1318 Hostine, widow, ii, 453 Hotham, Chas., ii, 67 7 Hothersall, ti, 334 Hoton, ii, 437, 442 Hough, Geo., ii, 98 Hough-end-Clough, i, 98a Hough End Hall, i, 714 Houghton, i, 335 #, 366% ; ii, 338, 348, 4696 Houghton Tower, i, 11, 207; ii, 229, 297, 464, 4700, 4974 ; Non- conformity, ii, 70 Houghton, —, ii, 475@; Adam de, 1, 372” ; il, 445”; Ann, ii, 58”; Sir Bold, ii, 4764; Edw., ii, 97 ; Sir Gilb., ii, 234 ; Helen, ii, 5706 ; Hen., ii, 5706; Sir Hen., ii, 6172; Hen. Bold, ii, 5034; Sir H. B., ii, 472@, 4736; John, ii, 6224; Rich., i, 374; ii, 56 7; Rich. de, i, 323; ii, 196; Sir Rich. de, i, 373; Sir Rich., ii, 97, 171a, 220, 229, 240, 5700, 6174; Will., i, 323; li, 366a ‘ Hougun,’ ii, 180 Houldsworth, Sir W., ii, 301 Houseman, John, ii, 5652, 622@ Hoveton (Norf.), church of St. Peter of, i, 328 Howard, Lord Edw., ii, 216 ; John, ii, 370a Howe, J. Allen, i, 7 Howick, i, 292, 335”; ii, 1044, 338 ; school in, ii, 6054 Howlett, Mr., ii, 130@; W. H., ii, 6134 Howley Marshes, the, Warrington, ii, 540 Howlyng, Trustram, ii, 97 Howse, Thom., ii, 399@ Howsham (Lincs.), i, 292 2, 319 1, 320, 322 Hoylake, i, 163, 192@; ii, 4132, d, 4142, 4690, 496a Hoyle Bank East, i, 210@ Hoyle, Mr., i, 107 ; Messrs. Thom. & Son, ii, 395 My 3978 Hubberthorne, Rich., ii, 78 Huddersfield, Market Place, i, tog 7 Huddleston, ii, 4934 ; Sir Adam de, ii, 199; Eleanor, dau. of John, i, 349; John, i, 348 Hudson, —, ii, 4792; 6163 Hugh, the Hermit, ii, 154¢ Hughes, George (of Manchester), ii, 3684 Hull, ii, 219, 230, 271 ”, 307 m, 324 ; prior of, ii, 42 Hulme, i, 698, 706, 2036, 366 x ; ii, 293, 348, 349; deanery of, ii, 1oo ; grammar school, ii, 5892, 6 ; 6104 Hulme, Humphrey, ii, 3944 ; ee ii, 575@; Ralph, ii, 5802, 5814, d, 582a, 0; Tim., ii, 394@ ; Will, ii, 5864, 5; Capt, li, 243 7 Hulmestead (Norf.), i i, 350, 351 Hulton, i, 794; filiation of Com- bermere Abbey at, ii, 1355 Hulton, Little, ii, 343, 350, 3574, 4716 Hulton, Middle, ii, 343 Hulton, Over, ii, 343 Hulton, —, ii, 476a; Adam (of Hulton), ii, 217 ; Geo., of Farn- worth, 11, 3574 ; Jessop, ii, 499 ; Rob. de, ii, 149 #; Will, ii, 6164; the, of Hulton, family of, ii, 189 7, 495 4; of Marske, family of, ii, 6094 Humphrey, a clerk, ii, 262 2 Humphrey Head, i, 40, 42a, 444, 454, 46a, 4, 470, 48a, 50a, 5, 52a, d, 542, 56a, 61a, 644, 652, 4, 66a , Humphrey, Tom, ii, 4894 _ Huncoat, i, 984 ; ii, 335 - Hundersfield, Middle, ii, 6232 Hundon, Simon. de, i, 322 Hunger Hill, i, 215, 216, 228, 252 Hungerford, Rob. de, ii, 444 Hunt, —, ii, 4954,4; Rich., ii, 5814, ; Thom., ii, 61 #; Mr. (of London), ii, 249, 251 Hunter, F., ii, 494@ Huntersholme, ii, 459 Hunting, ii, 4672, 469 Huntingdon, manor of, ii, 195 Huntingdon, earl of, ii, 31”, 225 ; Henry, earl of, ii, 224 Huntington, —, ii, 34 Huntley, Far, ii, 463 Huntley, Near, ii, 463 Huntley Wood, ii, 464 Hunt’s Cross, ii, 498d Hurde, John, priest, ii, 5944 Hurleston, Rich., ii, 221 # Hurlett, ii, 3994, 400a Hurlingham, i il, 4826 Hurlston, i, 1940 Hurst, ii, 48 Hurst Green, i, 793 ; ii, 101 Hurstwood, ii, 454 Hutchings, C., il, 495 7 John, ii, INDEX Hutchinson, —, ii, 511; Hutton, i, 303, 335 #; ii, 1574, 338, 435, 6054 ; manor of, 1, 3505 ii, 157 2, 158%; school, ii, 6054 ; steward of, ii, 158a Hutton, lord of, see Son of Orm, Roger Hutton Field, i, 374 Hutton, —,i, 21; Elias de, i, 303, 350; ii, 106 m, 1576; James, il, 81; Matthew, archbp. of York, ii, "609 ; Nathaniel, ii, 5990 : Rich. of, ii) 1084, 110a; Roger de, ii, 1574 ; Sapiencia, ii, 106 ” Huxley, Hugh, ii, 152 Huyton, i, 127, 1324, 134a, 1384, 3033 ii, 15, 79, 99, 345, 3662, 6246; advowson of, ii, 1480; chantries in, ii, 26, 27, 150a; church, ii, 6%, 77, Iom, 13%, 17 2, 19, 23 #, 26, 28, 1494, 1504; rectory of, ii, 1514; school at, ii, 6246 ; vicarage, ii, 7 1498 Huyton Quarry, i, 476 Hyde, ii, 321, 3924, 3934, 4046 ; Nonconformity in, ii, 87 Hymenoptera, i, 109, 110 Hyndelegh, Hugh de, 372 # Hweallaege, ii, 4, and see Whalley J. ” li, 473@ Ickleton (Cambs.), i, 351 Iddison, R,, ii, 489, 6 Ightenhill, ii, 201, 268m, 276%, 280%, 289, 453, 454, 455, 456%, 457; manor, coal mines at, ii, 292; mill at manor of, ii, 294; manorial court of, ii, 6076 ; Park, li, 335, 454, 456, 457%, 458, 459 Ilkley, i li, 3514, 4966 Ince, i, 24, 338, 366%; ii, 202, 258 2, 288, 472a ; Wood, i, 592 Ince Blundell, i, 486, 494, 53a, 1230, 198a, 340; ii, 346, 472a, 4776; Hall, i, 462 ; Wood, i, 494 Ince in Makerfield, ii, 177 #, 347, 350, 548, 550; New Hall, ii, 547, 550; Peel Hall, ii, 550 Independents, the, i ii, 65, 66, 69, 72 India-rubber, industry, 11, 401 Indulgence, Declaration of, li, 241 Industries, ii, 266, 300, 351 Ingham (Lincs.), i, 340; 1, 337 Ingham, Benjamin, ii, 70, 81 ; John, li, 6084 ; Oliver de, ii, 200, 202 Ingleborough, ii, 1214 Ingleby (Derby), i, 338, 339 Ingleby, Edelina, i, 339; Rob. de, i, 338, 339; John of, ii, 1144 Ingleton, i, 8; ii, 127@ Ingol, ii, 334 Ingoldmells, i, 304, 316; manor of, 1,313, Ings Beck, i, 7 Inislannaght (Ireland), house at, ii, 1294 Innocent II, ii, 1684, 193 Innocent III, i, 305 ; il, 20 Innocent IV, ii, 14, 22, 1144, 118 #, 1440 Innocent VI, ii, 28, 1074, 1354 Innocent VIII, ii, 1226 Innocent, John, ii, 173a Insectivora, i, 208 Insects, i, IOI Inskip, Inskip with Sowerby, i, 484, 3573 Uy 333 . Insula, Grace de, i, 322, 323, and see Lisle manor, religious 645 Interments and burial urns, i, 238 ; ii, 532, and see Barrows Ipres, Ralph d’, ii, 445 Ipswich, church of Holy Trinity of, i, 328 Ireby, i, 50a, 83a, 178”, 181 , 341 Ireland, Blackburne, Col. J., ii, 256 ; family of, i, 191; ii, 4754 Ireland, Edm., ii, 576a; Col. Gilb., ii, 240; Geo., ii, 98; Jonathan, ii, 89; Laur. ii, 97; Rob., ii, 50; Thom., il, 5994, 6026; Mr., Nl, 53 Ireleth,i, 2; chase of, ii, 120; mill, 1, 245, 246, 255 ; slate quarries at, 1, 4 Ireton, ii, 140 7 Irish Sea, i, 87, 88, 92, 95, 96, 157, 179, 1804, 1818, 1824, 1832, 6 Irk, River, ii, 5774, 580a, 6; fulling mill on, ii, 272 ” Irlam, i, 44a, 212, 227, 229, 236, 238, 249, 252; moss, ii, 288 Iron ore, mining and industry of, i, 2, 13, 23, 28, 29; ii, 122a, 3510, 3520, 3542, 360 a Iron Age, i, 260; implements, ii, 212, 213, 246, 250 Irven, John, ii, 478a ; Joe, 4784 Irving, W., li, 475 2 Irvingites, the, ii, 92 Irwell, River, i, 17, 1124, I14a, 11g@, 1216, 264; li, 454, 4799 ; fishery in, ii, 1134 Irwell House, Lower Broughton, i, 215 Irwell valley, i, 11, 192@; ii, 356a Isabella, Queen, i, 310; ii, 17, 1040, 1384, 1362, b, 202, 203, 454, 457, 45 Isfield (Sussex), lord of, see Warr, Roger la Isleworth, ii, 1714 Islington, ii, 4894 Islington, New, ii, 386a Istede, i, 351 Isurium, see Aldborough Ivimey, —, ii, 75 Ivy, R. C,, ii, 4985 b, 321”; ii, 5 #, Jackscar, i, 2000 Jackson, A., ii, 5956 ; Cyril, ii, 588a ; F,, ii, 6o1a } Hon. F. S., il, 4906 ; Thom. y lily 89; Will, ii, 368, 5854, 5884 ; Dr. i, 2044 ; ‘ii 5850; Mr, 1, 243 Jackson’s Boat, i, 74a ‘Jackus,’ —, ii, 78 Jacobites, the, ii, 244, 246 Jacques, Rob., ii, 6226 Jacson, Chas. "Roger, i li, 5740 James I, King, ii, 60, 62, 228, 229, 230, 297, 460, 4698, 4706 James II, ii, 241, 242, 244 James Il (the Pretender), ii, 244, 246 James IV (King of Scotland), ii, 216% James, Herbert Armitage, ii, 615¢ ; Thom., ii, 3870 Jam-making industry, ii, 408 Janson, Will., see Hurde, John Jardine, R., ii, 4754, 4756 Jefferson, H. %s i, 478a Jelley, James, ti, 578@ Jepson, Jane, wife of Rob., ii, 622a Jervaulx Abbey, ii, 5754, b; Thom., abbot of, ii, 1204 Jews, the, ii, 92 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Jewsbury & Brown, Messrs., ii, 408a@ Jocelin, historian of Furness Abbey, ll, 116a, 1296 John, King, i, 292, 296, 301, 302, 304, 321 #, 353, 363; ii, 21, 113¢, 1174, 127a, 144a, 1546, 1652, 1706, 182”, 190, I19I, 193, 195, 264, 266, 268, 282, 437, 438, amd see Mortain, John, count of, and John, Prince John, Prince (afterwards King), i, 351, 352 John XXII, Pope, ii, 111 2, 162a,1660 John, a chaplain, ii, 280; le Hermit de Singleton, ii, 103 ; the Smith, li, 280 Johnson, —, ii, 63, 3844; Hen., il, 5992, 6244 ; John, ii, 75, 76% ; Rich., ii, 142@ Johnston, F., ii, 475 2; J., ii, 475 2 Jolly, Ellis, ti, 4784 Jones, A. H., ii, 475%; B. H,, ii, 4744, 4750, 4760, 478a, 4; D., ii, 4974; Edm., ii, 67; S., ii, 64” Jones Sewing Machine Co., ii, 3744 Jongh, —, de, ii, 3874 Jordan, chancellor of David (king of Scotland), ii, 185 7 Jumbles, i, 74a Jumper Dye House, Baptist church, ii, 76” Jupp, — iN, 489a Kalveknave, Adam, ii, 455 Kaskenmoor, i, 320 Katharine, Queen, ii, 39 Kay, John, ti, 3834, 3852, 4, 3884; Rob. son of John, ii, 3834; Roger, rector of Fittleton (Wilts.), ii, 6124; Sam. son of Rob., ii, 3834 Kearsley, i, 326 ; ii, 343, 350, 616a; coal mines at, li, 292; moor, i, 1134, 6 Kearsley, Karsley, Symon, ii, 611a Keble, Edw., ii, 49 ” Kechyn, John, ii, 45, 96, 98 Keer, River, i, 69a, 2004; li, 437, 444 Keijeux, —, ii, 468 7 Kellamergh, ii, 6056 Kellet, i, 634, 1880 Kellet, Nether, ii, 176 2, 198 ”, 340 Kellet, Over, 1, 474, 50a, 72a, 77a, 786, 84a, 850 ; 11, 340, 461 ; chap., i, 18; park, ii, 444; school, ii, 5614, 6136 Kellet, Kelyt, Adam son of Orm de, li, 127”; Gailb. de, i, 324 % ; Go- dith of, ti, 102, 155@; Hugh, ii, 50; Rich. of, ii, 148a@; Thom., ii, 1616 Kelloe, Rob. of, ii, 1108 Kelly, Kelley, —, u, 387@ ; John, ii, 408a Kelsal, John, 11, 81 Kelsey, South :Lincs.’, i, 319 7, 320, 321, 323 ; church of, i, 291 Kelway, Rob., ii, 5706, 5754, 5792 Kemble, A. T., il, 4914, 4952 Kemp, Geo., ii, 4904; John, see York, archbp. of Kemple End, i, 77a, 78a Kendal, i, 1304, 133@, 4, 2044, 207, 358, 360, 362 ; il, 9, 40%, 43, 49, 114d, 1474, 1584, 1614, 181, 182, 1847, 190, 264, 272, 297, 437, 470a, 6084 ; barony of, ii, 1407, 358, 359,361,365 ; deanery, ii, 6 7, 100 ; hospital of St. Leonard at, ii, 1400, 142@, 6, and see Kentdale Kendal, barons of, i, 354, 357, 358, 360, 361; il, 140@, 6, 193; con- stable of, i, 361 Kendal Ward (Westmld.\, ii, 340 ” Kendal, Rob., ii, 1594 ; Will. of, ii, 148a@ Kenilworth, i, 349 ; castle of, ii, 195 Kenilworth, canon of, ii, 151a@ Kennedy, James, ii, 382a, 3854, 3876 Kent, River, i, 2044 ; il, 144” Kent Sands, ii, 1464 Kent, Edm., earl of, ii, 203 2; Hu- bert de Burgh, earl of, i, 325 ; li, 438, 440; Margaret, countess of, i, 325 Kent, J. E., ii, 6008 ; T., ii, 495 Kentdale, i, 2106 ; ii, 181 Kentigern, St., ii, 1, 2 Kent’s Bank, i, 46a, 474, 58a, 592, 634; ii, 412a Kenyon, i, 241, 246, 252, 366 #, 370, 3745 i, 348 : Kenyon, Kenion, Harold M., ii, 4710; Jord. de, i, 372 2; Rob., ii, 398e ; Will., ii, 97, 98, 571a,4; Mr,, ii, 5864 Kere Holm, ii, 3618 Kere, River, ii, 462 Kermode, —, ii, 4894, 493@ Kersal, ii, 20, 1134, 398@; cell, ii, 20, 102, 103; Edge, il, 497@; moor, i, 716, 1134, 1408, 215, 228, 252; il, 4796 ; monks of, il, 555 Kershaw, Anne, ii, 6134; John, ii, 6136 Keswick, ii, 354@ Kethlenedei, i, 369 ‘ Ketilhurste,’ li, 457 Kevardeley, see Cuerdley Kewley, E., li, 4934, 4944, 4954 Keylway, Rol>., ii, 45, 46, 96 Kibble Bank, 11, 4986 K.dd, John, 11,0114, 612a; Capt., ii, 248 Kighley, Rich. de, ii, 212 Kildare, John Fitz Thom. Fitz Ge- rald, earl of, Joan, dau. of, i, 357 Kilgrimol, ii, 1 Kilham, Alex., ii, 85, 87, 88 Kilrush (Ireland), advowson of church of, ii, 1444 ; manor of, ii, 14s Kilwinning, abbey of, i, 360 Kinalton (Notts.), i, 337, 340, 343 # King, Bolton, Mr., ti, 4714 King, James, ii, 451; Jeffery, ii, 64 # ; John Edw., ii, 589@ ; Will. Ny, 4994 Kingley, i, 19 Kingston, manor of (Dorset), i, 311 King’s College, Cambridge, ii, 35, 36 Kirkandreas (Cumberland), i, 320, 321 Kirkby, i, 44a, 52a, 58a, 61a, 644, 65a, 662, 70a, 736, 77a, 6, 79a, 84a, 1306, 1474, 6, 1504, 152a, 6, 154a, 1550, 156a, 303; ii, 347, 4726 ; chap., ii, 37 # ; manor of, i, 298, 368 oe urness, se¢ Kirkby Ire- eth Kirkby in Kesteven (Lincs.), i, 292 Kirkby Ireleth, i, 1884, 216, 228, 255 ; li, 100, 101, 1204, 122a, 1282, 339 ; church of, ii, 6 ~, 82, 1om, 13, 18, 22; hospice in, ii, 120”; lord of, ii, 1194 ; rector of, ii, 99 Kirkby Kendal, i, 322, 364, 365 ; cas- tle of, i, 363, 364 ; hospital of St. Leonard, i, 364 646 Kirkby Lonsdale, i, 38, 44a, 466 474, 50a, 584, 594, 694, 71a, 72a 754, 836, 840, 85a, 1984 ; ii, yon 244, 520; deanery, li, 100 Kirkby Moor, i, 245, 255 Kirkby Moss, il, 290 Kirkby, Alexander of, ii, 1206; Hen., ii, 450; John of, ii, 1202; R. de, ii, 99”; Rich. son of Roger de, i, 363 2; Roger son of Will. de, i, 331; Roger, ii, 231, 232, 234 Kirkdale, i, 654, 1154@, 303, 335%; li, 348, 426 Kirkdale, Quenilda, dau. of Roger de, i, 303 Kirketon, manor of, see Tickhill, manor of Kirkham, ii, 7, 8 7, 25 #, 30,37 #,92, 100, 272 , 285, 299, 332, 333) 350) 3794, 3856, 436, 443 #, 4700, 4714, 604a, 6056 ; advowson of, ii, I1, 12, 1674, 168a, 6; chantry rents of, ii, 605@ ; church, i, 353; ii, 62, 7, 10%, 13%, 23, 29, 33%, 1074, 1094, 191 ~; fair and mar- ket at, ii, 281, 293; grammar school, ii, 298, 561a, 572a, 604, 605 ; rectory, ii, 13, 605@ ; vicar- age, il, 15, 28, 32 Kirkham, clergy of, ii, 33; dean of, il, 262%; rector of, ii, 99, and see London, Hen. de Wengham, bp. of ; vicar of, li, 15, 605@ Kirkham, Adam, dean of, ii, 99 Kirkham, Kyrkeham, Adam de, dean of Amounderness, ii, 30, 99; Thom. of, schoolmaster of Lancaster, ii, 5614, 570a; Will. of, clk., ii, 5696 Kirkhead, nr. Allithwaite, i, 237, 238, 255 Kirkhead Cave, i, 237 Kirk Lancaster, ii, 8 Kirkland, i, 357% ; ii, 332 Kirkle, ii, 3586 Kirkless, ii, 3646 Kirk Maughold (Isle of Man), church of, ti, 117a Kirk Michael (Isle of Man), church of, ii, 117a Kirksanton, ii, 126a Kirkstall Abbey (Yorks.), i, 317, 318, 319 ; abbot of, ii, 455 ; monks of, n, 454 Kirmington (Lincs.), i, 368 Kirton-in-Lindsey (Lincs.), i, 326 Kitchen, Anne, ii, 157; John of Hatfield (Herts.), ii, 1572 Klegg, see Clegg Knagg, Rich., ti, 6094 Knapperthaw, i, 245, 246, 255 Knaresborough (Yorks.), castle and honour of, ii, 207%; governor of, i, 308; lord of, see Chester, Eustace Fitz John, constable of Kneeton (Yorks.), i, 358 Knight, Dr. Will., see Bath and Wells, bp. of Knoll Hill, i, 214, 215, 216, 228, 252 Knoll Moor, i, 12 Knoop, Ludwig, ii, 3546 Knott End, i, 49a, 6, 52a, 546 Knotty Ash, ii, 476a Knowle Green, i, 56a, 58a Knowles, —, ii, 3876 ; J., ii, 4762, 4 Knowsley, i, 434, 46a, 57a, 62a, 66a, 776, 112a, 6, 1336, 196a, 1976, 303; I, 79, 1484, 1494, 157 », 198, 214, 215, 258, 345, 426, 488a, 4984, 6246 ; chap., li, 19, 1488 ; manor Knowsley (covz.) of, i, 298; Nonconformity at, ii, 69, 79 # ; Park, i, 197@ ; ii, 4792, 4846 ; Woods, il, 440 Knowsley, lord of, ii, 1484, 149@ Knowt, Rob., ii, 110d Knox, Arbuthnot, see Manchester, bp. of Knutsford, ii, 235 Knyvet, John, li, 445 Kuerden, Dr., i, 297 ; ii, 553 Kurtz, A. G., ii, go1a Kyme, John de, i, 324%; Rob. de, i, 364 La Lawe, chapel of Walton in the Dale, ii, 18 Lacrosse, game of, ii, 4693 Lacy of Clitheroe, barony of, i, 312- 19 Lacy, Albreda, sister of Hen. de, i, 300%; Alice, Alesia, de, i, 309, 311 ; ii, 197, 457 2; Edm. de, i, 303; li, 132a@, 281, and see Ches- ter, constable of, and Lincoln, earl of ; Edm. son of Hen. de, i, 309 7; Gilb. de, i, 302, 313 2; Hen. de, i, 315, 316, 317, 318 1, 320, 336, 369 ; li, 7 2,17, 27, and see Lin- coln, earl of, and Chester, con- stable of ; Hugh de, i, 299 ; Ilbert de, i, 313, 315, 316 ; li, 10 #; Isa- bel, Isabella, de, i, 306 Ny, 318, 319; John son of Edm. de, i, 307; John son of Hen. de, i, 309% ; Margaret de, i, 307; Maud dau. of John de, i, 306; Maud w. of Rob. de, i, 315; Maud w. of Roger de, 1, 304 ; John de, i, 307, 3345; ii, 139@, 192, 193, 194 %, and see Chester, constable of, and Lincoln, earl of ; Rob. de, i, 300, 306 2, 313, 314, 317, 318, 319, 3353 i, 1324; 136%, 184, 190, 454, 524; Rob. son of Roger de, i, 304%; Roger de, i, 300; ii, 10, 192, and see Chester, con- stable of ; Roger son of Roger de, i, 304, 305 #; Walt. de, ii, 1260 Lacy, family, the, lands and estate of, i, ek, A il, 274, 275, 278 #, 280, 3566, 3 ieee F eceghilltiy ii, 93 2 L’Aigle, Alice de, i, 306, 312; Gilb. de, i, 306, 312, 319 Laithgrim, see Leagram Laithwait, Peter, ii, 79 Lake District, i, 1474, 1884 ; ii, 3544 Lake Lancashire, i, 190 Lamare, John de, ii, 438 2 Lambert, General, ii, 241 Lampett, a priest at Ulverston, ii, 78 Lamplugh, i, 358 Lamplugh, Sir John, ii, 1252 Lancashire Plot, the, ii, 243 Lancashire preachers, the, ii, 48 Lancashire, Jas., ii, 6202, 6224 Lancaster, i, 38, 40, 42a, 514, 60a, 6, 62a, 64a, 654, 692, 4, 714, 4, 734, 754, 790, 984, 103, 1136, 1174, 1454, 146a, 6, 1470, 148a, 1534, 154a, 1554, 190, I94a, 1982, 205a, 218, 222, 228, 246, 252, 265, 293, 294, 357%, 359 %, 303, 372 3 il, 4, 8, 17, 18 2, 21, 30, 43, 49, 58, 64, 78, 94, 100, 102, 103, 119 #, 124a, 6, 1254, 126%, 1274, 138a, 1554, 1584, 161a, 1674, 1706, 1724, 181, 182, 183, 188, INDEX Lancaster (conz.) ii, 192, 193, 196 #, 197, 199, 218, 226, 244, 250, 255, 265, 282, 283, 284, 285, 292, 293, 295, 297, 299, 317, 333, 340%, 341, 348, 3734, 3774, 6, 403@, 408d, 4164, 424 %, 427, 430, 436, 438, 439, 440, 441, 442, 443, 445, 447, 448, 4792, 4822, 4990, 5034, Soga, 519, 520, 528, 554, 5614, 564 m, 5650; adv., ll, 1676, 169a, 1714 ; almshouses, ii, 34, 102, 5624, 5634, 564a; appro- priation of ch., ii, 13 #, 14, 1716; Baptist church, ii, 75 ; benefice, ii, 647,997; Bridge, li, 437,441, 4453 Castle, i, 329, 331, 341, 352, 359; li, I112a, 186, 188, 189, 190, I9I, 192, 193 #, 211 #, 237, 265, 266, 284, 341, 440, hes 443, 445, 446, 447, 448, 520, 528; chantries, ii, 1624, 1662, 5622, 6, 563, 6, 564a; chapter, ii, 99, 160 # ; church, i, 337; i, 6”, 10 #, 12, 13 %, 14, 18, 23, 28, 29, 166a, 167a, 4, 528, 5622,5; 5684; DeepCar or Usher’s meadow, ii, 5664, 5676, 5684; Fair, ii, 204, 293 ; fishery, ii, 1704, 444 ; forest of, ii, 189 7, 190, 262, 437; 438, 439, 441, 442 7, 444, 452; friary of, ii, 103, 161, 162a, 4, 1634, 166a; Gardiner’s Hospital, ii, 166; hospital of St. Leonard, ii, 20 7, 30 %, 34, 37, 102, 1652, "8, 1700, 438 ; manor, ii, 165, 268, 286; mill, ii, 1654, 275, 294, 295, and see Lune Mill; Moor, i, 48, 235, 242; nonconf, ii, 69, 79, 80, 86, 90; priory, i, 294, 321, 341 #; il, 8,10, 11,12 2, 13 7, 35, 99%, 102, 103, 107”, 1200, 121d, 132@, 154%, 1555, 1602, 1654, 167, 5614, 564%; rectory, ii, 172%; school, ii, 34”, 298, 5044, 5618; tithes, ii, 154 2, 1654, 17oa; vicarage, il, 35, 1710; ‘ Wellen > Bank Wood, ii, 447 Lancaster, chantry priest of, ii, 34; burgesses of, ii, 166a, 1700, 190, 274, 437, 442; hermit of, ii, 103 ; mayor and town council of, ii, 48, 78, 97, 166a, 568, 4, 5804; monks of, i, 369; preaching friars of, ii, 441; schoolmaster of, ii, 48, 562@; seneschal of, ii, 1654; vicar of, ii, 36, 50 2, 1710; sheriff, i, 341, 365; ii, 118a, 188, 193, 222, 439, 440, 441, 442, 445 7; witches of, 11, 297 Lancaster, priors of, ii, 444; Ful- cher, prior of, ii, 1726; John, prior of, il, 172@; Nich., prior of, ii, 168 2, 172a; Nigel, prior of, 1706, 1726; Will. prior of, ii, 172, 173” Lancaster, Adam, dean of, ii, 99 Lancaster, archdeaconry of, ii, 100 Lancaster, County and County Pala- tine of, ii, 189, 206, 209 Lancaster, deanery of, ii, 99, 100 Lancaster, duchy of, i, 296, 297, 312, 3363; il, 146%, 1470, 207, 211, 215, 447, 449, 459, 461; chancellor of, ii, 1234 Lancaster, earldom of, ii, 208 Lancaster, honour of, i, 291, 292, 293, 294, 295, 296, 298, 320, 322, 326, 328, 336, 337, 3407, 350, 351, 352, 356; ii, 8, Io, 17, 1072, II4a, 116a, 1430, 148”, 1622, 163a, 165a, 1684, 182”, 184, 185, 647 Lancaster, honour of (comz.) ii, 186, 187, 189, 191, 195, 211 #, 264, 269, 270, 273 ”, 275, 438, 441, 537 Lancaster, hundred and wapentake of, il, 231, 273” Lancaster, Roman Catholic deanery of, ii, 95 Lancaster, dukes of, ii, 32 7, 148a, 207, 458, 461; Hen., duke, i, 296, 312; li, 25 #, 32, 103, 1044, 1374, 163a, 164 #, 1654, 136a, 6, 207, 208, and see Hen., earl; John of Gaunt, duke, i, 296, 345; li, 1194, 1368, 164”; Maud dau. of Duke Henry of, ii, 208 Lancaster, earls of, i, 309, 336, 3735 i, 32, 1o8a, 1456, 182, 284, 461; Edm., earl, i, 309, 311, 332, 356, 37353 i, 12, I1ga, 144a, 1490, 162a, 1690, 172%, 195, 197, 205, 207, 283, 441, 442, 443, 444, 456; Hen., earl, 1, 296, 312, 334, 3745 il, 32, 1054, 119a, 136a, 6, 150a, 162a, 202, 203, 205, 206, 207, 444, 445, 461, and see Hen., duke of; Thom., earl, i, 296, 309, 311, 312, 333) 343, 373 5 My 17,25, 31, 11 la, 130a, 133%, 1346, 135, 1384, 164 #, 1654, 1664, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 206, 278%”, 326, 443, 456, 457 Lancaster, Adeline de, i, 293 7; Agnes dau. of Will. de, i, 360; Alice w. of Gilb. de, 1, 361%; Alice sister of Will. de, 1, 364 ; Annora w. of John de, i, 366; Avice dau. of Will. de, i, 360; Gilb. de, 1, 3612; Gundreda, w of Will. de, i, 359; Harold of, ii, 262%; Heloise w. of Will. de, ii, 1526, 154@; Helewise dau. of Will. de, 1, 361, 364, 365; li, 1532, 155@; John son of Gilb. de, i, 361 2; John de, of Rydal, i, 365, 366 ; ii, 1426, 273 2,276; John de (of Howgill), i, 366; Jordan son of Will. de, i, 359, 360; Rob. de, i, 366; Roger Fitz Gilbert de, 35972; Roger de, i, 361, 365, 3663 ii, 1270, 195 ny 1420: Siegrid dau. of Will de, i, 360; Will. de, i, 293, 324, 354) 358, 359, 360, 362, 363, 364, 365; ii, 10m, 117%, 1196, 1266, 1270, 140a, 6, 1426, 1524, 1532, %, 1544, 1570, 193, 270, 440 ; fam., i, 357, 358; ii, 1170; of Sockbridge, i, 301 # Lancaster, Edw., ii, 142@ ; Sir John, ii, 213 ; Mich. of, li, 130@; Will., ii, 6186 ; Master Will., ii, 161@ Lancelot, John Bennet, ii, 596a Laneshaw Bridge, i, 11 Langdale (Westmld.) manor, i, 364 Langdale Tarn, Little, i, 56 Langdale, Sir Marmaduke, ii, 239 Langho, i, 834; ii, 176% Langley Hall, Middleton, i li, 5752 Langley, Geoff. de, ii, 441; Ralph, ii, 1490; Sir Rob., ii, 220 ; Thom., see Durham, bp. ‘of; Thom., rec- tor of Prestwich, ii, 581 ; Will, ii, 50, 54, 59, 61 ; family of, il, 33 Langton (Yorks.) church, ii, 50 Langton (Leics.) manor, i , 374 Langton, Agnes w. of Hen. rt, 3743 Alesia w. of John de, i, 373; Alice w. of Sir Ralph, i, 374; A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Langton (cont) Geoff. de, i, 374 ; Hen. son of Sir Ralph, i, 374 ; Joan dau. of Sir Thom., i, 375; John de, i, 373, 374; Mary, ii, 6094 ; Nich. de, 1, 374; Phil., ii, 243; Ralph de, i, 373%, 3743 Rich., i, 374; Rob. de, i, 373, 374 ; Sir Thom. de, 1, 374 3 li, 220, 293; Walt. de, see Lichfield, bp. of ; Will., ii, 6044 ; Mr., i, 366; family of, i, 375 7; ii, 31, 32, 36, 213; of the Lowe, in Hindley, family of, i, 374 Langtree, i, 371 ; Old Hall, ii, 550 Lanvaley, barony of, i, 332 Larbreck, i, 357 7, 360 Lark Hill, ii, 481@ ‘Larpitts’ Wood, il, 448 Larton, ii, 79 # Lasci, see Lacy Latchford, ford at, ii, 540 Lathom, i, 452; ii, 12, 53, 1244, 1494, 190, 214, 215, 237, 346, 350, $50, 554, 5854; clap. it, 34 : hospital or almshouse, ii, 34, 3%, 102, 1664; house, il, 227, 23", 282, 298, 423 #, 4844, 551 ; park, li, 444, 498d Lathom, chantry priest of, ii, 34; lord of, ii, 1484, 149a@, 151a, 6 Lathom, Latham, Hen. de, 1, 328 # ; ii, 12, 1514; Paul, ii, 64 2 ; Peter, ii, sola, 6; Rich. son of Hen., i, 328; Rich. son of Rob. de, i, 303, 330; Rob. de, i, 303, 3395 Rob. de, ii, 12, 151@; Siward, 1, 328 2 ; Thom. de, i, 344 5 ll, 444; Sir Thom., li, 214 ; family of, il, 190, 456 Lathom, Earl of, ii, 472a, 484a, 6 Latimer, Will. le, ii, 441 2, 442 7 Laton, i, 337, 340, 342; grange, i, 341 2; mkt. and fair, i, 341, 348 ; manor, i, 341, 343 Latrigg, Moss, i, 1882@ Laud, Will., see London, bp. of Laughton (Lincs.), 1, 319 #, 320, 323 Laund, New, ii, 336, 459 Laund, Old, 1i, 336, 459 Laurence, Rob., ti, 212 Lauton, Rob. de, i, 372 # Laval, Guy de, i, 301, 317, 318”; Hugh de, i, 315; ii, lo”, 18%, 133” Lavergne, Léonce de, il, 431 Law, Edw., bp. of Carliste, ii, 6114 Lawe, John del, ii, 456 Lawrence, Hen., ii, 6214 ; Rob., ii, 216; Sir Rob., ii, 1654; Sir Thom., ii, 1624, 499@; Will, il, 1456, 1484 Lawson Park, ii, 450 Lawson, Chas., ii, 5874, 5882, 0; Thom., ii, 78 Layburn, Sir James, ii, 1464, 157@ Layet, John, 1i, 1494 Layland & Son, Hen., ii, 3944 Layton and Layton with Warbreck, ii, 1094, 1682, 4, 332, 6122 Layton, Dr., ii, 1116, 113%, I14a, 124a, 1426, 1464, I51a, 1574, 1608 Lea, i, 702, 754; ii, 334; Fell, i, 826 ; Hall, i, 374 Lea, Sir Hen., i, 373 ; ii, 199 ; Will. de, i, 373 Leach, Arth., 1, 5692, 5994, 6014 Leacocke, Walt., ii, 377a Lead and Lead-mining, i, 11, 29; li, 3552 Leagram, i, 217, 228, 252; ii, 182", 184 7, 337. 454, 458, 6170; Hal, i, 776; Mill, 1, 79@; Park, ii, 446 Leake, Mr., ii, 256 Leapers Wood, 1, 774 Leasowe, li, 4134 Leather, G., ii, 4958 Leaver, W. J., ii, 498@ Leck, i, 44a, 464, 50a, 6, §1a, 52a, 534, 592, 652, 662, 6, 72a, 6, 734; 74a, 776, 794, 83a, 4; il, 176, 341; chap., li, 37 #3 Fell, i, 434, 50a, 514, 57a, 664, 674, 68a, 704, 716, 72a, 79a, 856; Hall, i, 84a Leck Beck, i, 38, 574, 594, 69a, 724, 744 . Ledet, Christiana, i, 332; Walt., i, 332% Lee, —, ii, 3874 Lee, Adam de, ii, 1574; Edw., see York, archbp. of ; Dr. Prince, see Manchester, bp. of ; Thom. Faulk- ner, ii, 5684, 5694 Leece, i, 238 Leeds, ii, 250, 308, 457, 4894, 4934; Baptist church, ii, 76 7 ; chap., ul, gt es Leeds and Liverpool Canal, the, ii, 3516 Leeds, duke of, ti, 4734 Leeds, John, ii, 73 Leek, vicarave of, ii, 574@ Leek, W. H., ii, 6114 Lees, i, 2525 ii, 454, 455%, 4970; Holt’s mill in, ii, 3694 ; Nonconf., ii, 82, 90 Lees, Aaron, ii, 476a; Asa son of Sam., ii, 3694; Eli son of Sam., ii, 3694 ; J., ii, 248 ; Laur., ii, 97 ; Sam., ii, 3694 Leet, Steph., ii, 1634 Legate, Rob, ii, 1244, 6, 1254 Legh, —, ii, 4754@, 4764; Cecily, dau. of Sir Piers, of Lyme, i, 348; Gilb. de la, ii, 456, 457; Gwalter, ii, 6036; Jno. de la, ii, 456; Lawrt., ii, 459 ; Mich. de la, ii, 456; Peter, ii, 5032, 6034, 6194, 6234, 5 ; Sir Piers, ii, 220 ; Rich., 1, 375 ; Rob.,, ii, 459 ; Thom. Wodehouse, i, 375, and see Newton, baron; W. J., ii, 475"; Dr. Thom., ii, 111, 1134, I14a, 124a, 142a, 4, 1464, I51a, 157a, 1604 ; Mr., ti, 256; of Lyme and Golborne, family of, i, 375 2, and see Leigh Legherton (Notts.), i, 321 ‘ Leghes,’ the, ti, 453 Leicester, i, 259; Abbey, ii, 10”, 12, 138, 20, 21, 1523, 1532, 154a, 6; honour of, ii, 195 ; siege of, ii, 188 Leicester, abbot of, ii, 153 2; Paul, abbot of, ii, 153@, 1540 Leicester, canons of, 1, 359 ; ii, 12; dean and wardens of college of, li, 1636 Leicester, earldom of, ii, 208 Leicester, earl of, i, 349; ii, 56, 195 #, 207, 226; Hen.,, earl, ii, 207; Margaret dau. of Rob., earl, i, 312; Rob., earl, ii, 143 7, 1526; Thom., earl, i, 312; ii, 1664 Leige, Nich., ii, 5074 Leigh, i, 17, 19, 23, 420, 189, 191, 196a, 1974, 236, 238, 252; ji, 99, 100, 101, 237, 272 ”, 293, 296, 300, 306, 307, 346, 3924, 3954, 426, 5874, 6114; adv., ii, 35 ; 648 Leigh (con?.) church, ii, 6”, 7#, 23, 35; fair and market, ii, 293 ; Nonconfor- mity in, ti, So, $65 rector of, it, 33; school, il, 5614, 6100; vicar, il, 35 %; vicarage, il, 35 Leigh, C., i, 31; Chas., il, 35a, 8 ; James, ii, 6094; Sir Piers, i, 347 #, and see Legh and Leye Leighton, ii, 93 #, 3634; Park, ii, 618 Leighton Beck, i, 754, 76a, 4, 794 Lekhurst, ii, 458 Lemaistre, Steph. Caesar, li, 4064 Lempriére, John, ii, 5984 Lemyng, Thom., vicar of Croston, ii, 50 eee duke of, ii, 380a, 4, 3814 ; earl of, ii, 216 Lenthall, Will., the Speaker, ii, 5864 Lenton, priory of, 1,336; ii, 20, 102, 113a, 6 Lentworth, 11, 443 Leominster, i, 385¢ Leopold, Dr., ii, 362 Lepidoptera, 1, 127-142 Lessi, Elias son of, ii, 262 # Lestrange, Eubolo, i, 311 ; Hamon, i, 308; Roger, ii, 442, and see Strange Leven river, i, 63a, 80; ii, 1434; fishery, i, 364 ; li, 1426, 295 Leven Sands, ii, 199 Levens Hall, 1, 358 Levenshulme, 1, 326% ; ii, 344, 350, 3984, 555 ‘ Lever, Darcy, i, 326 #; ii, 342 Lever, Gt., 1, 319%; li, 344, 4074; manor Of, ii, 215 # Lever, Little, i, 326”, 328”; il, 342, 350, 3984, 4074, 5982 7 Lever, —, ii, 48%; Adam de, ii, 204; Sir Ashton, i, 2024 ; James, ii, 5964, 5974; John, ii, 5962, 5966; Rob., ii, 4074, 596a, 6, 5974, 6; Roger, il, 215”; Will., ll, 5964, 5974; Will. Hen., ii, 5614, 6004, 6; Capt., ii, 243 ” Levers Water, i, 40 Levinstein, Ivan, ii, 4016 Lewis, Peter, ii, 3664; 64” Lewyns, Roger, ii, 570a, 4 Lexington, John de, ii, 441 Leyburne, Leybourne, John, ti, 93 ; Sir Rob. de, ii, 202, 456 Leye, Chris., ii, 5624, 5634 Leyland, i, 542, 654, 664, 1882, 303, 335 %5 i, 37%, 70, 99, 106a, 350, 3984, 4026; adv., li, 1044, 1064; chantry, ii, 37,6000; church, i, 335; Wi, 6, Ion, 12m, 372%, 50, 1044, 6008 ; deanery, ii, 6%, 40%, 50, 99, 100; hundred and wapentake, i, 257, 303, 326%, 335%, 337, 338, 350; li, 6, 52, 71, 93%, 94, 1614, 176, 193, 195, 199, 220, 223, 338, 339, 349, 350; Moor, ii, 199 ; rectory, ii, 27, 105¢, 6, 1064 ; Roman Catholicdeanery, ii, 95 ; school, ii, 37, 5614, 6006 ; vicarage, li, 27, 38, 64 Leyland, lord of, see Bussel, Will. ; rector of, ii, 31 #; vicar, il, 15 ” Leyland, family of, i, 336 Leylands Common, ii, 6234 Leylandschire, ii, 186” Leystone Abbey, i, 351 Leyton, ii, 4932, 6 Leyton, Will., ii, 45, 96 Will. ii, Liberal Party, the, ii, 250, 254, 255, 256, 258 Lichenes, i, 82-5 Lichfield, ii, 385@; Cathedral, ii, 13; chapter, ii, 1334; diocese, ii, 5 6, 8, 15 %, 22, 24, 27 #, 99, 179 ; treasurership of, li, 22 Lichfield, bps. of, ii, 12, 14, 15 , 16, 19, 32, 36, 103, 132, 1334, 183, 575a, and see Coventry and Lichfield; Hales, bp, ii, 36, 1116; Peter, bp., ii, 6; Reginald Boulers, bp., ii, 1504; Robt. Stretton, bp., ii, 26, 33, 1527; Roger Longespée, bp. .) li, 27, 132a, 133@, 1494; Roger Northburgh, bp., li, 15, 27, 28, 30, 32, 33, 1054, 1354, 1495; Walt., bp., 1, 3395 Walt. de Langton, bp. yil, 15,22, 32, Illa, 1342, 6, 139 2, 1626; Will. de Cornhill, bp., ti, 132@, 149@; Will. Heyworth, bp. ii, 35 ; Will. Smith, bp., ii, 5894 Lidgate, near Todmorden, Baptist church, ii, 77 Lightbodys, family of, ii, 3994 Lilburne, Col., ii, 240 Lillie Bridge, i ti, 4814 Lilly, Edw., ii, 3044 Limestone quarrying, i, 28, ii, 3550 Linacre, i, 564, 1324, 1380 Linacre, Thom., ii, 38 Lincoln, i, 259, 301, 308, 324, 334, 339%; battle of, 316; ch., i, 291, 292 ; ii, 32 Lincoln, earldom of, ii, 194, 208 Lincoln, earl of, i, 304; ii, 122d, 1342, 5, 1350, 136a, 216, 455; Alice,Countess, i, 312; li, 202 7; Edmund de Lacy, Earl, i, 307; li, 455, and see Lacy; Gilb. de Gaunt, Earl, i, 316; Hawise, countess of, i, 312; Hen. de Lacy, Earl, i, 308, 309, 310, 311, 3125 il, 1320, 133a, 151 2, 197, 268, 3762, 419, and see Chester, constable of, and Lacy ; John de Lacy, Earl, 1, 304, 306, 312, 313, 325; li, 132@, 454, and see Lacy, and Chester, constable of ; Marg., countess of, 312; ii, 455 ; Ranulf, earl of, and see Chester, Earl; Will. de Roumare, Earl, i, 316, 367, 368 Lincoln, Geoff. de, ii, 110” Lincoln, Will. Smith, bp. of, ii, 5894 Lincoln’s Inn, Lond., 1, 311 Lindale, i, 3, 39, 45, 472, 520, 223, 228, 229, 255; Park, ii, 456 Lindeth, i, 716 Lindisfarne (Durh.), diocese, ii, 2, 4 ; monastery, ii, 8 Lindisfarne, Tuda, bp. of, ii, 4 Lindley, John, ii, 131 ”, 1357, 136a, 6, 1390 Lindow, i, 115@ Lindsay, Lindsey, Alice de, ii, 1400 ; Christiana de, ii, 153¢; G.C., ii, 4944, Theophilus, ii, 68; Walt. son of Will. de, i, 364; Will. de, i, 365, 366; family of, ii, 1406 Lindsey, i, 293 ; ii, 184 Linen Industry, ii, 378, 379 Lingard, Dr., ti, 528 Ling-Gill, i, 161 Linoleum-making, ii, 408 Lionel son of Edw. III, ii, 150a Lipscomb, Will. Gull, ii, 6004 L’Isle, John de, i, 340, axd see Insula 2 293 INDEX Lisours, Albreda de, i, 299, 300, 301, 315, 319; Rob. de, i, aon 315 Lister, S. C., ii, 475%; T. T. C., Ny 4754; Dr., ii, 4974 Litel-ley, ii, 443 Litherland, i, 44a, 610, 62a, 1202, 168; ii, 346%, 347; Down, ii, 437 Litherland, Thom. of, ii, 150a, 152a Littleborough, i i, 11,14, 28, 32, 33) 34) 35 52a, 218, 239, 246, 252; il, 356a; chap., ll, 34, 35, 6184; rae ii, 6182 Littlebury (Notts.), i, 321% Littledale, ii, 341, 438; Fell, i, 632 Liverpool, 1, 24, 25, 37, 38, 41, 42a, 5, 430, 44a, 45a, 464, 474, 50a, 4, 51a, 53a, 55a, 564, 574, 59a, 60a, 614, 62a, 694, 74a, 804, 82, 844, 88, 89, 93, 94, 98a, 102, 103, 105, 106, 107, I108a, 4, 109, 109a, 1106, III, 112, 1128, 1134, 6, 114a, 6, 1154, 17a, 120, 1214, b, 1224, b, 1232, 1244, 1254, 4, 1264, 127, 1310, 132a, 0, 1334, 4, 134a, 136a, 4, 1370, 138a, 4, 140a, 6, 141a, 1426, 150d, 1520, 160, 1872, 4, 188, 191, 1924, 1934, 197a, 1984, 2094, 248, 252, 260, 296, 348; ii, 48, 56, 72%, 73, 76, 78, 88, 94, 196% ; 202, 204, 235, 237, 238, 239, 245, 251, 253, 254, 265, 267 #, 272, 273%, 281 , 295, 299, 303, 305, 306, 307, 314, 316, 317; 319, 321, 322, 323, 324, 3255 332%, 353a, 3662, 5, 3670, 3740, 3754, 3924, 0, 3934, 3994, 0, 4000, 402, a, 6, 4034, 4, 4o4a, b, 4osa, 4062, 0, 4074, 0, 408a, 4, 4096, 4134, 414, 415@, 6, 4176, 421, 422, 423, 425, 426, 427, 429, 431, 432, 433, 438, 442, 4674, 6, 468a, 4762, 4774, 478a, 479a, 6, 4802, 481a, 4832, 485a, 488a, 4892, 4914, 4932, 4944, 4954, 4964, 4974, 5024, 528, 554, 5934 ; Bar, i, 91; Bay, i, 166, 167, 1822, 1982 ; borough, ii, 192, 194, 197, 250, 285, 347 2, 348 ; Bot. Gardens, i, 726, 306 ; Broad Green, i, 802 ; Canada Dock, i, 2080; Castle, i, 3455 il, 198, 211”, 214, 273%, 281 #, 282, 545, 551 ; Cathedral, ii, 95, 258; chantries, ii, 37, 38, 5934, 5, 5940 ; chaps. of St. Mary and St. Nicholas, ii, 19, 25 2, 30, 5934, 4, 5944, 595@; church, ii, 96, 404a; College, ii, 5954; Docks, i, 185a, 218, 228; fair and mar- ket, ii, 281, 5944, 5954; gram- mar school, ii, 37, 38, 298, 5614, 6, 5934 ; Greenwich Park, ii, 4684; Guild, ii, 272 ; Hundred, ii, 304 ; Institution and Institute, ii, 5954 ; Mills, ii, 275 ; nonconformity, ii, 69, 71, 72, 75, 76, 80, 81, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90; prison, ii, 56; Toxteth and Tue Brook, see those titles Liverpool, burgesses of, ii, 30; corporation, i, 198a@; ii, 482d, 4882 ; re as and bailiffs of, ii, 97) 5934, 6 Liverpool, Adam, clerk of, ii, 280 Liverpool, archdeaconry, ii, 101 Liverpool, bishopric, ii, 94, 96, Ior Liverpool, deaneries, ii, 95, 101 Liverpool, Alex. Goss, bp. of, ii, 94 ; Bernard O’Reilly, bp. of, ii, 94 ; Geo. Brown, bp. of, ii, 94 ; John 649 Liverpool (conz.) Chas. Ryle, bp. of, ii, 96 ; Thom. Whiteside, bp. of, ii, 94 ; Dr. Cha- vasse, bp. of, 1i, 96 Liverpool, Earl, arms of, i, 198@ Liverpool, Will, de, ii, 2057 Liversedge, Rob. de, dau. of, i, 302 Livesey, 1, 304; li, 3375 coal mines at, ii, 292 Livesey, Hargreaves & Co., ii, 3960 ; Henry, Messrs., ii, 3700 Llandaff, Anthony Kitchin, bp. of, ii, 49 2 Llewelyn, Prince of Wales, i, 331, 356, 362, 369 Lloyd, —, ii, 4740; Geo., see Ches- ter, bp. of Lloyd-Mostyn, Hon. E. N., ii, 4800 Local Government Acts, the, ii, 258 Lockwood, —, ii, 4904 Lodge, —, ii, 566¢ ; Thom., ii, 5654, 5720 Loges, John des, ii, 1734 Loidis, King, ii, 175 Lollardism, ii, 33 London, i, 259, 310, 332, 341; il, 50 %, 71, 79, 203 7%, 301, 303, 304, 307 or 324, ae 3804, 4, 3832, 3924, 4, 3954, 4, 3979, 4064, 461, 499a, 5000; Essex Street, ii, 68 ; Fetter Lane, i ii, 81; Fleet "Prison, ii, 49; Gray’s Inn, chaplain of, ii, 1622; Little Wild Street, ii, 81 ; Paternoster Row, ii, 612@ ; St. An- drew by the Wardrobe, i, 349; and see St. Paul’s London, Lord Mayor of, ii, 4684, 7 London and Birmingham Railway, li, 3724 London and Manchester Plate Glass Co., ti, 4068 London, bp. of, ii, 57%; Hen. de Wengham, bp. of, ii, 21 ; Rich. de Belmeis, bp. of, i, 367; Will. Laud, bp. of, ii, 60, 62, 63 Long Parliament, the, ii, 63, 232 Longchamp, Margaret, dau. of Hen. de, i, 329; Will., 1, 362; ii, 190 Long Crag, i, 774, 6, 78a, 824, 834, 84a Longdendale, ii, 282 % Longden End Moor, i, 215, 228, 252 Longespée, Lungspée, Roger, see Lichfield, bp.; Will. de, i, 322, and see Salisbury, earl of Longford, i, 740 Longford, Lady Joan de, ii, 287 ; Sir John de, ii, 287 ; Nich. de, ii, 212, 287 ; family of, i, 328 2 Longly, Rob. of Agercroft, ii, 583¢ ; Thom., see Durham, bp. of Longridge, i, 484, 50a, 684, 734, 77a, 786, 1336, 1406, 215, 216%, 210, 223, 228, 229, 252; il, 350; chap. ii, 37”; Fell, i, 6, 7, 8, 604, 676, 68a, 6, 69a, 706, 730, 754, 76a, 776, 78a, 1125, 1936, 216, 228 ; ii, 4984 Longsight, i, 23 Longton, i, 303, 335; ii, 1044, 106a, 338; chap.,ii,18; Moss, ii, 289 ; school in, ii, 6056 Longton, Geoff. de, ii, 2622; John de, ii, 287; W., ii, 429 Longworth, i, 326%; li, 342 Lonsdale, 1, 2102, 201, 357%, 358, 359, 362; li, 5 7, 1250, 1280, 1290’ 1520, 1604, 161a, 187%, 265) 284 7, 436, 437, 443, 445, 446) 456, 464; deanery of, i, 6 n: 82 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Le nedale ‘cont, forest of, ii, 165@, 438, 439, 440, 441, 444, 462; hundred and wapentake of, ii, 265, 335%; ii, 4,8, 71, 94, 178 n, 181, 182, 187 2, 220, 223, 231, 264, 271", 304, 332%, 333%, 339, 349, 341, 342, 348 #, 349, 350 ; Lonsdale Ward (Westmorland), ii, 340% Lonsdale, Miles, ii, 620a Lord-Lieutenant, office of, ii, 219, 220, 235, 241, 242 Lord, Hen., ii, 74; James, ii, 369a ; Thom., li, 1424, 1434, 3694 Lord’s Wood, i, 984 Lostock, i, 1124, 113a, 114a, 326, 328 n, 330; ii, 937, 342; Moss, 1, 1134 Lostock Bridge, near Croston, ii, 199” Lostock, lands so-called at Cuerden, li, 617a Loud Lower Bridge, i, 784 Loud River, ii, 454, 4£8a Loushrizy, i, 365 Louzhsetter, David, ii, 354@ Lound .Derb.), i, 292, 338 Love Clough, ti, 45°, 4uu Lovel, Giles, ii, 171@, 6, 173@; John, Lord, of Titchmarsh, Northants., il, 112a@; Will, Lord, ii, 35; Lord, ii, 216; family of, ii, 203 », 213 Lovel’s Hall, in Halewood, ii, 548, 550 , Low End, i, 642 Low Marsh, i, 552 Low Water, 1, 40 Lowe, --, clk. of Huyton, ii, 54% Lowe, —, vicar of Leigh, ii, 6100 Lowe, Abraham, ti, 4714 ; Dick, ii, 471a; G., ii, 4974, 498a, 4, 4994 ; J. L., il, 496@; Rob., ii, 5874 Lower Gills, i, 7 Lowerhouse, 11, 397@ Lower Moor, i, 215, 228, 252 Lewick, 1, 47@; i, 340 Lowther, 1, 358 2; Castle, i, 361” Lowton, i, 366 7, 370, 374; ti, 348, 35; school, ii, 6044; Waste, ii, 289 Lowton, Adam de, i, 370 Loyne, see Lune Lucas, Will. of Cockersand, ii, 156, 1596 Luce Hay, i, 95, 1830 Lufclogh, see Love Clough Lumb, in the forest of Rossendale, ii, 74; Baptist church, 1i, 75 Lumley, Aymer of, ii, 110d Lund, chapel, in Kirkham, ii, 37 ”, 73 Lunde, John, ii, 5642 Lune Bank, 1, 45a Lune, Crook of, i, 844 Lune Estuary, ul, 4146 Lune, mill of, ii, 275, 294, 295, 443, 448, and see Newton nr. Aldcliffe, mill at Lune, Ribble, and Mersey, lands between, ii, 261 Lune, River, the, i, 30, 38, 452, 524, 53%, 574, 584, 59a, 706, 754, 994, 158, 184a, 1864, 187a, 189, 2052, 222, 229, 252, 3593 il, 437, 438, 443. 445, 447, 462, 472a, 4572, 4°52, 4994, 524, 526,528 ; fishery In, 1, 359; MN, 103, 114@, 1204, 121d, 295, 437 Lune, valley of, ii, 176, 181, 529, 54 Lunesdale, ii, 199 Lungvilers, Ellen, w. of John de, i, 325; Eudo de, i, 323, 325; Jonn de, i, 324, 325, 326; Margaret, dau. of John de, i, 326 Lunt, ii, 347 Lupus, Hugo de, see Chester, earl of Lurgan, Lord, il, 4730, 475 # Lutwich, Mr., ti, 580é Lyde, Lionel W., 11, 6004 Lydiate, i, 424, 444, 57a, 60a, 1132, 132a, 335, 3403 Hi, 345 Lydiate, Will. de, i, 340 Ly nche, Over, ii, 460 Lynn, nr. Warrington, i, 1194; in, 271 Lynn, —, ii, 4724, 4734, 480a, 6 Lyon, John, ii, 6184; Rob., ii, 4034 ; Lieut.-Col., 1, 248 Lyster, Lawr., ii, 3572 Lyth (Westmld.), manor, i, 364. Lytham, i, 420, 44a, 454, 4, 48a, 534, 554, 576, 54, 61a, 654, 71 a,6, 720, 736, 742, 752s 935 980, 1318,1328, 1344, 1362, 6, 1376, 1384, 1394, 1404, 6, 1426, 161, 171, 173, 2004; li, “, 17, 93 4%, 100, 107a, 108a, 109/, 196, 271, 285, 299, 333; 413@, 4144, 465, 4694, 4700, 4714, 4724, 4746, 4756, 4774, 6, 478a, 6, 4534, 484a, 496a, 6; church, ii, 62, 8, 10%, 14, 23, 28, 29, 39; 107a, 6, 1084, toga, 6; school, li, 6216; Nonconformity, ii, 87 ; Priory, i, 367, 368; ii, 1, lo”, 20, 102, 103, 107, 270, 273 Lytham, curate of, ii, 39” Lytham, prior of, ii, 288, 445; Clement, prior ol, ii, 110a; John, prior of, 1104 ; Helias, prior of, ii, 110a; Roger, prior of, ii, 110a; Thom., prior of, ii, 110a; Will. prior of, ii, 110a Lytham, Will. of, ii, 108@ Lythe, Le, ii, 4.42 McAdam, —, ii, 313 Macalis‘er, John, ii, 497@ Mac Arthy, Dermot, i, 357 Macbeth, Maleoim, ii, 1162; Nor- man, il, 4976 McCarthy, H. B., ii, 4962 ; Justin, Ny 257 Macclesfield ‘Ches. , ii, 356a, 580a ; park, i, 331 M’Corquodale, Messrs., ii, 4086 McCulloch, J. R., ii, 379@ Macdonald, Ranald, ii, 406a McEwan, David, ii, 4966; Peter, li, 497a; W., ii, 496a McGeorge, —, li, 478a Machell, J., ii, 364@ ; family, ii, 3634 Machinery, invention of, ii, 302, 311, 3524, 6, 3534, and see Engineering Machon, Hugh de, ii, 3564 Macintosh, Chas., ii, 4014, 4024, 6 McIntyre, —, ii, 489a, 490a, 6 Men Angus, ii, 4054; John, ii, 405 Mackerell, Rob., ii, 166 2 Mackey & West, Messrs., ii, 4064 Mackie, John, ii, 3686 Mackland, J. W., ii, 4960 Mackworth, Herbert, ii, 405 McLaren, A. C., ii, 490a, 4, 491d, 4924, 6, 4934 ; J., ii, 4934, 4944, 6 650 McNiven & Ormrod, ii, 3684 Madoc, Prince of Wales, i, 362 Maghull, i, 71a, 84a, 6, 836, 1294, 303; li, 345, 470a, 480a, 6, 550; chap., il, I Magnus, King of Manand the Isles, il, 141@ Maikins, —~, ii, 479@ Mainwaring, Edw., ii, 573@; John, ii, 6025 ; Margaret, ii, 6924 Maisterson, Margaret, dau. of Rich. of Nantwich, i, 349 Makerell, Rob., ii, 162a, 166 # Makereth, Will, i, 450 Makerteld, i, 262, 263, 370, 371, 372, 373; ii, 189; lordship of, i, 370 ; wapentake of, li, 194 #; lord of, see Newton in Makerfield, barony of Malacopterygii, i, 185, 186 Malbanc, Will. de, i, 338, 367 Malcolm IV, King of Scotland, ii, 187 Maldon, i, 259 Malherbe, Clemence, sister of John, i, 323 #, 325 ; John, i, 320, 322, 323, 325%; Maud, or Mabel, sister of John, i, 323 #, 325 Mallabey, — ii, 4764 Mallett, Will., ii, 97 Mallowdale Fell, i, 67a, 4, 68a Maltravers, Will., 1, 315 Mamecestre, see Manchester Mamecestre, Alexander de, ii, 3984, 39942; Rob. son of Rob., son of Simon de, ii, 3984 ; Wlvric de, i, 328" Mammals, i, 206-10 Man, Calf of, i, 88 Man, Isle of, i, 2, 81, 87, 95 #, 102, III, 160, 174, 175, 176, 179, 1814, 182a, 183a, 184a, 1864, 195a, 2040 ; il, 94, 114 #, 116a, 4, 117a, 6, 1264, 214, 4134, 5006; abbey of, ii, 117%; deanery of St. Maug- hold, ii, 95 ; churches of St. Mi- chael and St. Maughold, ii, 117a, 128a; bishopric of, ii, 41, and see Sodor and Man Mun, King of, i, 363, and see Magnus, and Reginald, King Manchester, i, 6, 13, 14, 19, 38, 434, 50 n, 60a, 4, 614, 690, 714, b, 72a, 6, 734, 6,796, 806, 97, 98a, 6,994, 102, 103, 105, 106, 107, 108, 1084, 1094, 6, 1104,6, 1114,113a, 46,1144, 6, 1154, 4, 1164, 6, 1174, 6, 1184, 4, 119a, 6, 1204, 6, 1214, 6, 1224, b, 123a, 6, 1246, 12§a, 6, 1264, 1272, 6, 127, 128, 129a, 1306, 1314, 4, 1324, 6, 1334, 6, 1344, 6, 1354, b, 1376, 138a, 6, 139a, 6, 140a, 4, 1414, 142a, 6, 142, 143@, 4, 1444, b, 1508, 1514, 1542, 190, 1934, 6, 1944, 1962, 200a, 2036, 2084, 219, 229, 244, 253, 264, 326%, 327, 328 m, 329, 331, 3335 li, 7, 17, 23, 25 7, 30, 48, 50,572, 64, 66, 70, 76, 78, 945 95, 99, 176, 178, 183, 193, 200 #, 213, 215, 218, 226, 225, 235, 236, 238, 240m, 241, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 251, 252, 253, 254, 255, 255%, 259, 264 7, 265, 274, 285, 295, 296, 297; 299; 300, 302, 303, 306, 307, 308, 309, 310, 311, 313, 314% 316, 317, 318, 319, 321, 323, 324 325, 326, 324, 343, 344, 349, 3510 3524, 6, 3546, 3504, 3574, 4, 358a, 3592, 4, 366a, 3674, 4, Manchester (conzd.) ii, 3682, 4, 3704, 0, 3714,6, 3724, d, 3734, 4, 374@, 6, 376a, 6, 3774, 0, 3782, 3794, 0, 3804, 3814, 4, 3822, 4, 3832, 4, 384a, 3854, d, 3864, 4, 3874, 4, 3882, 3914, 3924, 4, 3932, 4, 3944, 4, 3954, 4, 3974, 4, 3982, 4, 3994, 4004, 4014, 4o2a, b, 404d, 4074, 6, 408a, 4154, 422, 429, 431, 432, 433, 463, 4674, 468a, 5, 4690, 476a, 6, 4776, 4784, 4794, 6, 4804, 4814, 4822, 6, 4872, 4896, 4904, 6, 4922, 4944, 0, 4954, 4974, 6, 4982, 4, 501a, 5024, 5032, 519, 548, 554, 5862, 5874, 6206 ; advowson, i, 332; ii, 167@ ; Alexandra Park, i, 227, 253 ; castle, i, 329; Castle Field, i, 13; cathedral, ti, 4, 6, 100 ; chantries, il, 26, 37, 38, 5792, .6; Cheetham Hill, ii, 87; Chet- ham Hospital or College, ii, 34 7, 38 2, 247, 283; Chorlton’s Aca- demy, ii, 69 ; church, i, 260, 328 7, 334 5 ii, 6, 7", ea 20, 26, 38 my, 1136, 1674, 5794, 4, 5854; colle- giate church or college, ii, 34, 50, 66, 100, 102, 167, 293, 2971 5024, 6, 5794, 6, 5814, 582a, 4, 583a, 5856, 5874, 6214; Crumpsall Hall, 1, 152a, 154a; Deansgate, i i, 192; ii, QI ; Frankland’s Academy, ii, 69; gilds, ii, 37, 38 2, 1676, 5798 ; grammar school, ii, 37, 294, 298, 561a, 562a, 578, 5974, 606d; Hinde’s school at, ii, 6206; Jesus cchap., ti, 37; Municipal Secondary School, ti, 589@ ; manor of, i, 326, 330, 332, 333, 334, 336; il, 34, 1674, 272%, 279, 286, 293, 3762, 554, 5800, 5880 ; market and fair at, 1, 330; i, 281; Memorial Hall, ii, 69; Milligate, Long Mill-gate, ii, 3682, 4024, 5832 ; mills, i, 327; li, 275, 295, 302, 579%, 580a, 4, 5814, 5822, 5832, 5874, 5880; Newton chap., il, 349; Noncon- formity in, ii, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 75, 79 2, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89,91 ; Owens College, ii, 5892 ; prison, li, 56, 57, 225; race- course, il, 4684; rectory, ii, 21, 30%; Ship Canal, i, 1854, 249 ;ii, 258, 323, 324, 325, 3924; Stret- ford, Throstle Nest, and Trafford, see those titles ; and see Mancu- nium Manchester, archdeaconry of, ii, 100 Manchester, barony of, ii, 1692, 263, 463 Manchester, deanery of, ii, 6”, 40”, 59, 99, 100 Manchester, diocese of, ii, 96, 100 Manchester, Roman Catholic dean- eries, li, 95 Manchester, barons of, see Grelley ; burgesses and townsmen, ii, 197, 237, 294; dean of, ii, 262”; Jordan, dean of, ii, 99, 190; rec- tor of, ii, 20, 22 ; wardens of colle- giate ch.ii, 33 2, 38, 5804, 5814, 86a Manchester, bp. of, ii, 5o1a; Ar- buthnot Knox, Dr., bp. of, ii, 96 ; Dr. Fraser, bp. of, ii, 96; Dr. Moorhouse, bp. of, ii, 96; Dr. Prince Lee, bp. of, ii, 96 Manchester, earl of, ii, 238, 585 Manchester College, Oxford, ii, 69 Manchester and Liverpool Railway, the, il, 3532, 3714, 3926 INDEX Mancunium, Manchester, i, 13; il, 261 Mandevill, Geoff. de, see Essex, earl of; Will. de, see Essex, earl of Manley, Peter de, i, 363 Mansel, John, ii, 16, 21, 32, 197%, 265 Mansriggs, ii, 340 Mantoux, Paul, ii, 385 Manvers, Leon de, i, 293 Manwering, Randall, ii, 97 Mar, earl of, ii, 244 March Hill, i, 214 March, earls of, il, 211 Marche, La, count of, ii, 181 Mare, John de la, i, 322, 323%; ii, 169 2; Warin son of Ralph de, i, 322; Will. de, i, 323 Marescall, see Marshall Mareys, Geoff. de, i, 354; Hen. de, i, 361 2; Joan sister of Geoff. de, i, 354; Nich. de, i, 357%; Stephen de, i, 357 # Marfleet, C. E., ti, 475 2 Marisco, Abbas de, ii, 154a; Roger, Abbas de, ii, 1584 ; Thom., Abbas de, ii, 1586 Mark, Philip, i, 354, 363 # Market Rasen (Lincs.), i, 319%, 320, 322 Markets, ii, 265, 281, 282, 292, 293, and see under place-names Markham, Gervase, ii, 421 Marland, ii, 132%; grange of, ii, 1336; manor, ii, 138 2 Marlborough, i, 361 2; ii, 492d Marlborough, Thom. of, ii, roga, 0 Marney, Master, ii, 139 # Marriage, —, li, 4950 Marries Wood, ii, 447 Marriott, E. E. + ly 4954 Marsden, i, 1114; il, 357@; 454, 514; Nonconformity in, ii, 79, 80 Marsden, Great, i, 318; ii, 278, 2807, 292, 293, 335) 455, 514 Marsden, Little, ii, 278, 280%, 335, 419,455,514 Marsden (Yorks.), i, 308 Marsden, —, ii, 5970; Geo. & Sons, li, 3744; Thom., ii, 6184; Will. ii, 3680 Marsey Priory, ii, 10 #, 13 2 Marsey, Mattersey, Roger de, i, 297 3 li, 10”, 194 Marsh, E., ii, 611@ ; Geo., ii, 48 Marshal, Will. the, i, 304, 305, 323, 352, 361; ii, 10”, 189, and see Pembroke, earl of Marshall, Mershall, —, ii, 78; Agnes sister of Will., ii, 608a; Alexander, ii, 570a; Chris., ii, 608@; Fras., ii, 3984; John, ii, 565@; John le, ii, 570a ; Marg. sister of Will. ii, 608a ; Rich., ii, 570a, and see Pembroke, earl of; Walt., see Pembroke, earl of ; Will., ii, 424, 608a Marshalsea Prison, ii, 458 % Marshaw, i, 55a, 700, 764 ; ii, 443 ; Fell, i, 554, 67a, 726, 73a, 6, 766, 78a, 83a Marshfield, ii, 339 Marshside, ii, 413@ Marsland, Peter, ii, 384 Marston Mine (Ches.), i, 25 Marston Moor, ii, 238 Martholme, Great Harwood, ii, 550 Martin, ii, 263 Martin Marshes, i, 202@, 4, 203a 651 Martin Mere, i, 30, 31, 454, 76a, 138a, 212, 218%, 226, 229, 230”, 231, 237, 249, 253, 321 Martin V., Pope, ii, 35 7, 123 #,171 % Martin, Peter, i ii, 1724, 173 n Martin, of Kemys, Joan, dau. of Will., lord, i, 312 Martindale, —, ii, 65 ; Adam, ii, 3570 Marton, i, 229, 350%; ii, 1484, I51a Marton in Amounderness or Marton in the Fylde, i, 234, 238, 253; manor, i, 292, 354 Marton, Great, in Amounderness, ii, 1044, 6, 184%, 334 ; manor, i, 343 Marton, Little, ii, 334 Marton Mere, i, 794, 218 # Mary, Queen, 1i, 46, 47, 1094, 1470, 1674, 5614, 5644, 6056 Mary, Queen of Scots, ii, 51, 221, 222, 226 Masci, Mascy, Hamon de, ii, 188 189, 200” ; Will. of Rixton, i, 347 Maserfield, i, 262, 263 ; ii, 176 7 Mason, Jos. +y iI, 3830; J., li, 480d Masrudder, Chris., ii, 1244, b Massey, Millington, ii, 5884 ; Messrs. B. & S., 11, 3746 Masson, Helen, ii, 570 Match-making industry, ii, 408 Mather, Rich., minister of Toxteth, ii, 63; Sir Will, ii, 370a, 3730; W., ii, 475%; and Platt, Ltd. Messrs., ii, 3530, 3704, 3736 Mathew, Matthews, Chris. of, ii, 98; F. H., ii, 600@ ; Will. & Co., li, 3744 Matilda or Maud, Empress, i, 317; ii, 18 Matlock (Derb.), i, 235 Mattersey, see Marsey Matthew son of Edith, ii, 1130 ‘ Maudlands,’ Preston, ii, 164@ Maudsley, see Mawdesley Mauduit, Will., see Warwick, earl of Mauleon, Savari de, i, 302 Mauleverer, Maulever, Nich. de, ii, 201, 456 Mawdesiey, i i, 207, 319 #5 ii, 338, 425 Mawdesley, John, li, 449 j Rob., ii, 449; Thom., ii, 5752, 6, 5764 Mayall, li, 3682 Mayer, Jos., ii, 404d Mayfield, ii, 3970 Mayhull, 1, 57a Mead, Rob., ii, 598a Meadows, Hen., ii, 470a, 3 Mearley, i, 304 ; il, 290, 335 Mearley, Great, i, 304; 1, 455, 456 Mearley Hall, Little, clough, 1, 7 Mearley (Parva), Hugh de, 1, 304 Meath, Ric. de, 1i, 437 Meaux, Nich. of, ii, 117@, 1308 Medlar, Medlar with Wesham, 1, 350; li, 1552, 1576, 333 Medlock Vale, i, 434, 560 Mees, Will. ii, 3942 Melandra, a Roman fortress, ii, 516 Melkanthorpe, i 1 358% Melling, i, 38, 50a, 654, 72a, 82a, 84a, 6, 85a, 266, 267, 326; ii, 4, 8x, 18%, 100, 169%, 340, 341, 521, 550; advowson of, ii, 1600, 1670, 1686 ; castle mount at, it, 5273 church of, i, 321, 325 : il, 6 m, 8, lom, 23%; Manor, i, 325, 326 ; Nonconformity, ii, 79 2; Old Conscough Hall, ii, 550; rec- tory, ii, 21,24, 27,64; rector of, ii, 168 # ; vicar of, ii, 1600 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Melling-cum-Cunscouyh, ti, 345 Melling, in Halsall, chap., il, 19,25 % Meliing with Wrayton, i, 319; il, 340, 520, §29; vicarage, li, 529, 539 Mellingford Brook, the, ii, 532 Mellor, i, 10, 215, 223, 228, 229, 253, 318, 369 5 i, 337, 3824, 552 ; Moor, i, 1944; fi, 553 Mellow, i, 8 Melmerby (Cumb.), i, 320 Meols Bay, i, 1874 Meols, North, i, 31, 2014, 303, 335 %; li, 7 2, 49 2, 92, 99, 265 2, 281%, 346, 4762, 497a ; advowson of, ii, 1044, 105a, 106a; chap., i, 335; li, 17, 104@; church, ii, 6”, 7”, 10 ”, 22 ; deanery of, ii, 1o1 ; non- conformity, ii, 79”; rectory of, il, 67 # ; parson or rector, li, 31 7, 262 Meols, Alan de, i, 303 ; Rob. de, i, 303 Mercer, John, ii, 3974; Rich., i, 4036 ‘Merclesden, Gret,’ see Marsden, Great Merclesden, Rich. de, ii, 456”, 457, 458 Mere Clough, i, 48a, 1224 Mere Mere, i, 1126 Meredith & Mayall, ii, 368¢ Merevale Abbey, ii, 102 Merlewood, Grange over Sands, i, 259 Merry, —, ii, 4988 Mersco, see Myerscough Mersey, rivcr, the, i, 26, 30, 31, 37, 444, 532, 604, 61a, 88, 89, 90, 96, 104, I1oa, 1126, 113a, 6, I14a, 1194, 1204, 1 21a, 6, 1244, 158, 163, 172,173,175, 179, 1804, 4, 1814, 0, 182a, 1842, 6, 1864, 1874, 6, 189, 190, I9I, 197a, 199a, 200a, 2024, 204a, 206, 2084, 2094, 2104, 6; li, T, 3, 438, 441, 444, 4674, 4714, 4852, 4882, 4962, 4972, 4984, 520, 540, 548, and see Ribble and Mersey ; ferry of, i, 348; fishery, ll, 295 Mersey, valley of, i, 1914, 1946 Mersey and Solway, lands between, ii, 2 Merston, Will. of, ii, 1066 Merton College (Oxford), ii, 419, 5934 Merton, Adam of, ii, 1225 Meschin, Ranulf, i, 292, 293, 367; ii, 184, 186, and see Chester, earl of ; Will, i, 358, 359 Metcalfe, Sir T., ti, 475 # Methodism, ti, 82 Meulan, Rob., count of, i, 359 Meurick Aston, ii, 1314 Mewith in Bentham, ii, 462 Meynell, —, ii, 93 2 Miche Wall Diche, see Nico Ditch Micheland, i, 297 Michelescherche (St. Michael’s on Wyre), ii, 7 Mickle Ditch, ii, 555 Middilford, ii, 3564 Middle Gill, i, 72a, 824, 83a, 6, 844 Middle Hill, i, 215, 216, 228, 253 Middlebarrow, i, 734, 79a; Wood, i, 585 Middleham, John, ii, 110d Middleton, i, 15, 38, 55a, 608, 674, 83a, 205a, 319”, 322, 366%; ii, 37”, 48, 99, 249, 307, 321, 341, Middleton (com?.) ii, 344, 348, 388%, 3924, 3944, 4, 3984, 405a, 4o8a, 550, 5762, 5870 ; benefice, ii, 64; chantries, ii, 33, 1574, 6, 5752, 6,576; church, i, 64, 7”, 33, 575@; grammar school, ii, 34, 561@, 5744, 604, 6062; Hall, i, 207; mills at, il, 296; nonconformity at, ii, 89; Wood, i, 594 Middleton, chantry priest of, 1i, 28, 34 Middleton, nr. Winwick, 1, 22 Middleton in Lonsdale, manor of, ii, 1576 Middleton (Yorks.), i, 358 Middleton, Roger de, i, 322; Rob. de, i, 322; Will of, ii, 1306; family of, ii, 33 Middlewich (Chesh.), ii, 238 Midgeley, Joseph, vicar of Rochdale, ii, 60, 612; Ric., vicar of Roch- dale, ii, 58, 59 7, 61 Midway House, ii, 554 Mikeham, John de, i, 324 ” Mikel-iey, ii, 443 Mildmay, Sir Walt. ii, 45, 46, 96, 5700, 575%, 5794 Miles Platting, ii, 81 Milford, ii, 4128 Milford Haven, i, 351 Military musters, see Musters Militia, ii, 239, 241, 257 Milk Wall, sce Nico Ditch Millegate, Millgate, Long Mill-gate, see under Manchester and Wigan Mill-stones, ii, 3554, 4 Mills and Milling, 11, 273, 274, 275, 294, 295, and see under place- names Mill Wood, i, 634; ii, 4838 Mill, John Stuart, ii, 317 Millar Barn, nr. Newchurch, ii, 361a Miller, Millar, —, ii, 3844; John, ii, 3664; Thom., ii, 5744 Millington, John, i, 398¢ Millom, ii, 128”, 180%; church of, ii, 128a; nonconformity, ii, 87; lords of, ti, 1274 Millom, Millum, Walt. of, ii, 1300 ; Will. de, i, 324 #, 368; ii, 1074 Millwall, ii, 372a Milne, Miln, John & Co., ii, 368a ; R. Finley, ii, 4962 Milner’s Safe Co., ii, 3748 Milnrow, i, 594, 218, 228, 229, 253; ii, 361a; chap., 1i, 34; Low House, i, 223 Milnthorpe (Westmld.), ii, 426 Milthorpe, ii, 362a@ Milton, ii, 421 Minster Lovel, ii, 203 ” Mirescowe, see Myerscough Mirkeholm Wood, ii, 448 Mitchell, Will., ii, 73, 3863 Mitton, i, 71a, 72a; li, 335, 337; advowson of, li, 155a; church, ii, 157a@: rectory, il, 158; vicar of, ii, 28 Mitton, lord of, ii, 1554 Mitton, Gt., i, 8, 314; manor, i, 313 Mitton, Little, i, 303, 313 ; ii, ror Mitton (Yorks.), ii, 5 2 Mitton, Hugh de, 1, 304 ; Ralph de, 1, 304 Mode Wheel, i, 253 Model Parliament, the, ii, 197 Modye, John, vicar of Eccleston, ii, 50 652 Mohammedans, ii, 92 Mohaut, see Montalt Mold, Arthur, ii, 4894, 4904, 4914, 4924, b, 4934 . Mollin (of the Wood), John, ii, 53 Mollington, Little, see Mollington Banastre Mollington Banastre (Chesh.), i, 373 3 manor, i, 372 Molluscs, i, 22, 23, 97 Molyneux, Adam de, i, 303, 340, and see Chichester, bp. of; Alice dau. of Sir Rich., ii, 53 ; Ann, ii, 6164; Antony, rector of Walton, ii, 50; Sir C., ii, 475”; Edw. rector of Sefton and Walton, ii, 38; Jane dau. of Sir Rich,, ii, 53; John son of Sir Rich., it, 53; Rich. de, i, 303; 1, 52, 53, 214, 220; Rob. de, i, 293, 338, 340; Sir R., ii, 295; Thom. of Cuerdale, see Chester, constable of; Thom,, ii, 446; Sir Thom. of Sefton, ii, 16”, 35; Sir Will., ii, 98, 216; Lord, li, 235, 237, 242, 243, 4726, 4744 ; Mr., Ny 4794 ; Viscount, li, 256; family of, i, 297 ; ii, 35 #, 38, 190, 213, 437, 456, 4754 . Monewden (Suff.), i, 319 #, 323 Monewden, Agnes dau. of Roger, i, 324; Hen. de, i, 313, 322, 323, 324, 325, 326; ii, 160a, 4, 454; John de, i, 323 Monhaut, see Montalt Monk, Coniston, il, 339, 3554 Monk, General, ii, 239 Monkbretton, priory of, i, 321 ; prior of, ii, 454 Monmouth manor of, ii, 195 Monmouth, duke of, ii, 241 Mont St. Michael, Abbey of, i, 337 Montalt, Mohaut, seneschal of, i, 339 % Montalt, Rich. de, i, 371; Roger de (of Hawarden), i, 341 Montbegon, barony of, i, 319 Montbegon, Adam, de, i, 320, 321; ii, 160a; Alice dau. of Adam de, i, 324%; Agnes dau. of Roger, i, 324; Beatrice dau. of Roger, i, 324; Emma dau. of Roger, i, 324”; Maud dau. of Roger, i, 324%; Olive w. of Roger, i, 324, 325; Roger de, i, 294, 320, 321, 322, 323, 324, 325, 329; ii, 18%, 1604, 1614, 1684, 190, I91 #, 192, 193, 454, 462 ; Sezilia w. of Roger de, i, 320 ; family of, ii, 1604, 183, 190 Monteagle, Mounteagle, Lord, ii, 97, 102 #, 123”, 129”, 139”, 143a, 217, 220; Edw. Stanley, Lord, ii, 38, 1564; Thom. Stanley, Lord, il, 1584, 1614 Montfort, earldom of, ii, 195 Montfort, count de, i, 344 Montfort, Simon de, ii, 194 Montfort and Evreux, Bertrada, dau. of Simon, Count of, i, 312 Montgomery, ii, 238 Montgomery, Roger of, ii, 11, 1684, 180 ; family of, ii, 1672 Monton, nonconf. in, ii, 69 Moon, Edw., of Aigburth, ii, 6094 Moor Brook, ii, 536 Moor Head, i, 255 Moor, Mr., i, 2036 Moore, Edm., ii, 110d; Sir Edw., ii, 4o6a@ ; John, ii, 232 ; Sir John, ii, 233 ; Randolph, ti, 593@, avd see More Moorhouse, Dr., see Manchester, bp. of Moot How, Carnforth, ii, 554 Moravians, the, ii, 80 Moray, earl of, ii, 199 ; Angus, earl, ii, 18 Morcar, earldom of, ii, 180 Morchehadn, ii, 608@ More, Sir Thom., ii, 5700 ; Will. de la, i, 333, ad see Moore Morecambe, i, 42a, 49a, 620, 9o, 132a, 1336, 1364, 1384, 1392, 142a, 154a, 164, 165, 166, 169, 172, 173, 174, 1863, 1874, 1946, 2030, 218, 228, 253; ii, 4104, 4, 4l2a, 6, 4140 ; ; nonconformity, ii, 8 7 Morecambe Bay, i, 38, 39, 40, 87, 88, 89, 90, 92, 93, 94, 104, 166, 174, 179, 1802, 1822, 1832, 4, 1844, 185a, 1862, 4, 189, 1954, 1992, 2002, 4, 202a, 6, 203a, 4, 2042, 2084, 2104, 8 ; ii, 1214, 182, 4114, 4, 419 Moreerctt, Edw., rector of Aughton, li, 50; ‘Tas. Ss ii, 4024 Moreholme Castle, in Warton, i, 363, 364 Moreton, Edw., ii, 64 # ; Hugh de, i, 303, 368 . a Morevill, Avicia w. of Rich., ii, 126a; Hugh de, of Burgh-upon Sands, i, 361; ii, 1520, 1540; Rich. de, i, 360; ii, 1264; Will. de, i, 360 Morewich, Hugh de, i, 322 Morgan, Philip, rector of Prescot, ii, 36, and see Worcester and Ely, bp. of Morhull, see Moreholme Morland (Westmld.), i, 358, 365 ; manor, i, 360 Morland, Geo., ii, 5674 Morle, see Morleys in Astley Morley, Lord, ii, 447, 463 Morley, Mr., ii, 217 Morleys in Astley, ii, 446, 547 Morley’s Hall, Astley, ii, 548 Mormons, the, ii, 92 Morne alias Butcher a/zas Fisher, of Formeby, ii, 53 Morris, F., ii, 498@ ; James, of Haigh, ii, 3614; Mr., ii, 3870 Morsel, Walt., ii, 120@ Mort, Adam, ii, 6152; Thom., ii, 6155 Mortain, honour of, i, 292 Mortain, count of, ii, 107 2, 182, 191 ; John, count of, i, 292, 293, 295, 300, 321, 336, 3393 li, 1074, 1184, 1434, 148”, 1520, 1542, 0, 1654, 1684, 170a, 182 2, 189, 192, 263, 265, 274, 439, 442, and see John, King ; Stephen, count of, i, 292 #, 293, 320, 327, 337, 360; ii, 1o#, 114a, and see Boulogne, count of, and Blois, count of; Will. count of, ii, 1602, and see Warenne, Will., earl of Morthyng, Thom. of, ii, 1434 ; family of, ii, 1426 Mortimer, Roger, ii, 203 Morton, Thom., see Chester, bp. of Morvil, see Morevill Moseley, Mosley, David & Sons, ii, 4020 INDEX Moseley, Edw., ii, 6174 ; Sir Edw., ii, 6174; Nich., i, 334; Sir Os- wald, i, 334; ii, 587@; Rich. de, ii, 136a ; Rowland, i, 334 Mosley Common, Nonconf., ii, 89 Mosney, near Preston, ii, 3960 Moss Hall, ii, 4986 Moss Side, i, 454, 470, 215, 228, 253, 326 # ; ii, 344 Moss Side, St. Michael’s, i, 65a Moss, John, ii, 6208 Mossborough Hall, Rainford, ii, 550 Mosshouses, ii, 339 Mossley (Ches.), i, 10 Mossley, ii, 321; Hill, i, 112, 1200, 122a, 6 Mossley Hall, Lowton, ii, 550 Mossock, —, ii, 403@ Mossy Lea, Nonconformity at, ii, 72, and see Tunley Moston, i, 16, 794, 326%; li, 344, 3560 Mostyn, Sir Piers, ii, 475a Mottram (Ches.), i, 10 Mountgrace, prior of, ii, 42 Mountstuart, John Stuart, Lord, ii, 4056 Mow Cop, near Burslem, ii, 88, 89 Mow Road, near Rochdale, i, 212, 253 Mowbray, barony of, i, 358 Mowbray, Eleanor, i, 334; James, li, 405; John de, ii, 462 ; Roger de, i, 316, 358, 360 ; ii, 462 ; Will. de, il, 462 Mowbrick, ii, 92 Mugliston, —, ii, 4766 Multon, Lambert de, i, 322, 361; Sarot w. of Alan de, i, 364 ; Thom. de, i, 322; family of, 1, 361 Muncaster (Cumb. ), 1, 293) 358, 359; chap., ii, 140%; church, li, 140a, I4I 2 Muncaster, Lord, ii, 556 Munfichet, barony of, i, 365 Munfichet, Margery sister of Rich. de, i, 365 Munslow, i, 367, 368 Mureside Mosses, i, 188a Murray, —, warden of Manchester, ii, 63; Grace, ii, 82; H.,i, 1932, 1964, 2024, 2030, 2104 Musbury, i, 319 ; ii, 334 ; Park, ii, 454, 456, 457, 458, 460 Muschamp, Geoff. de, bp. of Coven- try and Lichfield, ii, 1494 Musden, ii, 455, 458 Musgrave & Sons, Messrs., li, 3730 Muspratt, James, ii, 400, 4o1a Musters, Military, ii, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227, 230, 231, 235 Myerscough, ii, 240, 333, 446, 449 ; forest of, ii, 439, 444, 445, 448, 449, 456 ; Lodge, ii, 93%; Park, ii, 297, 444, 445, 446, 448, 452 Mythorp, i, 331 2 Mytton, 1, 57a Nail-making, ii, 3654 Nantwich, ii, 238; Nonconformity, ii, 76” Napier, J. R., ii, 4900 Narborough (Leics.), i, 353 Naseby (Northants), i, 305 ; ii, 238 Nash, —,, ii, 4892, 4900 Nasmyth, James, ii, 3532, 2, 3542, 3714, 3725, 3734; & Gaskell, Messrs., ii, 3732; Wilson & Co., ii, 3734, 3740 653 Nateby, i, 357 % 3 li, 332 Navarre, king of, i, 318 Navenby (Lincs.), ii, 191 ; church, i, 291; manor, i, 292 Neal, —, ti, 59, 60 Need, Sam., 11, 3854 Neile, Rich., see York, archbp. of Neldesle, Ph. of, ii, 1060 Nelson, ii, 3914, 392@; Noncon- formity, li, 80, 87 Nelson, John, ii, 82 ; Rich., mayor of Lancaster, ii, 5634, 6; Rob., ii, 50; Thom., ti, 3576; W., ii, 498a Neolithic Age and implements, i, 27, 212, 213, 238, 239, 240, 246 Neolithic Man, i, 27 Nethermill, Julius, i, 348 Netherton, i, 44a, 49a, 4, 674, 68a, 77, 78), 826, 830, 84, 85a, db; ii, 347 Nettleton (Lincs.), i, 319 #, 320, 322, 327 Neuton, see Newton Nevill, Neville, Alan de, ii, 262 % ; Albert de, rector of Manchester, ii, 20, 113@; Alex., archbp. of York, ii, 50a, 570a; Sir Edm. de, il, 1574, 202; Sir Edw. de, ii, 198; Geoff. de, i, 325, 326; Jollan de, i, 323; Dame Maret. de, ii, 462; Lord Ralph of Raby, ii, 35 2; Rob. de, ii, 442; Rob. de of Raby, i, 326 ; family, ii, 214 New Connexion, the, ii, 87, 88 Newbarns, ii, 1224 Newbery, John, ii, 3964, 3974 Newbigging, nr. Singleton, li, 1554 Newbigging, Mr., ii, 3776 Newbold, i, 337, 340 Newbold, Thom., ii, 1060 Newporuen (Yorks.), i, 353 2; ii, 42 New Brighton, see Brighton, New Newburgh in Lathon, ii, 6204 Newburgh, Roger de, i, 358 Newby, 1, 362; ii, 126a; tithes in, li, 120 # Newby Bridge, i, 464, 474, 50a, 67a, 684, 69a Newby, John of, ii, 130d Newcastle-upon-Tyne, i, 342, 344; li, 203, 219, 221, 305; the Cow- gate, u, 4674 Newcastle-under-Lyme, _ ii, 265 ; honour of, ii, 195 Newcastle, earl of, ii, 235 7, 237 Newchurch-in-Pendle, i 1, 10; chap, li, 37 # N ewchurch-in-Rossendale, i, II, 37, 336, 4715; grammar school, ii, 5614, 6136 Newchurch, in Whalley, ii, 3784 Newchurch, nr. Bacup, li, 555 Newclose, ii, 451 Newcombe, Hen., ii, 68 2 Newey, A., ii, 4814 Newfield, i, 444, 644 New Forest, i, 1130 Newhall, ii, 460 ” ‘Newhallhey,’ ii, 460, amd see Hall, Hey, New Newhey, ii, 460 Newhouse Abbey, ii, 158 7 Newland, nr. Wakefield, ii, 102, 166 Newland, ii, 3634, 3644 Newlands (Yorks.), ii, 102 New Mills, Nonconformity in, ii, 86 189 7, A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE New Park Wood, il, 447 Newport ‘I. of Wight), i, 235 Newsham, i, 295, 335 #, 158%, and see Goosnargh Newsham, —, abbot of Cockersand, ii, 1596 Newton, i, 716, 766; ii, 250, 251, 255, 289, 3944, 3982, 457 2, 4670, 4794, 5034, 6 Newton, Higher, i, 706 Newton in Amounderness, i, 304, 307, 335 #5 li, 132 Newton in Cartmel, ii, 1472 Newton in Makerfield cr Newton le Willows, i, 1984, 216, 217, 228, 253, 366 #, 370, 372, 373, 374, 3755 li, 198, 203, 258, 348, 350, 3724, 467”, 4716, 4764, 4974, 531; barony of, i, 366; Castle Hill, ti, §31, 532,533, 534 5 chap., ii, 19; Dean school, ii, 6044, 623a, 6; manor, i, 372, 374; market and fair, i, 372, 3733 barons of, i, 368, 374, 3753 ti, 192, 213 Newton in Poulton, li, 1704, and see Hardhorn with Newton Newton, in Salford Hundred, i, 326” Newton in Winwick, li, 7 Newton in Wirral, i, 371 Newton nr. Aldcliffe or Newton in Bulk, manor of, ii, 1674, 172@; tithes of, ii, 563@; water-mill at, ii, 562a, 6, 563a, 4, 564a, 6 Newton with Scales, ii, 333 Newton chap., in Manchester, ii, 349 Newton Common, i, 57a Newton Heath, ii, 3704, 4, 3736 Newton, hundred of, i, 257, 366; ii, 7 1, 184 2 Newton Lake, ii, 532 Newton Old or Newton by Stow (Suff.}, i, 350, 354% Newton, Anselm de, i, 354 ” ; Paulin son of Rich. de, i, 372 2; Lord, li, 467 ” Newtown, ii, 4794 Nibthwaite, ii, 450 Nicholas IV, Pope, ii, 22, 1324, 1334, 134a, 200; taxation of, ii, 22, 23, 25, 200 Nicholson, Alice, ii, 6166; Francis, li, 363 2, 4oom ; James, ii, 3996; Rob., 3994, 4004 Nickson, Herbert, ii, 500a ; John, li, 5006 Nico Ditch, the, ii, 554, 555 Nigel, i, 327 Nightingale, —, ii, 478@ Ninian, ii, 1 Noble, M., ii, 4794; Rich., ii, 604@ Noel, Adam, il, 456 Nonant, Bishop Hugh of, ii, 12”, 18 Norbery, John, ii, 97, 98 Norbreck, i, 340, 342, and see Bispham Norbury, see Newborough Norbury, Gregory of, ii, 1334, 1352, 6, 139a; Rich., ii, 1394 Norcot, Sam., ii, 4074 Norfolk, duke of, ii, 123@, 217, 219 Norfolk, earl of, i, 307; Hugh Bigod, ear] of, i, 317 Norham, 1, 309, 342; ii, 185 ” Norman, Hugh, i, 359 7 Normanby, John of, ii, 1100 Normandy, Rob., duke of, i, 315, 3375 i, 167%, 181 Norrevs, Will. le, i, 328%; family, ii, 456 Norris, Anne dau. of Edward of Speke, i, 349; Roger, ii, 1054, 4, 1064, 1074, 6; Rich., il, 10a ; Sir Will, ii, 52, 53, 220, 230, 6164 North, Roger, ii, 358a ; Col.,1i, 4734 North Bnitish Locomotive Co., ii, 3724 North Scale, in the Isle of Walney, i, 228 Northallerton, i, 316 Northampton, i, 301; ii, 186%, I9I #, 385a@; statute of, i, 203 Northburgh, Roger; see Lichfield, bp. of ; Will. of, ii, 1618 Northenden (Ches.), i, 113¢, 114a, I15a, 1250; ii, 4970 Northorpe (Lincs.), i, 319 #, 323 Northumberland, duke of, ii, 562a Northumberland, earl of, ii, 123 7, 129 m, 222; Hen. (son of David, king of Scotland), earl of, i, 294 Northumberland, Will. de Vesci, sheriff of, ii, 188 Northumbria, earldom of, ii, 180, 185 Northumbria, earls of, ii, 186; Tos- tig, earl of, ii, 5, 180 Northwich (Ches.), it, 4006 Norton (Ches.), i, 298; Priory, i, 298, 328; ii, 1484, and see Run- corn Priary Norton, abbot of, i, 346 # Norton, Hen., prior of, ii, 148 ” Norton (Somers.), hundred of, i, 3 Nora, i, 105, 128; ii, 3814 Norwich Taxation, ii, 22 Norwich, Walt. Suffield, bp. of, ii, 22 Nostell, i, 314 ; abbey of St. Oswa'd of, i, 314; Priory, i, 293, 318, 372; li, 8, 10”, 124,13”, loz Nostell, canons of, i, 315; ii, 4”, 28,35 Nostell, Rich., pr or of, i, 372 Nottingham, i, 314, 318, 352; il, 5%, 190, 202, 3854, 3864, 3874, 3884 ; Castle, i, 300, 321, 363.7”; ll, 191 2; honour of, i, 293 Notton, Gilb. de, i, 320 #, 322, 330 Nowell, Alex., ii, 53, 228, 5752, 576a, 6, 77a, 578a, 6o4a, 6234 ; Rob., i:, 5764, 4; family of, ii, 290, 455 a Nuny, Will. de, ii, 1354 Nuthurst Waste, ii, 288 Nutt Hall, ii, 453 Nutt, Rich., ii, 453 Nuttal, John, u, 74; Thom., ii, 6104, 6204 Oakenclough, i, 734 Oakenrod, Rochdale, i, 221, 229, 253 pera ii, 74 Oakenshaw, Thurstan de, ii, 103 Oakley, —, ii, 489a, 4924 Occleston, John, ii, 3692 Ockelshaw, land in Abram, i, 370 Ockelshaw, Will. de, i, 370 O’Connor, Fergus, ii, 252 Ogden, ii, 3822, 4084 ; Nonconfor- mity in, il, 75 Ogden Clough, i, 224, 253 654 Ogden, Ogdeyne, Amos, ii, 4784; Jonathan, li, 3686; Roger, 1i, 57” Okeneywood, ii, 459 Olaf, King, ii, 1166, 117 2, 1266 Old Plantation, ii, 4836 Oldham, i, 15, 16, 19, 20, 23, 422, 4, 476, 696, 984, 1234, 214, 320; ii, 66 #, 92, 249, 251, 252, 307, 311, 321, 324, 325, 344, 3594, 3674, 3684, 3694, 3704, 3734, 3744, 3774, 3784, 3826, 3840, 3852, 386a, 6, 391, 3922, 3932, 4684, 4944, 5044, 6; ii, 5762, 610, 6204 ; benefice, ii, 4”; chap., li, 25 7, 35; deanery, ii, 100 ; grammar school, ii, 561¢, 5774, $89a, 610a ; Nonconformity, li, 79, 80, 82, 86, 87, 89, go; Roman Catholic deanery of, ii, 95; Waste, ii, 288 Oldham Edge, i, 9 Oldham, Bernard, archd. of Corn- wall, ti, 581a, 6; Hugh, see Exe- ter, bp. of ; James, ii, 3934; Mar- gery, li, 5814; Roger, il, 5814 Olive Mount, i, 24 Oliver, —, ii, 4994; Rob., ii, 5734 ; T., ii, 4806 Olkers, Luke, ii, 4074 Olton, Hen., ii, 152@ Onslow, Captain Arthur, ii, 247 Openshaw, i, 326%; ii, 344, 3724, 373%, 3742, 4, 3754, 3974, 398a ; Nonconformity, ti, 81 Openshaw, W. E., il, 4952 Opiliones, i, 156 Orange, Will. Prince of, ii, 242 Ordnance and armaments, ii, 374 Ordovician Age, i, 1-3 Ordsall, mills at, ii, 295 Ore, John, ii, 595@ O’Really, Bernard, ti, 94 Oregate, Gt., ii, 465 Orford, i, 218, 228, 253; Hall, in, 4674, 4854, 6 Orme the Englishman, ii, 524 Ormerod, ii, 516, 518 Ormeschurch, see Ormskirk Orme’s Head, Gt., i, 1844 ; ii, 4094 Ormond, earl of, ii, 197; James Butler, earl of, i, 352, 357 ; Lhom., earl of, ii, 1482 Ormrod, Peter, ii, 470a ; Capt., ii, 465 Ormskirk, i, 24, 434, 56a, 4, 58a, 644, 77a, 1146, 1234, 1984, 2016, 264 ; li, 15%, 70, 92, 94, 99, 103, 1494, 1514, 152a, 226, 346, 350, 3666, 4024, 419, 421, 423, 424, 436, 449, 476a, 484a, 6; advowson, il, 1484; church, ii, 6”, 77, 10”, 13%, 14, 23 #, 27, 28, 59, 14924, 4; deanery, ii,101; elementary school at, ii, 6216; grammar school, ii, 5614, 6102; Manor Waste, mills on, ii, 294; market and fair, ii, 1494, 1504 ; Nonconformity, ii, 86, 70, 79%; rectory, li, 1514; vicar- age, ll, 149@ ; vicar, ii, 27, 28, 36, 1494 Orreby, Philip de, justice of Chester, 1, 371 Orrell, i, 524, 366 # ; ii, 12a, 6, 1662, 346, 347, 350; coal pits at, ii, 292 Orrell, —, ii, 4764; Alex., ii b; John, il, 5966 ae Orthoptera, i, 108 Ortner, ii, 443 “Ortney ’ Wood, ii, 448 Orton (Cumb.), i, 25 Orton (Westmld.), church, ii, 28, 140@, 1414, 142a, 6 ; vicarage, ii, 1426 Orwike, see Horwich Osbaldeston, i, 318; ii, 337 ; Old Hall, ii, Ae Posares Osbaldeston, Sir Alex., ii, 603¢ ; Edw.,, ii, 53 Osborne, R. R., ii, 495@; Will. Alex., li, 6144, 6154 Osferth, the collector, i, 258 Osmotherley, ii, 340 Oswald, Bp., see Worcester, bp. of Oswald, King, i, 262 ; ii, 176 Oswaldbec (Notts.), i, 324 ; manor, i, 321, 325 Oswaldtwistle, ii, 337, 350; Wood and moor of, ii, 438 # Oswestry, i, 262, 263 ; li, 176% Otby (Lincs.), i, 319 % Otho, the legate, i, i, 306 Othulf, the Hold, i, 258 Ottar, the earl, i, 258 Otterspool, i, 534, 642; ii, 438 Oulton, Mr., ii, 76 ‘Our Lady’s’ Mills, ii, 294 2 Ouse, river, i, 161 Outhwaite, ii, 438 Outwood, ii, 387a, 6164; School, ii, 616@ Overton, i, 514; ii, 263 2, 286 7, 341, 550; chap., ii,18 ; Marsh, i, 56a, Overtonhargh, se¢ Ortner Owen, Edw., ii, 6026; Rich., ii, 3654; Sir Rich., i, 31; Rob., ii, 316, 3884 Owthorpe (Notts.), i, 337, 340 Oxford, i, 734, 157, 310, 316; ii, 433; College of Durham Priory, ii, 1070; college of St. Bernard at, ii, 122 2, 1384; Oriel College, ii, 1s0@; University College, ii, 1294 ; Wolsey’s College, ii, 142@ Oxford council of, ii, 14, 27 ” Oxford, earl of, ii, 215 2; Aubrey de Vere, earl, i, 300; Rob. de Vere, earl, i, 366 ; ii, 153@, 210 Oxford, Will. Jackson, bp. of, ii, 588a Oxhey Wood, ii, 462 Ringley Paddington, i, 74 Paddlesworth, Lower, Reservoir, ii, 488a Padgate, i, 73a Padiham, ii, 59, 277, 278, 280, 311, 336, 3574, 436, 455; millat, li, 275,294 ; Nonconformity at, 1i, 87 Paegnalaech, ii, 4 Page Bank, near Leece, i, 237, 255 Paget, John, ii, 61; Thom., ii, 61, 62; Sir Will., ii, 143@, 1510 Pain, knight of Will. Maltravers, i, 315 Pain, Theobald, i, 350 # Painter, Edw., ii, 499 ; Nehemiah, ii, 5862 Palaeolithic Man, i, 27 ; implements, i, 27 Palaeontology, i, 31 Paldenlegh, ii, 1144 Pale Dyke, ii, 454 Palk, Rob., ii, 4056 Pallett, — , ti, 4924 Palmer, —, li, 4884 ; Ann, ii, 6206 ; Sir Roger, 1 li, 232, ‘and see Paumer INDEX Palmerston, Lord, ii, 251, 253, 254 Pandulf, the legate, | ii, 1056 Panell, Will. + il, 146@ Paper ‘Industry, ii, 407 Papplewick (Notts.), ii, 352@, 3864 Parbold, i, 112a, 116, 1184, 326 7, 327, 330 ; li, 338, 3676 Paris aes (Anglesey), ii, 3524, 355 Park Bridge, i, 634, 784, 794 Park Fell, i, 564 Parker, —, ii, 53 2; Bryan, ii, 228 ; Edw,, ii, 97, 98; Gylbert, il, 98 ; James, it, 453 ; John, ii, 453, 6044, 6184; Matthew, archbp. of Canter- bury, ii, 606¢; Rich., il, 449; Rob., ii, 608@ ; Hon. S., ii, 4954 Parkes, Alex., ii, 402a Parkfield, i, 646 Parkinson, Chris., ii, 6174; C. D., ii, 499@; Edw., ii, 452; Thom., lil, 452, 6236; W., i, 52a,550 Parkside, i, 454, 716 Parliamentary representation, ii, 197, 250, 251, 255, 299 Parlick Pike, i, 824 ; ii, 438 Parr, ii, 346; Moss, i, 67a Parre, Parr, John de, ii, 1360; Rich., see Man, bp. of; Sir Thom., ii, 142a Parry, Seaton & Co., ii, 3866 Parsons, —, a Jesuit, li, 55, 573 Chris., rector of Slaidburn, ii, 1374, 6 Part, Will. ii, 6224, Partington, Joshua, ii, 5655 Partrik or Patrik, Will., ii, 108d, 109@, 1100 Paslew, John, ii, 44, 1376, 1384, 1394 Paterson, Patterson, D. J. ii, 475 % ; W. S., ii, 4902 Paton, John Lewis, ii, 589@ Patricroft, i, 19 ; ii, 373@, 0, 3746 Patshull, church of, ii, 164 Patshull, Martin de, i, 324 Patten, —, il, 475@; Andrew, ii, 4004 Patterdale, i, 365 Patton, ii, 1426 Paul, —, li, 245, 4892; Lewis, ii, 3852, 4, 3870, Paumer, Ralph le, i, 323 Payne, Edw., ii, 565@; J. H., ii, 4952; Will, ii, 1462 Peacock, —y, il, 474@, 477a; Rich., ii, 373@; Thom., ii, 394@; Dr. sii, 4992 Peak, the, i, 105 ; ii, 271, 355@ Peak, High, castle and manor of, ii, 207 Pearn, Frank & Co., ii, 3744 Peasants’ Revolt, the, ii, 210, 286 Peche, Hamon, i, 350; Rich., bp. of Chester, ii, 9 ; Rich. de, i, 299 Pedder, —, ii, 475; J., ii, 476a Peel, Old Hall, ii, 5992, and see Hulton, Little Peel, the, in Heaton Norris, ii, 547, 548, 550 Peel of Foudrey, the, see Fouldrey, the Peel of Peel, —, ii, 432, 4902, 6 ; Hon. Geo., ii, 3954; Lawrence, ii, 3976; Rob., ti, 3874, 3882, 3962, 4, 3974, b; Sir ’Rob., li, 251, 319, 3964, 3974, 430; Capt., ii, 248, and see Pele Peeters, Maurice, ii, 380 Peile, —, ii, 5952 Pekard, brother Rich., ti, 103, 1614 655 Pele, Rob., ii, 131@ ; Roger, ii, 1224, 123a, 6, 124a, 6, 125a, 126a, 1284, and see Peel Pelecypoda, i, 99 Pemberton, i, 366%; ii, 348, 350 Pemberton, Sir James, ii, 609 Pembroke, earls of, i, 354, 368; ii, 145, 193, 221%; Aymer de Valence, earl of, ii, 145 2 ; Gilb. Marshal, earl of, ii, 145@; Rich. Marshal, earl of, ii, 145@; Walt. Marshall, earl of, i, 307, 312; Will. Marshall, earl, i, 324, 354; ii, 1436, 1444, 6, 1472 Penda, king of, Mercia, i, 263 ; ii, 175 Pendilton, Edw., ii, 5792, 5840 Pendle, i, II, 216, 217, 228, 254 ; li, 201, 287 2, 3600, 420, 455, 456, 459, 460, 461; chase of, il, 457,458, 459; coal mines in foresi, ii, 292; forest, i, 257; ii, 268, 269, 292, 293, 294, 453, 454, 4555, 457, 458, 459, 4674, 514; mill in forest, ii, 294 ; master of forestry, ii, 203 Pendle Hill, i, 7, 8, 37, 54a, 594, 68a, 4, 694, 70a, 6, 714, b, 73a, 754, 76a, 786, 836, 1934 5 il, 454, 482a ; Nonconformity, ii, 75 Pendle Range, i, 11, 20 ‘Pendle, Nick of,’ 1, 10; ii, 281 z Pendlebury, i, 133@, 1414; ii, 343, 3562, 3874, 3986 Pendlebury, Ellis de, i, 328 2; Hen., ii, 575@ ; John, ii, 5974 Pendleton, i, 17, 19, 454, 462, 97, 102 #, 105, 111, 1370, 1394, 296 2 ; ii, 276 2, 277, 290, 33s 343, 3562, 3982, 3992, 408a, 4, 453, 455; Wood, il, 455 Penhull, see Pendle Penketh, i, 338, 340, 341, 342, 347 5 ii, 346; Nonconformity, ii, 80 Penketh, Friar, ii, 163 2 Pennant, —, ii, 488a, 540 Pennine Range, i, 55a, 190, 207; il, 3, 4, 3510 Pennington, i, 219, 229, 255, 261 ; li, 8, 100, IOI, 1204, 340, 346, 550, 5555 556, 6114, 615a; Castle Hill, 1, 2193 li, 555, 5563 church, ii, 62, 10%, 11, 13 2, 23, 1282, I40a, 141a, 6; manor, ti, 120a, 140a, 556; rectory, ii, 16, 24 Pennington Beck, ii, 556 Pennington, Alan de, i, 324 ”; ii, 140”, 439; Benet de, ii, 140”; Gamel, de, ii, 10%, 1404; Jocelin of, ii, 1306; Maldred, son of Gamel de, ii, 1404; Will. of, ii, 120a@; Sir Will, ii, 556 ; family of, li, 556 Penny Bridge, i, 46a Penny, Ric., ii, 450 Penrith, ii, 244 ” Penry, —, ii, 228 Penswick, Thom., ii, 93 7 Penulbury, see Pendlebury Penwortham, i, 292, 303, 304, 306, 309, 314, 335, 336, 3713 ii, 25, 99, 1044, 106a, 1576, 181 #, 183, I9I %, 197, 202, 289, 338, 419, 452, 520, 522, 533; barony, i, 312, 313, 335) 3305 il, 77, 192; Castle, li, 520, 533, 534, 535; Chase, ii, 458; church, i, 250, 335 3 ii, 6n, 7, 10%, 12, 13, 14, 18, 23 2, 28, 39, Io4a, 1054, 1064 ; court of, li, 3560 ; fisheries, ii, 295 ; A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Penwortham (con?.) honour or lordship, i, 302, 371; manor, ii, 1056; Moss, ii, 290; mount, ii, 543; Priory, ii, lon, 13 2,27 , 102, 104, 1054, 1074; rectory, ii, 1054, 106a; schools, ii, 298, 561a, 6050 Penwortham, monk of, ii, 29 Penwortham, prior of, i, 371; ii, 14 %, 31m, 108m”, 203%; Hen., prior of, ii, 1064; John, prior of, il, 1064 ; Maurice, prior of, ii, 104 7 ; Reginald, abbot of, ii, 104a; Rob., prior of, ii, 104a ; Roger, prior of, ii, 106 ; Thom., prior of, ii, 1064 Penwortham, steward of, ii, 203 2 Percival, —, ii, 4766, 4774; Sir John, Lord Mayor, ii, 5802; Thom., ii, 5752 Percy, Hen., ii, 212; Will. de, i, 317, 367 Periton (Oxf.), i, 328, 329 ; church, i, 298 ; manor, i, 333 Permian Age, i, 23 Perrin, Isaac, ii, 499@ Person, Thom., i, 146” Pestilence, the, see Black Death Peterborough Abbey, ii, 128 Peterloo, massacre of, ii, 249 Petre, bishop, ii, 93 Petre, Francis, ii, 93 #; Mr., il, 6244, and see Stourton and Petre Petyt, Will., ii, 379 7 Pevensey, castle of, ii, 207 2 Peverel, honor or fee of, i, 292, 293 ; ii, 184” Peverel, Will., i, 293, 295 ; li, 184 Peyle alas Picke, —, il, 53 Pfeiffer, Peter, ii, 4074 Phaenogamia, i, 42 Philip, King, ii, 1474, 226, 5646 Philip of France, i, 309, 310 Philip, king of Spain, li, 226 Phillips, Phelips, —, ii, 49ta; Sir Edw., ii, 59; James, li, 4924; J. L, ii, 247; Samuel John, ii, 6146; Shakespeare, il, 248; Thom. & Co., ti, 394; & Lea, Messrs., ii, 3864 Phyton, see Fitton Piccop, Joseph, ii, 74, 75 Pickering, honour of, ii, 195 Pickford, A. G., il, 6104 Pickup Bank, ii, 336, avd see Hod- dlesden Pictavensis, see Poitou Piel, i, 87, 92, 96, 160, 163, 169, 170, 171,172, 173, 174, 175, 1854, 1864, 1874 ; 11, 412a, 4156, 4164, 4176; Castle, i, 66a, and see Fouldrey Piel Island, i, 66a, 165, 166, 188@ Pierpont, Rich. de, 1, 330; il, 262”; Thom., i, 325 7 Piethorne, nr. Rochdale, 1, 236, 238, 253 Pievre, Robert de, ii, 456” Pigeon Flying, li, 4684 Pigott, Hen., ii, 619@ Pike, Low, i, 11 Pilgrim-cross-shaw, ii, 454 Pilgrimage of Grace, ii, 124@, 1374, 138a, 1464, 151a, 1674, 6, 217, 219 Pilkington, i, 574, 634, 694, 326, 330; i, 3443; manor, ii, 215, 292 Pilkington, Alex., de, i, 324 2, 330; James, see Durham, bp. of ; J.,ii, Pilkington, Alex., de ‘cont.) 247; L., ii, 475, 4784; Roger, de, i, 330; Sir Thom., ii, 215; W. Lee, ii, 4814 ; Messrs. ii, 4060 Pilling, i, 46a, 474, 48a, 544, 58a, 726, 774, 6; ii, 1554, 158%, 3325 4724 ; chapel, ii, 18, 103; Hay, il, 1546; Moss, i, 532, 133@, 134@, 1374, 142a@, 204a, 212, 218, 228, 247) 253 Pilling, —, ii, 4892, 4904, 6, 4914, b ; Ralph, ii, 6112 Pilsworth, 1, 420, 319 # ; li, 344 Pimbowe Park, ii, 456 Pimlico, nr. Clitheroe, ii, 3552 Pincanheal, ii, 4 Pinder, —, ii, 491@ Pin-making, ii, 3650 Pirton, see Periton Pius V, Pope, ii, 52, 54; WI, Pope, li, 5924 Plankton, i, 93 Plantaganet, John see Lancaster, duke of; Hen., i, 296, and see Lancaster, earl of; Thom., i, 312, and see Lancaster, earl of, and Leicester, earl of ; family of, ii, 4674 Platt, Nonconformity in, ii, 68 2, 69 Platt, Hen., ii, 3694 ; John, ii, 3692 ; Joseph, ii, 3694; Peter, ii, 358@ Pleasington, ii, 288, 337 Pleasington, Plesington, John de, il, 456; Thom., ii, 5844, 585a; Will., li, 5814 Pleistocene Period, i, 25, 31 Plot, Dr., ii, 363@ Plumb, —, ii, 491@; John, ii, 3662, 597 Plumpton, i, 42a, 504, 55a, 562, 626; ii,92; Peat Moss, i, 444, 59a; Woods, i, 500 Plumpton, Alice dau. of Sir Will. de, i, 345 ; Plumtree, James, li, 585a; Will., ti, 6010, 6024 Pluralities and Pluralists, ii, 21, 32 Plymouth, 1, 1134, 309 Plymouth brethren, the, ii, 92 Plymstock (Devon), i, 235 Pocket Nook, ii, 406é Pococke, Dr. Rich., ii, 358a, 4044 Poidevin, L.O.S., ii, 489, 4934 Poinz, Reg. de, i, 354 Poitou, Mabel, countess of, ii, 1674 ; Roger of, 1, 291, 292, 293, 294, 295, 297, 298, 312, 313, 314, 327, 337 511, 4,6, 8, 10, 11, 1044, 167¢, 168a, 6, 169a, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 437, 454, 524 Polesland, John, ii, 98 Political History, ti, 175 Pollard, Sir Lewis, ii, 5834; Ric., N, 453 Pollesworth, nuns of, i, 367” Polo, ii, 468a, 481 Ponsonby (Cumb.), church of, ii, 1406 Pont, —, ii, 4776 Pontefract, i, 314; ii, 201, 202%, 281, 282, 456%; castle of, i, 300, 301, 304, 309%, 313, 314, 3167; church of St. Clement in castle, i, 313; honour or lordship, i, 300, 301, 304, 309, 314, 315, 316, 317, "318, 319, 320, 369 ; ii, 10”, 1374, 184, 190; hospital of White Friars, i, 307; manor, i, 307; Priory, i, 291, 314, 315, 316; ii, Ion, 18”, 133a, 6; monks of, 656 Pontefract (comt.) ; i, 318; warden of St. Nicholas hospital of, ii, 164 ” Pontone, see Poulton by Pulford Poole, Pool, A.L., ii, 4964; Daniel, ii, 4964; Sir John, of Poole Hall, i, 347; Josiah, ii, 4034, 405@; Simon del, i,303 ; Will of Wirrall, i, 3475 il, 213% . ” Pooley, —, ii, 491@; Major J., ii, 248 Pope, the, i, 311; ii, 33, 223 Popplewell, Ann, ii, 599@; John, ii, 5994a; Rebecca, li, 5994 Population, returns of, ii, 209, 330 Port Erin, i, 87, 96”, 102, 111, 174 Portfield, ii, 463, 511, 512, 516 Portslade, manor of (Sussex), 1, 332 Portsmouth (Hants), i, 342; ii, 194 Postlethwayt, ii, 3814 Potter, —, ii, 502a, 503a, 6: C. and J. G., ii, 4074, 4082; Edm, ii, 3976; Thom., ii, 406a Pottery and Potteries, i, 28, 259; ii, 261, 403, 404, 511, 532, $42 Potton (Northants), manor of, i, 332 Potts, —, ii, 4808 Poulton, i, 26; ii, 290 Poulton in Lonsdale, ii, 1404, 1424, 341, 622a; chapel, ii, 622a; school, ii, 622a Poulton-le-Fylde, ii, 30%, 100, 103, 132a, 1676, 168, 169”, 1704, 171a, 172a, 285, 288, 334, 350, 6206 ; advowson, ii, 1674, 1682, d, 1694 ; appropriation of church, ii, 1694, 1716 ; church, i, 353 ; ii, 6, 7,8, lon, 11, 13%, 18, 23, 29, Igt #2; rectory, ii, 153%; tithes in, ii, 154%, 1700; vicarage, ii, 35, 153%, 169a Poulton or Poulton with Fearnhead, i, 366 2, 372; ii, 347, 550 Poulton by Pulford (Ches.), i, 338 Poulton, Rob., ii, 157a, 1594; Thom., ii, 1564 Powell, —, li, 573@; Eliz., ii, 1626 Power, John, ii, 1068 Praers, Roger de, i, 304 Prees, i, 304, 335 #3; il, 176 Prees, Will. de, 1, 304 Preesall, Preesall with Hackensall, i, 24, 434, 484, 49a, 544, 65a, 714, 6 ; il, 190 2, 333, 3544, 4,554 Premonstratensian Canons, i, 321, 352, 360; ii, 102, 154, 1700 Prémontré, abbot of, li, 158a, 6 160” Prendergast, Gerald de, i, 354 Presbyterians, li, 64, 65, 66, 71, 72, 73, 243, 244 Prescot, i, 32, 136a, 298; ii, 34, 57%, 59, 99, 346, 3534, 4, 3542, 3664, 6, 3672, 6, 4o4a, 4052, 423, 433, 436, 456, 4794, 4976 ; advow- son and appropriation of church, li, 35; church, ii, 6”, 7m, 109, 237, 35, 50, 457; deanery, ii, Iol; grammar school at, ii, 298, 561a, 5786; Nonconformity at, i, 69, 86; rectory, ii, 22, 32; vicarage, ii, 35 Prescot, curate and parson of, ii, 50, 262m; rectors of, ii, 36 Prescot, Prescott, Peter, ii, 1114, 1126: Capt., il, 4676 Prestatyn (co. Flint), i, 369, 370; castle, i, 369; ii, 189; manor, i. 369, 372 Prestolee, nr. Bolton, ii, 3862 Preston, i, 31, 424, 604, 71a, 72a, 746, 754, 6, 982, 6, 994, 103, 104, 105, 112, 113@, 114a, 6, 115a, 127, 128, 130a, 4, 131a, 4, 132a, 4, 133@, 4, 134a, 6, 135a, 1362, 4, 137a, 6, 138a, 6, 139a, 4, 141d, 142a, 6, 185a, 190, 1964, 211, 212, 220, 229, 249, 250, 253, 314, 335, 352, 3585 il, 7, 8, 17 #, 21, 24, 30, 33 % 43, 44, 57%, 64, 93%, 00, 102, 103, 147a, 162a, 180, 189, 190, 199, 202 #, 226, 237, 239, 240, 244, 245, 248, 252, 258m, 264, 265, 267%, 272, 277, 278, 284, 285, 290, 293, 297, 299, 308, 312, 313, 319, 334, 338%, 361a, 3742, 3794, 3854, 3862, 3914, 3922, 4156, 4174, 419, 420, 424 #, 4262, 430, 433, 436, 440, 441, 444, 456%, 4676, 4694, 4714, 476a, 4824, 4834. 4944, 4982, 5030, 520, 536, 548, 554, 561a, 5694, 5702, 6, 572%, 6056 ; advowson of, ii, 11, 12, 32, 137a, 1670, 168a, b; appropria- tion of church, ii, 27; borough of, ii, 197, 250; castle, ii, 520; chantries, ii, 570a, 5, 571a,0; chapel of St. Mary Magdalene, ii, 17, 29, 163a, 6, 164a, 6, 445; church of, i, 291, 353 ; ii, 6 2, 10 2, 23, 163@, 191%, 570@, 4, 5714 ; Cuerden Hall, i, 98¢; deanery of, ii, 100; docks, i, 206; fair, ii, 281, 283, 293; friary, ii, 1614, 1622, 6, 163@, 164a@: gild, ii, 283; grammar school, ii, 34, 298, 569 ; Harris Institute, ii, 5734, 574.05 hospital of St. Mary Magdalen, ii, 20 #, 37, 102, 1062, 1625, 163,164, 537; hundred of, li, 231 ; manor of, ii, 286 ; Moor, ii, 479@; Non- conformity, ii, 71, 76, 78, 80, 86, 87, 89, 90; rectory of, li, 21, 32, 137@2; Roman Catholic deanery, li,95 ; Stonygate, ii, 5724; tithes of, li, 1674; vicarage of, ii, 27, 1374, 5735 Preston, chantry priests of, ii, 34 ; Friars Minor of, ii, 441 ; mayor, bailiffs, and burgesses of, ii, 97, 137 %, 293, 437) 440, 444, 5704, 6 ; rector of, ii, 177%, 30, 32, 1636, 1704 ; schoolmaster of, li, 1636 Preston, Philip, warden of friary of, ii, 1626 Preston, Will, warden of St. Mary Magdalene’s hospital of, ii, 164@ Preston Wives, i, 484 Preston(Patrick)(Westmld.),religious house of, ii, 157 Preston, Adam de, i, 304 ; ii, 1644; Hugh de, ii, 164 2; John, ii, 97, 1596; Nich., ii, 570@; Ric., ii, 1464, 147a, 1486 ; Thom., ii, 451, 5704, 6110; family of, ii, 162a Prestsone, Rob. son of Jordan le, ii, 199 Prestwich, i, 19, 444, 454, 48a, 69a, 4, 726, 730, 766, 984, 1154, 4; li, 25 2, 37%, 48, 99, 200%, 289, 344, 3984, 0, 4990, 554, 5762, 5850 ; Castle Hill, ii, 554; chantry, ii, 97; church, ii, 6”, 7%, 23 2, 50, 97, 5746, 586a; deanery of, ii, 100; rectory of, ii, 64; rector of, ii, 50, 54%, 59%, 61, 5814, 5862 Prestwich Clough, i, 1970 Prestwich, Alice wid. of Adam de, ii, 200 2; Rob., ii, 50, 5794 2 INDEX Priest Booth, nr. Bacup, ii, 3614 Priest Hutton, i, 357 2; ii, 342 Primitive Methodists, ii, 88, gt Printing, ii, 408 Procter, Chris., ii, 566a, 6, 567@ Prowett, Thom., ii, 1646 Pryke, W. E., ii, 569¢ ‘Prymerosefeld,’ ii, 460 Pudsey, Hugh, see Durham, bp. of Puffin Island, i, 95, 96 Pule Hill, i, 10, 11 Pullbeck, nr. Ambleside, i, 3 Pulteney, David, ii, 5732 Pulton, i, 338; abbey, i, 338, avd see Dieulacres Punchardun, John, i, 303 Purcell, Reynold, i, 337 Puritanism, ii, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 228, 229, 232, 236 Purnall, Will., ii, 587¢, Pursnooke, ii, 451 Purvey, John, ii, 98 Pwllheli, i, 183 ; ti, 415d Pyatt, John, ii, 3670 Pykehod, Will. ii, 120@ Pypard, John, i, 357 6, 588a Quakers, see Society of Friends Quarlemore, see Quernmore Quarlton, ii, 342, 470d Quarmore, see Quernmore Quarr, abbot of, ii, 115¢ Quay, New, ii, 4154 Quernmore, i, 62a, 77a, 226, 229, 253; li, 341, 448 ; Common, ii, 292; forest of, ii, 1700, 199 7, 230, 437, 438, 442, 443, 444, 445, 446, 447, 467@ ; Park, i, 494; il, 443, 444: 445, 446, 447, 452, 4826 Quincy, Quinci, Hawise wife of Rob., i, 306; Marg. de, i, 306, 307 : Rob. de, i i, 306, 312 Raby, Will. de, ii, 1634 Rachedale, see Rochdale Racing, ii, 4674, 468a, 479 Radcliffe, i, 694, 215, 228, 253; i, 7, 48, 50%, 99, 296, 344, 382, 4, 3924, 3986; church, ii, 62, 7m, 22; manor of, ii, 194; Non- conformity, ii, 80, 87; rectory, ii, 32, 5754 Radcliffe on Soar, advowson of, ii, 150a@ ; rectory, ii, 1574, 152” Radcliffe, —, ii, 492@; Adam de, ii, 198, 438 2, 456; Alex. de, ii, 619a; Sir Alex., ii, 234, 5834; Joan dau. of Will. de, i, 374; John and John de, ii, 203, 456, 5804, 5812; Ralph de, ii, 210; Ric. de, ii, 212; Rob. de, ii, 2052; Sam., ii, 606a; Will, ii, 97, 3846; Sir Will, ii, 220; family, ii, 456 Radcot Bridge (Oxf.), ii, 210 Radholme, ii, 454, 455; Park, ii, 457, 458 Railways, il, 307, 308 Rainfall, i, 30 Rainford, 1, 70a, 75a, 774, 780, 840, 85a, 1974 ;, li, 346, 350, 4042, 550; chap. ii, 68%; Moss, i, 64a, 674, 6, 68a, b, 69a, 726, 735, 740, 770; Nonconformity, i ii, 70 Rainford, Hugh, ii, 152@ 657 Rainhill, i, 474, 72a, 107, 109, 1092, I10a, 6, 1124, 113@, 1384, 298, 303; ti, 346, 3664, 429; Cop- holt Common, ii, 290 Rainow, ii, 3678 Rainshough Hill, Prestwich, ii, 554 Rake Brook Reservoir, ii, 488a Rakehead, nr. Stocksteads, li, 3612 Rampside, i, i, 440, 534, 574, 227, 229, 2553 li, 78; Wood, li, 45t Ramsbottom, i i, 11, 3974, 3984, 408a, 4700 ; Nonconformity, il, 72 Ramsden, i, 215, 253 Ramsden Clough, 1, 11 Ramsgreave, ii, 337; 454) 455, 457, 460 2 ; Wood, ii, 462 Randell, C., ii, 4754, 4784 Randolfbooth, ii, 458, 460 2 Ranicars, John, li, 611a Ranjitsinhji, K. S., ii, 4g0a, 492@ Ranulf, the clerk, 1, 339 Raper, —, ii, 478@ Ratchers, the, i, 11 Ratcliffe, Ratclyff, Chas., ii, 3662 ; Rycherd, ii, 97 ; Will, ii, 503@ Rathband, Will, ii, 63 Raven Winder, i, 55a Raven, James, ii, 5894 Ravenhead, ii, 3526, 4054 Ravenkil, see Ragnald Ravensbarrow Hole, i, 31 Ravenscar Wood, ii, 465 Ravensdale, ii, 201 7 Ravenstonedale, i, 38 Rawcliffe, i, 246, 350, 3553 603; Hall, ii, 6034 Rawcliffe, Middle, i i, 3507 Rawcliffe Moss, i, 69a Rawcliffe, Out, 1, 350 2, 356; ii, 333, 603a Rawcliffe and Upper Rawcliffe with Tarnacre, i, 357, 361 ; ii, 334 Rawdon or Heatton, Baptist church, ii, 76 Rawlinson, Rawlingson, Daniel, ii, 6084; John, ii, 451; Thom., ii, 450; Will., ii, 3634, 364a; Widow, ii, 450 Rawne Tree Carr, ii, 447 Rawson, Benjamin & Co., ii, 4004 Rawstorne, Raustorne, —, 475@; Lawr., ii, 97, 1572; Rob., ii, 6026 Rawtenstall, i, 11; ii, 321, 3924, 3984, 458, 459, 460%; Noncon- formity, ii, 69, 75, 87 Rawthey, River, i, 38 Ray, Rey, John, 6) ii, 1694, 1720 Raynton, Rich., ti, 5852 Read, i, 229, 237, 253; ii, 336; manor, ii, 1384, 290; Moor, ii, 290 ; school, ii, 6234 Read, Will., ii, 1398 Reading Abbey, i, 338 Readycon Dean, 1, 215, 228, 253 Reake Mosses, i, 464 Rebecca Hill, near Ulverston, i, 2, 4 Recusancy, ii, 56, 224, 225, 229 Red Moss, Rossendale, i, 261, 262 Red Rock, ii, 498d Red Scar, i, 105 Red Water Brook, i, 11 Redbank, i, 244, 246, 253 Reddaway, Messrs. F., il, 4085 Reddiche, John, of Reddiche, ii, 583a Reddish, i, 46a, 4, 48a, 554, 564, 614, 62a, 65a, 674, 74a, 770, 794, b, 80a ; 3 li, 344, 350, 550, 554; Wood, i, 630 Reddish’ Canal, i, 794 Redditch, ii, 91, 5864 ii, 4724, 83 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Rede, John, ii, go; Wil., li, 124 Redhalowes, ii, 459, avd see RKeed- ley Hallows ‘Redlaihalghes,’ see Reedley Hal- lows Redman, Hen. de, ii, 1474, I91 %, 193 2, 439; Matth. de, il, 197 ; Norman son of Hen. de, i, 363 7 ; Rich. ii, 156a, 6, 1584, 161”; family, ii, 190 Redufus, John, ii, 172 ” Redvales, li, 4974 Reed, T. L., ii, 475 #; Mr., ti, 429 Reedley Hallows, 1i, 335 7, 336, 448 Reformation, the, i, 44, 45, 48 Reginald, king of Man, il, 117a, 6 Regular Canons, institution of, ii, 20 Reio (Reo,, Will. de, ii, 1724 Religious Houses of Lancashire, the, il, 102 ; establishment of, ii, 262, 263 Renouf, F. G., ii, 498¢ Renricke, James, ii, 5750 Renshall, Will., ii, 3942 Reptiles and Batrachians, i, 188 Revidge, i, 242, 243, 246, 2513 ii, 86 9 Rewley, abbot of, 1i, 1348 Rhode, Baptist church, il, 75 Rhopalocera, i, 128 Rhuddlan, i, 367; castle, i, 367, 369 ; manor, 1, 367 Rhuddlan, Robert de, 1, 367, 369 Rhydderch, of Alclud, King, ii, 1 Rhyl, ii, 4136 Ribble, River, i, 23, 26, 30, 37, 38, 42a, 454, 52a; 89, 90, 95, 104, I1g4a, 115d, 1214, 158, 161, 162, 167, 169, 179, 183a, 184a, 186a, 187a, 189, 190, 199a, 4, 2022, 6, 206, 2086 ; i, 233, 236, 238, 239, 253, 258, 314, 320; Il, 3, 5, 115a, 472a, 487a, 6, 488a, 496, 520, 523, 533, 5375 fishery of, ii, 1044, 106a ; lands, north of, 1, 293, 294 ; Ny 4, 5, 7) 9, 12, 23 %, 37, 40%, 59, 1510, 419, 548; land south of, ii, 4, 8, 12, 24, 99, 1574, 419 Ribble and Carlisle, lands between, il, 185 Ribble and Cocker, land between, li, 3, 420 Ribble and Mersey, lands between, i, 291, 293, 294, 296, 297, 298, 320, 328, 337, 340, 3415 ii, 3, 4, 5) 6, 7,9, 104m, 1130, 177, 178, 179, 180, 181, 183, 184, 186, 187, 189, 193, 194, 195, 441 Ribble, bridge of, chapel by, ii, 103 Ribblesdale, ii, 43, 185 Ribblesdale, Lord, ii, 4704 Ribbleton, i, 752; ii, 334; moor, i, 46a, 476, 516, 52a Ribbleton Scales, ii, 440 Ribby, Ribby with Wrea, ii, 277, 278, 333, 4714 ; lordship, ii, 289 ; school, ii, 618a ; Waste, ii, 290 ” Ribchester, i, 1124, 131a, 1354, 260, 313, 319; ii, 8, 17, 37 7, 100, 1664, 184, 200, 284, 285, 334, 337, 454, 516, 519 ; church, ii, 6 7, 23 ”, 64; Roman fortress at, ii, 5533 rector, li, 37 Rich, Ric., ii, 106 2 Richard I, King, i, 295, 296, 299, 339, 352. 361, 362, 369; ii, 11, 105d, 1184, 1436, 189, 190, 263, 438, 439 Richard II, il, 1134, 11g”, I50a, 1554, I71@, 208, 209, 210 Richard III, ii, 122 #, 1376 Richard, John, ii, 5734 Richards, John, ii, 5864, 5874 Richardson, —, ii, 490a; Alex., ii, 124a; Matt., ii, 451; Will, ii, 452; Mr., ii, 252 Richmond, archdeaconry of, ii, 3, 9, 10, 13, 16, 19, 23, 24, 27, 32, 40, 41, 42, 100, 141d, 1694, joa Richmond, archdeacons Of, ii, 9, 12, 14, 33, 35s 36, 41, 99, 1084, 109 2, 110 #, 131, I41a, 6, 142 2, 148 2, 1694, 285 ; Chris. Urswick, archd. of, ii, 1454; Elias de, archd. of, ii, 33 ; Francesco Gactani, archd. of, ii, 33 ; Gerard de Vyspeyns, archd. of, ii, 33 ; Honorius, archd. of, ii, 107 #, 141 #; James, archd., ii, 38; John le Romeyn, archd., li, 21, 1§5a, 169@; John Sher- wood, archd. of, ii, 562 #2; Morgan archd. of, ii, 107 2; Roger of St. Edmund, archd. of, ii, 1076 ; Will., archd., ii, 155@, and see Conan the archd. Richmond, earldom and honour of, i, 321%, 358; ii, 207 % Richmond, countess of, ii, 282; Marg. Beaufort, countess, ii, 215 ; Earl, ii, 215 ; Count Alan of, ii, 9; Hen. (illegitimate son of Hen. VIII), duke of, ii, 1406; John of Gaunt, Earl, 11, 207 Richmond, fee of, i, 365 Ricketts, I., ii, 489@ Ridding Chapel, the, i, 19 ”, and see Knowsley, chapel Riddings Wood, ii, 464 Rider, Jos., ii, 3676; Thom., ii, 3676 Ridgate, ii, 1514; hospital, ii, 1510 Ridgmount, ii, 476@ Ridgway, ii, 476a Ridgway, ~~? ii, 4754, 4766 ; Jos., li, 476a ; T., li, 476a Ridley, John, ii, 146 ”, 147@ Rievaulx Abbey, ii, 1164, 1286 Rievaulx, Ailred of, ii, 1154, 116 2 Rigby, —, ii, 474@; Alex., ii, 228, 232, 234, 235; Will., ii, 4o08a; Capt., ii, 243 # ; Col., ti, 237, 238 Rigge, Will., il, 1244 ‘Rigges,’ li, 563@ Right, Capt., il, 243 2 Rigmaden, i, 38 Rigmayden, Rigmaiden, —, ii, 56%, 456; John, ii, 53, 97, 446; Walt., 11, 6094 Rigodunum, i, 246 Riley, ii, 458 Riley, J. & J, ii, 4086 Rimmington, i, 29 Ringley, ii, 62; chapelry, ii, 6162 ; school, ti, 5616, 616a; Wood, i, 11246, 1176, 119a, 122a, 5 Ripon, ii, 5024 ; church, ii, 2; dio- cese, ii, IOI Risby (Suff.), i, 326 7, 331 Rishton, i, 304 ; ii, 337, 350 Rishton, Edw., ii, 55 ; Gilb. son of Hen. de, i, 304 Rishton Thornes, see Rusketon Thornes Rising, ii, 458 Risley, i, 229, 237, 253; Moor, i, joa; Moss, i, 105, 112a; Non- conformity, ii, 72 Rivers, John son of Rich. de, ii, 1645 658 Riversvale, i, 98a, 6 Rivington, i, 494, 1134, 144@; ii, 339 , 342, 356a, 4826 ; chapel, chapelry, ii, 37 #, 66”, 68 ”; gram- mar school, ii, 5614, 6064; Non- conformity, ii, 69 ; Pike, i, to, 11; Reservoirs, ii, 488a Rixton, Rixton with Glaze Brook, i, 230, 237, 253, 340; I, 290, 347, 548,550 . Rixton Moss, 1, 122a ; i, 482a Rixton, Alan de, i, 340; Hen., rec- tor of Leigh, ti, 32; Rich. de, i, 345 Roa Island, i, 1814, 1826 ; ii, 417@ Roads, ancient, ii, 281, 512, 514, 516, 523, 534, 5375 54% 555 Robert the Falconer, 1, 359 # Robert, steward of the earl of Ches- ter, 1, 367 Robert, a necromancer, ii, 1504 Robert, duke of Normandy, see Normandy Roberts, Chris., ii, 3964, 397@; Lewis, ii, 301, 379@, 3800, 3816; Ric., ii, 3534, 371a, 6; Will., ii, 4054 Robin Hood’s Bed, i, 215, 253 Robinson, —, ii, 489a, 4914, §72a; Daniel & Sons, ii, 3944 ; Eliz., ii, 50; Geo., ii, 4074 ; G., ii, 475 a, John, ii, 3716; Thom. & Sons, li, 3743 Robinsons, Messrs., ii, 3860 Roby, i, 694, 71a, 168, 171 ; ii, 345, 246 ; manor, 1, 298 Roby, Will, ii, 70, 71 Roch, River, i, 221 ; ii, §20, 538 Rochdale, i, 20, 23, 28, 694, 70a, 726, 77a, I11a, 194d, 211, 214, 215, 218, 306, 313; li, 7, 15 4, 18, 34, 37, 52, 58, 61 2, 99, 132, 133 #2, 1386, 202, 250, 251, 252, 254, 296, 297, 303, 307, 317, 318, 321, 324, 345, 3562, 3614, 3684, 3694, 3714, 3746, 3764, 3770, 3784, 6, 392a, 3934, 6, 399, 4084, 4696, 4716, 4766, 497, 520, 537, 6120; castle, ii, 538, 539; chapel, ii, 606a ; chase, ii, 458 ; church, i, 302; ii, 6%, 7”, 10, 14%, 17, 23 #, 50,1380; deanery, li, 100 ; grammar school, ii, 5614, 6062 ; liberty, i, 300, 302; lord- ship, i, 312; market and fair, i, 307 ; ii, 281 ; Nonconformity, ii, 69, 75, 76 n, 80, 86, 87, 90, QI ; rectory, ii, 132@a, 6064; Roman Catholic deanery, ii, 95 ; tithes, ii, 19, 99 #, 6062 ; vicarage, ii, 29, 32 Rochdale, schoolmaster of, ii, 58 ; vicar, li, 14, 28, 50”, 135%, 6064 Rochdale Saddleworth (Yorks.), ii, 5 Roches, Aymer des, ii, 17%; Peter des, i, 306; ii, 21 Rochester (Kent), ii, 55, 193 ; castle, i, 362 Rochester, Walt. de Merton, bp. of, ii, 21 Rock Ferry, see Ferry, Rock Rock-salt, i, 25, 29 Roddlesworth Brook or River, i, II Rodentia, i, 209 Rodes, James, ii, 61042 Rodhill End, Nonconformity at, ii, 74; 75, 76 Roe Cross, i, 10 Roeburndale, i, 682, 69, 702, [4a bs, 762, 856, 319%; ii, 340, 438, 445, 462; Chase, ii, 454; Fells, i, 50a Roeburndale River, i, 534 Roel, see Royle Roelent, see Rhuddlan Roger, kt. of Roger of Poitou, i, 319, 320 Rokeby, James, ii, 45 Rokeden in Newton, chantry in manor of, i, 372 Rokeden or Newton Chapel, ii, 19 Rolos, James, ii, 90 Roman Catholics, the, ii, 92, 93, 94, 95, 229, 236, 243 Roman coins, ii, 516 Roman remains and settlements, li, 516, 542, 553 Romare, Roumare, Rohaise (or Hawise), dau. of Will de, i, 361 7 ; Will. de, i, 316, 338, 367, and see Lincoln, earl of Rome, English College at, ii, 55 Romeyn (Romanus), John le, see York, archbp. of Romilly, Alice de, ii, 1404, 185 7 Romysgreve, see Ramsgreave Rooley Moor, i, 682, 4, 69a Roose, i, 245, 246, 255 ; ii, 126 Roosebeck, 1, 444, 476, 514, 219, 229, 255; li, 412@ Roper, Mr., ii, 563¢ Ros, Margaret de, ii, 1425; Rob. de, i, 305; Will. de, i, 309, 322, 324% ; li, 140% Roscoe, —, ti, 428 ; James, ii, 6204 ; John, ii, 6202 ; Rob. i, 562 Roscow Fold, Breightmet, li, 621@ Rose, John, ii, 59524 Roseacre, i, 3507, 357; ii, 333 Rosegrove, Molly Wood, i, 936 Roses, wars of, il, 214, 215 Ross, Col., ii, 429 Rossal, i, 98a; ii, 271, 299; Hall, ii, 614a, 4; school, ii, 4682, 4960, 5614, 614, 615 Rossendale, i, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 28; ii, 287”, 311, 3614, 3974, 420, 455, 459, 461, 4716; chase, ii, 457,458; forest, i, 257, 262; ii, 268, 269, 3604, 377, 453, 454, 455, 456, 458, 459, 460%, 4672; Nonconformity, li, 73, 74, 75, 76, 79; Waste, ii, 291 Rotenstall, see Rawtenstall Roter, le, of Thornton, nr. Stanlaw, fam. of, ii, 1392 Rothay, River, ii, 488d Rothwell, Peter, ii, 369@; Phineas, ii, 5974; Rich., ii, 612; Thom., ii, 4076; Will, ii, 64 2 Rotswell, Geo., ii, 453 Rough Hill, i, 215, 238, 253 Rough Lee Booth, ii, 336 Rough Lee, Nether, 1i, 458,459 Rough Lee, Over, ii, 458, 459 Roundhay, i, 318 Round Hill Wood, ii, 447 Roundsea Moss, i, 198a Roundsea Wood, i, 198@ Rounstall, see Rawtenstall Rous, Hugh de, i, 322; Ralph le, i, 314; Rob. le, ii, 191 Routandbrook, see Rowton Brook Rowbottom, Will., ii, 3684 Rowcliff Wood, ii, 460 Rowe, Will., ii, 4o4a Rowland, John, ii, 5854, 4 Rowley, i, 319 ; Moor, i, 744, & INDEX Rowley, A. B., ii, 489a; E. B., ii, 4896; H.C.,, ii, 495@; Joseph, ii, 5674, 6 Rowton Brook, ii, 443 Royall, see Royle Royle, ii, 458, 460 7 Royle, John, ii, 595@; Vernon, ii, 3954; V.F., 11, 490a, 4, 49la Royton, i, 218, 228, 253; ii, 249, 344, 3986 Rudd Heath, i, 1214@, 1384 Rudyard, Ric. of, ii, 1344 Rufford, i, 614, 335 7, 336; ii, 272 7, 338, 472a, 476a, 488a, 547, 548, 550; chantry, ii, 37 ; chapel, ii, 19, 25 #, 37 #, 97; sch. ii, 37 Rughley, see Rough Lee Rumelli, Rumeli, Alice de, i, 316; li, 116 7, 1264 ; J. de, ii, 141d Rumworth, i, 326 nN, 3282, 330; 1, 343 5 school, ti, 5614, 6168 Runcorm, i, 24, 64a, 131, 188a, 2004, 298; li, 485a; ferry, ii, 292; Gap, ii, 183; Heath, i, 552; priory, i, 298 Runymede, i, 323, 329 Rupert, Prince, ii, 238 Rushen (Isle of Man), religious house at, ii, 1294 Rusheton Thornes, ii, 459, 460 Rusholme, i, 454, 73a, 3267; ii, 344, 4984, 554, 555 Rushton Grange in Bowland 318 Rushton, —, ii, 479d Rushy Hill, i, 215, 228, 253 Rusland, i, 204a, 227, 229, 255; Valley, i, 198a, 201a, 2084; Wood, ii, 450 Russell, Lord John, ii, 249, 250, 25 I, 254; Rob. i, 303; Will. ii, 1174, 6; W.,, ii, 4015 Rutter, H. y li, 5018 Rydal, forest, i, 365 ; manor, i, 366 Rylands, Joseph, il, 3650; Rich., ii, ? 1, 395 Ryle, John Chas., see Liverpool, bp. of ye. High, ii, 460 Rymbaut, Will., ii, 1734 Sabden, i, 10, 11 5 ii, 3974, 455, 456, 458, 459%; Waste, li, 290 Sacheverell, Dr. , li, 244 Sadberge (Dur. ) i ii, 575a Saddleworth (Yorks, ), i, To, 216, 228, 253 ; ii, 3694 ; chapel, ii, 17, 18, 19 Sagar, Oates, ii, 608¢ Sailor’s Shore, 1, 694, 72, 734, 786 St. Albans, i, 332 St. Aloysius, College of, ii, 60 7 St. Anne’s, i, 424, 43a, 44a, 4, 454, 48a, 520, 544, 55a, 4, 60a, 620. 64a, 65a, 664, 694, 716, 726, 734, 4, 746, 754, 0, 76a, 786, 79a, 826, 984, 1374, 1733 li, 413a, 469%, 4962, 6, 4976 St. Asaph, Rich. Redman, bp. of, ii, 1564, 6, 1584, 161%; Thom. Goldwell, bp. of, ii, 55 St. Bees Abbey, i, 359 ; monks of, i, 360 St. Botolph, Boston (Lincs.), i, 306 St. Chad, Jesuit College, ii, 60 St. Davids, Bernard, bp. of, ii, 168a 659 St. Edmund, Roger of, ii, 107 St. Helens, i, 13, 17, 21, 32, 33; 34) 35, 106, 128, 225, 229, 254; ii, 258 x, 3522, 5, 3540, 355%, 3564, 4, 3575, 374a, 3994, 4008, 4ola, 404%, 4054, 4o6a, 6, 468d, 488a, 4954, 4974, 5044; chapel, ii, 68 7 ; Nonconformity, ii, 70, 80, 86; Roman Catholic deanery, il, 95 ; schools at, ii, 6194 St. John, Olive w. of Rob. de, i, 321 ; John de, ii, 196 ; Will. de, i, 3217 St. Michael’s on Wyre, i, 474, 2010; li, 8%, 10”, 17, 100, 285, 333, 334, 472@; appropriation of ch., li, 35 ; chantry and chantry rents, ii, 6034, 6, 6054; church, i, 353; ii, 61,7, 12, 137, 14, 23,35, 1314a, 212, 603a, 6; grammar school, ii, 34, 5614, 603 ; rectory, ii, 22; vicar- age, ll, 35 St. Michael’s on Wyre, chantry priests, ii, 34 ; rector of, ii, 170@ St. Michael’s on Wyre, H—, chap- lain of, i, 360 St. Paul’s Cathedral (London), Lady Chapel, i, 311 St. Paul’s Cathedral, dean and chapter of, ii, 5764, 577a, 4, 6124 St. Paul’s School, London, ii, 5834, 5844, 5884, 5892, 5974 St. Quentin, Rich. de, ii, 1304 Saladin tithe, ii, 22 Sale, i, 196a Salendine Nook, ii, 76” Salesbury, ii, 337 Salford, i, 23, 132, 212, 220, 253, 296 2; ii, 7, 667, 251, 255, 293, 306, 309, 321, 349, 3682, 3714, 3742, 379, 3860, 3924, 3944, 4, 3984, 4, 3994, 4o0a, 431, 479, 4954, 5032, 550, 5876 ; bridge, 1 i, 3684 ; cathedral, li, 95 ; cross, ii, 83; deanery of, ii,100; hundred and wapentake, i, 257, 264, 313, 326, 335 % ; li, 71, 94, 1574, 193, 2007, 220, 223, 231, 273 7, 2767, 296, 334%, 342, 343, 344, 345, 349, 350, 454; Man., i, 113a, 194 ; mkt. and fairs at, ii, 280, 281 ; mill at, ii, 275 ; Nonconf,, il, m1, 82, 83, 89 ; Ordsall Hall, ii, 550; Roman Catholic deanery, ii, 95 Salford, justices of, ii, 227 Salford, bishopric of, li, 94, 95; Herbert Vaughan, |p, ii, 95; John Bilsborrow, bp., ii, 955 Louis Chas. Casartelli, bp., ii, ; Will. Turner, bp., ii, 95 Salfordshire, i ii, 186”, 456 Salisbury, ii, 203 2 ; cathedral, ii, 32 Salisbury, earl of, ii, 59, 3804 ; Will. Longespee, earl, 1, 308, 312; ii, 1430; Ela, countess of, i, 312; Margaret, countess of, i, 307, 308, 312 Salisbury, Hubert Walter, bp. of, i, 357 Salisbury, Walter of, ii, 1430 Salley, see Sawley Salley, Hen., ii, 124@, 12524 Salt, il, 3542, 6, 3552 Salt Hill, quarries, i, 5, 6, Salter, Lower, i, 65a, 674, B38 Saluzzo, Alice, dau. of Manfred III, marquis of, i, 307, 312 Salwick, Salwick in the Fylde, i, 218, 228, 230 M, 253 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Salwick Hall (Clifton with Salwick), li, 92, 548 Samlesbury, ii, 18, 337, 463 ; chapel ii, 18, 99; school, ii, 6244; lords of, ii, 18 Samlesbury, Rob. de, i, 340. 372%; Roger de, i, 330; Will. de, i, 339 se Samwall, Samwell, Francis, ii, 97, 98 Sandbach, Rich. de, ii, 166@ Sanders, Dr., ii, 52 Sanderson, John, ti, 569@ Sandes, Will. ii, 3604 Sandford, Messrs. B. & W., ii, 3862 Sands, North, i, 46¢ Sandstone, Red, i, 4, 5, 23, 24; ii, 3564, 419; mining of, i, 28, 29 Sandyford, ii, 462 Sandys, C., ii, 364@ ; Edwin, archbp. of York, ii, 6084 ; Myles, ii, 3634; Thom., ii, 6086; Col., ii, 465 ; family, ii, 3636 Sankey, i, 341, 342 ; il, 274; bridge, iy 342 : Sankey, Gt., i, 53@, 347, 3493 ii, 346 ; manor, i, 343 Sankey, Little, i, 338, 340 Sankey Canal, li, 3524, 358a Sankey, Sonky, Gerard de, i, 338 ; Ralph de, i, 338 ; Rob. de, i, 340, 343, 345; Roger de, 1, 340. 343%; Will. de, i, 372” Sargeant, Edm., ii, 608a Satterthwaite, ii, 339 Saunders, —, ii, 4904, 5016; Dr., Ny 53 Saunderson, Ellis, ii, 61 Saurby, see Sowerby Savage, Sir John, ti, 98; Will., i, 347% Savell, Nich., ii, 97 . Savigny in Mortain, abbey of, i, 293 ; abbot of, ii, 114a, 115¢, 4, se 141a; monks of, i, 360 ; ii, I Savile, Saville, Anne dau. of Sir John, i, 347; Sir Hen,, ii, 504d ; Hugh, ii, 97 Savok, river, ii, 438, 440 Savoy Hospital, ii, 5716 Savoy, Amadeo of, i, 333 ; Peter of, 1, 397, 355 Savoy, Philip, count of, i, 307 # Sawley (Yorks.), ii, 43 ; abbey of, i, 3175 1, 43, 44, 134a, 1370 Sawrey, li, 450 Sawrey, John, ii, 3604; Miles, ii, 450 sawyer, C. M., ii, 495@ Saxthorpe (Norf.), 1, 351 Saxton (Norf.), manor of, i, 354 Say, Beatrice w. of Will, i, 300» ; Geoffrey de, i, 3007; Will. de, i, 300 Scalby, manor of, ii, 195 Scales, i, 245, 246, 255 Scallwith, see Skelwith Scarisbrick, i, 44@, 454, 118a, 1194, 124a, 1262, 168, 169, 1987; ii, 346, 4762, 550 ; bridge, ii, 472a; school, ii, 6206 Scarisbrick, —, ii, 472@ ; Hector, ii, 152@ ; squire, ii, 4762 Scarphole Scar, i, 169 Scarthwaite, nr. Caton, ii, 442 Scathwaite, i, 364 Schneider, H. W., ii, 3640. 6; Hannay & Co., ii, 3534, 3648 Scholes, Gen., ii, 6104 Schoolecroft, Scolecroft, Augustin, ii, 5657 ; Hen., ii, 3564; James, ii, 565.7; Rich., ii, 565@; family, ii, 574? Schools, ii, 298, 561 ‘Sclateston at Langford-longheude, coal mines at, il, 357@ Scofield, J., ii, 495¢ Scond Moor, 1, 70 Scorton, i, 60a, 68a, 6, 714, 748 ; ii, 4704 Scoteny, Thom. de, i, 324 7 Scotforth, i, 357%, 35973 li, 341, 348", 564%; manor, 1, 364 ; school, il, 6234 Scotland, king of, i, 305, 306; king and queen of, i, 307 S: tt, Cuthbert, see Chester, bp. of ; Geoffrey, ii, 3654 ; James, ii, 3654 ; John and John le, i, 364 ; ii, 194, 311 n, 365a, 4; Jonathan, il, 70 ; Will. ii, 213, 3654; and Steven- son, Messrs., 11, 3864 Scotton (Lincs.), i, 319 #, 320 Scout, nr. Mossley, i, 464 Scout Moor, nr. Edenfield, i, 12 Scowcroft (Scholcroft and Schole- croft) in Chadderton, ii, 5744, 575@ : Scrope, Geoffrey de, ii, 1384, 202 # ; Rich. le, 33 Scrope and Grosvenor, case of, i, 374 Scrow Moss, Coniston Moor, ti, 558 Scurfa, the Earl, i, 258 Sea-fisheries, ii, 409-17 Seaforth, i, 464, 168, 188a ; Common, 1, 552 Seals, ii, 34”, I11@, 1120, 130a, 1394, 1484, 1526, 1594, 1614, 1646, 1675, 1736, 211 Seaman, Peter, ii, 405 Seat Naze, i, 12 Seathwaite, i, 444, 64a; ii, 339; Fells, 1, 39, 44a; Stone Walls, Long House Close, ii, 558 ; Tarn, i, 40, 436 Seaton Mersey, i, 148@ Seaton, Sir John, ii, 236, 237 Sedbergh, i, 4, 38; ii, 520; school, ii, 565, $73 Sedden, R. L., il, 495@ Sedgewick (Westmld.), ii, 1576 Seed, R., li, 470@ Seedley, ii, 3984 Sées, abbey of, i, 291, 320, 321, 327, 335, 337; i, 8, 10, 11, 160a, 167a, 168a, 1694, 171a, 437; abbot and convent of, ii, 1684, 1694, 170a, 1722; Hen., abbot of, ii, 170”; monks of, i, 353 ; ii, II, 115a Sefton, 1, 562, 297; ii, 37%; 99, 214, 346, 347, 437, 456, 4722, 547, 550; church, ii, 67, 7m, 23, 50; rectory, li, 35, 64”; rector or minister of, ii, 1702, 6116 Sefton, countess of, ii, 479@; earl of, li, 247, 465, 4722, 6, 4734, 6, 4744, 475@, n, 4766, 478a, 4, 4804, 482a; Lord, estates of, ii, 428 Sekerston, Ralph, ii, 5952 Selby Abbey, i, 313 Selby, Will. ii, 1394 Selfleet, i, 351 Selletbeck, the (Whittington), ii, 545 Selsete, i, 360 171, 173, 660 Selside, ii, 1274 Sempringham, canons of, ii, 28 # Senesty, li, 438 Serelfal Brook, ii, 462 Seton Priory (Cumberld.), chantry at, ii, 1654; nuns of, ii, 30%, 1656 Seton, —, ii, 1236; Thom., ii, 98 Settle, ii, 451 Sevenoaks Grammar 580a Sevenoaks, Will., ii, 580a Seyvell, see Savile Shaa, Sir Edm., Lord Mayor, i, 580a Shackerley, ii, 48 ; Nonconformity, ii, 82 Shap Abbey, 11, 1254, 157 % Sharney ford, i, 14 Sharp, Sharpe, —, ii, 4904, 4924, 4936; John, ii, 3716; Rot. Chapman, ii, 3714; Thom. ii, 3716; T. W., il, 6146 Sharp, Roberts & Co., ii, 3732, 387a, b Sharp, Stewart & Co., ii, 3716 Sharples, i, 232, 237, 326 % ; ti, 342 ; Egbert Dean, i, 253 Sharples, Nich., ii, 6184 ; Capt., ii, 243% Shaw chapel, ii, 37 2 Shaw, Shawe, Adam, ii, 6244; Alfred, ii, 489a, 6; Robt., ii, 97 ; Sam. ii, 6026 ; Thom., li, 5984 Shawforth, i, 73a Shawtown school in Flixton, ii, 6236 Shedden Edge, i, 11 Sheep-breeding, ii, 270, 271 Sheffield (Yorks.), ii, 76, 375a, 4, 4890 Shelbrook, manor (Yorks.), i, 350 Sheldon, —, ti, 92 Shelmerdine, John, ii, 598@ Shelton, —, ii, 485a Shepherd, Mary, ti, 606¢ ; Rich., ii, 5736 ‘ Shepley (Yorks.), i, 355, 356 7, 357; manor, i, 353 Sherburn, Shirburne, Sherborne, Hugh, ii, 139 2; Sir Rich., ii, 97, 98, 220, 226, 228 ; Roger, ii, 5724; Will. of, ii, 155 7 Shere (Surrey), manor of, i, 357 Sherrard, Mr., ii, 3684, 6 Sherson, Thom., ii, 5664 Sherwin, Margaret, ii, 619a ; Thom., ii, 6192 Sherwood, Shirwood, Ellis, ii, 1614; Master John, ii, 562 7 Shevington, i, 303, 335 #, 3713 i: 198, 339, 3646 Shipbuilding, ii, 375 Ship money, ii, 231 Shirbourn, see Sherburn Shirington, Walt., ii, 211 ” Shooting, li, 4674, 482 Shore, South, i, 554, 664 ; ii, 4966 Shore Baptist church, birchcliffe, ii, 77 Shore Hay, ii, 453 Showley, nr. Ribchester, ii, 93 2 Shrewsbury, ii, 219 ; Abbey, i, 294, 295, 299, 3373 il, 8, 10 2, 11, 16”, 35, 107a, 1682, 6, 185 Shrewsbury, abbot of, i, 342; ii, 1684 ; Hugh, abbot of, ii, 107¢ ; Ralph, abbot of, i, 367 So monks of, i, 294, 353, 397 Shrewsbury, battle of, ii, 35, 212 School, ii, Shrewsbury, earldom of, ii, 180 Shrewsbury, earl of, ii, 43, 243 sbtersay John, see Norton, abbot 0 Shrokinerton, James, ii, 1066 Shultz, S. S., ti, 4goa Shuttleworth, Moss, i, rr ; moor of, ii, 438 1 Shuttleworth, Rich., ii, 231, 232, 233; Ughtred, Kay-Shuttleworth, Lord, ii, 256; Mr., ii, 245 Siddall, H., ti, 4974 Sihtric, King, ii, 178 Silk trade, ii, 310, 394 Silkstone (Yorks.), 1, 320 Silurian Age or strata, i, 3, wood and 43 ii, 555 sifedale, i, 42a, 6, 43a, 6, 44a, 4, 454, 5, 46a, 4, 47a, 6, 48a, 4, 492, 5, 50a, 6, 51a, 526, 53a, 4, 54d, 554, 56a, 4, 5724, 584, 59a, 4, 60a, 4, 61a, 6,625, 63a, 6, 64a, 4, 66a, 694, 4, 71a, 4, 724, 4, 730, 742, 4, 75a, 76a, b, 77a, b, 786, 79a, b, 82a, 4, 834, 84a, 4, 85a, 4, 98.2, 4, 994, 1252, 128a, 4, 129a, 4, 1314, 133a, 4, 134a, 5, 1400, 2004, 224, 226, 229, 253, 357%3 ii, 147@, 342; Cliffs, 1, 52a ; Cove, i, 82a Silvester, Lieut.-Colonel, ii, 248 Simmonds, Rob., ii, 5850 Simnel, Lambert, ii, 216 Simon the Dyer, ii, 399@ Simonstone, 1, 984 ; ii, 336 Simonswood, i, 45a, 49a, 514, 520, 61a, 625, 746, 764, 77a, 1136, 1144, 1184, 1190, 122a, 129, 264, 368 ; ii, 347, 437, 444, Spit 446, 456, 4726 ; forest, i, 348; Moss, i, 464, 47a, 484, 494, 54, 582, 634, 664, 68a, 76a, 774, 6, 78a, 1144, 1246 ; li, 290; park, i 345 Simpson, —, ii, 302 7, 397 4, 5662 ; Harry, ii, 497a ; Messrs. J. & R., ii, 3862 Singleton, ii, 92,95, 277, 278 #, 445, 472a; chapel, il, 25 ” Singleton, Gt., li, 333 Singleton, Little, 11, 333 Singleton, Much, ii, 290 Singleton, Alan de, i, 303; Rich., ii, 618a; Rich. de, ii, 1664; Thom., ii, 50; W., ii, 293; family of, i, 295 Sion, Syon, House, nr. Isleworth, li, 5624 Sion, nunnery of, ii, 35 ; 1214, 1710, 172a, 564a, 0; abbess of, ii, 35, 562a, 6 Sion, Eliz., abbess of, ii, 17i 2” Siward, Rich., i, 329 Sixhills (Lincs.), i, 326 2, 328, 331, 121%; 333% Skearton, see Skerton Skegill, i, 3 Skelbrook (Yorks.), i, 357 Skelhorne, Will., ii, 407@ Skelmersdale, ii, 346, 350 ; school, ii, 621 Skelmersdale, lord of manor of, ii, 621 Skelwith, i, 640; Wood, ii, 450 Skenfrith (Wales), manor of, ii, 195 Skerton, ii, 121a, 1650, 263 2, 278, 284, 286%, 341, 348%, 448; school, ii, 622a; tithes of, ii, 1654, 5632 Skiddaw, i, 39 li, 339, 355@ 3 INDEX Skinner, Rich. le, ii, 457 Skipsey Castle, i, 324 Skipton, i, 8; ii, 202, 281, 3515; barony, ii, 116a@; Castle, i, 305, 324 5 il, 456 Skipton, James, ii, 1564, 1594 ; Will. de, ii, 165a Skyllar, Hugh, ii, 130d Slade Hall, ii, 554 ; lane, ii, 554, 555 Slaidburn in Bowland, li, 455 2, 457 #, 458; advowson, ii, 133 # church, 1, 315; manor, i, 3133 mills, ii, 294 #2; tithes, il, 137¢ Slaidburn, Will. de, vicar of Kirk- ham, ti, 32 ” Slate, i, 4, 29 5 il, 3552 Slater, N., ii, 4726 ; Messrs. G. & J., ii, 3980 Slawright, —, prior of Warrington, ii, 1636 Sleddale, Long, i, 4 Slocock, L. A. N., ii, 4950 Slyne, Slyne with Hest, i, 794 ; ii, 286 1, 340, 448 Smalley, Mary, ii, 610a Smallwood, Thom., ii, 5985 Smedley, mills at, ii, 295 Smeedon, see Smithdown Smethurst, James, li, 566¢ Smith House, nr. Wyke, ii, 81 Smith, Smyth, —, ii, 4914, 492a; Dr. Chearnley, ii, 498a¢; Edwin, ii, 5730 ; Geo. Nun, ii, 5734 ; Hen., ii, 6206 ; James, bp. of Callipolis, ii, 93 2; James, ii, 476a ; Jeremy, ii, 5884 ; John, ii, 64, 97, 3684, 476a; Nich., ti, 5942; Rob., ii, 4762; Thom., ii, 93%, 3944; Will, ii, 5894, 6266; Will. & Bros., ii, 371a@; Mr., ii, 4o6a; & Co., i, 3684 ; and Townley, ii, 3864 Smith-Stanley, Rt. Hon. E. G.,, ii, 255 Smithdown, i, 704; ii, 135a, 437, 438, 445 Smithhills, ii, 4970 Smithson, Laurence, ii, 618a@ ; Mar- garet, ii, 618@ Snaith, manor and soke of, i, 301 Snape, ii, 6206 Snayth, Will. de, ii, 166@ Snoddle Hill, i, 254 Snodgrass, Mr., ii, 3874 Snodworth, i, 304 Snydal, in Westhoughton, i, 328 Soap Industry, ii, 402, 403 Social and Economic Hist., ii, 261 Society of Friends, the, ii, 78 Sockbridge, manor of, i, 361 Sodor and Man, bishopric of, ii, 1164 ; bp. of, ii, 38, 497, 50 ; John Duncan, bp. of, ii, 117a; Lau- rence, bp. of, ii, 117a@; Nich. of Argyll, bp. of, 117a; Nich. of Meaux, bp. of, ii, 117a@ ; Mark, bp. of, ii, 128@; Reginald, bp. of, ti, 117a; Rich, bp. of, ii, 117%; Rich. Parr, bp of, ii, 64 2; Will. Russell, bp. of, ii, 117a, 5; Wi- mund, bp. of, ii, 116a, 6, 1172, 185, 186 # Sokell, —, ii, 6044 Solvay, Belgian engineer, ii, 4000 Somerby (Lincs.), i, 328 Somerset, duke of, ii, 215, 220, 289 Somervill, Edelina w. of Walt. de, i, 339; Roger de, i, 339 # Son of Ailward, Orm, i, Roger, i, 327 661 327 5 Son of Benedict, John, i, 322 — Bernard, Hen., ii, 149@ — Bleddyn, Yorwerth, ii, 189 % — Cugincy, Cyneferth, ii, 4 — Edmund, Waltheof, ii, 1262 — Eldred, Ketel, i, 358, 360 — Gerold, Alex., ii, 1406 — Gillemichael, Rob., i, 304; ii, 1452 — Gospatric, Thom., ii, 157 — Griffin, David, i, 341 — Gruffydd, Llewellyn, ii, 196 — Heardberht, Alric, ii, 176 — Henry, Rob., i, 319; ii, 10%, 1484, 1494, 151a,6; Roger, ii, 149@ ; Rich., i, 328 2 ; ii, 1516 — Hervey, Hervey, i, 350 — Hubert, Hervey, see Walter, Hervey — Huck, Ughtred, i, 295 — Hugh, Rob.,ii,155@; Will., ii, 128@ — John, John, i, 323 — Jordan, i, 321 — Ketelbern or Chetelbert, Godric, i, 299” Leofwin, Hugh, i, 318 Magnus, Orm, i, 350 Maldred, Adan, ii, 127¢ Orm, Roger, i, 327, 350 Punzun, John, ii, 1400 Ragnald or Ravenkil, —,ii, 107 ” Ralph, Hen., i, 340 Richard, John, ii, 3564 ; 1, 303, 340 — Roger, Rich., i, 303, 304 ; ii, 10 7, 107a, 108a, and see Fitz Roger, Rich.; Will, i, 327 5 ii, 128¢ — Siward, Hen., ii, 12, 149a — Swain, "Adam, i 3321 — Thomas, Rob. 7% 340 — Urieth, Alex., i, 328 — Waltheof, Gilb., ii, 189 — Waltheve, Rich., ii, 278 — William, Matth., ii, Ralph, ii, 196 — Winnoc, Will., i, 340 — Wulfrich, Will., i, 328 2 Son of, see Fitz Sopley (Hants), manor of, i, 357 Sortes, Adam, ii, 1052, 4, 1060 Souterscales, ti, 127@ Southampton (Hants), ii, 324 Southorpe (Lincs.), i, 319 # Southport, i, 26, 30, 444, 45a, 4, 46a, 52a, 546, 554, 0, 56a, 4, 574, 58a, 4, 59a, 4, 604, 62a, 64a, 652, 4, 698, 71a, 6, 726, 73a, 6, 746, 754, 6, 76a, 6, 78a, 6, 794, 90, 92, 98a, 4, 99@, 103, 105, 107, 1o8a, 6, 109, 1104, 6, III, 12a, b, 1134, 6, 114a, 8, 1154, 6, 116a, 4, 1174, 6, 1182, 6, 1192, 4, 1204, 6, 121a, 6, 122a, 6, 123a, 6, 124a, 125a, 6, 126a, 6, 136a, 143, 1432, 6, 1444, 5, 1452, 6, 146a, 6, 1474, 4, 148a, 4, 149a, 6, 1504, 4, 1514, 4, 1522, 6, 1534, 6, 1544, 6, 1552, 4, 159, 166, 167, 1844, 1854, 1860, 1874, 188, 188a, 4, 1924, 1984, 2024, 2090, 249, 252, 253; ii, 3462, 409, 410a, 413a, 414d, 4176, 436, 472a, 4756, 476, 8, 4774, 6, 478a, 4952, 4962, 6, 4974 ; manor, ii, 476@ ; Nonconformity, ii, 80, 90; Roman Catholic deanery of, ii, 95 Southwark, Gram. Sch., ii, 565@ Southwell, Rob., ii, 1254, 1264 Southworth near Warrington, South- worth with Croft, i, 230, 237, 253, 366 2; ii, 348 Pe a ee a Rob., 262 ”; A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Southworth, Adam de, i, 344”; Gilbert ‘of Croft), ii, 163@ ; Gil- bert de, i, 372 ” ; Geo., ii, 121a, # ; Joan dau. of Chnis.,i, 374; John, li, 212; Sir John, ii, 53%, 220, 225, 226; Thom., ii, 56 Sowerby (Yorks.), i, 199@, 357% ; ii, 76, 618a ; Wood, ii, 451 Spa Roughs, ii, 4842, 4 Spalding, lord of, ii, 181 ; prior of, i, 322 Spaldington, Rich. de, ii, 457 Spangenburg, —, ii, 81 Speke, i, 426, 514, 574, 604, 1334, 209 ; ii, 345, 3662, 4834, 4982, 550; Hall, i, 206; ii, 548, 550 Spencer, Capt., ii, 474@, 4754 ; Mr., ii, 242 Spiders, see Arachnida Spink, —, ii, 477@; Nich., ii, 1636 Spixworth (Norf.), i, 326 Spooner, R. H., ii, 4905, 4924, 4934, 6 Sport, ii, 467 Spot, Wulfric, ii, 179 Spotland, ii, 132% ; ii, 292, 345, 6154, 621a ; Toad Lane School, 1i, 6226 Spring, —, li, 4990 Springman, H.H., ii, 495@ Springthorpe, John de, 1i, 211 Sprodspool, ii, 290 Sprotborough, lordship of, i, 300, 319 ; lady of, see Lisours, Albreda de ; lord of, see Lisours, Robert de, and Fitz William, Will. Spynk, Nich., ii, 1636 Stackhouse, ii, 1274 Stafford, John, ii, 1364 ; Nigel de, i, 339%; Rob. de, ii, 107a Stahlknecht, B., ii, 4984 Stainclife Wapentake, ii, 337 M, 341% Staindrop, advowson, ii, 35 7 Stainford, Will, ii, 159@ Staining, i, 298, 299, 307 ; ii, 132a, 138 2, 170; grange of, li, 1330 ; manor, i, 298 ; ii, 138 7 Stainsby (Derbys.), church of, i, 291 Stainsby, Roger de, i, 338 Stainton, i, 219, 229, 237, 238, 245, 249, 255 Stainton Lincs.), i, 319 2, 323 Stair, earl of, ii, 475 7 Stalmine, Stalmine with Staynall, i, 262 ; li, 122 ”, 333 ; chapel, ii, 18, 29 n, 35 %, 169a ; grange, ii, 1264 ; moss, ll, 289 Stalmine, Rob. of, ii, 12646 Stalybridge, i, 11, 102, 105, 125a, 1320, 227, 229, 254 ; li, 255, 3872, 392a ; Nonconformity, ii, 77 ‘Stalybrushes,’ i, 105, 1214, 1306, 131a, 8 Stalyhinsley, i, 64a Stamford (Lincs.), i, 311 ; rectory, ii, 32 Stamp, James, ii, 91 Stanbridge, —, ii, 5834 Stand, Nonconformity in, ii, 69 Stand Hill, nr. Blackburn, ii, 387a Standard, Battle of, i, 315, 316 Standen and Standen Hey, ii, 274, 276 n, 336%; Grange, ii, 272; Hall, ii, 4712 Standish, Standish with Langtree, i, 335%, 3715 Ul, 93 %, 99, 338, 339, 350, 3644, 550; church, ii, 6x, 7 ”,23"; Nonconformity, ii, 79 #; rectory, il, 32 7, 64; school, ii, 561a, 6090 335 %, Standish, chantry priests of, 11, 34. 38 ; rectors of, ii, 31 Standish, Edw.,, ii, 6094; Eliz. dau. of Sir Rob., i, 346; Gilb. de, ii, 32; James, ii, 1644; Ralph, ii, 245 ; Sir Rich., ii, 3554; Siward de, ii, 262% ; Thom., 11, 232, 234; Mr., ii, 243; family, ti, 31 Stanford, ii, 4174 Stanford, Alex. of, ii, 1537, 1692 Stanhope, Roger of, ii, 110 Stanlaw, abbey of, i, 298, 299, 302, 307, 308 ; ii, 10”, 13 #, 14, 17, 18, 99 2, 1316, 132a, 1334, 6, 134, 1706, 197, and see Whalley Abbey Stanlaw, Chas., abbot of, ii, 1392 ; Osbern, abbot of, ii, 1394 Stanlaw, monks of, i, 372; ii, 17, 20, 102, 552 Stanley Abbey, ii, 1284, 130@ Stanley, —, ii, 475a@; Sir Edw., ii, 1716, 215, 216, 232, 292, and see Monteagle, Lord; Hon. E. G., i, 1974; i, 255; Hon. F. A, ii, 257; Sir Humph., ii, 2167; James, see Ely, bp. of; Sir James, ii, 151 2 ; James, ii, 5790; John, ii, 212; Sir John, ii, 35, 214, 216; Marg., i, 347, 348; Ralph, ii, 36; Sir Rowland, ii, 243; Thom., ii, 50; Thom., Lord, ii, 35 #, 214, 215, and see Derby, earl of; Sir Thom., i, 347; ii, 97, 171%, 234, 235, 4744, and see Monteagle, Thom. Stanley, lord; Sir T. Massey, ii, 4806; Sir Will., il, §7, 214; Lord, i, 1954, 347%, 3743 i, 251, 480a, 6; family of, li, 33, 35, 36, 38, 1714, 213, 217 Stannal, Rob., wife of, ii, 603 7 Stanney (Ches.), ii, 1316, 138%; grange, li, 1314, 1334; manor, ii, 138 ” Stansfeld, Rob., ii, 503¢ Stansted Mountfichet (Essex),manor, 1, 365 Stanton, Walt. de, i, 340 Stanworth Edge, i, II ‘ Stapeloke,’ ii, 458 Stapelton Terne, ii, 127a Stapleton, Will. de, ii, 17 Starkethwaite, see Scarthwaite Starkie, Starkey, James, li, 45, 67 7, 96, 6104, 6214; Nich., ii, 234 Starkie, Mr. Chamberlain, 1, 256 Staunton, John, ii, 106d Staveley, il, 339 ; Nonconformity, ii, 74, 78 Staveley, Adam de, ii, 462; Alicia of, ii, 127a; Ralph de, ii, 212 ar ae Alex., see Coventry, bp. ° Stayning, Hen., ii, 1594 Steel, Steele, A. G., ii, 490a, 4, 4912; E. E,, ii, 4924; Lawr,, ii, 5774 Steeple Aston (Oxon.), school, ii, 6064 Steiner, Messrs., ii, 3974 Stell, John, ii, 129@ Stempe, Will, ii, 5972 Stephen, King, i, 294, 295, 316, 320, 327, 359: ll, 115a, 126a, 1274, 185, 186, 187, 437, and see Mor- tain, Count of, and Blois Stephen’s Head, High, ii, 438 Stephenson, Geo., ii, 3722; Leonard, ii, 97; Rob. ii, 372a Sterkye, see Starkie 662 Stevens, G., i, 4814 Stevenseat, see Stephen's High Stewart, Chas. Patrick, ii, 3716 Stickle, Great, u, 558 Stidd, ii, 337 ” ; chapel, 11, 93 7 Stidd or Longridge, hospital of, ii, 20 n, 102, 1664 Stiperden Moor, i, 11, 1952 Stirling, John, ii, 3964 Stirrup, John, ii, 6044, 6234 Stirzaker, Rich., ii, 5654 Stockdale, i, 4 Stockdale, Mr., ii, 5770 Stockenbridge, i, 52a Stocker, —, li, 4776 Stockport, 1, 2335 il, 238, 249, 252, 302, 308, 313, 315, 3560, 3834, 3844, 3924, 3934, 4044, 4054, 476a ; grammar school, ii, 5804 Stockport, Rob. de, i, 303, 368; ii, 1076 Stockport & Warren, of Poynton, family of, i, 368 Stocks, Geo. Alfred, ii, 5694, 5914 Stockton Heath, i, 1234 Stoddart, —, ii, 492@; Alex., ii, 4962 ; John, il, 5994 Stodday, manor, i, 364 Stoke, i, 436 Stoke, nr. Newark, ii, 216 Stoke Green, nr. Hawkshead kirk, Ny 43 Stoke Prior, li, goa Stone Implements, see Neolithic Age Stone-slack, nr. Heptonstall (Yorks.), un, 74 Stone, T., ii, 473@, 475 7%, 4756 Stoneyholme, i, 97 Stonnes, James, li, 57 Stonton, in Furness, ii, 3610 Stonyhurst, i, 42a, 450, 50a, 6, 51a, 53a, 560, 57a, 584, 59a, 6, 606, 61a, 634, 66a, 6, 70a, 71a, 784, 794, 97, 112, 113a, 218, 239, 245, 254; li, 93 2; College, ii, 498a, 5614, 5914; Hall, ii, 5918 Storer, —, ii, 492a Storeton, i, 24, 32; ii, 214 Storey, Sir Thom., ii, 569a, 6 Storey Brothers & Co., Messrs., ii, 4086 Storth, West, Brook, ii, 462 Stott Park, ii, 450 Stour, River, the, i, 308 Stourton & Petre, Lords, i, 355 Strange, Lord, ii, 216, 231, 233, 234, 235, 236, 471a, 503a; Ferdinan- do, Lord, ii, 225, 226, and see Lestrange Stratford-on-Avon, gild of, ii, 5804; grammar school at, ii, 580a Streets, Rob., ii, 3670 ‘ Strehokes,’ ii, 442 Stretford, i, 47a, 106”, 1108, 112, 115, 118, 121a, 1226, 139@; ll, 344, 350, 4074 ; chapel, ii, 25 7, 6214; school, ii, 621a ; Noncon- formity, ii, 89 ; Will. clerk of, ii, 25” Stretton, nr. Warrington, i, 240, 254 Stretton (Notts.), i, 313, 321 2 Stretton, Rob., see Lichfield, bp. of Stribers, i, 584 Strickland, ii, 180% Strickland Kettle, i, 361 Strickland, John, ii, 64 7; Will. de, ii, 147 2 Striguil, Will. Marshall, earl of, i, 301 Head Stroder, Rob., ii, 1106 were Jedediah, ii, 3854; Will, ii, 7a Stabbs, Peter, ii, 3534; Thom, ii, 79; Will, ii, 3534, 354@ Stutevill, Helewise dau. of Rob. de, i, 361 Subberthwaite, ii, 340 Subden, i, 193@ Suffield, Walt., see Norwich, bp. of Suffolk, duke of, di, 123a, 142 Sugar Industry, i ii, 406, 407 Sugg, F. H., il, 4904, 4914, 4924 Sulby Abbey (N pean li, 1565 Suenos of iron, manufacture of, i, 2 Sulphuric acid, manufacture of, i, 28 Summerby (Lincs.), i, 343 7 Summercotes (Warw.), i, 342 Sunderland, i, 51a; li, 341; conformity, ii, 76 Sunderland, J., ii, 248 Sunny Brow, Windermere, i, 2 Supremacy, ‘Act of, ii, 49, 50, 51 Surdevalle, Eudes ‘de, i ii, 130 Surrey, earl of, i, 308 ; ii, 216, 217 Surrey, Thom. Holland, duke of, ii, 2118” Sussex, earl of, ii, 54, 1244, 1252, 0, 1294, 1384, 139 7, 218 Sutcliffe, —, ii, 71 ‘ Suth-Gedluit,’ ii, 4 Suthworth, see Southworth Sutton, i, 23, 298, 303; ii, 346, 3664, 40442, 405a, 4064; manor, 1, 298 ; Nonconformity, ii, 75, 76 Sutton (Lincs.), i, 319 2, 322 Sutton (Beds. ?), manor of, i, 332 Sutton, Eliz. dau. of Sir Edw., i, 348; John, ii, 5024; Rich., ii, 5894 Swaffham Fen, Norfolk, i, 235 Swainby (Lincs.) Abbey, i, 361%; canons of, i, 352 Swainesholme, ii, 458 Swainson, Geo., ii, 6145 Swan, J. W., ii, 4736, 4740 Swanshead, ii, 443 Swarth Moor, ii, 78, 80 Swarthead, see Swarthof Swarthof, Swarthead, in Hensing- ham, i, 359 . Swedenborgians, the, ii, 92 Sweinshurst, i, 296 # Swift, Evan, ii, 622@ Swindlehurst, ii, 458, 460 7 Swineshead (Lincs.), i, 326%, 331 ; Abbey, i, 327, 328, 334 3 ii, 129a; abbot of, i, 330; manor of, i, 333 Swinglehurst, John, ii, 453 ; Rich, ii, 453 Swinsey, ii, 452 Swinton, i, 474, 98a, 112, 1260; li, 4944, 4950 Sydwood, ii, 1624, 441 Syke, i, 68 Symonds, Rob., ii, 64 % Syngilton, see Singleton Non- Taillebois, Ivo, i, 358, 362; ii, 181 Taillor, John, ii, 98, and see Taylor Talbot, Hugh, ti, 139%; John, ii, 533; Thom., ii, 228; Sir Thom., li, 98, 210, 220; Mrs, ii, 56 2 Taleworth, Rob., i, 324 % Talior, Will, ii, 453 Talleyrand, Elias son of Elias de, Nl, 33 INDEX Tame, River, i, 16; valley of, i, 10 Tanai, Avice de, i, 299 # Tancock, Charles Coverdale, ii, 6154 Tanfield, Rich., ii, 110d Tanshelf, market and fair at, i, 307 ar igite i, 298, 303 ; il, 345, 4724, 4, 550, 6246; chantry in oratory at, 1,175; Hall, ii, 550; parks, Nn, 444 Tarbock, lord of, ii, 1514 Tarbock, Tarbrock, Hen. de, ii,17 7; 149a ; Rich. de, li, 149@, 444 Tarleton, i, 319 #, 321 ; il, 37%, 339, 472a, 4775; the Holmes In, 1, 321 Tarn Brook, ii, 131@, 443 Tarnbrook Fell, i, 434, 544, 674, 68a, 6, 726, 734, 6, 776, 78a, 83a 84a; Gt. Clough of, i, 69a, 84a ; Hell Crag, i, 70a, see that title Tarnbrook Wood, i, 76 Tarn House, i, 57a Tarn Hows Tarn, i, 40 Tarnicar, i, 357 2 Tatham, i, 222, 223, 229, 254, 321 2; ii, 8, 100, 160 2, 341, 550; church, ii, 6”, 8, 23 2,24; Fell, ii, 458 2, 482a; Hall, ii, 550; Moor, i, 692, 73a, 826 ; Nonconformity, ii, 79 ”; rectory, ii, 16; school, 1i, 6248 Tatham, rector of, ii, 99 Tatham Beck, i, 672, 684, 783 Tatham, Geo. Turner, ii, 5734, 5744; Will. de, i, 321 2, 324 2; ii, 443 Tatlock, John, ii, 6024 Tattersall, Rob., ii, 453 Tatton, Rob., ii, 45 Taunton, i, 464, 73a, 4, 786 Taxal, bells of church at, ii, 365a Tayleur, Chas. ii, 372@ Taylor, —, ii, 5874 ; Chas., ii, 3974; David, ii, Sr, 82 ; F., ti, 491@ ; Hen. i, 268; ii, ‘OB; ; James, ii, 4052 ; John, ii, 3644, 62424 ; Rich., il, 5728, 601, 6026 ; Rob., ii, 472; Roger, li, 610a; Sam.,, ii, 6225 ; Thurstane, ii, 6004 ; Timo- thy, ii, 65; Tristram, ii, 6000 ; W., ii, 501a, and see Taillor Taylor & Timmis, Messrs., ii, 403 Taylor & Wilson, Messrs. ti, 3740 Tealby (Lincs.), i, 319 2, 320 Tebbe, Hen. of Threnguston, ii, I11a, b Teggin, A., ii, 495a Teleosteans, i, 180 Tempest, Nich., ii, 1370 Templars, the, i, 299 ; ii, 102 Tennis-playing, ii, 468a, 501 Ternebrook, see Tarn Brook Terrill, Will., ii, 585@ Terry, E. E. G., ii, 4960 Tetlaw, John, ii, 79 Tetlow Fold, Northmoor, ii, 3684 Tetlow, Rich., ii, 37 Textile Industries, ii, 376 Teyrnllwg, ii, 175 7 Thackeray, Mrs., ii, 386¢ Thatto Heath, ii, 4064 Thelwall, i, 299 ; ii, 178; fishery at, ii, 295 Thelwall, Thom. de, ii, 207 Thetford, Cluniac monks of, i, 321 Thieveley, i, 12 Thieveley Pike, ii, 454 Thing wall, li, 177 2, 437 Thistleton, i, 350 ; ti, 333 Thistleton, James, li, 618¢ Thomas, John, i, 1326 ; Rich., ti, 74 Thomasson, Mr., ii, 600a 663 Thompson, Thomson, —, li, 4 4764 ; G. A,, ii, 4754 ; James, ii, 314%, 402a; Joseph, ii, 672; J. R., ii, 4752; Ralph, ii, 5026; R. H., i, 2004 Thonock (Lincs.), 324, 325 - Thonock, James, ii, 463 Thoresby, John, archp. of York, ii, 28 Thorington, Rich. de, i, 324 # Thornbergh, Chris., ii, 1374, 1398 Thornellye, Oliver, ii, 5790 Thornham, i, 424, 3197; ii, 344, 5632 Thornhill, Jordan de, i, 368 Thornley, Thornley with Wheatley, ii, 337, 6170 Thornley, Edm., ii, 574@ Thornton, i, 49a ; ii, 171@; rector, of, ii, 99 Thornton, nr. Sefton, i, 338, 340; Nn, 347 . Thornton in Lonsdale, ii, 1o1, 181, 334, 341; school, ii, 6200 Thornton le Moor (Lincs.), i, 319 ”, 320, 321, 323 Thornton (Yorks.), ii, 5 7 Thornton, Alan de, ii, 165@; Gilb. son of Eawin de, i, 340 ; John de, i, 323; Rich. of, il, 139@; Rob. son of Rob. de, i, 340; Thom. de, ii, 197; Will. de, ii, 439 Thorp, i, 335 7 Thorp Constantine (Staffs.), i, 292 Thorp-Morieux (Suff.), i, 335 2, 336 Thorpe (Lincs.), i, 320, 323, 324 Thorpe, —, ii, 387a¢; Rich. de, i, 303 ; Rich. ii, 394a Thorphensty, i, 451 Thrang End, i, 714, 760, 786 Threlfall, Rich., ii, 6160 Throstle Nest, nr. Manchester, i, 225, 229, 254 Thrushgill, i, 67a Thrushgill Fell, i, 70a, 78a Thurforth the Hold, i, 258 Thurgarton, priory of, i, 338, 339 Thurland Castle, i, 38; il, 238, 551 Thurland, Thom., ii, 354@ Thurlow, Will., ii, 6o4a Thurnhan, i, 357 7%; li, 1544, 340, 341, 444 . Thurstan Water, Coniston Lake, fishery in, ii, 1420 Thurstan, i, 298; John son of, ii, 262” Tickhill, i, 294 ; ji, 190; castle of, i, 300; ii, 207%; honour of, i, 300 ; li, 207 2; manor of, i, 316 n Tid, Adam de, i, 324 2 Tilberthwaite, i, 58a; quarries of, Nl, 355@ Tiles, manufacture of, i, 28 Tilli, Ralph de, i, 299 Tillsley, Tilsley, see Tyldesley Tinker, Jethro, i, 102 Tinling & Co., Messrs. C., ii, 4178 Tinsley, —, ii, 489@, 492a Tintwistle, li, 514, 516 Tire, Eliz., ii, 6184 Titheby, church of, i, 339 Tobacco industry, ii, 408 Tobin, F., ii, 495@ Tockholes, i, 11, 12; ti, 292, 337, 596a ; Nonconformity, ii, 70 Todgill, Thom., ii, 1626 Todmorden, i, 33, 76a, 784, 215, 228, 2543 il, 74, 292, 345, 3924; chapel, li, 34, 355 school, ii, 0194 ; Nonconformity, ii, 80, 86 1, 319 %, 320, 323, A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Todmorden, valley, i, 6 Toeltschig, Johan, ii, 81 Tolleshunt, Tregoz (Essex), manor of, i, 365 Tomlinsons, Messrs., ti, 371@ Tonge, i, 319%; il, 344 Tonge with Haulgh, ii, 342, 6184, 6214 Tonge Moor, ii, 289 Tootal, Messrs., ii, 395@ Tootell Heights, 1, 732 Tooter Hill, i, 215, 228, 254 Topcliffe, Rob., ii, 1354, 1398 Topping, John, ii, 1124; Roger, ii, 6216; Will, ii, 1122 Tories, the, ii, 244, 246, 250 Torigni, Rob. of, i, 361 Torrisholme, ti, 198 2, 341, 622a Torrisholme, Ralph de, i, 359 2 Tortworth (Gloucs.), benetice, ii, 5876 Torver, i, 66a, 1884, 216, 227, 228, 229, 245, 246, 255 ; il, 1420, 340, 559 Tostig, see Northumbria, earl of Totell Wood, ii, 447 Tottington, i, 309, 313, 319 2, 321, 322, 325; ii, 183, 202, 3984, 453) 454, 455, 458; Chase, ii, 456, 458; forest of, ii, 454, 456; lord- ship of, i, 312; i, 454, 4700; market, ii, 281; mills, ii, 275; waste, 11, 289, 291 Tottington, Higher End, i, 319 7; li, 342 Tottington, Lower End, 1, 319 7 ; ii, 343 ; school, ii, 6202 Tottlebank, Baptist church, ii, 73, 75 Towneley, i, 14, 304; ii, 93 2, 453, 455, 456, 464; Moor, ti, 482a, 6 Towneley, Chnis., i, 298; il, 131”; Frances, ii, 290; Francis, ii, 246; Hen., ii, 2882; John, ii, 220, 357a; Sir John, ii, 290; Lawr., 11, 288, 294; Rich. de, ii, 136 #2; Rich., il, 245, 291, 461, 6216; Sir Rich., 1, 290 # ; Sir T., i, 288%”; Mr., ii, 243; family of, ii, 453, 455, 608¢ Townsend, mills at, ii, 295 Toxteth, li, 135a, 1384; ii, 437, 444, 456 ; deanery, ii, 101 ; forest and chase of, i, 348; ii, 437, 438, 442, 456; park, i, 345; li, 347, 348, 3662, 4, 4034, 445, 446; Non- conformity, ii, 69 Trade Unions, ii, 315, 316, 321, 322, 326 Trafford, 11, 498a; Moss, ii, 428; Park, i, 105, 117@, 118a, 1204 ; il, 324, 3530, 3734, 3744, 4974 Trafford, Old, i, 734, 107; ii, 472a, 4892, 4930 Trafford, Cecil, ii, 57”; Edm., ii, 225, 228, 5834; Sir Edm., ii, 56, 97, 220, 297; Geoff. de, son of Sir Hen. de, ii, 204; Geo., ii, 584a; Marg., ii, 584a; Rich. son of Hen. de, i, 344; Will, u, 44 Tranmere, ii, 413¢ Travers, Peter, ii, 64 7 Travis, Matt., ii, 53 Trawden, ii, 201, 287%, 336, 350, 3568, 3574, 4, 3614, 4555 456, 458, 459, 461; Brook, li, 454; Chase, il, 457, 458; forest of, ii, 268, 269, 293 #, 3584, 454, 459, 460, 4674, 514 Treales, i, 350 #, 355 ; ii, 333,4704, 472a Trefford, a ford over the Roch, ii, 538 Tregoz, Amabil w. of Geoff., i, 328; Will. de, i, 328 Trehamton, family of, i, 337 Tremblet, Oliver de, ii, 167 Treswell, Rob., ii, 129 Treyford (Sussex), i, 337, 340 Trias (Triassic Period), i, 24, 32 Trillwind, John, ii, 3654; Thom., ii, 3650 Trough of Bowland, i, 834 ; ii, 458, 460 2 Trough Edge, i, 215, 228, 254 Troughton Hall, Furness, ii, 610@ Troutbeck, i, 4 Troutbeck, Joan dau. of Sir Will. i, 347; Marg. w. of Sir Will, i, 347; Will. son of Sir Will., i, 347% Trowbarrow, i, 66a, 71a, 6, 764, 774 Trumble, —, ii, 4904 Trun, Ralph de, ii, 1724 Tucker, —, ii, 467d Tue Brook, i, 1404 Tuitefeld, John de, i, 324 # Tulketh, ti, 8, 93%, 102, I14a, 184, 440, 537; Hall, ii, 536; monastery, 1, 293 ; il, $37 Tunley (in Wrizhtington), Noncon- formity at, ii, 72 Tunshill, ii, 3614 Tunstall, i, 319%; ii, 37%, 92, 100, 341, 565a ; advowson and appro- priation of church, ti, 1604 ; chan- try, ii, 157@; church, ii, 6”, 8, 13m, 23 2, 36, 98, 1604 ; deanery, ii, 100 ; Nonconformity, 11, 89, 90; school, ii, 5614, 614a@ ; rectory, ti, 1608 ; vicarage, ii, 160a, 6; chan- try priest of, ii, 28; vicar of, ii, 36, 1608 Tunstall (Norf.), i, 326 ”, 329 Tunstall, Brian, ii, 216 ; Francis, ii, 53, 220; Marmaduke, ii, 1614; Sir Marmaduke, ii, 97, 1254, 217, 220; Will. de, i, 324%; Will, ii, 1226 Tunstead, ii, 460 Tunstead (Norf.), i, 328, 331 Turner, John, ii, 131@; Miles, ii, 6162; Sam., ii, 408a, 6214; Will, ii,95 ; Mr., ii, 256 ; Messrs. ii, 408a, 6 Turnough, John, ii, 3784 Turnshaw Hill, i, 215, 228, 254 Turton, i, 226, 229, 231, 237, 254, 326, 330; ii, 289; chapel, il, 66 2, 342 ; Moor, il, 290; school, li, 6234 Turvey, manor of, i, 356 Tusculum, Nich. of, ii, 105 Tuson, Miss, ii, 574d Tutbury, ii, 200 Tuxford (Notts.), lord of, 321 Twenge, Marmaduke de, ii, 140 ” Twist Castle, ii, 553 Twiston, i, 304 ; ii, 336 Twyselton, Will. of, ii, 127a Tydd, Adam de, i, 322; Reginald de, i, 322 Tydd Gote (Lincs.), i, 319”, 320, 322 Tyldesley, i, 17, 66a, 72a, 340; lil, 272, 3786, 476a, 6016; Moss, i, 47a Tyldesley cum Shakerley, ii, 346, 359, 547, 550 664 Tyldesley, —, ii, 490@, 4, 4924, 4, ak. a wae a fal Eliz., ii, 6070 ; Hen. de, 1, 303, 349; Hugh de, i, 303, 340; John, 11, 65 ; Sir Thom., ti, 236, 238, 240 3 Thur- stan, ii, 1134, 452; Col., ii, 237; Mr., ii, 244, 245 , Tyllesley, Thurstan, of Worsley, ii, 5834 ‘ Tynemouth, Roger of, ti, 1084, 110a Tyrwhit, Sir Robt., ii, 98 Tythby (Notts.), church of, i, 338 Udale, i, 63a, 654, 684, 70a, 742, 76a, 6, 776, 78a, b Ugden, ii, 455, 458 Ughtred’s-gate, ii, 438 Ulfsty, ii, 438 Ullathorne, —, ii, 94 Ulneswalton, i, 303, 335 #3 ii, 338 Ulverston, i, 1, 3, 6, 40, 444, 454, 46a, 476, 50, 514, 520, 56a, 4, 64a, 6, 656, 82a, 6,173, 1954, 219, 229, 255, 360, 362, 364, 366; i, 8, 78, 100, 101, 1198, 1204, 126, 141@, 1424, 340, 350, 4124, 4140, 433, 498@; advowson, ii, 1o#; church, i, 360; ii, 6, 11, 13 #, 14, 18 2, 23 2, 24, 28%, 39, 1284, 1404, 1414, }, 143 2; deanery, ii, Tor; manor, i, 365; li, I14a, 1194, 1276, 140@; market and fair, i, 365; Nonconformity, ii, 79"; rectory, ii, 1416; school, ii, 5614, 6144 Ulverston, curate of, ii, 39 2; lords of, i, 3573 ii, 126@; parson or rector of, ii, 128 7, I141a Ulverston Channel, i, 1854, 187a Ulverston, Adam, son of Rich. de, ii, 142 a, 6; Stephen of, ii, 1304 Underley, i, 38 Ungulata, i, 209 Uniformity, Act of, ii, 49, 51, 52, 53 Unitarians, the, ii, 68, 69 United Methodist Free Church, the, i, QT, 92 Unsworth Moss, i, 72a; Noncon- formity, ii, 89 ; school, ii, 6224 Unsworth, —, li, 4742, 6 Upbury (Kent), manor of, ii, 5764, 5774 Upholland, i, 454, 66a ; ii, 112a, 4, 1504, 166a, 198, 348, 350, 3664, 3676; chapel of, ii, 25, 1662; college and priory, ii, 25, 26, 27, 29, 33, 36, 39, 102, III, 112, 166a ; manor of, ii, I112a, 166a, 202, 280 ” ; park, ii, 456 ; school of, ii, 5615, 6134 Upholland, Thom., prior of, ii, 1126 ; Will., prior of, ii, 1120 Upton, i, 1884, 337 ; ii, 455 Upton (Warw.), i, 341 Upton, Stephen de, i, 341 Urban II, Pope, ii, 136 Urban III, ii, 136% Urban V, ii, 32, 1364, 1504, 1634, 172”, 173% Urmston, 3, 1934; ii, 343, 350; manor, li, 194 Urns, burial, see Interments and burial urns Urswick, i, 255; ii, 8%, 100, 101, 128 2, 340, 558; advowson, ii, 1276; church, ii, 6”, 10”, 11, 13%, 23”, 1275, 128a, 1414, 6; school, ti, 5612, 6084 Urswick, vicars of, ii, 15, 6085 Urswick, Little, i, 237, 238 ; ii, 126m, . man ” ; rswick Tarn, i, 42a, sta, ¢sJ, 614, 624, 63, a ea Urswick, Chris, ii, 1455; Rob. de, kt., ti, 446 ; Thom. ii, 446 ; Walt. de, ii, 445 Vaccaries, ii, 268, 269, 443, 455, 457, 458, 461 Vale Royal Abbey, ii, 13 7, toga; abbot of, ii, 28, 33, 1344 ; monks of, ii, 15, 28 Valence, Aymer de, ii, 145 7; Joan w. of Will. ii, 145@; Will. de, ii, 145a, 441 : Valentine, James, ii, 4950 Valoignes, Valognes, Geoffrey de, i, 320, 321, 336%; ii, 188; Maud de, i, 350, 353, 356%; Theobald de, i, 350, 361 Vantini, —, il, 6144 Vardon, Harry, ii, 496a, 4 Vaucanson, —, ii, 384 # Vaudey, abbot of, 1, 330 Vaughan, Herbert, Cardinal, ii, 95 5926, and see Salford, bp. of ; Rich., see Chester, bp. of Vaux, John de, i, 309; Lawr., ii, 50, 51 #, §2, 55 ; Rob. de, i, 323 Vavasour, John, i, 356 7; Mauddau. of Rob., i, 353; Rob., i, 354; Sir Walt. de, ii, 199 Venables, Rich. de, i, 301 # ; family of, i, 371 Verdon, John de, i, 355; Roesia, dau. of Nich., i, 355 ; Lords, the, i, 355 Vere, Alice de, i, 300; Aubrey de, i, 300%; Rob. de, see Oxford, earl of; Rohese de, i, 300; Simon de, i, 323 ; Walt. de, i, 323 Verelst, C. L., ii, 4954 Vermandois, Eliz. of, i, 359 Vernon, Ralph, ii, 210; Rich. de, ii, 192; Sir Rich. de, ii, 1074; Sir Will. de, ii, 194 ” ; family, ii, 1074, 1084 Vesci, Albreda, de, i, 318 ; Eustace de, i, 318; Will. de, i, 318, and see Northumberland, sheriff of Vicarages, perpetual, institution of, ii, 14, 16 Vickers & Maxim, Messrs., ii, 3744, 3754, 6, 3766 Victoria, Queen, ii, 253, 258, 5692, 614d Vigor, Allen, ii, 5874 Vilers, Alan de, i, 337, 338 ; Beatrice dau. of Matthew de, i, 338; Emma dau. of Pain de, i, 338; John de, i, 340, 343 5 Matth. de, i, 338, 339; Pain de, i, 295, 335, 337, 341; Rob. de, i, 337, 340, 341; Thom. de, i, 337, 338; Will. de, 1, 337, 338, 340; Warin de, i, 341; fam., ii, 183 Violer, Adam the, i, 338 Visitation of dioceses (1559), ii, 49 Vitalis, Orderic, ii, 182 Volunteers, ii, 247, 248, 257 Vyner, R. C., ii, 475 7 Vyspeyns, Gerard de, ii, 33 Wada, Dux, ii, 176 Waddingham (Lincs.), i, 292 7,319 7, 320, 323 2 INDEX Waddingham, Simon de, i, 323 Waddington, ti, 176”, 471a Wadenhoe, manor of, i, 308 Wadhow, ii, 176 2 Wages, ii, 276, 277, 278, 279, 280, 308, 309, 311, 312, 318 Wainsgate, Baptist church, ii, 76 Wainwright, Chas., ii, 50; Sir Thom., ii, 595@ Waitham Hill, ii, 339 Wake, Joan w, of John, i, 333 Wakefield, ii, 6084 Wakefield, Alex. of, ii, 1.494 Wakerley (Northants) ch., ii, 1684 ; manor, i, 332, 333 Wakes, ii, 468d Walden, ii, go Wales, Prince of, ii, 494a; Edw., Prince of, i, 310, 333 Walesby (Lincs.), i, 319 7, 320, 323 Waleton, Stephen de, ii, 262 7 Waleys, Sir Ric. le, ii, 199 ; family of, i, 368 ; ii, 456 Walkden Moor, ti, 288 ; Noncon- formity at, ii, 89 Walker, David, ti, 3674; Francis, ii, 450; Frederick Will., ii, 588 ; Ric., ii, 64%, 4026; Roger, ii, 4952; V.E., ii, 489a Wall, Will, ii, 38 Wallasey, Wallasea, i, r1oa@, 1130, 1254; ii, 3654, 4100, 4114, 4132, 26 4 Waller, Alderman, ii, 566a ; Sam., ii, 89 Wallingford (Berks.), i, 295, 298 Wallis, Albany, ii, 4062 Wallop (Hants), rectory, ii, 21 Walmersley cum Shuttleworth, i, 319 73 N, 343, 554 Walmesley, Walmsley, Bart., ii, 243; Geo., ti, 5726; Thom., ii, 461 Walmsley, i, 218, 228, 241, 246, 254; Baldingstone school, _ ii, 6204; chapel, ii, 63; Noncon- formity, ii, 69 Walna Scar, i, 430, 508 Walney, Island, i, 26, 39, 42a, 434, 444, 6, 45a, 46a, 5, 47a, 51, 53a, 542, 4, 556, 576, 58a, 6, 59a, 6, 654, 82a, 4, 1814, 1882, 189, 1934, 1964, 6, 1994, 4, 2000, 2014, 202a, 2034, 6, 2044, 2056, 2092, 2108, 229, 255; ii, 78, 1142, 1182, 1224, 180 2, 3554, 451, 496a Walsden, ii, 345 ; school, ii, 6192 Walsden, in Hundersfield, ii, 618@ Walsden Moor, i, 216, 228, 254 Walsh, Walensis, Le Walseh, family, ii, 31, and see Waleys Walshe, Edw., ii, 59, 61 2 Walsingham, Sir Francis, ii, 57 7, 225, 227 Walter, Aliz dau. of Hervey, i, 350; Beatrice dau. of Theobald, i, 3542; Edm., see Butler, Edm.; Hamon, i, 351; Hervey, i, 350, 351, 3533; Hubert, i, 351, 352, and see Canterbury, archbp. of; Maud, i, 354; Peter, i, 351; Roger, i, 351; Theobald, i, 296, 359, 352; 353, 354, 370 #; Il, 10%, II, 12, 21, 131a, 1544, 1684, 190, IQI, 192%, 439, and see Butler, Theobald ; Walter, i, 351 ; Will. 1, 350, 351 Walter the usher, i, 361 7 Walters, John, ii, 5952 Waltheof, earl, dau. of, ii, 185 665 Walthew, John, ii, 457; Rob., ii, 613a Walton, i, 434, 44 @, 6, 46a, 484, 49a, b, 53a, 594, 64a, 4, 68a, 69a, 70a, 4, 71a, b, 72b, 734, 774, 786, 794, 6; ii, 64, 92; church, ti, 23 %, 36 ; rectory, ii, 13, 29, 64 ”; rector of, il, 31 #2, 170a Walton Mere, i, 58a Walton-le-Dale, i, 229, 233, 238, 247, 254, 304, 318, 369, 370, 371, 372; 373) 374 5 M, 337 359; 5700 ; chapel of La Lawe, i, 372 ; ii, 18 ; manor, i, 374 ; market and fair at, i, 373 ; school at, ii, 617@ Walton-on-the-Hill, i, 263, 295 ; ii, 25 2, 37 Hy 99, 347; 348, 439, 5934, 6, 594a; advowson of, il, 35, 168a@ ; church, ii, 6, 7, 10”, 11, 19, 27 #, 30, 50, 5944; deinery, ii, tor; school, ii, 615a@; tithes of, ii, 168¢@ ; vicarage, ii, 16 Walton-on-the-Hill, rector of, ii, 30 ; vicar of, 11, 30 Walton, —, ii, 145 7, 5700 Walton, Adam, son of Ulf de, i, 303; Alex., ii, 1304; Chris., ii, 6054; Hen. son of Gilbert de, i, 340; Hen. de, see Richmond, archdeacon of; J. C., ii, 6054 ; James, ii, 164a ; Rob. de, ii, 7 #; Stephen de, ii, 439 ; Waldeve de, i, 295, 339; Warin de, i, 303 ; ii, 1694; Will. de, i, 303, 340; ti, 93 7, 148a, 5724 Walverden, mills, ii, 274 Walworth, Nathan, ii, 6162 Wandelbury (Norf. and Suff.), i, 351 Warbreck, i, 337, 340; Moor, i, 624, 64a, 67a, 754 Warburton (Ches.), ii, 157 ; church of St. Werburgh, ii, 1570; priory, ii, 157 2 Warburton, Warberton, Geo. ii, 4072 ; Sir John, ii, 98 ; Sir Peter, ii, 6026 Warburton de Brook, Peter, ii, 6234 Ward, Albert, ii, 489a, 490a, 4, 4914, 492a, b; Frank, ii, 489a; Rich., ii, 50; Will., ii, 164@ Wardle, i, 215, 218, 228, 254; ii, 345; Moor, i, 215, 228 Wardleworth, ii, 345, 6232 Wardley in Worsley, ii, 547, 548, 550 Wardon, barony of (Northants), i, 332 Wardstone, i, 39, 694, 824, 83a, 4, 84a, 4, 85a Warenne, Isabel de, i, 359; Regi- nald de, i, 295 ”, 336 Warenne, earl of, 307, 357, 373; John, earl of, i, 311 ; Will, earl of, i, 295, 324, 327, 358, 359; ii, 117”, 141a, 160a, 187, 437, and see Blois, Will. de, and Boulogne, Count of Warin, the Little, ii, 114a, 1274 Waring, Thom., ti, 3772 Warmton Wood, i, 10 Warner, Will. le, of Exhall, i, 343 Warr, Warre, Geo., ii, 5954; Joan w. of John, i, 333; Joan dau. of Roger, lord la, i, 334 ; John la, i, 333, 334; Margaret w. of Sir John la, i, 334 ; Reginald, lord la, i, 3343 Roger la, i, 333, 334; Thom., lord la, i, 334; ii, 1672; Lord la, ii, 293, 294, 5800, 582a ; family, ii, 34, 213 84 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Warren, Dr. Sam., ii, 85,91; Mr. it, 242 Warmer, John, ii, 64 2 Warrington, i, 614, 634, 64a, 4, 66a, 694, 71a, 764, 103, 105, 106, 108a, Lil, 1146, 1154, 118a, 1194, 1224, 123a, 6, 127, 1294, 130a, 1434, 145, 1454, 1462, 6, 1474, 6, 1486, 1494, 6, 150a, 6, 1514, b, 152a, 4, 153@, 6, 1§4a, 4, 155a, 6, 1858, 212, 235, 249, 254, 338, 339; 342, 343) 3475 Uy 21, 32%, 49%, 53, 64, 73, 99, 102, 183, 198, 2007, 239, 240, 251, 274, 287, 299, 302, 347, 3544, 3554, 4, 3640, 3654, 4, 3062, 4, 3676, 379a, b, 385%, 3874, 4004, 403a, 4054, 4074, d, 423, 428, 437, 438, 439, 4674, 476a, 4826, 485a, 487a, 5024, 4, 520, §22, 528, 539, 540, 554, 5934, 6014, 6; archdeaconry of, il, Io1; Blue Coat School, ii, 6194 ; bridge, i, 342 ; li, 103, 245, 282; ‘castle, ii, 520, 529, 536, 5395 540, 542, 543,545 ; chantry, il, 37, 38, 1634; 6024 ; baronage, ii, 543, and see Butler, baron of Warrington ; chapter of, ii, 99 ; church, i, 338, 339, 3483 ii, 2, 4, 6, 7 2, 23m, 25 2, 539, 543, 6014, 6024 ; deanery, ii, 6%, 407, 50, QQ, 100, IOI ; friary, i ii, 1163, 1626: hundred or wapentake, i, 298, 335%, 337%; Ay, 183, 184 2; 194 #; manor, i, 344; ii, 271, 293, 543, 6020; market and fair, 1, 341, 342, 348; li, 281, 293; Mote Hill, i, 262 ; ji, 540, 543; Nonconformity, ii, 78, 79, 80, 83, 86; rectory of, ii, 6026 ; Roman Catholic deanery, ii, 95 ; school, i, 348; ll, 37, 561a@, 6014; weir, ii, 4876 Warrington, barons of, see Butler of Warrington ; rector of, ii, 571 Warrington, Hen. prior of, ii, 1630 Warter, prior and convent of, i, 366 Warton, Warton-with-Lindeth, i, 464, 66a, 714, 764, 776, 212, 246, 247, 254, 291, 357 2%; il, 8 %, 100, 341, 342, 448, 508, 564 2; benefice, ii, 64 %; church, ii, 67%, 23; lord- ship, i, 357; school, ii, 56142, 6094 Warton, lords of, i, 357; ii, 193; vicar of, ii, 573a Warton, par. of Kirkham, i, 304, 335 %3 M, 104%, 333 Warton Crag, i, 474, 52¢, 590, 82a, 84a, 85a, 4, 1884, 2086; 11, 426, 508 Warton Tam, i, 61a Warwick, earl of, ii, 196, 214, 215 ; Gundreda, countess of, i, 355. 359; li, 1526; Margaret dau. of, 1, 3593 Gundreda dau. of, i, 359; Roger, earl of, ii, 1526; Will. Mauduit, earl of, 1, 341 Warwick, Mr., ii, 478¢ Wash Dub Wood, i, 694, 714, 72a, 74d, 774, 794, 84a, 85a, b Wash Dub Wood Beck, i, 854 Watch-making, ii, 366 Waterfoot, i, 11 Waterhead, i, 39, 822; Nonconform- ity, ii, 90 Waterhouses, i 1, 436, 52a, 796 Waterhowse, Rob., ii, 97 Waterloo, i, 454, 168, 198a ;_ ii, 4134; Nonconformity, ii, 87; Roman Catholic deanery, ii, 95 Waterside Park, ii, 450 Waterton, Chas., ii, 5924 Waterward, Lawr., li, 49 ” Waterworth, Stephen, ii, 407@ Watkins, John, ii, 6t9@; Dr., it, 4974 Watson, —, ii, 489a, 4, 490a, 4, 4916, 492a ; Herbert Armstrong, ii, 5690 ; Jas, ii, 5664, 567; John, ii, 3686, go2a, 516, 518; John son of Legh, ii, 5876 ; Lieut.- Col., ti, 248 Watt, Jas. il, 352a Wauton, John de, 1, 366 2 Waverley Abbey, ii, 1154, 128 % Waverton (Sussex), i, 321 ” Wavertree, i, 24, 764, IIl4a, I15a, 211, 216, 218, 228, 239, 246, 254, 295, 296% ; ii, 345, 3064, 6, 4892; mills at, ii, 295 Way, Jas. Pearce, ii, 6156 Wayles, Rob., ii, 1224 Weaver, River, the, i, 24 Weaver, J., ii, 478@ Weaving industry, ii, 266, 272, 299 Webb, Sidney, ii, 4894, 4924, 4934 Wedacre, family of, 1, 360 Wednesfield (Staffs. ), i, 178 % Weekley (Northants), i, 292 ; church, i, 291 ; manor, i, 291 Weeton, ’Weeton with Preese, i, 218, 228, 232, 237, 246, 254, 350%, 355, 357%; lI, 184 , 333 ; manor, i, 350, 356, 357 ; lord of, ii, 1314, 190 Weets, i, 7 Wegber, nr. Carnforth, i, 234, 254 Weisse, H. V., ii, 5954 Welbeck Abbey, i, 318; ii, 158 7 Welch, Hen., ii, 5664 Weld, Thom., ii, 5914 Weld-Blundell, C., ii, 475 2 Well i’ th’ Lane, i, 215, 228, 254 Well, wapentake, i, 337 Wellingore (Lincs.), church of, i, 291, 292; manor, i, 291 Wells, cathedral (Somers.), ii, 32 Welsh Whittle, i, 303, 335%, 371; ii, 198, 339 Welsh, Hen., ii, 68 Wenghale, Priory (Lincs.), i, 291 # ; ii, 169 ” Wengham, Hen. de, see London, bp. of Wenhunwen, i, 322 Wenlock Priory, i, 367 Wenning, River, i, 38 ; ii, 526, 528 Wennington, i, 554, 774, 82a, 84a, 6, 319%, 322; ii, 160%, 341, 4620 Wennington, Weninton, Adam de, i, 322, 324 2; Elias de, i, 322 Wensleydale, i, 5 Wentworth, Thom., ii, 230 Werlingham, lord of, i, 329 Werneth, ii, 3694 Wesham, i, 3502 Wesley, John, ii, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85 Wesleyans, i ii, 82 West, Joan w. of Lord Thos., i, 334; Reginald, i, 334; Thom., Lord, i, 334; Sir Thom. » li, 5800; Thom., ii, 406d ; family, i ii, 213 Westby, ii, 1094 Westby with Plumpton, ii, 333 Westby, John, ii, 53, 567, 57%; Mr., il, 53 ; Mistress, ii, 58 Westclose, i li, 457, 459, 460 n Westhall, ii, 92 666 Westhoughton, i, 326%; il, 1574, 217, 258%, 289, 343, 3674, 550; chapel, ti, 3745 Nonconformity, ii, 80 ; school, ii, 623@ ; steward of, il, 1584 Westleigh, ii, 311, 346, 550, 61924; manor, li, 194 Westminster, ii, 212; the King’s houses of, ii, 264 Westminster, the marquis of, ii, 319 Westmorland, barony of, i, 358, 361 Westmorland, earl of, ii, 222 Weston, i, 188¢ ; lord of, i, 329 Wetherhal, monks of, i, 321 Whalley, i, 5, 6, 8, 10, 464, 62:7, 64a, 98a, 4, 1106, 265, 291; Ii, 4, 5 7, 7,15, 16, 20, 25, 3d, 37%, 43, 52, 99, 102, 103, 1254, 1326, 133%, 1374, 138a, 6, 176, 180, 197, 217, 218, 226, 237, 335, 336, 337) 3774 455%, 458, 461, 463, 511, 551, 6126 ; ate and monastery, 1, 207 ; li, 13, 14, 15, 18, 19, 27, 28, 29, 36, 39, 43, 103, 115%, 1280, 1316, 1706, 204, 297, 454, 462, 551, 606@ ; advowson, il, 132 b: appropriation of church, ii, 1324, 133a@, 134@; chapel, ii, 18, 1g 2, 37, 6064; church, i, 308, 315, 3195 Uy 6, 7, TON, 13%, 17, 19, 23, 1326, 134, 135a, 4, 1384, 1394; convent of, ii, 581a@; dean- ery, ii, 99, 100, 552; school, ii, 298, 5614, 5764, 604a; hermitage at, li, 137@; manor, ii, 138a, 7 ; Park, ii, 462, 463%; Planes Wood, ii, 511; rectory, ii, 13, 23, 577a, 6062; tithes of, li, 1324, 134@, 606a ; vicarage, ii, 15, 29, 1334, 134a, 0 Whalley, abbot of, ii, 203 7, 218, 293, 455,458, 5802, 582a, 6 ; John, abbot of, il, 5814, 6014 ; Gregory, abbot of, li, 1348; Peter, abbot of, ii, 1300 ; Ralph, abbot of, ii, 139a; Simon, abbot of, ii, 139@ Whalley, monks of, ii, 14 #, 27, 28, 29; rectors, vicars, and parsons of, i, 15, 19, 27, 99, 1334, 1354, 136 2, 139 2 Whalley, deans of, ii, 18, 455 ; Geoffrey, dean of, i, 371; Geof- frey son of Rob. dean of, i, 304 ; Roger, dean of, ii, 136 Whalley Nab, i, 10, 98¢ Whalley Range, i, 122@; ii, 4940 Whalley, Hen. de, i, 372”; Hugh, ii, §72a. 6054; John of, ii, 1334; Matthew, ii, 1126; Rich. de, ti, 456; Will., ii, 1124, 1395 Wharfe, valley of the, ii, 351d Wharles, i, 3507 ; ii, 333 Wharmer Forest, see Quernmore Wharton, in Little Hulton, Nonconf. in, il, 72 Wharton, —, ii, 42, 566a; Post- humus, 11, 573@; Sir Thom., ii, 123a ; lord, ii, 233 Whately, Ralph of, 1i, 1064 Wheatley (Notts.), i, 323, 324 Wheatley Booth, ii, 335 Wheatley Carr Booth, ii, 336 Wheelton, i, 335%; ii, 338, 6076 ; moor, i, 10 Whernside (Yorks.), ii, 1214 Whessoe (Dur.’, ii, 5754 Whigs, the, i, 243, 250 Whippet-racing, ii, 4684, 504, 505 Whiston, ii, 346, 404a Whitacre, John, ii, 453; Nich., ii, 453 Whitaker, Whittaker, John, i Ai, 5874; Sutcliff, ii, 50ga ; Thom, ii, 357¢; J. D., ii, 357@; Messrs., ii, 3740 Whitbarrow, i, 19 95a Whitbeck (Cumb. ), ii, 1426 ; church, ii, 40a, 141 2 Whitby, abbot of, ii, 141d Whitchurch, ii, 5876; Castle, i, 306 White Moss, i, 516, 78a White, A. P., ii, 4984; John, ii, 4002 ; Will, ii, 4ooa Whitecastle (Wales), manor of, ii, 195 Whitefield, ii, 3984 Whitefield, Rob., ii, 3664 Whitehaven, i ii, 305 ; Nonconformity at, ii, 76 Whitehead, Edm,, ii, 3934; Thom., ii, 64 7, 5726 Whiteley Dean, i, 54a, 67a, 6, 68a, 4, 706, 726, 746, 76a, 6, 776, 78a Whitendale Moor, i, 1965 Whiteray Gill, i, 784 Whiteriding, ii, 443 Whites, J., li, 503 Whiteside, Thom., see Liverpool, bp. of Whitestone, i, 774, 836 Whitestone Clough, i, 844, 85a Whitewell, i, 5, 6,7, 39, 65a, 71a, 0, 72a, 736, 774, 794, 82a, b, 83a, 4, 84a, 0, 85a, 6; li, 460 2, 4876 Whitfield, Peter, ii, 407@ Whitgift, Jeho, see Canterbury, archbp. of Whithern, Thom., bp. of, ii, 1214 ‘ Whitleghdale,’ ii, 460 2 Whitley Carre, ii, 459 Whitley in Haw Booth, ii, 459 Whitmoor, i, 68a, 4 Whitmore Fell, ii, 454 Whitridingbrow Wood, ii, 448 Whittingdon Hall, i, 31 Whittingham, i, 602, 984, 304, 335 2; ii, 95, 333, 550 Whittington, i, 44a, 72a, 854, 1984; li, 8, 23, 100, 180, 342, 520, 545; advowson, i li, 1450; Castle, li, 546 ; church, ii, 6%, 545; churchyard, i, 545, 546; lordship, ii, 437 ; moor, i, 574, 70a ; mount, ii, 521 ; rectory, ii, 1476, 148 n Whittle-le-Woods, i, 335 2 ; ii, 338, 355a, 5 hs Whitwick (Leics.), advowson, | ii, 111#; church, ii, 11a, 112a; rectory, ii, 111a, 112a@, 1660; tithes of, ii, 11a Whitworth, i, 28, 764; ii, 66%, 132 2, 3744, 5543; chapel, ii, 377, 66%, 621a; school, ii, 62I1a; valley, i, 11 Whitworth, Joseph, i, 102 ; ii, 353, 4, 3714, 3720 Wickes, John, ii, 5862 Wickwar (Gloucs.), manor of, i, 334 Wicoler, see Wycoller Widdington, lord, ii, 244 Widditt, John, ii, 567@ Widdop, i, 11, 54a Widnes, i, 984, 297 2, 298, 300, 303, 308 ; ii, 1310, 1517, 192, 197, 346, 350, 3544, % 3994, 4ola, teak 455, 548, 6186; barony, honour or lordship, i, 298, 299, 301, 302, 303, 312; common, ii, 288; court at, ii, 183 ; Farnworth grammar school, ii, 5894 ; manor i, 298 ; vaccary of, ii, 269 INDEX Widnes, lord, of, ii, 31 Widowfield, ii, 1624, 1642 Wigan, i, 17, 21, 190, 366”, 370”; ii, 25, 48, 49, 57%, 72 2, 93% 99; 1187, 189 7, 198, 202, 203, 226, 235, 237, 240, 251, 265, 272, 2822, 290, 293, 299, 345, 3475 348, 350, 3514, 3524, 353@, 3562, 3574, 3582, 4, 3594, 3614, 3644, 6, 3652, 4, 3796, 3874, 3994, 4, 4004, 4044, 421, 423, 426%, 457, 468a, 4762, 548, 553, 554; ad- vowson, ii, 155@ ; borough, ii, 197, 250, 285, 349, 350; church, i, 370, 3713 il, 6, 7, 237, 50; deanery, li, TO1; guild, ii, 272 ; manor, i, 370; ji, 32, 197%; market and fairs, ii, 280, 293; Nonconformity, ii, 69, ’80, 83, 86, 90 ; rectory, i, 370; ii, 16, 32, 36, 38, I50a; Roman Catholic deanery, ii, 95 ; school, li, 561@, 6094 Wigan, corporation of, ii, 231; mayor and bailiffs of, ii, 97, 137 7, 213; rector or parson of, ii, 21, a 57 #59, 99, 164 7, 197 2, 227, 265, 293 ; vicar of, ii, 16.7 Wigan, Agnes w. ‘of Rob. de, ii, 32%; Joan dau. of Rob. de, it, 32% ; John, ii, 65, 73 ; Rob. de, ii, 32” Wigglesworth, i, 454 Wilbraham, Hon. R. B. , li, 256 Wilcote, Ralph. of, ii, 105a, 1064 Wilcox, Peter, ii, 405a Wildbore, Augustine, ii, 64 7 Wilding, Isabel, ii, 605a Wilgrave, i, 726 Wilkins, Ric., ii, 6052 Wilkinson, Isaac, ii, 3634; John son of Isaac, ii, 3634; family, ii, 478a Willcocks, E. J., ii, 603@ Willen, Brian, ii, 146 7 William I, i, 297, 313 William II, i, 292, 3133; ii, 167 2, 181, 182 William III, ii, 243, 447 William IV, ii, 250 William, king of Scotland, i, 301 ; ii, 116 2, 129 2, IQI William, Prince, brother of Hen. III, 1, 307 William the hermit, of Heaton, nr. Lancaster, ii, 103 Williams, Lieut.-Colonel, ii, 247 Williams & Norgate, Messrs., ii,417 Williamson, Hen., ii, 622@; John, ii, 398@ ; Messrs. James, ii, 4080 Willington (Ches.), ii, 1314 ; manor, ii, 138 Willis, —, ii, 4754 Willisham (Suff.), i, 3267, 331; church of, i, 328 ; manor of, i, 333 Willoughby (Notts.), i, 292 Willoughby, —, ii, 488@ ; Baldwin, ii, 1136; Sir John, ii, 113 7; Capt., ii, 243 2 Wills, General, ii, 245 Wilmslow, bells of church at, ii, 3654 ; road, ii, 554 Wilne (Derby.), ti, 3874 Wilpshire, nr. Blackburn, i, 222, 229, 254 ; ti, 337, 4978 _ Wilson, Eliz. ii, 618@; Geo., ii, 255; John, ii, 5992, 6184; Marg. dau. of Rob., 1i, 405a@; Nich., ii, 42; Rob., ii, 366¢; R. P., ii, 4950 ; Thom., ii, 6130; Will., 6086. 667 Wilson-Patten, J., ii, 255 Wilton, earl of, 1i, 248 Wiltshire, earl of, ii, 123@ Winborneholt Chace (Dorset), i, 306 Winchcombe, Will. of, ii, 1o6a Winchelsey, Rob., archbp. of Can- terbury, ii, 1330 Winchester (Hants), i, 259, 296, 316, 364; ii, 5 2; College, ii, 582 7, 593@ : Winchester, bp. of, i, 354; Rich. Fox, bp. of, ti, 580d Winchester, earl of, ii, 480d; Roger, earl of, i, 3023 Sayer de Quinci, earl of, i, 312 Winckley, John, ii, 572¢ Winder Moor, i, 219 Windermere, i, 4, 39, 40, 420, 434, b, 46a, 48a, 50a, 514, 544, 61a, b, 624, 65a, 662, 834, 844, 85a, 104, 105, 1234, 128, 1284, 1300, 1314, 1324, 6,1334, 6, 1344, 6, 1364, 1374, 6, 138a, 139a, 1406, 1414, 6, 1424, 6, 1434, 171, 202a, 2046, 2084 ; ii, 1214@, 1260, 3644, 437; Ferry Inn, i, 50a, 65a, 82a, 6, 83a, 6, 840; fishery at, ii, 295 Windermere Lake, i, 514, 984, 168, 189, 190, 2004, 6, 364; ii, 464, 4676, 488a, 6 Windhull, Alan son of Alan de, i, 340 Windle, i, 338, 340; ii, 346, 4o4a; chapel, ii, 34; manor, i, 341; moss, i, 726 ; school, ii, 6196 Windsore, Alex. de, i, 360 3 Will. de, i, 363 2 Winewall, nr. Colne, i, 11 ; ii, 458, 459, 460 2 Wingfield, i, 350 Winmarleigh, i, 42a, 212, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 254, 357 7; ii, 332, 4724, 4830 Winmarleigh, Lord, ii, 256, 472@ Winstanley, i, 366 » ; 3 ti, 1124, 291, 348, 349, 550, 6174 Winster River, i, 39; ii, 1434; valley of, i, 203 ; ii, 4846 Winter Hill, i, 10 Winterbottom, John, ii, 3680; Mr., u, 75 Winterburn (Yorks.), ii, 122d, 123 2, 1264, 129@; grange of, ii, 1154, 121a@, 1274 ; lordship of, il, 1230 Winwick, i, 70a, 73a, 786, 11sa, 2024, 211, 225, 229, 231, 234, 235, 237, 238, 240, 246, 254, 262, 366 7; ii, 4, 7, 99, 102 2, 176 2, 239, 348, 502a ; advowson, i ii, 4 2; church, 1, 293, 372; li, 4, 6, 7, 10 nm, 12n, 13 2, 19, 35,503 deanery, i ii, TOT ; quarry, i, 730; school, 1i, Ona, 603; vicarage, ii, 29, 36, 38; vicar of, ii, 2 Winwick, John de, ii, 27, 32, 1 50a Wirral (Ches.), i, 32, 127, 168 ; ii, 177, 179, 4820 ; deanery, ii, tor Wissant, port of, ii, 1186 Wiswell, 1, 217, 228, 254, 303, 318 ; ii, 336, 455; manor, li, 1384; Moor, 1, 10 ‘ Witchona,’ i, 313 Witham Priory, i, 361 2 Witham, Geo., ii, 93 7 Witherslack, i, 104, 105, 128a, 1294, 1354, 365 ; manor, i, 366 Withington, i, 460, 1124, 4, 113¢, 114@, 1384, 229, 254, 326 2, 330 ; li, 293, 344, 550; manor ii, 6170 Withington, lord of, i i, 328 2 A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE Withnell, i, Moor, i, 10 Witton, ii, 337 Wodroofe, Wodruff, Woodruffe, —, ii, 453, 461 ; Rich., ii, 608@ ; Rob., ii, 58 Wogan, John, i, 3557, 357 Wolf Fell, i, 706 Wolfeclose, ii, 460 Wolfenden, ii, 458, 460; Booth, il, 460 Wolfhole Crag, i, 684, 69a, 724, 78a, 82a, 4, 846; ii, 462 Wolsey, Cardinal, ii, 104, 1052, 1236, 142a Wood, John, ii, 1134, 6234; R. ii, 4914; Mr., ii, 256 Woodburn, Hugh, ii, 110a, 6; John, ii, 6144 Woodchurch, i, 168 Woodcock, —, ii, 5032, 4; Alice dau. of Gilbert, i, 372, 373 Woodhead (Rutl.), manor of, i, 328 Woodlands, i, 255 Woodplumpton, i, 367, 368 ; ii, 334 ; school, ii, 6164 Woods, Chas., ii, 407@ ; F., ii, 4716; Sam., ii, 4o5@ Woodward, John, ii, 452; Rich., il, 97; Rob., ii, 1504, 152a ; Thom. (or Will.), it, 131@ Wool and Woollen industry, i, 13 ; ii, 270, 271, 272, 295, 296, 303, 321, 3514, 376, 377, 378. Woolley, John, ii, 6146 Woolston, Woolston with Martins- croft, 1, 474, 366%, 372, 373; ii, 347; manor, ii, 290; moss, i, 68a, 6, 72a, 6 Woolton, i, 1316, 133@; manor, ii, 271, 276; Nonconformity, ii, 87 Woolton, Much or Gt, ii, 345, 6163; manor, i, 299 ; school, ii, 5614 Woolton, Little, ii, 1314, 345, 350; manor, i, 302 Wootton, —, 11, 489a, 4 Worcester Abbey, ii, 5 7 Worcester, battle of, 11, 240 Worcester, Oswald bp. of, ii, 179 % ; Philip Morgan, bp. of, ii, 36 Word, dean of Ely, ii, 6132 Wordsworth, Will., ii, 6084, 6146 Workington, 1, 358 Worsaw Hill, i, 6 Worsley, i, 14, 19, 72a, 118a@; ii, 306, 343, 3524, 358, 4, 3982, 4724, 498a, 550; Canal, li, 307 ; manor, ii, 6192; Row Green School, ii, 6194 Worsley, Elias of, ii, 139@ ; Marck, ii, 97; Rob. ii, 56; Sir Rob., ii, 98, 220; Thom., ii, 6154 ; Major- General, ii, 240, 250 Worsthorne, Worsthorne with Hurst- wood, i, 239, 254; il, 77, 336, 454, 464, 554 ; Moor, i, 215 Worston, i, 704, 746, 768; ii, 276, 290, 336, 453,458; mill, li, 274, 275 Worston Brook, 1, 7 Worthington, i, 330 ; ii, 339, 4076 Worthington, —, ii, 611@; Barth. li, 5726; John, ii, 398¢; Thom. de, i, 330; Will. de, 1, 330 Wotheney, i, 354 ; abbey, i, 356; ii, 129a Wotton, Peter de, i, 332; family, ii, 112% Wrae, see Wrea 11, 335 %5 ii, 338; Wraton, Rich. de, i, 324 ” Wray, 1, 65a, 724 ; ii, 277 Wray Hill, i, 219, 227, 229, 255 Wray with Botton, i, 319 # ; 11, 341 Wrayton, i, 530, 604, 626 ; ii, 1606 Wrea, Le, lands in, 11, 278 Wrea Green, school, ii, 6186 Wrea Waste, ii, 290 # Wrench, Thom., il, 5854 Wrestling, ti, 4682, 499 Wrey, Lower, ii, 450 Wrey, Upper, ti, 450 Wright, F. W., ii, 4894; Jack, ii, 478a; Joe, li, 478a; Rob., ii, 478a; Tom, ii, 4784; Capt., ii, 247 : Wrightington, i, 326 #, 327, 330; il, 93 #, 338, 550; hall, il, 4704 Wnightington, John, ii, 97, 152@; Rich., ii, 1644 ; W., ii, 228 Wrigley, Francis, ii, 367@, 4; Joseph ii, 3672, 5; Joshua, ii, 368a Wrottesley, John son of Sir Hugh de, i, 346 Wudemundeslai, i, 367 Wuerdale, ii, 345 Wulcote, Walt. of, ii, 1060 Wulfrich, lord of Withington, i, 328 2, and see Mamecestre, Ulvric de Wulstoncroft, Rich., ii, 5813 Wyatt, —, ii, 385@ Wycherley, John, ii, 3674, 6 Wycliffe, John, ti, 33 Wycoller, Wycolure, ii, 458, 460 7 ; Nether, ii, 459 ; Over, ti, 459 Wycoller Beck, 11, 454 Wygston, Sir Will., ii, 98 Wyk, Thom. de, rector of Man- chester, ti, 31, 32 Wyke, John, ti, 3668 Wykeham, Will. of, ii, 5805 Wymondhouses, Nonconformity at, li, 70 Wyn, Sir Rich., ii, 232 Wyndgates, in Westhoughton, ii, 8 19 ‘Wyndmylnflat,’ nr. Warrington, i, 346 Wyre River, i, 39, 484, 654, 70a, 89, 1334, 1364, 1384, 158, 189, 1936 ; ii, 304, 4700, 472, 550, 6144 ; fishery at, ii, 295 Wyresdale, i, 426, 434, 48a, 55a, 594, 63a, 654, 69a, 754, 76a, 4, 2100, 357%; li, 129a, 263 #, 284, 419, 420, 437, 440, 441, 442 and 2, 443, 444, 446, 455, 456; abbey, ii, 10”, 13”, 20”, 102, 1314; forest of, ii, 269, 287 2, 438, 439, 440, 441, 445, 446, 447, 448, 452, 453, 4672; Nonconformity in, ii, to) Wyresdale, abbot and monks of, i, 360 ; ii, 12, 14, 274; lord of, ii, 1544 Wyresdale, Nether, i, 357 ”; ii, 332 465 ; lord of, ii, 193 Wyresdale, Over, i, 454, 48a, 5, 494, 50a, 542, 4, 654, 664, 67a, 4, 68a, 4, 694, 6, 70a, 6, 726, 736, 756, 76a, 774, 784, b, 850 ; ii, 341 Wyresdale, Hugh de, ii, 438 2 Wyreside, ii, 482a Wytewall, see Whitewell Wythens, ii, 455 Wyther, Sir G., ii, 203 2; Thom., ii, 1615 ; Will, ii, 442” 668 Yarfrith, heiress of, i, 297” Yarlside, i, 188a Yarwood, Will. ii, 5974 Yate and Pickup Bank, ii, 336 Yates, Hen., il, 5714; Joseph, ii, 5874; Rob. ui, 67; Will, n, §72a; Capt. ii, 248; Mr, n, 396@ ; & Thorn, ti, 3734 Yatton, Rob., ii, 1068 Yawthorpe (Lincs.), i, 319, 320, 323 Yeadon (Yorks.), ii, 3 Yealand, i, 494, 524, 594, 714, 72a, 774, 82a, 836, 84a, 85a, 244, 246, 254 ; li, 181, 427 Yealand Conyers, i, 357 # ; il, 342; Nonconformity in, 1, 80 Yealand Redmayne, i, 357%; ii, 342 Yealand Storrs, i, 524 Yealand, Adam de, i, 329 ; ii, 193 # Yearwood, Ric., ii, 565 Yeats, John, ti, 5654 Yewbarrow, i, 424, 734, 764, 850 Yewdale Beck, i, 56a Yonge, Geo., ii, 98 York, 1, 259, 306, 310, 311; ii, 22, 61, 1274, 141a, 176, 185, 219, 237) 261, 270, 281, 297, 4706; cathedral, ii, 5, 8, 13, 22, 32, 128a, 178 ; diocese of, 11, 2, 3, 4, 5, 22, 40, 41, 42, 49, 51, 52, 99, 1374, 1416, 180, 570a ; hospital of St. Leonard, 1, 359, 360; St. Mary’s Church, 1, 313, 358 2, 359, 362; treasurership of, ii, 32; weavers’ guild at, ii, 272 York, archbp. of, ii, 9, 17, 56, 63, 99, 118%, 1374, 1454, 6, 155 2%, 161a, 162a, 1636, 224; Alex. Neville, archbp. of, ii, 150a, 570a; Edw., archbp. of, ii, 41%; Edw. Lee, archbp. of, il, 42; Edwin Sandys, archbp. of, ii, 49, 50, 6086 ; Hen. Murdac, archbp. of, i, 3172; John Kemp, archbp. of, ii, 1716 ; John le Romeyn, archbp. of, ti, 21; John Thoresby, archbp. of, ii, 28; Laur. Booth, archbp. of, ii, 33 ; Matt. Hutton, archbp. of, ii, 609@ ; Rich. Neile, archbp. of, ii, 63 ; Rich. le Scrope, archbp. of, ii, 33; Roger, archbp. of, 1i, 140a, 1416; Thom., archbp. of, il, 314, 168@ ; Thurstan, archbp. of, ii, 117%; Vigmund, archbp. of, i, 259 ; Walt. de Gray, archbp. of, li, 19, 1172, 128a; Wilfrid, archbp. of, ii, 2, 3, 5 ”, 176”; Will. Booth, archbp. of, ii, 33; Will. Fitzherbert, archbp. of, ii, 11, 168a; Wulfstan, archbp. of, li, 5 ” York, chancellor of, ii, 9; merchants of, ii, 204 York, duke of, ii, 214 York, Hubert Walter, dean of, i, 351, 352 York, Aaron of, i, 331 2; Nich. of, ii, 1394; Peter of, ii, 115@, 130a Zinc, i, 29 Zinzendorf, founder of Moravian Church, ii, 81 Zoology, Marine, i, 87 Zouche (of Ashby), Maud dau. of Alan Lord, ii, 198 ” , Vol. I, page 6, CORRIGENDA y ” Il, 10, ” 50, Io, ” 535 19, ” 13, 39, ” 534, 1% 774, y 15, 1934, ” 39, 207, ” 26, 233, » 18, 244, yy 37, 25 2, ” 15, 281, 4, 30, 2886, ,, 31, 2894, after line 25 add: ‘M. add to note 9, ‘Cf. Pipe Roll Soc. v, 52 line 30, for Burgh on the Sands read Burgh by Sands 295) 310, 316, note 9, 318, line 19, 337, » 14, 339, 1 24, 368, 3735 ” ” ” ” ” ” ” line 59, for Tiviston read Twiston Mellow ,, Mellor Malmesbury vead Salmesbury Rough Lea water read Rough Lee water Kingley read Ringley 20, omit ‘probably miocene time’ (see Dawkins’ ‘ Prehistoric Man’) 43, for Wragton read Wrayton Leepers ,, Leapers Subden ,, Sabden Houghton ,, Hoghton parish » township west » north-east Alrum » Abram Geoffrey ,, Warin Bulk » Quernmore In Aldingham Ernulf 6 carucates of land to geld’ Chirchecon 7ead Chircheton Eccleshall ,, Eccleshill Brittany » Britanny or before 1176 read 1177 14, (cf. pedigree) for 1260 read 1206 lines I, 2, for ‘by the feoffment of Roger son of Henry de Cuerden’ read ‘by feoffment of Robert de Grendon and relict of Philip de Legh, both of co. Stafford’ 373, in place of note 1, read Staf. Hist. Collect. xviii, 256, 297 Vol. II, page 77, line 20, for Yorkshire read Lancashire vy 1204, 4, 1214, 4, 45, ” 25, ,, Collesham ,, Cockerham Cockerham Cokesham ,, 122a, note 105, after Gressoms add i.e. Fines for entry to land 1304, line 18, for Acclorne read Acclom (Acklam) 1474, ” 32, ” Estrigge ,, Escrigge 1592, Thomas, abbot of Cockersand, occurs in Trin. term 1303 ; De Banc. R. 148, m. 179d. 1604, line 38 \consyll should probably be Cousyll 166, note 53, for Franciscans read Dominicans 1618, ,, 333, line 38, 334, 5 50, 339, note 25, 4972, line 12, 5044, y 24, 512, » 9 6134, 5, 555 Westoy », Westby Hatherall » Hathersall Home » Holme Bibby-Hesketh read Fleetwood-Hesketh Whittar read Whitaker Clewford ,, Chew Mill Ford Wathew ,, Walthew 669