Full text of "The Victoria history of the county of Lancaster;"

See other formats

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

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

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

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 the Rev. H. J. Cuaytor, M.A.

By A. F. Leacu, M.A., F.S.A.
By the Rev. H. J. Cuayror, M.A.

” ” ”

” ” ?

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“)

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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. Pipe R. 353-6; below, ‘Religious Houses,’ p. 149.
© Evesham received from the church of Leyland until its appropri

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.

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

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).

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.

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,

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.

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.

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

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.

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

‘ 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.

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 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

”' 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.

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.

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

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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).

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

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.

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-

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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,

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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,

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.

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

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.

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.

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

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.’

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

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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 <W.
clericus de Wygan,’ suggests the possibility that Blackburn may be a misreading here, and that that
parish was then included in the deanery of Warrington.‘ The later deanery of Blackburn con-
tained only two parishes, Blackburn and Whalley ; if Blackburn was originally in Warrington
deanery some light is perhaps thrown upon the title of dean borne by the hereditary rectors of
Whalley down to the second quarter of the thirteenth century.

It may have been on the suppression of the hereditary deanery of Whalley that the two
parishes were annexed to the deanery of Manchester, as they are found when the Taxation of
Pope Nicholas was made in 1291.° In that year the three deaneries in Coventry and Lichfield
diocese were within the archdeaconry of Chester, and were as follows :—

Mancuester and Biackgurn, containing the twelve parishes of Ashton-under-Lyne, Black-
burn, Bolton (not taxed), Bury, Eccles, Flixton, Manchester, Middleton, Prestwich,
Radcliffe (not taxed), Rochdale, Whalley.

WarRINGTON, containing the thirteen parishes of Childwall, Huyton, Halsall, Leigh,
Ormskirk, Prescot, Sefton, Walton-on-the-Hill, Warrington, Wigan, Winwick, Aughton
and North Meols, the last two not taxed.

LEYLAND, containing the five parishes of Croston, Eccleston, Leyland, Penwortham, Standish.

By 1535, the date of the Valor Ecclesiasticus, a separate deanery of Blackburn, containing the
parishes of Blackburn, Eccles, Rochdale, Whalley, had come into existence, and a sixth parish
(Brindle) had been formed in the deanery of Leyland, but there was no other change.

In the parts of the county which lay in the diocese of York the original arrangements seem
to have been subjected to a still more drastic alteration in the thirteenth century. In 1178 mention
is found of an Adam, dean of Amounderness,’ and from about that date to 1205 of an Adam, dean
of Kirkham (or ‘ Adam of Kirkham then dean’), and of an Adam dean of Lancaster, and a ruri-
decanal chapter of Lancaster. It seems not improbable that the three Adams are but one person,
who was rector of Kirkham in Amounderness and dean of Lancaster.? Adam may have been an
hereditary dean, but during the first half of the thirteenth century the deanery of Lancaster was
held at various times by the rectors of Garstang,” Kirkby Ireleth,"’ Thornton,” Tatham, and
(c. 1250) Halton.* The names of the rectors present at recorded chapters and the locality of the
matters brought before them suggest that the area of the deanery was at first even wider than the

1 Lancs. Pipe R. 38, 97. ® Coucher Book of Whalley, 89. 5 Tbid. gt.

* Geoffrey de Buckley’s resignation of the tithes of Rochdale to Stanlaw Abbey between 1224 and 1235
was also made in the Warrington Chapter (ibid. 143). us Ibid. passim.

® Pope Nich. Tax. (Rec. Com.), 249. It might, however, be held that the joint title implies the pre-
vious existence of an independent deanery of Blackburn. ee ;

” Lancs. Pipe R. 38. Ibid. ee

° The dean of Lancaster must necessarily have held some benefice other than Lancaster, for that was
appropriated to the priory.

© Cockersand Chart. (Chet. Soc.), 1039. :
non Pipe R. If R. de Kirkby here is the Roger parson of Kirkby Ireleth who flourished at

this date. :
® Coucher of Furness, 435. 13 Church of Lancaster (Chet. Soc.), 362, 392. 4 Thid. 431.

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

parishes of the above-mentioned deans show it to have been.'® It would appear to have included
the greater part, if not the whole, of that portion of the archdeaconry of Richmond which lay on the
western side of the Pennine ridge. Furness was certainly within it originally,"® though it is
mentioned as a separate deanery as early as 1247.7

By 1291, the date of the Taxation of Pope Nicholas, the deanery of Lancaster had ceased to
exist, and its parishes had been distributed among three deaneries, only one of which was entirely
in the county.8 They were within the archdeaconry of Richmond, and were as follows :—

AMOoUNDERNESS, containing the ten parishes of Chipping, Cockerham, Garstang, Kirkham,
Lancaster, Lytham, Poulton, Preston, Ribchester, St. Michael-on-Wyre.

(Kirxpy) Lonspate and Kenpat, containing the nine parishes of Bolton-le-Sands (not taxed),
Claughton, Halton, Heysham, Melling, Tatham, Tunstall, Warton, Whittington (with
ten Westmorland and Yorkshire parishes).

Copetanp (and Furness), containing the seven parishes of Aldingham, Cartmel, Dalton, Kirkby
Ireleth (not taxed), Pennington, Ulverston, Urswick (with twenty Cumberland parishes).

These three deaneries were included in the new diocese of Chester on its creation in 1541.
The deanery of Amounderness was unaltered except for the omission of Lytham from taxation ;
the other two deaneries had been subdivided thus :-—

Kirxsy Lonspate, containing the five Lancashire parishes of Claughton, Melling, Tatham,
Tunstall, Whittington (with five Yorkshire and Westmorland parishes).

KENDAL, containing the four Lancashire parishes of Bolton-le-Sands, Halton, Heysham,
Warton (with five Westmorland parishes).

Furness and CARTMEL, containing the seven parishes of Aldingham, Cartmel, Dalton,
Kirkby Ireleth, Pennington, Ulverston, Urswick (originally in Copeland deanery).

CopELAND, containing no Lancashire parishes,

The growth of the population of Lancashire in the nineteenth century necessitated a drastic
revision of the ecclesiastical organization of the county. The bishopric of Chester was becoming
too important as well as too unwieldy to be managed by a single hand. The needs of the situation
were set forth in the third report of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners in 1836, and finally in 1847
the new diocese of Manchester was created.!® The old collegiate church was made the cathedral,
its warden becoming dean of the chapter constituted there, which includes four residentiary canons
and a number of honorary ones.” The deaneries of Amounderness, Blackburn, Manchester, and
Leyland, together with the parish of Leigh in the deanery of Warrington, and such parts of the
deaneries of Kendal and Kirkby Lonsdale as were within the county were taken out of the diocese of
Chester and formed into the new diocese, which was made subject to the metropolitan jurisdiction
of York and divided into two archdeaconries, Manchester and Lancaster.” In 1877 a new arch-
deaconry of Blackburn was carved out of that of Manchester. Thus the diocese of Manchester
consists (1907) of the three archdeaconries of Manchester, Lancaster, and Blackburn. That of
Manchester now consists of twelve deaneries :—The deanery of the cathedral containing 27 parishes ; ”
Ardwick containing 39 parishes ; Cheetham containing 22 parishes; Hulme containing 33 parishes ;
Salford containing 24 parishes; Ashton-under-Lyne containing 24 parishes; Bolton containing
51 parishes ; Bury containing 24 parishes; Eccles containing 25 parishes; Oldham containing
25 parishes ; Prestwich and Middleton containing 16 parishes ; Rochdale containing 26 parishes.

The archdeaconry of Blackburn consists of four deaneries : Blackburn containing 39 parishes ;
Burnley containing 28 parishes ; Whalley containing 39 parishes ; Leyland containing 31 parishes.

The archdeaconry of Lancaster consists of five deaneries : Amounderness containing 19 parishes ;
Preston containing 26 parishes; ‘The Fylde’ containing 21 parishes; Garstang containing
16 parishes ; Tunstall * containing 17 parishes. ‘

Besides the creation of the diocese of Manchester provision was made in 1847 for the trans-
ference of the deanery of Furness and Cartmel from the diocese of Chester to that of Carlisle at the

8 Lancs. Pipe R. 338, 361.

'S Meeting of the chapter of Lancaster at Aldingham (Coucher of Furness, 435-6).

" Thid. 656. 8 Pope Nich. Tax. (Rec. Com.), 3074, 308.

® Stat. 10 & 11 Vict. cap. 108. * Lond. Gaz.

*! Le Neve, Fasti, ili, 333.

* The parishes here enumerated are the modern ecclesiastical parishes,

* This deanery represents the Lancashire portions of the deaneries of Kirkby Lonsdale and Kendal.

100

ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY

next vacancy of the latter see, which took place in 1856.24 The diocese of Carlisle at present
(1907) includes the following parishes of Lancashire :—Hawkshead in the deanery of Ambleside ;
Cartmel and Colton with their dependent ecclesiastical parishes comprising the deanery of Cartmel ;
Aldingham and Dalton with their dependent ecclesiastical parishes comprising the deanery of
Dalton; and Kirkby Ireleth, Pennington, Ulverston, and Urswick within the deanery of
Ulverston.

The deanery of Warrington (excluding the parish of Leigh) was united in 1847 with that of
Wirral in Cheshire to form a new archdeaconry within the diocese of Chester called the arch-
deaconry of Liverpool,” and remained within Chester diocese until 1880. But again the practical
need which arose from the enormous growth of population and churches in the district resulted in
the creation of a new bishopric. Thus the diocese of Liverpool came into existence, including all
this portion of Lancashire and placing the whole of the county—with the exception of part of the
parish of Ashton-under-Lyne—outside the diocese of Chester. It was rendered possible by the
passing of Sir Richard Cross’s Bishoprics Act, 1878,"° and after the subscribing of an endowment
fund of £100,000 was established by order in Council of 30 March, 1880, which came into force
from 9 April the same year. A supplementary order of 3 August, 1880, vested in the new bishop
so much of the patronage lying within its boundaries as had hitherto been exercised by the bishop
of Chester, and founded twenty-four honorary canonries. The diocese is divided into two arch-
deaconries, those of Liverpool and Warrington, the latter formed 21 July, 1880, These arch-
deaconries were re-arranged on the 14 July, 1882.

The archdeaconry of Liverpool now consists of six deaneries: Liverpool North containing
13 parishes ; Bootle containing 16 parishes ; Ormskirk containing 12 parishes ; North Meols con-
taining 20 parishes; Walton containing 27 parishes; Wigan containing 22 parishes.

Thearchdeaconry of Warrington consists also of six deaneries : Childwall containing 21 parishes ;
Liverpool South containing 20 parishes; Prescott containing 16 parishes; Toxteth containing
18 parishes; West Derby containing 9 parishes ; Winwick containing 22 parishes.

The parishes of Little Mitton, Hurst Green, and Thornton in Lonsdale are in the diocese
of Ripon, becoming part of that diocese on its formation in 1847.7

* Le Neve, Fasti, iii, 229. 5 Thid. 257.
* Stat. 41 & 42 Vict. 7 Stat. 6 & 7 Will. IV. cap. 79.

Io!

THE RELIGIOUS HOUSES
OF LANCASHIRE

INTRODUCTION

No religious house arose in the poor and remote districts which in the
twelfth century became the county of Lancaster, until nearly thirty years after
the Norman Conquest. Eleven monasteries were established before 1200,
but more than half of these were cells of houses outside the county. The
alien priory of Lancaster was founded about 1094 and followed the Benedic-
tine rule, which as yet was the only one introduced into England. Cells of
the great Benedictine abbeys of Evesham and Durham were established at
Penwortham and Lytham in the reigns of Stephen and Richard I respectively.
The only independent house of the order in the county, the priory of Uphol-
land, was founded as late as 1319.

The Cluniac adaptation of the Benedictine rule was represented by the
small cell of Lenton Priory at Kersal, which dated from Stephen’s reign. Of
the three Cistercian houses Furness was the earliest, having been founded at
Tulketh near Preston in 1124, and removed to Furness in 1127 ; Wyresdale
existed for a few years only in the reign of Richard I ; the monks of Stanlaw
Abbey in Cheshire were transferred to Whalley in 1296. There were four
houses of Austin Canons; the priory of Conishead was founded (at first as a
hospital) before 1181, the priories of Burscough and Cartmel about 1190, and
Cockerham Priory, a cell of Leicester Abbey, about 1207. Two other houses
of regular canons followed the Premonstratensian or Norbertine rule ;
Cockersand Abbey was founded as a hospital before 1184, and the priory of
Hornby, a cell of Croxton Abbey, before 1212. The total number of houses
was thus fourteen. The Cistercian abbey of Merevale kept one or two monks
at Altcar, but this did not rank as a cell.’ No preceptory of the Templars or
the Hospitallers existed inthe county. Both, however, held lands there, and to
the latter belonged the hospital of Stidd or Longridge, founded in the twelfth
century, and dependent on their preceptory at Newlands in Yorkshire.
Besides this there was a hospital for lepers at Preston, dating from the twelfth
century, and at Lancaster one for lepers and destitute poor founded about
1190; small almshouses were established there and at Lathom in 1485 and
1500.°

In the thirteenth century the Dominican Friars settled at Lancaster, the
Friars Minor at Preston, and the Austin Friars at Warrington. A college of
secular priests was founded in the chapel of Upholland in 1310, but dissolved
nine years later ; the church of Manchester became collegiate in 1421.

"See under Altcar. The abbey and nunnery of Chester, Birkenhead Priory, and Dieulacres Abbey had

also lands in the county. Nostell Priory held the advowson of Winwick for a time.

* Lancs. Chantries, 221. Lord Monteagle, who died in 1523, made provision for a small hospital at
Hornby, but this was never carried out.

102

RELIGIOUS HOUSES

It may be noted here that besides these regular and ordinary forms of
the religious life, Lancashire had also from time to time its hermits and
anchorites. Hugh Garth, the founder of Cockersand Abbey, was a hermit.
Kersal Cell grew out of a hermitage. William the Hermit, of Heaton, near
Lancaster, is mentioned about 1280.‘ In 1366 John ‘dictus le Hermit de
Singleton ’ was licensed to have Divine service in the chapel at the foot of the
bridge of Ribble for three years.’ John of Gaunt, in 1372, granted to
Brother Richard de Goldbourne, hermit, the custody of the hermitage of the
chapel of St. Martin in Chatburn with its lands and other property, as the
hermits, his predecessors, held it.6 The ‘hermit of Lancaster’ is mentioned
in 1403.’ Five oaks were given in 1406 to Thurstan de Oakenshaw, hermit,
to repair Warrington bridge.* The life of the hermit, though further with-
drawn from the throng of men, was more open to the world than that led by
the other type of solitary, the anchorite or recluse, whose voluntary prison
usually adjoined or formed part of a church. Brother Richard Pekard, recluse
of the Dominican Friary at Lancaster, was licensed to hear confessions in
1390.” This form of solitude was, asa rule, the only one possible for women,
and several recorded recluses in Lancashire were anchoresses. Henry, duke of
Lancaster, made permanent provision for one at Whalley, but after several of
them had escaped into the world, the hermitage, as it was loosely called, was
dissolved in 1437." In 1493 the bishop of Lichfield issued an injunction to
the abbot of Cockersand to include Agnes Booth or Shepherd, a nun of
Norton Priory, who wished to lead the solitary life at the chapel of Pilling."

The religious houses of Lancashire, with the one great exception of
Furness, have few points of contact with general history until the eve of the
Dissolution, and only one produced a chronicle. Their local influence, ex-
cluding those which were mere cells of external houses, was extensive,
especially in the north of the county, where the people were poor and
Lancaster and Preston the only urban centres. Furness, Cartmel, and Whalley
exercised feudal lordship over wide tracts of country ; Burscough and Furness
were lords of the small boroughs of Ormskirk and Dalton. A considerable
number of the churches of the county were in the patronage of the religious
houses. Lytham Priory and others had trouble with neighbouring lords, but
these turned on disputed claims to land and common rights, rather than any
matter of religion. ‘There are some records of disputes between the various
houses ; these, however, do not seem to have had anything to do with
jealousy between the different orders. Furness naturally resented the founda-
tion of Conishead so close to itself, and on land under its own lordship, but
the quarrel was soon composed. Difficulties arose between the former house
and Lancaster Priory over their respective fishing rights in the Lune, and
between Lancaster Priory and the abbeys of Cockersand and Whalley, in
regard to tithes and parochial rights over lands held by those abbeys in the
parish of Poulton, whose church belonged tothe priory. These disputes, too,
were ultimately settled by legal or friendly arrangement.

3 See p. 154. * Lanc. Church (Chet. Soc.), 278.
* Lich. Epis. Reg. Stretton, vol. 2, fol. 13.
® Misc. Bks. (Duchy of Lancs.), vol. 13, fol. 744. Goldbourne was to pray for the souls of the duke and
his progenitors. ; ;
" Cal. Pat. 1401-5, p. 225. * Wylie, Hist. of Hen. IV, iv, 144.
° Lich. Epis. Reg. Scrope, fol. 1264. See p. 137. " Chet. Soc. Publ. (Old Ser.), lvii (2), p. 30.
103

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

HOUSES

1. THE PRIORY OF PENWORTHAM

This cell of the great Benedictine abbey of
Evesham was established by agreement between
the abbot and convent of that house and Warin
Bussel, baron of Penwortham. Bussel trans-
ferred to the abbey the whole township of Far-
ington and a fourth part of that of Great Marton
in Amounderness, the church of Penwortham
with its tithes, and pensions from the church of
Leyland and the chapel of (North) Meols. In
return the abbey undertook to have Penwortham
church served by three of its monks and a chap-
lain and to receive the profession of Bussel’s son
Warin should he desire to become a monk.?
The abbot who made the agreement is called
Robert in the Evesham Chartulary, and as the
only known abbot of that name within possible
limits ruled the house from 1086 to 1096, the
foundation of the priory has usually been assigned
to the reign of Rufus.? But the fact that sons
of Warin, who are described as children in the
agreement, were alive after 118g is inconsistent
with so early a date. We must suppose either
that a later abbot, Robert, is omitted from the
list of heads of the house or, with much greater
probability, that the copyist of the chartulary
wrongly extended the initial of Reginald,’ who
was abbot in the second quarter of the twelfth
century. The mention of Warin’s children
and other indications point to a date in the reign
of Stephen and not much if at all earlier than
1140. Bussel’s liberality to the distant abbey
of Evesham might seem to be sufficiently ex-
plained by the fact that it already owned land in
his neighbourhood, the vill of Howick adjoining
Penwortham having been given to it by Count
Roger the Poitevin.® But there was a closer

‘Evesham Chartul. Harl. ©MS. 3763, fol. 89; Far-
rer, Lancs. Pipe Rolls, 320.

7 Hulton, Priory of Penwortham (Chet. Soc. O.S.
xxx), 1-2. The volume contains many of the priory
charters from the Worden and Penwortham muni-
ments.

3 Abbot Reginald is usually stated to have suc-
ceeded Maurice in 1122, but the Continuator of
Florence of Worcester (ii, 91) and the Register of the
abbey (Cotton MS. Vesp. B. xxiv, fol. 27) make his
abbacy begin in 1130 (Farrer, op. cit. 321). It is
scarcely likely, however, that the chroniclers of the
house omitted an abbot.

‘Ibid. Constantine, the abbot’s chamberlain, one
of the witnesses, occurs elsewhere in connexion
with Abbot Reginzld, who died 25 August, 1149 ;
Harl. MS. 3763, fol. 169.

* Harl. MS. 3763, fol. 58 ; Lancs. Pipe R. 318-19.
His gift was confirmed by Ranulf Gernons, earl of
Chester, who was in possession of the land ‘ between
Ribble and Mersey’ in 1147 if not earlier; Tait,
Mediace. Manchester, 169.

OF BENEDICTINE MONKS

connexion: his wife held land in Evesham it-
self and probably belonged to a Worcestershire
family.®

Before his death Bussel added further gifts.
The whole, with the exception of the Marton
estate, were confirmed between 1153 and 1160
by his eldest son Richard, who himself gave
several parcels of land, the advowsons of Leyland
and North Meols, and a fourth share of his fish-
ing rights in the Ribble.” Charters of confirma-
tion were afterwards obtained by the abbey from
Richard’s younger brother and successor Albert,
from his son Hugh, and from Pope Alexander III.®
In the fourteenth century Queen Isabella, mother
of Edward III, who had a grant for life of the
Penwortham fief, and subsequently Henry, duke
of Lancaster, confirmed the monks of Evesham
in their Lancashire possessions.®

The priory never became an independent, or
even quasi-independent, house. From first to
last it remained a small cell or ‘obedience’ of
the parent monastery, which left it no freedom
of action. Its inmates were always monks of
Evesham, and their head, though commonly called
prior, was often given the more lowly title of
‘custos.’?? The abbey appointed him without
presentation to and institution by the bishop and
could at any time recall him or his brethren at
Penwortham and substitute others.’ Legally the
priory had no separate property, though a part
of the Lancashire estates might be appropriated
to its maintenance, and occasionally a benefactor
in earmarking a portion of his gift for this pur-
pose seems at first sight to be treating the cell as
a distinct legal person.” In the sixteenth century
the priory paid over to the abbey a fixed sum
annually, amounting to more than half the gross
income, and had to defray the fixed charges from
the rest.'* How far back this arrangement went
does not appear. The prior granted leases and

* Priory of Penwortham, 6.

"Lancs. Pipe R. 322-5. In exchange for the
plough-land and a half of land at Marton, the abbey
had received two oxgangs of land at Longton, two-
thirds of the tithes of the demesne at Warton and
Freckleton, and certain fishing rights. The priory
afterwards used to send salmon to Evesham on the
feast of St. Egwin, but this was ultimately commuted
for a money payment ; Priory of Penwortham, 10 5.

* Ibid. 5-8. * Ibid. 29, 16.

“e.g. Priory of Penwortham, 21, 53; “temporalis
custos’ (ibid 97) ; ‘ prior qui potius custos’ (ibid. 99)-

"Ibid. Several priors had two terms of office.
For a case of papal provision of a prior and prohibi-
tion of his removal without reasonable cause see
Cal. of Pap. Letters, v, 190 and below, p. 106. The last
prior was appointed by Cardinal Wolsey, perhaps as
papal legate.

" Priory of Penwortham, 9-10.

" Valr Eccl. (Rec. Com.), v, 233.

104

RELIGIOUS

entered into agreements, but he did so as proctor
for the abbey, and usually this was made clear in
the deed,’* which he sealed with one of the
Evesham seals, for the priory had none of its
own. As often as not the deed was drawn and
signed at Evesham. The abbot and convent,
not the priory, exercised the patronage of the
Leyland and North Meols livings. Down to
1331 they presented rectors to both, but in that
year they obtained the appropriation of the rec-
tory of Leyland to their own uses, subject to a
suitable provision for a perpetual vicar.!® Pen-
wortham church had been appropriated from the
first without obligation to endow a vicarage, being
served by monks of the priory or by paid chap-
lains.?®

Owing to the humble status of the priory its
history is little more than a record of land con-
veyances. With but one or two exceptions its
priors are mere names to us. Nor do the others
stand out from these shadows by reason of their
virtues, unless we may credit Prior Wilcote with
a good heart on the strength of his bequest to-
wards the expense of feeding up the monks of
the abbey after the periodical blood-letting.!”
They were certainly treated very differently by
Penwortham’s best-known prior.

Residence in monastic cells was generally
regarded as banishment and often used as a
punishment for monks who had made the mother
house too hot to hold them. To this practice
Penwortham owed the dubious honour of the
headship of Roger Norris, of whom his contem-
porary and opponent Thomas of Marlborough has
left a graphic portrait.’ A glutton, wine-bibber,
and loose-liver, he was able, unscrupulous, courtly
in manner, and his eloquence gave him a show
of learning. Originally a monk of Christ Church,
Canterbury, he betrayed his brethren in their quar-
rel with Archbishop Baldwin, and was imprisoned
by them, but escaped through a sewer. Thrust
into Evesham as abbot by Richard I he dissipated
its revenues until the monks were reduced to a
diet of bread and water, varied occasionally by
bread and beer ‘ which differed little from water,’
and for lack of decent clothing many of them
could not appear in choir and chapter-house.
The learned Adam Sortes was so persecuted by
him that in 1207 he retired to be prior of Pen-

“ Priory of Penwortham, 21, 54, 56.

% Ibid. 41-6 ; licence of Edward III, 26 June,
1330, that of Pope John XXII, 13 Jan. 1331, Bishop
Northburgh’s ordination of the vicarage, 4 Feb.
1332.

6 This privilege was admitted, after inquiry, by
Bishop Northburgh ; Priory of Penwortham, 97-105.
In 1394 the prior obtained episcopal licence to cele-
brate divine service in the parish church without
prejudice to the oratory in the priory for two years ;
Lich. Epis. Reg. Scrope, fol. 1314.

" Priory of Penwortham, 105.

8 Chron. Abbat. de Evesham (Rolls Ser.), 103 sqq.
See also Dict. Nat. Biog. xii, 139.

105

HOUSES

wortham,’® For many years Norris defied or
evaded protests and visitations, but at last in 1213
the papal legate, Cardinal Nicholas of Tusculum,
deposed him, ‘whom,’ adds Thomas of Marl-
borough, ‘may God for ever destroy.’2” Neverthe-
less the convent had no scruples in persuading
the legate to make him prior of Penwortham.
In five months his excesses obliged Nicholas to
deprive him of this post too.2!_ But about five
years later the legate Pandulf, out of pity and to
prevent his becoming one of the vagabond monks
condemned by St. Benedict, again invested him
with the priorship. He remained at Penwortham
until his death in July, 1223, refusing to the end
to be reconciled to the abbot and convent of
Evesham and withholding certain revenues which
belonged to them.” Between this date and the
Dissolution the only outstanding events in the
history of the priory are the inquiry of Bishop
Northburgh as to its status, already referred to,
a dispute with Queen Isabella’s steward at Pen-
wortham, who from 1340 to 1343 exacted from
the priory ‘puture’ or entertainment for himself
and his train during the holding of the three
weeks’ court there, and the claim of the sheriff
to similar hospitality. A local jury found that the
queen’s steward had no such right, and on g June,
1343, the royal commissioners of inquiry into
the oppressions of officers awarded the abbot of
Evesham damages.” Seven years later (25 Novem-
ber, 1350) Henry, earl of Lancaster, abandoned
his claim to puture for the sheriff and his ser-
vants."4

The visitors in the reign of Henry VIII in
1535 accused Prior Hawkesbury, who had been
appointed by Wolsey, of incontinence. The
number of monks in the priory is not stated.
Originally there had been three, but at the time
of Northburgh’s inquiry there were only two,
including the prior.° Between 1535 and 1539
the abbot and convent of Evesham must have
withdrawn the monks, for on 20 February in
the latter year they leased the priory or manor
and rectory of Penwortham and the rectory of
Leyland to John Fleetwood, gentleman, of
London, for ninety-nine years at a rent of

'® Sortes is described by Thomas of Marlborough
as ‘in literatura apprime eruditus, qui antequam esset
monachus rexerat scholas artium liberalium per multos
annos’; CAron. Evesham, 147. He was twice sent to
Rome on convent business; on the first of these
visits (1205) Abbot Roger compelled Adam to follow
him home on foot ; ibid. 148.

0 Ibid. 250. ® bid.

2? Marlborough asserts that he and Sortes with
others begged him in vain to lay aside his rancour
and ask the abbot to take him back as a monk of
Evesham.

3 Cal. of Pat. 1343-5, P- 213 3 Priory of Penwer-
tham, 36-9.

*4 Ibid. 39.

% L. and P. Hen. VIII, x, 364.

8 Priory of Penwortham, 97.

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

£99 55. 34.77 Fleetwood undertook to repair
the chancels of the two churches and find an
honest priest to serve Penwortham. Hawkes-
bury is mentioned in the deed as ‘late fermour,
custos or [prior] of Penwortham.’

‘The priory was dedicated to St. Mary. Its
original endowment, already described, had been
increased by subsequent grants. Four oxgangs
of land in Longton and one in Penwortham
were given by Richard Bussel. Geoffrey
Bussel gave two oxgangs of land in Longton, and
his wife Letitia part of her demesne in Leyland.”
Small parcels of land in these and neighbouring
townships were added by other donors. Hugh
Bussel bestowed the tithe of his pannage *° and
his cousin Robert a portion of his Ribble fishery.
The gross income of the priory when valued for
the tenth in 1535 was {114 16s. 10d.” Its
lands had a rental ofa little over £30, the rectory
of Penwortham was worth £36 11s. 1od. a year
and that of Leyland £48 12s. 11d. More than
half this income, £63 15. 1od., was paid over to
Evesham, and with other fixed charges reduced
the net annual revenue of the cell to £29 185. 7d.
The deductions included £3 65. 8d. for the fee
of the earl of Derby, who was seneschal of this
as of some other Lancashire monasteries, and £3
each to the bailiffs of Penwortham and Leyland.
Twenty shillings a year were given in alms to
the Leper Hospital of Preston, and £7 135. 4d.
to the poor at Penwortham and Leyland, the
latter by direction of the founder.**

Evesham Abbey being surrendered to the king
nine months after its lease of the priory estates to
Fleetwood,” the lessee from November, 1 § 39, paid
his rent to the crown.” In January, 1543, how-
ever, he bought the property, with the advowsons
of Leyland and North Meols and the manor of
Calwich and rectory of Ellastone in Staffordshire,
for the sum of £893 18s. 8d.°° The Penwortham
estate remained in the Fleetwood family down
to 1749, when it was sold to John Aspinall.3”

Priors oF PENWORTHAM

Henry,* occurs between 1159 and 1164
William of Winchcombe,®® occurs between
1180 and 1195

” Priory of Pen:ortham, 79. Possibly Fleetwood
had already hada shorter lease. On 4 July, 1536,
Richard Rich, chancellor of Augmentations, wrote to
the abbot and convent requiring them to let his friend
John Fleetwood, servant to the Lord Chancellor, have
a lease of the farm of Penwortham at once since no
more of their convent should have the same (L. and P.
Hen. VIII, xi, 25.) ” Lancs. Pipe R. 323.

® Priory of Pen:esrttam, 6. ™ Ibid. 7." Ibid. 9.

* Valor Eccl. v, 233. 8 Thid.

* Dugdale, Mon. ii, 9. ** Mins. Accts. 33 Hen.VIII.

> 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

“ 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?

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.

“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.

“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.

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.

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. <A few years before the Dissolution
the tenants of Skerton complained that Abbot
Alexander had ‘edified’ a fish-yard of such
great height and strength that the water was
stopped and did great damage to the town and
highway.”

In the Furness peninsula the monastic occu-
pation made great changes. At the Dissolution
the woods of High Furness fed three smithies,
and its streams turned five water-mills.* The
abbot had his boats for fishing on Coniston Lake
and Windermere from very early times.” He

“* Pat. 8 Edw. III, pt. 2, m. 12.

* Anct. D,, L.S. 118.

8 Coucher, 621-3.

’ Coucher B. passim. * Tbid.

® Tbid. fol. 88. For forest rights cf. fol, 70-84.

® See Anct. D., L. 346, L.S. 128 (agreement of
1460 with Abbess Elizabeth of Syon); Lancs. and Ches.
Rec. (ed. Selby), 268, 368; Lancs. Plead. ii, 241.
From a petition of George Southworth L. and P.
Hen. VIII, xii (1), 1093, it appears that the ‘ fishing
of salmons’ had not been retained by the monks for
their own use.

Duchy of Lanc. Rentals and Surv. R. 376;
Trans. Cumb, and Westmid. Antig. Soc. viii (1), p. 90 ;
Arch. Fourn, iv, 88-105.

% Lancs. Final Concords, i, 4-5.

= I2i

hunted and hawked on the hills between his
manor of Hawkshead and the lands of Ulvers-
ton; at Hawkshead was a grange, half manor-
house, half cell, with private chapel for the
monks, and gallows for misguided tenants.”
In Furness High and Low were commons and
woods kept for the maintenance of the monks’
cattle. In the course of time these had been
inclosed, like many other woods and pastures of
the abbey, to the great annoyance of the
tenantry.” In Low Furness activities were
still more varied ; here too mills and smithies
were kept in the hands of the brethren.°® “The
abbey cattle were pastured on Angerton Moss.”
The Duddon and other streams provided fish.
The little borough of Dalton was six times in
the year the scene of a busy fair, which
brought distant merchants to quicken trade and
gave dues to the abbey.”

Few of the men who gave and took all these
benefits have left more than their names. In 1314
Thomas, bishop of Whithern, granted forty days’
indulgence to those who prayed for the soul of
brother Elias of Egremont, the cellarer.°? In
1349 John of Collesham desired reconciliation ;
he had left his order, because he had been
refused leave to visit Rome in the jubilee year.1
Fortunately our knowledge of the tenantry is
more definite. The isolation of Furness, to-
gether with the supremacy of the abbey, gave
that independence of tenure which has been
so characteristic of the district. The villeins
rose out of their servile condition easily ;12 and
early in the sixteenth century the customs of
High and Low Furness could be put down
definitely in writing. Apart from the large
freeholders who only paid suit and annual
services, with no tithes, the tenants were cus-
tomary, holding by tenant-right. The only
copyholders seem to have been the burgesses of
Dalton, who paid a relief of 35. 4d. on the bur-
gage and provided six men for the defence of
the abbey. The customary tenants agreed
with Queen Elizabeth to pay a relief equal to
two years’ rent. This was perhaps traditional,
but the usual payment had only been the formal

Coucher, 111; Trans. Cumb. and Westmld. Antig.
Soc. xi (1), 7-16.

* Rentals and Surv. R. 376. Their annual value
was £39 135. 4d.

* Lancs. Plead. i, 69. Abbot Alexander kept deer
where none had been before.

8 Coucher, 249-61. ” Thid. 326, 331.

°° By grant of Hen. II]; Coucher, 131, 149.

® Anct. D., L.S. 118.

1 Cal. Pap. Letters, ili, 355.

10 Quitclaims of xativi to the abbey in Duchy of
Lanc. Cart. Misc. m. §3, pp. 70, 68, 94 ; Anct. D., L.
456, 4573 Coucher B. fol. 304, 68-9.

1 West, Antig. of Furness, 149, 599.

1 West, op. cit. 123-4. Copyholders and bur-
gage tenants in Dalton seem to be regarded as
identical.

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

‘God’s penny.’ They provided fifty-four men.’
The customs of tenure were kept up by tradition
and proven by inquest. Old men in the days of
Elizabeth, when John Brograve, the attorney-
general of the duchy, sought (1582) to restore
the old provisions for which the commissioners
had substituted a small annual rent, could re-
member the picturesque days of their childhood.
However burdensome feudal obligations were in
neighbouring districts,’°* the abbey repaid its
sustenance with many privileges. Robert Wayles
told how he used to visit a kinsman who was a
yeoman 1° of the convent kitchen, and saw
tenants come with twenty or thirty horses to
take away the weekly barrels of beer, sixty in
all, each containing ten gallons, and with each
barrel went a dozen loaves. He also saw thirty
or forty carts, called corops, which took away
dung to manure the tenants’ fields in Newbarns
and Hawcoat; and another witness could re-
member carting it to the fields of a certain
widow. Robert used to visit his father-in-law’s
smithy at Kirkby, and remembered how clott
iron, called livery iron, was brought to be melted
for their ploughs by the tenants. It was asserted,
too, that every tenant having a plough could
send two persons to dine one day in every week
from Martinmas till Pentecost. Children and
labourers could go to the abbey for meat and
drink ; one witness had been in the abbey
school, which contained both a grammar and a
song school. The tenants could send their
children to this school, who were allowed to
come into the hall every day, either to dinner or
supper. Apt boys might be elected monks or to
some office within the monastery. Perhaps it
was from this school that the scholars, of whom
we hear, went up to Oxford.” When, again,
the dykes of Walney were broken by the sea,
the abbot took his carts and men to renew them ;
and any tenant could take wood for his necessi-
ties, and gather whins and brakes for baking his
oatmeal cakes. The abbey also had special
clients. Thirteen poor men were kept as alms-
men; and every year bread and meat were
given at the gates. In Roger Pele’s rental eight
widows appear, who have the food of eight
monks, amounting to £12 a year.’ Sometimes
a bargain was struck. More than one grant was

™ West, op. cit. 98. The commissioners give the
number of abbey tenants in Lancashire, Yorkshire, and
Cumberland, ready to serve the king, ‘having harness
jack, coat of fence with long spears, bows and other
weapons,’ in readiness as 1,2 5 8, including 400 horsemen.

1°5 "The Gressoms are often referred to in the L. and
P. Hen, VIII (see e.g. xi, 1246; and xii (1), 478).

8 West, op. cit. App. viii.

7 Abbot Roger’s rental accounts for {10 for
Oxford scholars, and £4 ‘ pro contribucionibus collegii
nostri apud Oxforth.’ (The college was St. Bernard’s,
now St. John’s.) See also Beck, op. cit. 279.

*$ Rentals and Surv. ptfo. 9, No. 733 cf. Valor
Eel. ¥; 270;

given in return for a robe in time of need."
Alan, the son of the parson of Clapham, gave
two oxgangs of land to the abbey in return for a
promise to receive him as a monk if sickness or
old age were to drive him to this course. In
the meantime he was to be received at the abbey
or its granges, and provided with food and drink
for himself and his horse stcut unus eorum conversus.
While he was in the world he was to receive
twice a year at Winterburn a measure of corn.
In addition to all this, the abbey was to receive
one of his sons as servant, and if he desired it
and was worthy, as a lay brother.’° In 1264
Adam of Merton made a similar bargain full of
curious details."

During the fifteenth century the abbey took
no share in public affairs. It was still in the
days of Henry VII the most important place in
north Lancashire, and the Earl of Lincoln thought
its port a suitable landing-place in 1487. He
had little success, and it was probably at this
time that Innocent VIII’s bull against insurrec-
tion was ordered to be read in the abbey.'”
As time went on, the prestige of the abbey seems
to decline. There are complaints of cruel and
malicious attacks, while on the other side are
suspicious acts of favouritism and intrigue, which
are the customary signs of weakness. The ten-
dency becomes marked in the abbacy of Alex-
ander Banke, who seems to have descended to
the shelter of legal expedients. The privileges
of the abbey did not escape question in the
larger world. In 1530 William Tunstall gave
information that the abbot had kept back £250
of a subsidy which he had collected, and also
spoiled the king of harbour dues and the rents of
the sheriff's tourn."3 Disputes arose with the
local gentry."* Since the gentry were becoming

' e.g. Geoffrey de Boulton gets two cows and six
ells of russet cloth ‘in mea maxima necessitate.’
(Coucher B. fol. 54). "° Thid. fol. 114.

"™ Anct. D., L. 445. ‘Abbas et conventus furnes
concesserunt Ade de Merton victum et vesticum in
hac forma, videlicet unam panem conventualem et
unam lagenam bone cervisie per diem cum moram
fecerit in Abbatia, et si mittatur ad aliquam Grangiam
habebit eundem cibum et potum que habent conversi
cum quibus commoratur. Dabunt etiam eidem unam
robam annuatim ad Natale domini qualem dant pueris
de hospicio, et duo paria pannorum lineorum et tot-
idem paria caligarum et sufficientem calciaturam. Ad
hec invenient ei pannos ad lectum suum, scilicet duo
lintheamina et duos chalones quo advixerit ; ita dum-
taxat quod quociens novos reciperit, reddat cellarario
veteres incontinenter.’

Raine, Historians of York, iii, 337. In 1483 the
abbot lent Richard HI £100, perhaps ‘to meet, in
part, the expenses of Richard’s second coronation at
York.’ Beck, op. cit. 298.

™ Lancs. Plead. i, 195 ; Beck, op. cit. 311.

™ e.g. with Christopher Bardsey, the earl of Derby’s
under-steward at Aldingham (Lancs. Plead. i, 93 8qq.-
(1521-2)). Turbary dispute at Stalmine accom-
panied by violence (ibid. ii, 74).

122

RELIGIOUS HOUSES

independent, and the influence of the new no-
bility was exerted everywhere, the monasteries
had resort to favour. Annuities were paid to
the Dukes of Norfolk and Suffolk, to the Earl
of Wiltshire, to Cromwell both as Master of
the Rolls and Master Secretary, to the chan-
cellor of the Duchy, to Sir Thomas Wharton,
and by royal mandate to Mr. Thomas Holcroft.!¥
In several pleadings it was asserted that the abbot
or his monks had connived to defeat or thwart
justice. ‘There are ugly stories how a murderer
had been pardoned at the instance of his kinsman
the abbot; 7° how valuable deeds were kept from
the owners in a locked casket ;!” how a monk,
Hugh Brown, broke open a chest which con-
tained the common seal of the abbey and sealed
blank parchments upon which leases were after-
wards made of its Yorkshire manors to the Earl
of Cumberland.48 This last episode, which was
afterwards admitted by Hugh Brown in 1542,
occurred just after the death of Alexander.
After robbing the dead abbot’s bedroom of gold
and silver, he and others got a smith to break
open the chest where the seal was. Afterwards
the Earl of Cumberland sent to procure the con-
firmation of the lease from Roger Pele and the
convent. ‘The earl affirmed that he had got it
from Alexander on his death-bed ; but the plea was
unavailing. The forgers were imprisoned, and
the lease disallowed. The case throws light
upon the inner and outer relations of the abbey
just before the Dissolution, and it is not surpris-
ing that it shared in the contempt with which
the new gentry and officials regarded spiritual
dignities."® Roger Pele, the last abbot, adopted

5 The sums ranged from {£10 to 4os., and are
given in Roger’s Rental; ptfo. 9, No. 73. They
do not appear in the Vabr Eccl., which is otherwise
practically identical. The Survey also shows that
such men as the Marquis of Dorset and the Earl of
Derby were now titular tenants of the abbey and paid
quitrents; Rentals and Surv. R. 376. Although Roger
puts down the Master of the Rolls and the Secretary
separately, the amounts agree with the different sums
given to Cromwell in 1533 ; L. and P. Hen. VIII, vi,
632, 841. Cf. xi, p. 597. ‘The previous annuity had
been £4, now raised to £6 135. 4¢., with {10 as a
gift in ready money.

"6 Beck, op. cit. 314, 315.

™ Lanes. Plead. 116-118.

"8 Beck, App. lxxxvii-xciii. The invalid lease ap-
parently granted the stewardship of Winterburn, and
in the Valor and Rental he receives £6 ‘ pro exer-
cendo officium senescalli’; but the title was also a
matter of dispute between the Earls of Derby and
Northumberland ; Corres. of Edward, Third Earl of
Derby (Chet. Soc.), 115, 127. The Earl of Cumber-
land claimed the premises after the Dissolution, and
got a promise of confirmation. According to a letter
of Southwell he wanted Winterburn for less than it
was worth ; L. and P. Hen. VIII, xii (2), 206, 279.
The suit of 1542 went against him.

"9'The abbot was one of the executors of Lord
Monteagle, and visited Hornby Castle during the

the futile policy of keeping up a constant corre-
spondence with Thomas Cromwell. In 1528
his predecessor had incurred the blame of Wolsey
for negligence in attending to the minister’s
commands,” and there is evidence that Alex-
ander’s tenure of office was by no means smooth
or even unbroken.!_ Roger secured himself by
paying £200 for his admission and granting Crom-
well a yearly pension. His good relations with the
powerful secretary were needed to protect him from
recalcitrant neighbours and importunate nobles.’””
One Seton, farmer of Aldingham church,
entered information against the abbot for restor-
ing certain wines brought to Furness by an
Ipswich merchant.” ‘I give him yearly £6 by
patent that he should be gentle to me and our
monastery ; yet he goes daily about to do us
displeasure.’ #* The Earl of Cumberland clam-
oured for the lordship of Winterburn.” ‘The
deputy of Ireland forbad the Irish tenantry to
pay their rents to the monastic officers,!* the
king was induced to desire letters of presentation
to the parsonage of Hawkshead. This last
demand caused much uneasiness. Hawkshead,
the abbot wrote, had never been a separate bene-
fice, and was the peculiar property of the abbey ;
presentation would mean the undoing of the
abbey, which would be compelled to give up
hospitality. Roger sent a special present to
Cromwell in order to be excused to the king.!””

break up of the establishment. ‘My lord of Furness
was here with all his pontifical staff. Only thirty
priests were needed, but above eighty came—4d. and
his dinner to each’; L. and P. Hen. VIII, iv (1),
235.
19 Wolsey desired the stewardship of the abbey for
the young Earl of Derby, who was in his retinue ;
Beck, op. cit. 311; L. and P. Hen. VIII, iv (2),
4522.

™ In 1516 the auditor of the apostolic chamber
issued a decree on behalf of John Dalton, abbot of
Furness, and certain monks named who had been
thrown into prison by Alexander during the progress
of a suit touching his rights to the monastery ; L. and
P. Hen. VIII (2), ti, p. 1529. In the Bardsey case,
on the other hand, reference is made to the time
‘when plaintiff was most cruelly and unjustly expelled ’
from the abbey ; Lancs. Plead. i, 95. "The dispute
seems to have been carried on by Roger Pele also ;
Beck, op. cit. 315 note.

2 Others made use of them also; L. and P. Hen.
VIII, v, 740.

18 Land P. Hen. VIII, v, 849 ; viii, 1132 5 x, 51.

™% Tbid. viii, 1132 ; the pension does not appear in
the rental.

% Ibid. vi, 632.

6 Ibid. viii, 1132. In 1420 the abbey petitioned
Martin V to allow exchange for Irish and Manx lands,
which ‘sterilia et inutilia existunt’ (Beck, op. cit. 290),
but no exchange was ever made.

WT. and P. Hen. VIII, vii, 520, 531. Is this
another example of a chapel served by the regular
clergy ? As for the plea of poverty Roger says that his
predecessor had left the abbey in great debt to the
executors of Sir William Compton ; ibid. x, 51.

(23

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

Such a man could not stand a storm. His
servility lost him the respect of his brethren and
the reverence of his tenants. The letters about
the Borradalle case show that he was prepared to
betray the visitors of the order to the centralizing
policy of Cromwell.’ The monks were in-
subordinate ; Roger writes that he had been
forced to put one, Dan Richard Banke, in prison.’
It is suggestive that Doctors Legh and Layton
singled him out for their unpleasant criticism.!*
The district of Furness, moreover, was ablaze with
the ardour of the Pilgrimage of Grace.1*!_ Robert
Legate, a friar who had been put into the
monastery by the visitors to read and preach to
the brethren, sent accounts of the violent speech
and deeds which led to the surrender of the
house. When the northern insurrection broke
out, 3,000 men collected from the fells to the
north and east of the abbey.!? Most of them
desired to get rid of real feudal grievances,!*? but
they also gave expression to the feeling against
the royal supremacy. Several of the monks
desired to join the commons, and a coarse pro-
phecy was current among them: ‘In England
shall be slain the decorat Rose in his mother’s
belly,’ or in other words, ‘ Your Grace shall die
by the hands of priests, for their Church is your
mother.”* During the last months of 1536
words became more definite. John Broughton
laid a wager with Legate that in three years all
would be changed, and the new laws annulled.
The bishop of Rome, he said, was unjustly put
down. ~~ Henry Salley, when overcome with
ale, used to say that no secular knave should be
head of the church; he was afterwards clapped
into prison at Lancaster.'8@ =And Christopher
Masrudder even heard one of the brethren say
that the king was not right heir to the crown,
for his father came in by the sword.’ Legate
could not get a hearing for his lectures of Holy
Scripture.88 On All Hallows’ Eve the crisis
came. Four brethren, Michael Hammerton,
the cellarer, Christopher Brown, the master of
the fells, William Rigge, and the plain-spoken
Broughton had been sent to the rebels. “They
took with them over £20, came to terms, and
returned to Dalton for recruits. The captain of
the rebels, a man named Gilpin, was to meet the
tenants at Furness. The monks advised their
men to agree as they had done. Alexander
Richardson, the bailiff of Dalton, testified that

“8 0. and P. Hen. VIII, vi, 1357.

18 Ibid. vi, 787. 3) Thid. x, 364.

Tn 1533 a book entitled Unio Dissidentium was
being studied by the parish priest of Dalton. Legate
found William Rede construing the Paraphrases of
Erasmus to his scholars, and dismissed him from keep-
ing school in Dalton (ibid. vi, 287 ; xii (1), 842).

2 Corres. of Earl of Derby (Chet. Soc. New Ser.), 49.

33.1, and P. Hen. VIII, xi, 1246.

1M Thid. xii (1), S41.

'S Thid. 841; cf. 840, 1089.

‘SS Ibid.

8 Thid.
7 Thid.

the monks encouraged the commons, and urged
that now or never was the time,

for if they sit down, both you and Holy Church is
undone ; and if they lack company, we will go with
them, live and die with them to defend their most
godly pilgrimage.

When arguments failed, threats were used.
Brian Garner, the prior, and a fellow monk
commanded the tenants to meet the commons in
their best array, on pain of death and the pulling
down of their houses. The vicar of Dalton fled
into the woods to escape them. The abbot also
fled. He had tried in vain to keep a middle
course. When John Broughton uttered the
prophecy about the king, he had said, ‘Dan
John, this is a marvellous and a dangerous word.’
Three or four days afterwards he told the
brethren that he could not stay there till the
rebels came, or it would undo both himself
and them. So on the eve of All Saints he and
William Flitton, the deputy steward, put out in
a little boat and came to Lancaster. Thence
they escaped to the Earl of Derby at Lathom.
According to Christopher Masrudder, he bade
the monks ere he departed do their best for the
commons.’* The danger from the rebels did
not last long,'° but the abbot’s difficulties grew
greater rather than less. He is said to have
written to his brethren from Lathom that he
had taken a way to be sure both from king and
commons. This may have seemed easy at
Lathom, but it was impossible at Furness.
When Roger returned he was met with a re-
quest to sign certain articles. What these were
is not stated, but perhaps something may be
gathered from the words of John Green, spoken
on the Friday after St. Martin’s Day, that the
king should never make them an abbot, but they
would choose their own.'41. The monks shared
in the hopes nursed by the commons during this
winter. Dr. Dakyn, the vicar-general of Rich-
mond, hoped to get money from Furness.!!?_ The
speech of the brethren was as unguarded as ever;
only three took the king’s part, and the abbot
was so fearful that he ‘durst not go to the
church this winter alone before day.’"? The
royal officers began to arrive on the scene, and
Roger in alarm insisted upon a strict observance —
of the statutes and of the visitors’ injunctions.
This was on the first Sunday in Lent. Three
weeks later he heard that either Legate or the
bailiff of Dalton had put in letters of complaint.
The commissioners, the Earls of Derby and
Sussex, came to the abbey about the middle of

Tbid. xii (1), 652 (ii), 840-2 ; Corres. of Earl of
Derby, 45-6; Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. vi, 445.

“" See above, p. 43.

‘L, and P. Hen. VIII, xii (1), 652, 841.

"7 Thid. xii (1), 914, 965. "3 Ibid. 841.

““ The bailiffs testimony is dated 14 March, 1537,
oe there must have been information given before
this.

124

RELIGIOUS HOUSES

March, but they could learn very little. On
the previous Sunday Roger had commanded the
brethren in the chapter-house to say nothing,
and threatened to put the younger men in prison
if they were found telling anything outside.™
Even the friar seems to have been silent. On
13 March the bailiff met him on the road between
Furness and Dalton, and asked what would
happen to the monk Salley, now my lords were
come, Legate replied, ‘Nothing ; I will say
nothing.’ 47 On 21 March Sussex wrote that
the monks of Furness had been as bad as any
other; the king desired that the whole truth
about their disloyalty should be sought out ; but
on 10 April Sussex replied that only two had
been committed to Lancaster, ‘which was all we
could find faulty.’ 4

Still the general impression was too strong,
and some damaging depositions had been made.
The abbot saw that he could not hold out much
longer. If the brethren had been united, and
their head less selfish and weak, the abbey might
have lasted till the suppression of the great
houses, since nearly all the evidence referred to
acts and speech done before the general pardon
of the previous autumn. Sussex, in the letter
just quoted, admits that there seemed no like-
lihood of finding anything further. But he knew
with whom he had to deal, and found a way of
getting rid of the monks, so that the abbey in
his own words ‘might be at your gracious
pleasure.’*? The abbot was brought to Whalley.
After a futile examination, Sussex himself
‘assayed’ Roger. Would he be content to sur-
render his house ? The abbot was very facile,
and thought the convent would not be hard to
manage. §o, on 5 April, he signed his surren-
der. Three gentlemen were sent off immedi-
ately to take possession. Later in the evening
the justice, Mr. Fitzherbert, came, approved of
the deed, and attested it; he also drew up a formal
surrender, which was signed four days later by
abbot, prior, and twenty-eight monks.’ The
earl then made the full examination which has
given us the history of the last few months.

“3 They were at Furness at the time of the bailiff’s
deposition.

“8 T. and P. Hen. VIII, xii (1), 842. According to
Legate the abbot had pursued the same policy before
the visitors came to the abbey : some of the monks
admitted to him that ‘they did sigh every day in their
haste because they toke so much upon their conscience,’
saying that if all had confessed what they were bound
to do they should have been a sorry house ; ibid. 841.

47 Salley had repeated his saying about ‘lay knaves’
a fortnight before; this was one of the very few
charges post indulgentiam. He confessed on 23 March,
and was sent to Lancaster ; ibid. xii (1), 652, 841,
1089. Salley complained of Legate’s preaching, so
the friar was rather considerate in his case.

48 Thid. xii (1), 695, 840. ™ Ibid. 380. ' Ibid.

1 Thid. ; Wright, Suppression of Mon. 153-4.

182 Dep. Keeper’s Rep. viii, App. ii, 21.

King Henry was much relieved, and at once
made arrangements for the government of the
barony and the dismissal of the monks, The
conduct of affairs at the abbey was left to Sussex’
discretion, since His Majesty knew he would both
look to the king’s profit, ‘and yet rid the said
monks in such honest sort as all parties shall be
therewith content.’ "8 Sir Marmaduke Tunstall
was appointed deputy to the Lord Privy Seal in
the Lonsdale district, with instructions to execute
justice, exact lawful payments, and reconcile the
tenants to the rule of the royal landlord." At
the end of the year Sir John Lamplugh was sent
to the abbey with similar commands.“ On
23 June Robert Southwell arrived at Furness to
see the monks off the premises. He found them
discontented and excited. Sussex had made large
promises, but fixed nothing ; and the brethren
thought 20s. and their ‘capacities’ too little.
Southwell speaks of them with the utmost con-
tempt. None of them seem to have availed
themselves of the permission to join other monas-
teries, and the commissioner had to threaten
them with this fate before he could get them to
submit quietly. They complained that they
had been compelled to surrender ; so Southwell
had a document prepared which was read in the
hall before 500 persons, and was then signed by
monks and people. When he said that the king
desired them to join other houses, they eagerly
confessed their unworthiness to retain their habit,
and went away with 40s. and their permits.
Southwell says he could give them no less, since
‘the traitors of Whalley’ had the same, but he
consoles himself and Cromwell with the reflection
that most of it would be spent in the purchase
of their secular weeds, without which he would
not suffer them to depart. Precautions were
taken that they should not wander over the
moors to Shap, where a rebellious bill had been
nailed upon the abbey door; as a last word,
Southwell reminded them of some ‘goodly ex-
periments that hangeth on each side of York,
some in rochets, and some in cowls.’ So they
departed with much chatter and grumbling, the
victims of their own indecision and selfishness, of
an unworthy abbot, and a spying friar. They
were content to have infirmity to be their cause,
but in no case would have it read in the hall
before their neighbours. The writer wishes
Cromwell could have heard it all.

After I denied them their liberty, and would assign
them to religion, 1 never heard written nor spoken of
religion that was worst, to be worse than they them-
selves were content to confess. I have not seen in
my life such gentle companions; it were great pity if
such goodly possessions should not be assigned out for
the pasturing of such blessed carcasses,’

183 7. and P. Hen. VILL, xii (1), 896.
4 Ibid. 881. 5 Ibid. (2), 1216.
6 Thid. 205 ; Beck, dun. Furnes. 356-60,

£25

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

Roger Pele became parson of Dalton; and
Cromwell was still mean enough to receive his
petty gifts.1°7

Southwell valued the temporal possessions of
the abbey ; then, after the lead had been melted
down, and the church and steeple dismantled,
the survey of Furness Fells was completed. All
the cattle were sold ; and traders came from all
parts of the south to buy in this fruitful isle.
The inhabitants, however, were given the pre-
ference for six score milch neat. Throughout
Southwell is kindly to the tenants. They were
loyal, he says, and should not suffer for any
gentleman’s pleasure. He asks for allotments
for the beadsmen, and puts in a special plea
for seventy-two tall fellows who occupied
Beaumont Grange.’ Perhaps in the many
small grants of the next few years we may
trace the effects of his solicitude.¥® The later
history of the abbey is bound up with the
general history of Furness, and must be sought
elsewhere.!©

The original grant of Stephen to the abbey
contained 204 plough-lands.’*! In 1200 it has
been estimated that the monks owned 37 plough-
lands, or some 2,000 acres annually under wheat
and other crops.!’? The difference is due to the
grants made by Robert de Boyville of Kirksanton
and Horrum in Copeland (before 1153); by
Godard de Boyville, of a plough-land in Foss in
the same district ; * by Waltheof son of Edmund,
of Newby ; by William Greindorge, of Winter-
burn ; and by Richard de Morvill and Avicia his
wife, of Selside (before 1190).’* During this
period also the abbey made its well-known agree-
ment with the lords of Ulverston for the partition

7 L. and P. Hen. VIII, xiii (1), 67 ; Beck, op. cit.
366. The living was given in lieu of a pension of
100 marks (L. and P. Hen. VIII, (xiii (1), p. 583).

"8 T. and P. loc. cit.

9 Tbid. xili (1), pp. 587-8.

'© See Beck, 361-6 ; West, 137, and passim. The
possessions were generally annexed to the Duchy in
32 Hen. VIII (L. and P. xv, 498). Cromwell had got
a grant of the monastery with pastures, sheep-cotes,
fisheries, &c. in the neighbourhood (March, 31 Hen.
VIII) ; xv, p. 566.

" Lancs. Ing. i, 84.3 Lancs. and Ches. Antig. Soc.
Trins. xvili, This excludes the grant near Lan-
caster.

? Lancs. Pipe R. 125 ; cf. also p. 87 and addenda
p- vi. In 1298 the Furness land held in free alms was
calculated as 12 plough-lands ; Lancs. Ing. i, 292. In
1292 the 11 granges in Furness contained 10}
plough-lands (Coucher, 634).

8 Coucher, 591-4; Anct. D., L. 462.

™ Ceucher, 129, 662, 666 ; Coucher B. fol. 110—
113 for Newby charters. Waltheof gave a plough-
land, and it was confirmed by Richard de Morville
and Avicia his wife. Avicia got 80 marks in silver.
The other half of Newby was given by W.’s daughter
and her husband Robert de Boyvill, fol. 1104, 113 ;
Anct. D., L. 475 ; the Selside charters in B. fol. 123 ;
the Winterburn charters, ibid. fol. 132, sqq.

of Furness Fells." They became immediate
lords of the land between the lakes of Coniston
and Windermere, and had fishing rights in the
waters ; in later days Hawkshead manor was the
centre of monastic rule in this district. Ford-
bottle, Crivelton, and Roos were received from
Michael le Fleming in exchange for Bardsey ; '*
in Amounderness Robert of Stalmine gave a
plough-land which became the nucleus of Stalmine
Grange ;'" in Copeland, William, the nephew
of David of Scotland, and Ranulf Meschin, earl
of Chester, endowed Calder ; and King Olaf
gave the abbey an important position in the Isle
of Man.’ Early in the thirteenth century
Alicia de Rumeli, daughter of William Fitz
Duncan, gave all Borrowdale with extensive
rights and free transit through the barony of
Allerdale and Copeland.’ Walter de Lacy,
lord of Meath, made a grant in 1234 of land
and rights in Meath. This grant also was the
origin of a valuable property.” King Henry II],
in the eleventh year of his reign, made the
abbot lord of all Furness by giving him the
homage of Michael le Fleming for £10 a year.'7!

‘° The division of the fells was made about 1163
between the abbot and William of Lancaster I ; Lancs.
Pipe R. 310. William had lands both in Ulverston
and the fells, as his grants to Conishead and the re-
grants to and by Gilbert Fitz Reinfred show (ibid.
356, 39°, 399, 402); but it is uncertain when the
abbey gave up direct control of the manor. Mr.
Farrer thinks the Lancaster family held it ‘from the
reign of King Stephen, if not earlier’ (cf. Lancs. and
Ches, Antig. Soc. Trans. xviii) ; but there is a great deal
to be said for the older view, that it was first granted
to Gilbert and his wife in7 Ric. I; cf. Notit. Cest. ii,
534. Before 1196 there were disputes about the
fells, which at one time were all recovered by the
abbey (see above, note 32). No mention is made of
Ulverston, except as abbey property ; cf. Coucher, 662.
In the elaborate settlement of 1196 (Lancs. Final
Concords i, 4) the service of 20s. for the fells is re-
peated from the earlier arrangement, and ros. added
for Ulverston. Moreover, this was the later monastic
interpretation, /evata fuit finis de excambio villae de
Ulverston cum parte stiam montanorum, for forest rights
in the other fells, quitclaim of Newby, and service ;
Coucher, 3453; cf. 7. The plea about the gallows
in the suit with Gilbert’s son William (394) also
tends in this direction (see above).

' Lancs. Pipe R. 317. Another dispute led to the
transference of Foss and Urswick Parva to Michael ;
307.
‘7 Coucher B. fol. go ; Lancs. Ing. i, 47 (1160-
70). 8 See above, 117.

® Anct. D., L.S. 132 ; Lancs. Pipe R. 247; Cal. of
Pat. (ed. Hardy), 152.

'” Coucher, 18-20; Pat. 14 Edw. III, pt, 3, m:
25. In 1332 the abbot and convent of Beaubec in
Normandy was licensed to alienate its manor of
Beaubec, near Drogheda, with lands in Marinerstown
and elsewhere, to Furness; Pat. 6 Edw. Ill, pt. 3,
m. 3; 10 Edw. III, pt. 1, m. 42.

™ Coucher, 78, 130, 467; Pat. 11 Hen. III, m. 2.
See Vincent, Lancs. Lay Subsidies, i, 38.

126

RELIGIOUS HOUSES

During the next two centuries, especially in
the thirteenth, the abbey strengthened and ex-
tended the position gained by these grants.
Small gifts enlarged their holding in the town-
ships about Beaumont Grange.’”? The pasture
allowed by the Gernets in Halton led to much
litigation.’ The origin of Beaumont Grange is
curious. Warin the Little, whom Stephen
had granted with his land, retired with his
wife to the abbey in his old age, leaving to the
monks half a plough-land in Stapelton Terne.
This was converted into a grange. The story
runs that King John saw, on a sojourn, ‘that
the grange was too small and poor,’ and gave the
whole vill of Stapelton Terne. The monks then
transferred the men of the vill to the grange, and
thus made one large colony.” In 1221 the
rights of Furness in Stackhouse, which had
been granted by Adam the son of Maldred
in the previous century (before 1168), were
upheld.’

In 1250 Alicia of Staveley granted for £600 a
vast pasture in Souterscales on the fells of Whern-
side and Ingleborough. The monks tried to seize
the neighbouring pasture of Ingleton, which
covered 1,000 acres, and though William of
Twyselton successfully maintained his rights, he
surrendered them in 1316.8 Allicia’s grant
was quite near the great pasture of Selside and
Birkwith, which was said to comprise 5,000
acres. In 1256 John of Cancefeld quitclaimed
500 acres in Selside. Around the grange of
Winterburn the abbey collected several plough-
lands, often oxgang by oxgang. In Hetton, for
example, it held two and a half plough-lands.!”
In Eshton the abbey possessed more than a
plough-land.1”8 It had burgages in Lancaster,
York, and Boston, with the rents of some houses
in Beverley.’

In Copeland the lords of Millom added largely
to the privileges of the abbey.’ In Furness
proper the monks had in 1292 eleven granges,
and had got into their own hands a great deal of
their vassals’ land, including the manors of Bolton
and Elliscales, and the pasture and turbary of

™ Coucher B. fol. 32-59 and many of the
ancient deeds. Adam son of Orm de Kellet gives a
cultura ‘ad sustentacionem infirmitorii saecularis’
(fol. 46).

3 Thid. fol. 60-3 ; Lancs. Ing. i, 178.

™ Coucher B. fol. 64; Lancs. Pipe R. 133, and
Lancs. Ing. i, 84-6. It seems possible that the vill
was an earlier grant of Henry JI. For abbey lands
in neighbourhood cf. also Surv. of Lonsdale Wapentake
(Chet. Soc.), 66, 74; and for Ellel and Forton see
Coucher B. fol. 86-9.

% Ibid. fol. 115, sqq.

6 Ibid. fol. 119-21 ; Anct. D., L. 240.

™ Coucher B. fol. 141-85 ; Surtees Soc. Publ.
xlix, 190, 193.

™8 Coucher B. fol. 181, &c.

1 Thid. fol. 76-8, 190, 201.

'® Thid. fol. 205-11 ; Anct. D., L. 458-60.

Angerton Moss.*! The relations with Ulverston
demand more than a passing word. As William
of Lancaster III died without male heirs the
manor was divided and ultimately came to
William’s illegitimate brother Roger, as two
distinct halves. These became definitely separate
in the families of Harrington and Coucy.’” It
is perhaps characteristic that the abbey shows a
tendency to claim the service of 30s. from both.
The Harringtons kept their hold with only the
ordinary experience. But on the death of
William de Coucy without issue in 1343 the
king entered. William left a brother Enguer-
rand, but it was asserted that he was a French
subject. It was probably at this time that the
abbey first began to take possession on behalf of
the king.!® In 1348, however, Edward included
this half of the manor in his large grant to John
of Copeland and his wife. Abbot Alexander
protested, and finally received the reversion
for forty marks. An inquest of 1376 upheld
this, but in the next reign, when Enguerrand’s
descendant was a niece of the king and wife of
the powerful Duke of Ireland, the abbey’s hold
became precarious. Another inquest found the
abbot had been guilty of false allegation, and it
was only after a long suit that the estate was
retained.18”

There is no doubt that from the first the two
chief churches in Furness, Dalton and Urswick,
were included in the spiritual possessions of the
abbey." In 1195 Celestine III confirmed its
rights of appropriation and presentation, and a
few years later it was recognized that the heirs
of Michael le Fleming had no hereditary claim
to the advowson of Urswick. The chapel of
Hawkshead, which belonged to Dalton, was held
separately by the monks. It was claimed as a
chapel of Ulverston by the priory of Conishead,
but the claim was surrendered in 1208, when
Furness in return for certain annual payments

! For the grant of Bolton by Alan of Copeland
see Coucher, 515-36 (27 Edw. I). Elliscales was
finally granted in 8 Ric. II, Coucher, 286. The
grant of Angerton Moss at end of thirteenth century
is very complicated, Coucher, 326 sqq.

187 Coucher, 1-7, 482.

18 Tbid. 368, 396, 386, 388.

Ibid. 381-91.

5 In the survey of 1346 it is said to hold half
Ulverston by castleward for one twelfth part of a
knight’s fee ; Cer. Soc. Publ. \xxiv, 77.

*° Duchy of Lanc. Assize R. class xxv, 2, No. 250 ;
3, No. 154 (1352-4).

"7 Coucher, 368-77, 396-406; Inq. p.m. 21 Ric. II,
No. 75.

188 Coucher, 643, 657-60. For the vicars of
Dalton see ibid. 699-702 ; Anct. D., L. 397. The
relation of Michael le Fleming to Urswick is puzzling,
but it is certain that the church belonged to the abbey
(Coucher, 4553 and charter of Henry Fitz Hervey
on behalf of his ward, 452. Henry Fitz Hervey
became guardian of Michael’s heir in 1202-3 ; Lancs.
Pipe R. 180).

127

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

gave up its rights to the churches of Ulverston
and Pennington, which were asserted to be
daughter churches of Urswick.’® In the reign
of Henry II, William son of Roger gave to the
abbey the advowson of Kirkby Ireleth. It is
uncertain if the tithes were appropriated ; if so,
they were soon lost, since in 1228 Archbishop
Gray retained the church and advowson.'° About
the end of the century William son of Hugh
gave to the abbey the church of Millom. The
archbishop took half of this church also, and the
right of appointing vicars to both halves. In
1241 he appropriated the revenues to his chantry
in the chapel of St. Michael the Archangel in
York Minister; and later the abbey got back
the half on condition of maintaining the chaplain
of this chantry’! In 1299 Bishop Mark
granted to Furness the appropriation or the
churches of St. Michael and St. Maughold in the
Isle of Man.!% In the diocese of Dublin the
abbot for some time held the prebend of Swords, !?
and the convent also had a contingent interest in
a Lancaster chantry."

From the above account it will be obvious
that Furness Abbey was very wealthy. Not
many monastic houses in the north could
pay £600 for a sheep-walk, or 500 marks for a
charter. But with the exception of two great
records there is little evidence from which to
estimate the total revenues of the house. The
occasional references to subsidies are misleading,
for geographical as well as for more general
reasons.’*> 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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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;

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.

” 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.

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. <A
chaplain served the chapel. While the pes-
tilence was raging in the autumn of 1349 the
chaplaincy was vacant for eight weeks, during
which period the offerings in the chapel were
asserted to have been no less than £32.4 In
1355 Duke Henry of Lancaster, the patron,
procured from the pope a relaxation of one year
and forty days’ penance for penitents visiting the
chapel on the principal feasts of the year and

” Cal. Pap. Letters, iv, 34.

*® Dugdale, Mon. vi, 1593 ; Trans. Hist. Soc. (New
Ser.), v, 129.

Lancs. Chantries (Chet. Soc.), 65.

® L. and P. Hen. VILL, xiv (1), 348, 413, 494.

5! Tbid. xv, 831 (43).

* Coram Rege R. 297, m. 123 d.

8 Lich. Epis. Reg. Stretton, fol. 15, 20.

* Dugdale, Mon. vi, 1593.

55 Beamont, Fee of Makerfield,18. He was already
a friar of the house in 1371; Lich. Epis. Reg. Stretton,
fol. 26.

°° Trans. Hist. Soc. (New Ser.), v, 129.

7 Baines, Hist. of Lancs. iv, 404. The well-known
Friar Penketh (2 1487), was a brother of the house
(Dict. Nat. Biog. xliv, 302).

” Lancs. Pipe R. 333.

those of St. Mary Magdalen and St. Thomas
of Canterbury.” During one of these pilgrim-
ages, on the feast of the Invention of the Cross
(3 May) 1358, certain riotous persons, among
whom was the schoolmaster of Preston, invaded
the chapel, and some of them were kept prisoners
there for the whole of the day following.®

A few years later the right of the warden
and brethren to the offerings made in the chapel
seems to have been disputed, for Pope Urban V
in March, 1364, ordered the archbishop of
York to summon the rector of the parish and
others concerned, and if the facts were as repre-
sented to him to allow the warden and brethren
to receive to their use the voluntary offerings,
‘wherein the revenues of the hospital chiefly
consist.27_ A century later, in 1465, a royal
injunction forbad the dean and chapter of the
College of Leicester, the appropriators of the
parish church, to persist in taking tithe from the
incumbent of the ‘Free chapel of St. Mary
Magdalene’ on the ground belonging to the
chapel. By this time the hospital had appar-
ently fallen into disuse, and presentations were
now made not to the wardenship but to the
practically sinecure incumbency of the free
chapel. The chapel itself was allowed to fall into
decay. Thomas Barlow, the last incumbent,
leased the chapel and its lands about 1525 to

? For a suggestion that Count Stephen of Blois may
have been its founder see ibid.

* The brethren of the lepers complained to the king
in 1258-9 that whereas they should have a warden of
the king’s appointment the men of Preston had asserted
a right of patronage and had taken the brethren’s
goods ; Close, 43 Hen. III, m. 2.

3<Canons and brethren’ are once mentioned
(Duchy of Lanc. Anct. D., L. 2091), but this may be
aslip. Grants are usually made by or to ‘ the leper
brethren’ or ‘the leper brothers and sisters.’

* Engl. Hist. Rev. v,526. This is probably a gross
exaggeration.

5 Cal. Pap. Pet. i, 271.

® Duchy of Lanc. Assize R. 439.

” Cal. Pap. Letters, iv, go.

® Fishwick, Hist. of the Parish of Preston, 195.

163

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

James Walton for 20 years at a rent of
£7 6s. 8d., the lessee undertaking to repair the
chapel and to find a priest to say mass once a
week for the king's preservation.

Walton afterwards claimed to have transferred
this obligation to the Franciscan convent at
Preston, with a lease of a parcel of land called
‘Widowficld’ at a yearly rent of g_ shillings.
The friars, however, asserted that the land was
their own and the g shillings a quitrent, though
their warden ultimately admitted that ‘for peace
and quietness he signed a bill that Walton made
and wrote.” In January, 1528, two of the
friars and others forcibly entered upon the
field. Walton laid a complaint before the
Chancellor of the Duchy, but in May, 1545,
the land was again seized by his opponents, who
pulled down the mansion house attached to the
chapel and carried off the ornaments of the
chapel itself.°

The Chantry Commissioners of 1546 in their
certificate refer to Barlow’s lease to Walton, and
add that ‘the said chapel is defaced and open at
both ends.’ Its plate, including a chalice,
weighed eight ounces; there was one vestment
and one bell. The chapel lands, which lay
almost entirely in the fields of Preston, com-
prised 58 acres with a clear annual rental of
£5 12s. 8d." In 1548 the chapel was dissolved,
and with its lands, now estimated at 474 acres
only, leased on 2 June to Richard Wrightington
for twenty-one years at a yearly rent of
£5 16s. 8d. Shortly afterwards Edward VI
granted (18 April, 1549) the whole of the ‘ Maud-
lands’ property to John Dodyngton and William
Warde of London, gentlemen. They sold it in
January, 1550, to Thomas Fleetwood of Hes-
keth, from whom it was purchased some ten
years later (2 December, 1560) for £300 by
Thomas Fleetwood of Penwortham."

Warpens oF St. Mary Macpacen’s
HosPIraL

William,” occurs circa 1245
John of Coleham,™ occurs 1270

® Smith, Rec. of Preston Parish Church, 238-42.

Ibid. In the papal ‘Taxatio’ of 1292 the
temporalities of the hospital, after allowing for neces-
sary expenses, were assessed at 135. 4¢. In 1355
the wardenship was worth £5 ayear ; Ca/. Pap. Letters,
itl, 543. In 1361 it had apparently risen to £20,
from which it fell to £10 in 1366; Piccope MSS.
viil, 189 ; B.M. Add. MS. 6069, fol. 111, quoted
in Smith, op. cit. 238. The increase in 1361 was
probably due to the increase in offerings consequent
on the papal privilege of 1355.

” Lancs. Chantries, 208-9.

Willelmus capellanus rector noster ; Duchy of
Lanc. Great Coucher, i, fol. 86, No. 1.

3 Tbid. i, fol. 85, No. 31 5 cf. Anct. D., L. 2087,
2092.

Adam de Preston, occurs 1313, died 1322

John Coupland,'* appointed by the crown
30 May, 1322

John son ‘of Richard de Rivers,'® occurs
133!

Henry de Dale,” occurs 1345 and 1347

Pascal de Bononia}® (Bologna), occurs 1355

Walter Campden,!® occurs 1366, died 1370

Ralph de Erghum (Arkholme),” occurs 1373

Thomas Horston,”' occurs 1399

Thomas Prowett,”” before 1480

James Standish,” appointed 18 August, 1486

Thomas Barlow,* appointed 6 February,
1522, surrendered 1548.

The matrix of the common seal of the hos-
pital is preserved in the Fitzwilliam Museum,
Cambridge. It is oval pointed. In the centre,
within a niche, is a female figure, doubtless St.
Mary Magdalen, standing with a flower-pot in
her left hand, and what has been conjectured to
be an ornamental ointment box in the right ;
beneath her feet is represented a fleur-de-lis. The
legend runs—

SIGILLV : COMMVNE : FRATRYM : PRESTONE.”*

“Great Coucher, i, fol. 85, Nos. 29, 30. Styled
“custos capelle beate M.M.’ Son of Hugh de Pres-
ton. Inq. p.m. 21 June, 1322.

‘8 Piccope MSS. vi, 236. Chaplain to Edw. II,
who appointed him, the advowson being in his hands
by the forfeiture of Thomas, earl of Lancaster. A
grant of the wardenship to John de Evesham, king’s
clerk, was cancelled in 1326, as it appeared that
Coupland was still alive; Ca/ Pat. 1324-7, p.
337-

‘© Cal. Pap. Letters, ti, 343. Provided by the pope
to a canonry of Salisbury notwithstanding his warden-
ship.

" Tbid. iii, 148, 242. Dale, who was a bachelor
of civil law and of medicine, held with the wardenship
six canonries and (for a time) the rectory of Higham
Ferrers.

* Ibid. iii, 562 ; Cad Pap. Pet. i, 274. Physician
to Henry, duke of Lancaster, prebendary of St. Paul’s,
London ; Newcourt, Repertorium,i, 217. He also held
the church of ‘Patenhulle’ (Patshull).

BM. Add. MS. 6069, 111; also rector of
Wigan, canon of York, and warden of St. Nicholas’
Hospital, Pontefract.

* Duchy of Lanc. Misc.Bks. xlii, fol. 194: ‘Ralph
de Erghum’s chapel.’ He was chancellor of John of
Gaunt.

Granted charge of the free chapel for life by
John, duke of Lancaster ; confirmed by Hen. IV on
10 Dec. 1399; Duchy of Lanc. Misc. Bks. xv, fol.
68 d.

7 See a complaint by his executor in Pal. of Lanc.
Writs Proton., file 19 Edw. IVa.

* Materials for Hist. of Hen. VII (Rolls Ser.), i, 541.
Presented (?) by Henry VII.

*® Smith, Hist. of Preston Parish Church, 238 ;
Lancs. Chantries (Chet. Soc.), 208. He received a
pension of {5 and was still living in 1558.

* Figured in Fishwick, op. cit. 197.

164

RELIGIOUS HOUSES

18. THE HOSPITAL OF ST. LEONARD,
LANCASTER

The hospital of lepers at Lancaster, dedicated
to St. Leonard, is said to have been founded by
King John when count of Mortain and lord of
the honour of Lancaster, 1189-94.> 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.

" 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.

‘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.

“ 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.

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.

“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 ,

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.

“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,

* 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

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

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

“’ 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)

Er o1

¢Z 41

a
_

or Il

for €1

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

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

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,

S061 ‘Aon Of 03

sqyUoy W9ASTA bob £061 zo61 1061 0061 66gr g6gr 26g1 96g $6gr syioduiy jo uondruosag

—: So6r “1equiaAoN jo pua ay} 0} dn pue Suruado sy aours sea payotduioo Araaa Ul TVNVO) AHL dO AVAA Ad
UALSHHONVIA] OL SLUOAW] TvdIONTYg oy} smoys (S061 30y suaumadgng uvipsvnyy sajsaqiuvpy ay} wo uayv3) ATAV], ONIMOTIOG IH[—']]] aTav ap

329

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

APPENDIX II

TABLE OF POPULATION, 1801 To 1901
Introductory Notes

AREA

The county taken in this table is that existing subsequently to 7 & 8 Vict., chap. 61 (1844).
By this Act detached parts of counties, which had already for parliamentary purposes been amalga-
mated with the county by which they were surrounded or with which the detached part had the
longest common boundary (2 & 3 Wm. IV, chap. 64—1832), were annexed to the same county for
all purposes ; some exceptions were, however, permitted.

By the same Act (7 & 8 Vict., chap. 61) the detached parts of counties, transferred to other
counties, were also annexed to the hundred, ward, wapentake, &c. by which they were wholly or
mostly surrounded, or to which they next adjoin, in the counties to which they were transferred.
The hundreds, &c. in this table are also given as existing subsequently to this Act.

As is well known, the famous statute of Queen Elizabeth for the relief of the poor took the then-
existing ecclesiastical parish as the unit for Poor Law relief. ‘This continued for some centuries
with but few modifications; notably by an Act passed in the thirteenth year of Charles II’s reign
which permitted townships and villages to maintain their own poor. ‘This permission was necessary
owing to the large size of some of the parishes, especially in the north of England.

In 1801 the parish for rating purposes (now known as the civil parish, i.e. ‘an area for
which a separate poor rate is or can be made, or for which a separate overseer is or can be
appointed’) was in most cases co-extensive with the ecclesiastical parish of the same name; but
already there were numerous townships and villages rated separately for the relief of the poor,
and also there were many places scattered up and down the country, known as extra-parochial
places, which paid no rates at all. Further, many parishes had detached parts entirely surrounded
by another parish or parishes.

Parliament first turned its attention to extra-parochial places, and by an Act (20 Vict.,
chap. 19—1857) it was laid down (a) that all extra-parochial places entered separately in the
1851 census returns are to be deemed civil parishes, (6) that in any other place being, or being
reputed to be, extra-parochial, overseers of the poor may be appointed, and (c) that where, how-
ever, owners and occupiers of two-thirds in value of the land of any such place desire its
annexation to an adjoining civil parish, itmay be so added with the consent of the said parish.
This Act was not found entirely to fulfil its object, so by a further Act (31 & 32 Vict., chap. 122—
1868) it was enacted that every such place remaining on 25 December, 1868, should be added
to the parish with which it had the longest common boundary.

The next thing to be dealt with was the question of detached parts of civil parishes, which was
done by the Divided Parishes Acts of 1876, 1879, and 1882. The last, which amended the one of
1876, provides that every detached part of an entirely extra-metropolitan parish which is entirely
surrounded by another parish becomes transferred to this latter for civil purposes, or if the population
exceeds 300 persons it may be made a separate parish. These Acts also gave power to add detached
parts surrounded by more than one parish to one or more of the surrounding parishes, and also to
amalgamate entire parishes with one or more parishes. Under the 1879 Act it was not necessary
for the area dealt with to be entirely detached. These Acts also declared that every part added to
a parish in another county becomes part of that county.

Then came the Local Government Act, 1888, which permits the alteration of civil parish boun-
daries and the amalgamation of civil parishes by Local Government Board orders. Italso created the
administrative counties. The Local Government Act of 1894 enacts that where a civil parish is partly
in a rural district and partly in an urban district each part shall become a separate civil parish ; and
also that where a civil parish is situated in more than one urban district each part shall become a
separate civil parish, unless the county council otherwise direct. Meanwhile, the ecclesiastical parishes
had been altered and new ones created under entirely different Acts, which cannot be entered into
here, as the table treats of the ancient parishes in their civil aspect.

PopuLATION

The first census of England was taken in 1801, and was very
of the population in each parish (or place), excluding all persons,

as”

little more than a counting
such as soldiers, sailors, &c., who

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY

formed no part of its ordinary population. It was the de facto population (i.e. the population
actually resident at a particular time) and not the de jure (i.e. the population really belonging
to any particular place at a particular time). This principle has been sustained throughout
the censuses. F

The Army at home (including militia), the men of the Royal Navy ashore, and the registered
seamen ashore were not included in the population of the places where they happened to be,
at the time of the census, until 1841. The men of the Royal Navy and other persons on board
vessels (naval or mercantile) in home ports were first included in the population of those places
in 1851. Others temporarily present, such as gipsies, persons in barges, &c. were included in
1841 and perhaps earlier.

GENERAL

Up to and including 1831 the returns were mainly made by the overseers of the poor,
and more than one day was allowed for the enumeration, but the 1841-1901 returns were
made under the superintendence of the registration officers and the enumeration was to be
completed in one day. The Householder’s Schedule was first used in 1841. The exact dates
of the censuses are as follows :—

10 March, 1801 30 May, 1831 8 April, 1861 6 April, 1891
27 May, 1811 7 June, 1841 3 April, 1871 1 April, 1901
28 May, 1821 31 March, 1851 4 April, 1881

Notrs ExpLaANATORY OF THE TABLE

This table gives the population of the ancient county and arranges the parishes, &c. under the
hundred or other sub-division to which they belong, but there is no doubt that the constitution of
hundreds, &c. was in some cases doubtful.

In the main the table follows the arrangement in the 1841 census volume.

The table gives the population and area of each parish, &c. as it existed in 1801, as far
as possible.

The areas are those supplied by the Ordnance Survey Department, except in the case of those
marked ‘e,’ which are only estimates. The area includes inland water (if any), but not tidal water
or foreshore.

t after the name of a civil parish indicates that the parish was affected by the operation
of the Divided Parishes Acts, but the Registrar-General failed to obtain particulars of every
such change. ‘The changes which escaped notification were, however, probably small in area
and with little, if any, population. Considerable difficulty was experienced both in 1891 and
1901 in tracing the results of changes effected in civil parishes under the provisions of these
Acts; by the Registrar-General’s courtesy, however, reference has been permitted to certain
records of formerly detached parts of parishes, which has made it possible approximately to
ascertain the population in 1901 of parishes as constituted prior to such alterations, though the
figures in many instances must be regarded as partly estimates.

t after the name of a parish (or place) indicates that the ecclesiastical parish of the same name
at the I19OI census is coextensive with such parish (or place).

o in the table indicates that there is no population on the area in question.

— in the table indicates that no population can be ascertained.

The word ‘chapelry ’ seems often to have been used as an equivalent for ‘township’ in 1841,
which census volume has been adopted as the standard for names and descriptions of areas.

The figures in italics in the table relate to the area and population of such sub-divisions of
ancient parishes as chapelries, townships, and hamlets.

331

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

TABLE OF POPULATION, 1801—1901

— oy 1801 | 1811 1821 1831 1841 1851 1861 1871 1881 1891 Igor
age '
t

|
Ancient |1,203,3651673,486 824,464 1,052,948 1,335,600 1,667,054! 2,031,236 2,429,440,2,819,495 3,454,441/3,926,762 4,406,409

graphi-
cal
County !
PaRIsH om w8or | 1811 1821 1831 | 1841 1851 1861 1871 1881 1891 IgOI
Amounderness
Hundred
Bispham:— —- |: 3,983] 727 | 877 | 1,072 | 1,256 | 2,339 | 2,857 | 45344 | 7,639 |13.417 |22,418 |40,578
Bispham with | 7,624 254 297 323 313 371 293 437 547 706 794 | 2,499
Norbreck
Township f
Layton with} 2,359] 473 | 580| 749 | 943 | 1,968 | 2,564 | 3,907 | 7,092 |12,711 |21,624 |38,079
Warbreck
Township t?
Garstang :— ‘430,705 | 5,766 | 6,196 | 7,403 | 6,927 | 7,659 | 7,465 | 7,221 | 6,993 | 7,240 | 7,225 | 6,518
Barnacre’ with] 4,495 474 497 548 519 628 875 907 922 912 979 983
Bonds Town-
ship t
Bilsborrow 851 163 178 209 199 157 152 176 185 197 176 187
Township
Cabus Town- 1,388) 246 253 277 267 253 238 209 171 178 179 171
ship t
Catterall Town- | 7,742 560 546 704 457 | 1,102 | 1,036 867 672 612 470 451
ship t
Claughton 3,788 784 735 943 842 772 647 608 526 548 575 561
Township
Cleveley Town 620 145 173 148 140 124 73 62 65 51 65 62
ship t
Forton Towns 1,278 402 482 587 662 679 582 574 549 595 560 539
ship
Garstang Town- 503 731 790 936 929 909 839 714 687 783 856 808
ship ¢
Holleth Town-} 359 3h 38 43 50 35 28 30 35 50 25 25
ship *
Kirkland Town- 975 426 451 517 458 408 429 388 336 314 337 274
ship
Nateby Town- 2,088 272 296 406 232 341 325 385 435 393 350 297
ship
Pilling Town-| 6,060] 778 840 | 1,043 | 1,127 | 1,232 | 1,281 | 1,388 | 1,572 | 1,620 | 1,493 | 1,428
ship { t *

Winmarleigh 2,343 243 264 248 275 257 262 246 289 381 371 284
Township |
Wyresdale, 4,215| 571 713| 800| 770| 762| 704| 667| 5491 606 789 454

Nether
‘Township t |
Kirkham :— 43,729] 8,849 |10,321 11,925 |11,630 (11,604 |10,926 '11,445 |11,887 13,805 15,512 15,465
Bryning with] 7,067 105 131 145 164 152 126 116 115 114 102 129
Kellamergh |
Township
Clifton with Sal-] 3,373 552 575 608 508 538 471 447 447 418 470 413
wick Town-
ship

1 Anctent County.—The area of this County was unaffected by the operation of the Act 7 & 8 Vict. chap. 61. The
acreage is taken from the Census Report for rgor and includes certain lands common to two (or more) Civil Parishes
(or Townships). The population excludes 4,035 militia in 1811 and 1,254 militia in 1831, who could not be distributed
among the Parishes and Townships. (See also note to Liverpool.)

* Layton with Warbreck included in 1841 the Town of Blackpool, containing 1, 304 persons at that date.

$ Cleveley, Holleth, and Forton are all said to be (1841) partly in Cockerham Parish (Lonsdale Hundred, South of
the Sands), but they are entirely shown in Garstang Parish (Amounderness Hundred). :

* Pilling is said (1871) to be partly in Cockerham Parish (Lonsdale Hundred, South of th iti i
shown in Garstang Parish (Amounderness Hundred). : Seu ee) Pebitis ealely

332

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY

TABLE OF POPULATION, 1801—1901 (continued)

ParRIsH a 1801 1811 1821 1831 1841 1851 1861 1871 1881 1891 IgoI

Amounderness
Hundred (cont.)

Kirkham (cont)
Eccleston, Little, } 7,758 178 199 224 230 199 215 209 192 197 186 188
with Larbreck
Township
Freckleton 2,207 561 701 875 909 995 968 879 930 | 1,134 | 1,308 | 1,239
Township f
Goosnargh with] 8,673] 1,558 | 1,562 | 1,852 | 1,844 | 1,621 | 1,453 | 1,307 | 1,258 | 1,197 | 1,571 | 1,097
Newsham
Township
Greenhalgh with] 7,898] 378 403 419 408 371 362 383 365 380 374 408
Thistleton
Township
seed 1,445} 252 273 338 334 349 346 366 351 389 367 327
ap. f
Kirkham Town-| 857] 7,567 | 2,274 | 2,735 | 2,469 | 2,903 | 2,799 | 3,380 | 3,593 | 3,840 | 4,003 | 3,693
ship
Medlar with | 7,967 216 230 215 242 209 170 563 860 | 1,035 | 1,563 | 1,826
Wesham
Township
Newton with] 7,472 269 336 380 381 324 299 286 292 267 231 229
Scales Town-
ship :
Ribby with 1,390 307 398 500 482 442 406 444 466 392 401 475
Wrea Chap.
Singleton, Great] 2,730] 325 396 507 499 391 293 338 317 357 380 373
and Little
Chap.
Treales, Rose-] 4,700] 675 671 760 756 709 696 632 625 560 533 492
acre, and
Wharles
Township {
Warton Chap. 1,633] 376 445 468 537 522 473 446 444 408 414 446
Weeton with! 2,972 384 508 473 477 545 465 465 433 425 378 374
Preese Town-

ship
Westoy with | 3,600] 623 692 771 686 643 707 601 535 534 491 532
Plumptons
Township
Whittingham | 3,193} 529| 587| 667| 710| 691| 677| 583] 664 | 2,158 | 2,740 | 3,236
Township §
Lancaster (part 17,818] 2,028 | 2,112 | 2,406 | 2,495 | 2,832 | 3,833 | 4,394 | 5,231 | 5,868 | 6,304 | 8,022

of) & :—
Bleasdale Chap. |] 7,298] 220 | 225 | 212 236 249 295 372 376 410 402 403
Fulwood Town-] 2,776] 396 401 430 500 628 | 1,748 | 2,313 | 3,079 | 3,725 | 4,112 | 5,238
ship’
Myerecuied 2,708| 464| 459| 557| 510) 504| 459| 426| 418] 384) 395) 423
Township
Preesall with} 3,393 530 589 700 745 947 823 812 837 848 893 | 1,427
Hackensall
Township f
Stalmine with] 2,303 418 438 507 504 504 508 471 $27 501 502 537
Staynall
Chap.
Lytham . . . .| 5,310] 920 | 1,150 | 1,292 | 1,523 | 2,082 | 2,698 | 3,194 | 3,904 | 5,268 | 7,218 |13,992
St. a 18,803 | 3,426 | 3,041 | 4,553 | 4,708 | 4,786 | 4,680 | 4,509 | 4,234 | 4,084 | 3,784 | 3,691
yre :—
Eccleston, Great] 7,467] 455 540 648 624 667 631 641 565 628 553 583
Township
Elswick Town-| 7,038] 232 256 290 327 303 307 290 254 242 223 227
ship

Inskip with 2,984) 635 647 739 798 735 680 663 593 542 504 450
Sowerby
Township
Rawcliffe, Out 4,501} 413 484 598 575 728 791 771 832 815 721 705
Township f

5 Whittingham.—The increase in 1871 is attributed to the presence of workmen engaged in erecting a County
Asylum, which was opened for the reception of patients on 1 April, 1873.

8 Lancaster Parish is contained in (1) Amounderness Hundred; (2) Lonsdale Hundred, South of the Sands; and
(3) Lancaster Borough.

7 Fulwood.—Barracks were erected between 1841 and 1851, and were in use at the latter date.

333

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

TABLE OF POPULATION, 1801—1901 (continued)

PARISH peed 1801 1811 1821 1831 1841 1851 | 1861 1871 1881 1891 1901
|
Amounderness
Hundred (cont.)
St. Michael-on-
Wyre (cont.) :— |
Rawcliffe,Upper,| 3,842 494 617 643 665 | 671 697 682 700 618 599 518
with Tarnacre |
Township |
Woodplumpton | 4,971] 1,197 | 1,397 | 1,635 | 1,719 1,688 | 1,574 1,462 | 1,290 | 1,239 | 1,184) 1,208
Chap. t¢
Sa a 15,813] 2,938 | 3,390 | 4,031 | 4,082 | 7,273 | 7,690 | 8,665 | 9,215 [11.922 15,624] 28,083
yide :—
Carleton, Great} 2,032 269 308 356 319 | 378 400 363 433 385 436 780
and Little
Township ¢
Hardhorn with] 2,653] 317 324 392 409 358 386 386 436 420 462 597
Newton Town-
ship
Marton, Great] 4,707] 972 | 1,093 | 1,397 | 1,487 | 1,562 | 1,650 | 1,697 | 1,982 | 2,303 | 3,044) 9,293
and Little
Chap.
Poulton-le-Fylde| 975] 769 | 926 | 1,077 | 1,025 , 1,128 | 1,120 | 1,147 | 1,167 | 1,225 | 1,412) 2,223
Township
Thornton (with] 5,506 617 739 875 842 | 3,847 | 4,134 | 5,084 | 5,203 | 7,589 10,270| 15,190
Fleetwood)
Township ®
Preston :— 16,004 ]14,300 19,528 27,300 |36,336 53,482 |72,136 85,699 |89,323 [98,793 |110,031]115,483
Barton Town- 2,707 348 344 414 422 413 370 343 338 368 338 315:
shi
Broughton P 2,367 545 548 615 620 , 695 685 709 607 590 610) 616
Chap. t
Elston Township] 959 58 59 76 64 56 54 53 53 43 61 59
Fishwick Town-| 693] 287) 295 | 284, 759 756 | 1,005 | 1,884 | 1,912 | 2,142 | 3,427| 4,884
ship
Grimsargh and] 7,937 262 279 343 310 331 360 301 357 369 455 561
Brockholes
Township
Haighton Town-] 17,077 167 193 184 192 212 193 222 219 215 252 273
ship
Lea, Ashton, | 3,488 594 590 658 687 710 743 917 | 2,087 | 2,913 4,865| 6,586
Ingol, and
Cottam Town-
ship ft
ied Town-]| 2,127 |17,887 17,065 '24,575 '33,112 50,131 68,537 |81,101 |83,515 97,578 | 99,185|107 ,295
ship
Ribbleton Town- 649 152 155 157 170 178 189 175 247 575 838 894
shi
Ribchester (part 3,093] 664 782 | 948 | 1,030 | 976} 959 | 1,257 | 1,457 | 1,721 | 1,991] 2,007
of) #9 :—
Alston Township] 2,037 _ _ _ 844 807 807 | 1,098 | 1,337 | 1,589 7,876| 1,865
Hatherall, or Ho-} 7,056 _ — = 186 169 152 159 120 132 175 142
thersall Town-
ship
Blackburn Hun-
dred — Higher
Division
Bury (part of) :—] 3,213] 1,139 | 1,375 1,952 | 2,750 | 3,102 | 3,382 | 3,848 | 4,768 | 4,705 | 4,714] 4,390
Cowpe Lench,] 7,499] 676 | 786 | 1,224 | 1,519 | 1,716 | 2,154 | 2,851 | 3,638 | 3,695 | 3,600] 3,345
New Hall
Hey, and Hall
Carr Town-
ship
ey Town-| 17,774] 463 | 589 | 728 | 1,231 | 1,386 | 1,228) 997 | 1,130 | 1,010 | 1,114] 1,045
ship ;
|

* Thornton.—In 1834 Fleetwood was only a rabbit-warren; in 1841 it contained 2,833 persons and in 1go1 it hada

‘population of 12,082.

9 Preston Township included in 1851 nearly 600 strangers attending the fair.
10 Ribchestey Parish is contained in (1) Amounderness Hundred; and (2) Blackburn Hundred, Lower Division.
Bury Parish is contained in (1) Blackburn Hundred, Higher Division; and (z) Salford Hundred.

334

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY

TABLE OF POPULATION, 1801—1901 (continued)

Acre-

Pariso ape w8or | 18x | r82x | 1831 | 1841 | 1851 | 1861 | 1871 | 188r | 189% | 1901

Blackburn Hun-
adred—Higher
Division (cont.)

whee (part 196,190141,164 [52,513 |70,194 [81,322 [93,273 |111,610)139,668)159,954|205,852/259,841/298,043
re) a

Accrington, New] 2,633} 2,246 | 2,381 | 4,109 | 4,960 | 6,908 | 8,108] 11,853] 12,952
Townshia 31,435| 38,603) 43,122

Accrington, Old] 792] 837] 885 | 1,267 | 1,323 | 1,817 | 2,266] 5,835| 8,836|(9/4 : ’
Township

Altham Chap. t | 7,438] 328 | 383 | 439) 413] 349 426] 470| 401) 395) 427| 785

Barley with | 2,629 528 566 765 707 686 542 485 354 314 303 287
Wheatley

Booth Town-
ship
Barrowford 2,365) 1,224 | 1,727 | 2,168 | 2,633 | 2,630 | 2,875| 2,880) 3,110) 3,842| 4,776; 5,448
Township
Booths, Higher] 4,472] 7,667 | 2,568 | 3,172 | 4,347 | 3,652 | 3,827| 5,131) 5,667| 6,239) 6,765] 6,587
Township

Booths, Lower] 7,600] 934 | 7,178 | 1,513 | 2,178 | 2,464. | 3,778] 4,655] 5,174) 6,196] 6,837] 7,859
Township t¢

Briercliffe with] 4,227] 956 | 1,220 | 1,407 | 1,755 | 1,498 | 1,612] 1,332) 1,263) 1,147| 1,647| 2,324
Extwistle
Township
Burnley Chap. .] 7,996] 3,305 | 4,368 | 6,378 | 7,551 |10,699 | 14,706| 19,971| 21,501| 28,744| 39,550) 44,045
Chatburn Town-| 896] 475 | 487 | 552] 591 500 503) $21| 584) 771) 831) 772

ship
Clitheroe 2,385 | 1,368 | 1,767 | 3,273 | 5,273 | 6,765 | 7,244) 7,000| 8,217) 10,192| 10,828) 11,414
Township *
Cliviger 6,819| 7,058 | 1,193 | 1,314 | 7,598 | 1,395 | 1,447] 1,770| 1,674) 1,952| 2,121| 2,422
Township
Colne Township | 4,635] 3,626 | 5,336 | 7,274 | 8,080 | 8,675 | 8,987| 7,906| 8,633) 10,313| 14,023| 19,055
Downham 2,302 470 537 620 522 368 362 292 282 272 237 246
Township
Dunnockshaw 389 60 63 76 46 41 86 167 186 212 184 164
Township 4
Foulridge Town-] 2,458] 833 | 1,032 | 1,307 | 1,418 | 1,458 | 1,233) 988| 827) 890| 877] 1,373
ship
Goldshaw Booth | 2,034 516 626 819 763 748 620 406 358 355 343 422
Township
Habergham 4,217| 1,919 | 2,839 | 4,672 | 5,817 | 8,526 | 12,549| 18,013| 23,423) 35,033| 46,930| 52,229
Eaves Town-
ship
Hapton Town-| 4,008] 395) 533| s68| 583| 541 550| 1,003| 1,586] 2,155] 3,395| 3,870
shi
Henteads Town- 317 122 195 246 202 176 160 211 201 233 235 174
shi
Heyhouses 322 156 145 187 155 156 147 128 84 77 47 23
Township
Higham with | 7,584 583 742 891 | 1,038 960 839 759 791 751 751 627
West Close
Booth Town-
ship
Huncoat Town- 997 450 514 629 502 467 598 839 854 930 956) 1,281
ship 16
lenerball Park 760 126 107 208 164 158 176 161 149 205 519 888
Township*®
Marsden, Great] 4,689] 2,322 | 2,876 | 3,945 | 4,713 | 5,158 | 6,068] 7,342) 10,284] 16,725] 31,339] 44,045
and Little
Township
Mearley Town-} 7,509 75 75 89 63 53 47 47 48 30 36 41
shi
Mitton, Little 875 76 76 99 70 74 74 62 55 73 95 86
Township

12 Whalley Parish is contained in (1) Blackburn Hundred, Higher Division; (z) Blackburn Hundred, Lower
Division; and (3) Staincliffe and Ewcross Wapentake (Yorkshire, West Riding).

18 Clitheroe includes Clitheroe Castle, which was formerly Extra Parochial.

14 Dunnockshaw.—The 1801 population is an estimate.

13 Reedley Hallows, &c., Ightenhill Park, Heyhouses, and Wheatley Cavy Booth were described in 1851 as ‘Extra
Parochial Townships in Whalley Parish,’ but they were not then exempt from paying poor-rates.

16 Huncoat.—The 1801 population is an estimate.

335

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

TABLE OF POPULATION, 1801—1901 (continued)

PaRIsH HOKE ror , 1811 1821 1831 | 1841 , 1851 1861 | 1871 ; St 1891-1901
age i ( :
Od ! | | | |
Blackburn Hun- | ' : '
dred—Higher | | |
Division (cont.) :
Whalley (part of) | | |
cont, j ‘ ‘
Se Chk in| 5,858] 5,046 | 6,930 8,557 | 9,196 11,668 (16,915 24,413, 26,823, 28,261 26,374 26,917
Rossendale J
Chap.t ” | |
Padiham Town- 7,953] 2,778 | 2,556 | 3,060 3,529 3,789 4,509 5,977 i 8,346 9,923 70,500
shi 1 : | |
tid aunt aad 431 287 316 390 476 481 | 447 423 296 332. id 549
Township i
Pendleton 2,829 914 930 1,319 1,205 | 1,469 | 1,308 1,446 1,229 7,312 iney 1,063
Township ¥ F | | i
Read Township] 7,552 317 419 510 S70 467 449 537 O34 909. 1,359, 1,346
Reedley Hal-] 7,446 408 415 422 468 412 374 423 588 667; 1,150; 1,285
lows, Filly
Close, and
New Laund
Booth Town-
ship '*
Rough Lee] 7,740 684 795 958 949 782 719 424 372; Jag 324 307
Booth Town- |
ship | 1
Simonstone 1,027 298 336 | 396 440 416 365 325 366 421 477 491
Township !
Trawden Town-] 6,875 1,443 | 1,941 2,507 | 2,853 2,900 | 2,601 2,087| 2,129) 2,164, 2,354) 2,647
shi |
Tuidon Town- 861 189 215 236. 222 199 161 147 134) 128 71 43
ship ;
Whalley Town-]| 7,607 876 | 1,004 7,058 | 1,151 | 1,010 945 806 747) 895| 1,142, 1,100
shi
Wiveatley Carr] 254] 42 65 69 58 53 40 46 36 39 51 47
Booth Town- | |
ship 1 i
Wiswell Town- 7,692 349 488 683 724: 775 747 465 419 737 728 627
shi
Worsthedia with] 3,507 443 309 631 798 817 909 865 és 7,093| 1,069 852
Hurstwood |
Township t ; i
Worston Town-] 7,090} 128 157 | 178 129' 71197 89 84 71 62 70 95
shi |
Yate a Pickup} 852] 7,045 | 7,230 | 1,359 | 1,209 | 1,068 1,208 | 1,171] 766, 682| 581) 603
Bank Town-
ship

Blackburn Hun-

dred— Lower } }

Division |
Blackburn? :— 148,254 133,631 |39.899 53.350 '59,791 71,711 84.919 |r10,349 131,978 161,617|189,433 206,291
Balderstone 7,807 615 | 636 705 | 658 585 660 532 475 487 510 456
Chap. | ' i
Billington Lang-] 3,736] 844 893 922 7,089 | 988 882 | 1,038 1,204, 1,410, 1,458, 1,442
ho Chap. | | '
Blackburn 3,681 117,980 15,083 21,940 27,091 36,629 46,536 | 63,126| 76,339 91,958 hOaeeeTOR CD
Township : '
Clayton-le- Dale} 7,774 419 520 598 557 577 471 375 275 295 284, 317
Township |
Cuerdale Town- 689 170 159-166 7118 106 80 56 60 58 60 57
ship .
Darwen, Lower} 2,667] 1,646 1,805 2,238 | 2,667 3,077 3,521 | 3,301| 3,876 4,531| 8,573 6,597
Township | |
Darwen, Over | 5,134] 3,587 | 4.477 6,711 | 6,972 | 9,348 11,702 | 16,492| 21,278 27,626, 31,680 35,438
Chap. | | 1 :

Newchurch in Rossendale included Bacup in 1841.

18 Pendleton includes the area and the Population, 1871-1901, of Pendleton Hall and Standen with Standen Hey,
places formerly reputed Extra Parochial, but never separately shown.

18a See note 15, ante.

19 Blackburn Parish.—The increase in 1821 is said to be partly due to the introduction of vaccination.

336

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY

TABLE OF POPULATION, 1801—1901 (continued)

PaRIsH ae 1801 1811 1821 1831 1841 1851 1861 1871 1881 1891 IQOI

Blackburn Hun-
dread—Lower
Division (cont.)
Blackburn (con?.)

Dinckley Town- 610 197 250 238 223 183 151 120 119 123 62 74

ship

Eccleshill Town-| 797} 346 | 374 456 715 510 598 543 633 716 697 601

ship

Harwood, Great] 2,868] 7,659 1,676 | 2,104 | 2,436 | 2,273 | 2,548 | 4,070 | 4,907 | 6,287 | 9,073 |12,015

Township {

Harwood, Little 895 104 126 210 341 322 316 270 317 715 | 1,190 | 1,883

Township

Livesey Town-] 2,036] 1,784 | 1,126 | 1,664 | 1,787 | 1,996 | 2,649 | 3,587 | 4,035 | 6,065 | 8,878 |10,344

ship

Mellor Town-} 7,743] 1,439 | 7,548 | 1,987 | 2,077 | 7,844 | 1,668 | 1,398 | 1,178 | 1,096 | 1,138 | 1,111

ship

Osbaldeston 1,059 252 278 319 349 289 250 238 224 154 169 182
Township

Pleasington 1,703 614 599 625 633 517 428 422 336 459 436 461
Township

Ramsgreave 778 298 484 534 515 453 438 320 263 240 239 179
Township

Rishton Town-] 2,985] 1,057 | 7,084 1,170| 919| 917 | 800 | 1,198 | 2,577 | 4,055 | 6,010 | 7,031

ship {

Salesbury Chap. ]} 7,275 236 295 427 433 399 388 331 212 184 191 217

Samlesbury 4,384] 1,664 | 1,589 | 1,979 | 1,948 | 1,728 | 1,435 | 1,215 | 810| 752| 816] 860
Chap. ¢

Tockholes Chap. | 7,997] 758 | 7,077 | 7,269 | 1,124] 7,023 | 939; 820| 646} 484| 448| 496
Walton le Dale] 4,658} 3,832 | 4,776 | 5,740 | 5,767 | 6,659 | 6,855 | 7,383 | 8,187 | 9,286 |10,556 111,271

Township

Wilpshire Town-] 7,004 275 291 287 337 281 237 228 230 280 413 594
ship

Witton Town- 700 461 819 | 1,067 | 1,047 | 1,073 | 1,367 | 3,292 | 3,803 | 4,356 | 5,210 | 5,812
ship

Chipping t :— 8,850] 1,214 | 1,440 | 1,735 | 1,850 | 1,675 | 1,625 | 1,483 | 1,541 | 1,336 | 1,192 | 1,133
Chipping Town-] 5,637] 827 | 1,007 | 1,229 | 1,334 | 1,168 | 1,134 | 1,074 | 1,113 | 987 | 862 | 9820
ship

Thornley with] 3,279] 387 433 506 516 507 497 409 428 349 330 313
Wheatley

Township
Mitton (partof) #°:—

Aighton, Bailey,} 6,300] 1,260 | 1,296 | 1,487 | 1,980 | 1,798 | 1,613 | 1,500 | 1,524 | 1,663 | 1,378 | 1,314
and Chaigley

. Township t
ae (part} 5,371} 2,084 | 2,762 3,250 | 3,253 | 3,135 | 2,929 | 2,628 | 3,316 | 3,657 | 3,778 | 3,901
r6) — i
Dilworth 1,248] 524 | 861: 969| 874| 845 | 833} 959 | 1,730 | 2,116 | 2,285 | 2,439
Township
Dutton Town. | 7,899} 388 | 440, 521| 490| 563 | 446| 312| 257| 259) 228) 225
shipt
Ribchester 2,224] 1,172 | 1,467 | 1,760 | 1,889 | 1,727 | 1,650 | 1,357 | 1,329 | 1,282 | 1,265 | 1,237
Township
et (part [15,480] 8,521 /10,864 14,640 |17,111 19,138 |22,251 |27,479 132,359 |38,255 |42,538 45,345
re) oo |
Bowland, Little} 3,753 133 | 117| 123| 121| 106| 98! 103
Township hate 328 | 370 288 {
Leagram Town-| 7,572 140 | 123| 117| 115) 100 89 | 107
ship
Church = Kirk] 529] 323 | 474 | 752) 979 | 1,545 | 2,035 | 4,753 | 4,450 | 4,850 | 5,870 6,463
Township
Clayton le Moors} 7,059] 7,730 | 7,423 | 1,963 | 2,177 | 2,602 | 3,292 | 4,682 | 5,390 | 6,695 | 7,155 | 8,153
Township f
Haslingden 4,342 4,040 | 5,127 | 6,595 | 7,776 | 8,063 | 9,030 |10,109 |12,000 |14,298 |16,030 16,327
Township
Oswaldtwistle | 4,885] 2,770 | 3,572 | 4,960 | 5,897 | 6,655 | 7,654 | 7,707 |10,283 |12,206 |13,296 |14,192
Township

% Mitton Parish is contained in (1) Blackburn Hundred, Lower Division; and (2) Staincliffe and Ewcross Wapen-
take (Yorkshire, West Riding).

20a See note 10, ante

31 Dutton is said to include an entire Ancient Parish, Stidd, which has never been separately shown.

2a See note 12, ante.

2 337 43

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

TABLE OF POPULATION, 1801—1901 (continued)

Pariso ae w8or | r81r | 1821 | 1831 | r84x | 1851 | 1861 | 1874 | 188r 1891 | 1901
land
2a Hundred—
Brindlef. . . .| 3,106] 1,271 | 1,425 | 1,574 | 1,558 | 1,401 j 1,310 | 1,501 | 1,339 | 1,173 | 1,106 1,026
Chorley? . . «| 3,614] 4,516 , 5,182 | 7,315 | 9,282 |13,139 12,684 15,013 [16,864 19,478 |23,087 |26,852
Croston :— 10,758] 2,766 | 3,379 | 3,739 | 3,869 | 3,939 | 4,031 | 4,242 | 3,785 | 4,092 | 4,524 | 4,752
Bispham Town- 929 172 242 254 256 306 270 277 284 280 259 JLT
shi
Bist eron Tew 2,428 567 653 748 828 833 818 775 683 707 785 809
shipt
CrostonTownship] 2,347] 975 | 7,271 | 1,367 | 1,398 | 1,456 | 1,500 | 7,790 | 1,518 | 1,791 | 2,034 | 2,102
Mawdesley 2,947) 659 744 833 886 867 887 912 886 928 956 969
Township #
Ulnes Walton] 2,707 453 529 537 507 477 556 488 414 386 490 557
Township
Eccleston :— 8,412] 2,133 | 2,491 | 2,801 | 3,068 | 3,319 | 3,115 | 3,496 | 3,291 | 3,331 | 3,532 | 4,234
Eccleston 2,092 489 566 727 761 7771 671 965 953 900 980 | 1,249
Township
Heskin 1,242 249 309 274 324 359 358 439 336 382 404 537
Township
Parbold 7,161 255 348 339 382 418 473 474 477 529 598 579
Township
Wrightington 3,917} 1,140 | 1,268 | 1,467 | 1,607 | 1,777 | 1,673 | 1,678 | 1,525 | 1,520 | 1,550 | 1,869
Township
Hesketh with Bec-| 3,662] 353 347| 476} 523] 553| 692] 804] 799] 863| 933] gor
consall tf
Hoole { :— 2,993] 596 | 744 | 860) 934] 989 | 977 | 1,132 | 1,097 | 1,021 | 1,048 | 1,125
Hoole, Little 7,236 179 225 216 189 204 202 424 453 440 481 501
Township
Hoole, Much L757 417 519 644 745 785 F753: 708 644 581 567 624
Township
Penwortham :— —_|10,827] 2,909 | 3,710 | 4,554 | 4,679 | 5.498 | 5,722 | 5,488 | 5,305 | 5,553 | 5,646 | 6,756
Farington 1,862] 382) 497 | 513 | 672 | 1,719 | 1,932 | 1,791 | 1,797 | 2,017 | 2,154 | 2,005
Township
Howick 745 172 123 136 | 132 125 116 93 80 62 107 707
Township
Hutton 2,567 462 507 613 715 563 500 461 395 389 374 418
Township
Longton Chap.| 3,383 904 | 1,340 | 1,791 | 1,744 | 1,719 | 1,687 | 1,637 | 1,455 1,443 | 1,333 | 1,707

Penwortham 2,270) 1,049 | 1,243 | 1,501 | 1,416 1,372 | 1,487 | 1,506 | 1,578 | 1,642 | 1,684 | 2,525

Township ‘

Leyland :— 19,264} 8,459 |10,900 12,959 13,951 14.032 113,710 [13,684 |12,713 14,116 [15,994 [17,940

Clayton le Woods] 7,437} 706 | 730) 801 926 795 | 747|~ 705 | 607| 532| ° 542 | 7.002
Township

Cuerden 805} 519 | 573) 569 592} 573] 521| 666) 647| 573| 4561 401
Township |

Euxton Chap. {| 2,932] 837 | 1,193 | 1,360 | 1,587 1,562 | 1,631 | 1,491 | 1,182 | 1,147 | 1,167 | 1,132
Heapey Chap.| 7,466] 347 | 428| 530 465 396 | 290| 369| 497| 543
Hoghton Chap.t} 2.252] 1,301 | 1,698 | 2,117 2,198 , 1,706 | 1,373 | 1,207 | 906| 9871 | 923| 940

A
©
a
A
So
a

Leyland 3,725 | 2,088 | 2,646 | 3,173 3,404 3,569 | 3,617 | 3,755 | 3,839 | 4,967 | 5,972 | 6,865
Township

Wheelton 7,696] 583 | 884 | 1,186 1,519 | 1,331 | 1,041 | 1,260 , 1,477 | 1,570 | 1,538 | 1,535
Township

Whittle le Woods} 7,357| 7,325 1,699 2,083 2,015 | 2,295 2,310 | 2,151 1,805 | 1,937 | 2,120 | 2,333

Township |

Withnell 5,620) 765 | 1,049 1,146 | 1,251 | 1,705 | 1,975 | 2,059 | 1,966 | 2,106 | 2,779 | 3,789
Township +

Ruffordt . . ./ 3,120] 853 998 | 1,073 869 866 861 865 819 905 816 782

Standish :— 15,377] 5.489 | 6,258 | 7,616 | 7,719 8,686 8,594 |10,410 |12,382 |13,526 |16,090 18,766

Adlington 1,062) 470 | 640 | 1,043 | 1,082 , 1,130 | 1,090 | 1,975 | 2,606 | 3,258 | 4,190 | 4.523
Township !

Anderton 7,230 354 408 432) 343 339 284 243 262 317 454 819
Township

Charnock 7,946 587 668 794 755 784 872 899 750 685 645 682

Richard

Township

Coppull Chap. t] 2.252] 832} 927 | 1,017 908 | 1,031 | 1,107 | 1,230 | 1,484. 1,826 | 2,024 | 2,940

Duxbury 1,011) 255 | 305 | 312; 213; 371| 324! 347 | 325; 323| ‘2691 992
Township H

22 Chorley.—The increase in 1841 is partly due to the presence of labourers te i
ie p mporarily employed on the Bolton

* Mawdesley includes the area and the population, 1871-1 jor, of Holland Mead
Parochial, but never separately shown. re Sawer aan ely maple Eats

338

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY

TABLE OF POPULATION, 1801—1901 (continued)

PARISH sd 1801 1811 1821 1831 1841 1851 1861 1871 1881 1891 IQOI

age

Leyland
Hundred (cont.)

Standish (cont.)
Heath Charnock} 7,599 565 556 823 847 | 1,062 799 772 | 1,034 916 | 1,062 | 7,707

Township ™
Shevington 1,727| 646 | 726 | 836 | 899 | 1,122 | 1,147 | 1,615 | 1,924 | 1,570 | 1,629 | 1,753
Township
Standish with | 3,266] 7,542 | 1,770 | 2,065 | 2,407 | 2,565 | 2,655 | 3,054 | 3,698 | 4,261 | 5,416 | 6,303
Langtree
Township
Welch Whittle 596] 127 | 144] 151 147, | 149| 140| 148} 111 715 | 113 | 105
Township
Worthington 658) 7117 | 114 | 143 | 124| 133 | 176| 133) 188} 255 | 288| 258
Township
Tarletont . . .[ 5,545] 1,116 | 1,281 | 1,616 | 1,886 | 1,877 | 1,945 | 1,987 | 1,917 | 1,900 | 1,772 1,800
Lonsdale
Hundred (North
of the Sands)—
Aldingham . . .| 4,712] 633 696 760 884 907 968 | 1,011 | 1,061 | 1,152 ) 1,151 | 1,072
Cartmel :— 28,002] 4,007 | 3,939 | 4,923 | 4,802 | 4,927 | 5,213 | 5,108 | 5,492 | 5,600 | 6,319 | 6,270
Allithwaite, 3,211] 589 | 686 | 839| 838| 807| 888} 933 | 1,009 | 975 | 974 | 985
Lower Town-
ship +
Allithwaite, 2,682) 541| 567| 777| 759| 740| 746| 729| 776| 713 | 780| 753
Upper Town-
ship * +
Beene East] 3,425] 379 | 353| 387 | 476 | 458) 470| 534 | 1,007 | 1,251 | 1,758 | 2,033
hap. t
Cartmel Fell 4,958] 322] 280| 371 | 347| 356| 357| 308| 297 | 293 | 287| 268
Chapelry +
Holker, Lower | 2,387] 7,039 | 937 | 7,097 | 1,027 | 1,070 | 1,225 | 1,160 | 1,175 | 1,093 | 1,183 | 1,050
Township +
Holker, Upper | 7,740] 882 | 835 | 7,720 | 1,095 | 1,114 | 1,734 | 1,035 | 850 | 849 | 927 | 832
Township +

Staveley Chap.t] 4,799] 375 | 287| 350| 326| 382| 399| 409} 438] 426| 410) 349
Colton or Coulton 14,329] 1,516 | 1,524 | 1,627 | 1,786 | 1,983 | 2,008 | 1,794 | 1,860 | 1,783 | 1,774 | 1,648
Dalton in Furness |19,013] 1,954 | 2,074 | 2,446 | 2,697 | 3,231 | 4,683 | 9,152 |27,894 [60,598 |65,012 |70,606

with Barrow in

Furness

Hawkshead :— 22,206] 1,585 | 1,710 | 2,014 | 2,060 | 2,323 | 2,283 | 2,081 | 2,042 | 2,204 | 2,307 | 2,100
Claife Township| 4,458] 397 | 350| 452 | 463| 547 | 540) 540| 563 | 547 | 627 | 563
Hawkshead and|70,429| 920 | 1,062 | 1,255 | 1,194 | 1,362 | 7,277 | 1,144 | 7,085 | 7,205 | 7,228 | 1,126
Monk Coniston
with Skelwith
Township

Satterthwaite 7,319 274 298 307 403 420 472 397 394 452 452 411

Chap.
Kirkby Ireleth :— [25,946] 2,344 | 2,394 | 2,947 | 3.234 | 3,413 | 3,366 | 3,138 | 3,139 | 3,192 | 2,993 | 2,857
Broughton-in- | 6,943] 1,005 | 966 | 1,253 | 7,375 | 1,250 | 7,297 | 1,783 | 1,085 | 1,177 | 1,159 | 7,117

Furness Chap.
Dunnerdale with |70,273] 298 349 351 338 354 321 289 291 299 274 263
Seathwaite
Township
Kirkby Ireleth] 8,730] 7,047 | 7,079 | 1,343 | 7,527 | 1,809 | 1,748 | 1,666 | 1,763 | 1,722 | 1,560 | 1,477
Township
Waitham
Hill
and
Lah Cone 918} — = — = 36 32 31 36 32 28 27
Marshfield, | * #™
and
Herd-
house

% Heath Chaynock.—The increase in 1871 is partly due to the temporary presence of labourers employed in
enlarging Rivington Waterworks.

25 Upper Allithwaite includes the area and the population, 1871-1901, of Home Island, formerly reputed Extra
Parochial, but never separately shown.

26 Dalton in Fuyness—The figures include those for Barrow in Furness, which became a separate Civil Parish in
1871, having a population of 18,584 in that year

27 Waitham Hill, &c., became a Civil Parish under 20 Vict. c. 19, to be called Angerton.

339

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

TABLE OF POPULATION, 1801—1901 continued,

ParISa a 1801 | 1811 | 182r | 1831 | 1841 | 1851 | 1861 | 1871 | 1881 1891 | Igor
Lonsdale Hun-
dred (North
of the Sands)
(cont.)
Pennington f 2,850] 273 271 284 355 388 489 879 | 1,112 | 1,698 | 1,650 | 1,510
Ulverston :— 27,122] 4,942 | §,867 | 7,102 | 7,741 | 8,778 |10,623 |11,464 |11,303 |13,394 [13,025 [13,103

Blawith Chap.]} 2,998 160 170 790 171 173 229 193 146 158 153 148
Church Conis-]| 7,424 338 460 566 587 | 1,148 | 1,287 1,324 | 1,106 965 818 917

ton Chap. t *
Egton cum New-] 3,704 675 869 910 987 | 1,024 | 1,222 | 1,231 | 1,148 998 923 934
land Chap. ¢
Lowick Chap.| 2,277 278 373 378 371 374 4171 468 463 376 317 279
Mansriggs 569 64 64 62 69 63 64 69 73 64 67 64
Township
Osmotherley 1,931 218 237 264 293 298 325 419 405 474 453 391
Township
Subberthwaite 1,236 90 112 154 163 147 150 152 146 149 109 99
Township
Torver Chap. | 3,877 782 204 263 224 199 193 194 209 202 176 207
Ulverston 3,172] 2,937 | 3,378 | 4,315 | 4,876 | 5,352 | 6,742 | 7,414 | 7,607 |10,008 |10,015 |70,064
Township
Urswick 3,899] 633 590 787 752 761 891 | 1,080 | 1,144 | 1,287 | 1,274 | 1,186
Lonsdale Hun-

dred (South
of the Sands)

Bolton le Sands:—] 8,017] 1,609 | 1,604 | 1,821 | 1,781 | 1,774 | 1,802 | 1,713 | 1,758 | 1,859 | 1,901 | 2,037

Bolton le 1,580 639 591 615 695 671 686 692 753 785 756 926
Sands Town-
ship ¢
Kellet, Nether} 2,087 300 263 358 354 279 319 284 275 279 293 273
Township
Kellet, Over 3,213 417 464 531 446 508 488 425 423 494 514 438
Chap. {¢
Slyne with Hest] 7,743 259 286 317 286 316 309 312 307 301 338 400
Township t
Burton in Kendal
(part of )??:—
Dalton bee 2,170 73 _ ISI: 131 155 100 129 120 123 117 106
ship
Claughton f{ 1,581 71 g2 123 | 116 | 118 106 94 85 100 82 140
Cockerham :— 12,749] 1,881 | 2,194 | 2,624 2,794 | 3,230 | 2,520 | 2,955 2,582 | 2,708 | 2,504 | 2,489
Cockerham 5,809 714 738 773 577 847 774 778 803 761 705 677
Township |

Ellel Chap.t .| 5,874] 1,767 | 1,456 | 1,851 | 2,217 | 2,223 | 1,484 | 1,968 | 1,675 | 1,787 | 1,799 | 1,812

407 330 331 360 297 307 286

Thurnham 1,126 —~ — es 160 262 209 164 160 _ —
Township ;
(part of) %°
Halton . . . .[ 3,914] 823 776 . 1,027 834 694 718 670 615 731 906 892
Heysham{t . . .| 1,835] 365 464 | _ 540 582 | 698 593 567 628 632 766 | 3,381
Melling :— 23,424] 1,669 | 2,001 | 2.340 1,962 : 2,039 | 2,204 | 2,013 | 1,796 | 1,809 | 1,675 | 1,589

Arkholme with] 3,078] 303 324°: 357 349
Cawood Chap.t

Farleton 1,051 84 93 | 91 90 62 75 75 49 122 114 104
Township ®
Hornby Chap. .} 1,967 414! 420 | 477 383 318 374 317 323 358 338 293
Melling with 7,064 156 | 188 | 270 200: 195 197 169 7182 167 186 170
Wrayton :
Township
Roeburndale 8,824 229 | 228 237 199 197 206 144 730 112 706 95
Township ;

|
| i

33 Church Coniston.—In 1861 a large number of men were temporarily present, engaged in constructing a railwa

°° Burton in Kendal Parish is contained in (1) Lonsdale Hundred, South of the ‘ Le
(Kendal Ward and Lonsdale Ward). 8 Seavey ead (2): Westmorland

°° Thurnham is contained in (1) Cockerham Parish ; and (2) Lancaster Parish. Both in Lonsd
of the Sands. The part in Cockerham Parish contained a Extra Parochial Places, yNrhene oea
Parish of Cockersand Abbey under 20 Vict. c. 19; this Civil Parish, however, is still counted in with the part of Thurn-
ham in Cockerham Parish, for convenience of comparison. Thurnoham is entirely shown in Lancaster Parish, 1801-
1831, 891, and 1gor. :

8! Farleton.—The increase in 1881 is partly due to the opening of a new workhouse.

340

SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC HISTORY

TABLE OF POPULATION, 1801—1901 (continued)

ParRIsH — r8or | 18rzr | r82r | 1831 | 1841 1851 1861 | 1871 1881 1891 IQOI

Lonsdale Hun-
dred (South
of the Sands)
(cont.)

Melling (cont.)
Wennington 980 —_ 125 160 155 148 189 180 168 127 139 142
Township

Wray with Bot-] 6,526] 483 | 623 | 808| 586| 718 | 833 | 797 | 584 | 626; 491 499
ton Township :
Lancaster (part [50,488] 6,160 | 6,169 | 6,822 | 7,186 | 7,786 | 8,021 | 8,712 | 9,713 |13,000 17,759 25,042

of)! ;—
Aldcliffe 779 _ 73 85 96 111 85 74 68 94 106 83
Township *
Ashton with 1,522 176 206 242 213 185 173 184 197 207 186 187
Stodday
Township

Bulk Township*| 7,758] 790 | 1773 | 117 | 1702| 173 | 124 | 109| 116 | 117| 671 | 1,255

Caton and Little-} 8,393] 7,790 | 1,067 | 7,107 | 1,166 | 1,310 | 1,434 | 1,160 | 1,059 | 1,085 | 1,248 | 1,181
dale Township} :

eee , | 2:079 178 | 191) 201 177 | 185 | 187 | 158 | 134 152 | 147 | 119

Ap.}

Heaton with Ox-| 2,036] 206] 175 | 176| 170| 149| 174} 165 | 169| 136) 153) 165

cliffe Town-

ship

Middleton 1,370] 167 161 185.| 177 | 200| 185 | 182| 184 157 | 124 172
Township

Overton and 7,840] 322| 305| 344| 336| 390| 334] 305 | 296 | 325| 321) 346
Sunderland

Chap.
Poulton, Bare,} 7,725] 483] 488| 675 | 838 | 1,037 | 1,301 | 2,236 | 3,005 | 3,937 | 6,476 |17,786
and Torris-
holme Town-
ship ft
Quernmore 6,789} 490 471 672 605 556 579 563 555 585 576 529
Township {
Scotforth 2,880] 462| 466|-579| 557] 643 | 693 | 955 | 1,139 | 2,263 | 2,749 | 1,847
Township *
Skerton 1,316| 1,278 | 1,254 | 1,283 | 1,357 | 1,665 | 1,586 | 1,556 | 1,817 | 2,838 | 3,757 | 6,340
Township 3%
Thurnham 1,315 363 403 448 526 563 486 541 480 597 722 574
Township
(part of ) t 8
baa es 17,346 661 802 774 872 679 680 524 500 513 523 464
ap.{
Lancaster Castle 3, — _ _— 446 558 226 163 211 105 61 64
Extra Par,*
Tatham * t 8,551] 739 | 576| 765) 744) 677} 654} 588] 586] 534} 465 | 454
Thornton-in-Lons-
dale (part
of ) > :—
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

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

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

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)

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.

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

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.

* 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.

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.

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.

" 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.

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.’

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.

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. <A
self-actor weaving machine adapted for working

8” The reasons for the Manchester merchants assum-
ing the task are explained in Chapman’s Lanc. Cotton
Industry, 15-16.

8 Specification 257.

® The statement is made by Guest on the evidence
of a manuscript lent him by Robert Kay’s son Samuel,

383

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

by power was designed by a Monsieur de Gennes ;
a description of it extracted from the Journal de
Scavans appeared in the Philosophical Transac-
tions for July and August, 1678, and a shorter
account in the Gentleman’s Magazine nearly
three-quarters of a century later, namely in
1751 (vol. xxi, 391-2). The contrivance was
of no practical utility ; it was highly rudimentary,
consisting of mechanical arms with mechanical
hands, so to speak, that shot in and out of the
warp and exchanged the shuttle. Also in the
seventeenth century a John Barkstead was
granted a patent for a method of manufacturing
cotton goods, but the method is not described.”
Another idea that had a future was that of
grinding the shuttle through the warps by the
agency of cog-wheels working at each end upon
teeth afhxed to the upper side of the shuttle.
The shuttles, of course, could not be given
rapid motion in this way, but the machine
was economical for the production of ribbons and
tapes because many lengths could be woven at once
on the same machine. In 1724 Stukeley, in his
Itinerarium Curtosum, wrote that the people of
Manchester have ‘looms that work twenty-four
laces at a time, which was stolen from the
Dutch.” These were the swivel-looms described
above, and Ogden agrees that they were set up
in imitation of Dutch machines by Dutch
mechanics invited over to this country for the
purpose. There is another interesting passage
relating to the swivel-looms in the rules of the
Manchester small-ware weavers dated 1756,
where reference is made to the masters having
acquired by the use of ‘engine or Dutch looms
such large and opulent fortunes as hath enabled
them to vie with some of the best gentlemen of
the country,’ and the statement is made that
these machines, which wove twelve or fourteen
pieces at once, were in use in Manchester ‘thirty
years ago.’*! In 1760 a Mr. Gartside filled a
factory at Manchester with them, using water
power to drive them, but the enterprise, which
may not have been the first of its kind (i.e. in
power-weaving), failed.®?

Cartwright probably completed his invention
of the first ordinary practicable power-loom in
1787, and then lost a fortune in trying to
make it pay; he received some compensation

*° 1691, Specification 276.

“In the Parl. Rep, 1840, xxiv, 611, the
invention of the swivel-loom is claimed for a
‘Van <Anson.? If by ‘Van Anson’ is meant
Vaucanson, as seems probable, he could not have been
the original inventor, though he appears to have
improved the swivel-loom, as in 1724 (that is, when
Vaucanson was at most fifteen years of age) they were
being used in Manchester.

* Aikin, op. cit, 175-6 and Guest, Op. cit. 44.
An explanation of the mechanism of the swivel-loom
will be found in the Encyclopédie Méthodigue, Manu-

Jactures, Arts et Métiers, pt. i, vol. ii, PP: Ccii, ccviii ;
and Recueil de Planches (1786), vi, 72-8.

however, in 1809, in the form of a grant of
£10,000 from the Government. In 1790
Messrs. Grimshaw of Gorton erected a weaving
factory which they filled with Cartwright’s
looms, and tried with little success, though at
great cost, to improve them until the factory
was burnt down. Bell and Miller brought
forward their patents in 1794 and 1798 respec-
tively, and in 1803 and the next year William
Radcliffe of Stockport (who agitated for restric-
tion on the exportation of yarn), with the
assistance of an ingenious mechanic, Johnson,
took out patents for the dressing of the warp
before it was placed in the loom and for the
mechanical taking up of the woven cloth and
drawing forward of the warp to be woven upon.
Prior to these inventions the loom had to be
stopped for the woven cloth to be moved on and
for the parts of the warps brought within the
play of the shuttle to be sized. Looms fitted
with the latter of these devices were known as
‘dandy’ looms. In 1803 Horrocks, also of
Stockport, brought out a new loom which was
improved and further patented in 1805 and
1813. These, seemingly, were ‘dandy’ looms,
and Radcliffe asserts that their device for taking
up the cloth was copied from his hand-loom.
Another loom was brought forward by Peter
Marsland in 1806. While upon the subject of
weaving mechanisms we must notice that an
arrangement for throwing the loom out of action
when the weft broke came into use soon after
the introduction of power-looms, and that one
of Cartwright’s patents included a warp-stop
motion, though it was not employed. Looms
with warp-stop motions are now common in the
United States, as are also automatic looms, but
both are still the exception in Lancashire, for
reasons that need not be entered into.

The power-loom only very slowly made its
way into use: in 1813 a bare 2,400 could be
counted in the whole of the United Kingdom.
In 1820 the number was 14,000 (there were then
some 240,000 hand-looms); in 1829 the number
was 55,500; in 1833, 100,000; in 1870,
440,700; and to-day it stands at about 700,000."
Its imperfections at first retarded its adoption, but
despite improvements the factory system did not
prevail for many years. In Oldham the pressure
of power-manufacturing was felt very severely by
1824“ factory work is best for a poor family
at this time,’ wrote Rowbottom in his Diary in
that year, but in the finer work the hand-loom
weavers easily held their own. In 1829

* Figures for the years above up to 1833 will be
found in Parl. Rep. 1840, xxiv, 611.

“This is the manuscript diary of a weaver of
Oldham roughly covering the period 1787 to 1830.
It is now in the Oldham Public Library.
Mr. S. Andrew edited extracts from it in a series of
articles in the Standard (an Oldham paper) under the
title “Annals of Oldham’ (beginning 1 Jan. 1887).

384

INDUSTRIES

Kennedy wrote in his paper on The Rise and
Progress of the Cotton Trade, read to the
Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society :

It is found. . . . that one person cannot attend
upon more than two power-looms and it is still
problematical whether this saving of labour counter-
balances the expense of power and machinery, and
the disadvantages of being obliged to keep an
establishment of power-looms constantly at work.

Even in 1834 in the whole of Bolton there were
only 733 power-weavers, running 1,466 power-
looms, while in the same town 7,000 to 8,000
hand-loom weavers plied their craft and succeeded
in making a not unsatisfactory living as things
were then. The first power-looms were driven
by steam ; hence they were known generally as
steam-looms. One reason for the slow triumph
of power-weaving was the hatred of factory life
by the operatives, who had acquired their habits
under the domestic system. Yet it must be
remembered that some factories existed before
power-weaving was introduced: thus Butter-
worth writes of Oldham :

In the latter part of the last and the beginning of
the present century a large number of weavers
possessed spacious loom shops, where they not only
employed many journey-men weavers, but a consider-
able proportion of apprentice children.

The proportion of hand-loom weavers so em-
ployed, however, was not high; if anything it
would have increased as time went on, but the
commissioners on hand-loom weavers, who
reported in 1841, declared that the number so
employed was small.

This is not the place to describe in detail the
machinery used in the cotton industry, but the
development of this industry in Lancashire cannot
be understood apart from the general history of
the mechanical inventions relating to it. We
must now notice those in spinning. ‘The chief
inventors were Paul and Wyatt, Hargreaves, and
Crompton. The two latter were Lancashire
men, as John Kay had been, but Paul was of
foreign extraction, and Wyatt was born near
Lichfield, and the work of the two latter was
associated with Birmingham, Northampton, and
Leominster. It was Paul and Wyatt who gave
us the principle of spinning by rollers.” The

% Parl. Rep. 1834, x ; evidence, especially Q. 5627,
5058, 5728-30.

% Hist. of Oldham.

There has been a controversy over this point,
Arkwright, Wyatt, Paul, and Thomas Highs of
Leigh having severally had the discovery accredited
to them. The truth probably is that the invention,
as a working machine, resulted from the collaboration
of Wyatt and Paul, and that each of them had some
share in it. It is impossible to say to which belongs
the most credit. Robert Cole in his paper to the

patent was taken out in 1738, but nothing was
made of the plan until Arkwright, the ex-barber
of Kirkham, Preston, and Bolton, improved it in
1769. He obtained a patent in the same year,
and in 1775 he also patented machinery for
carding, drawing, and roving machinery. Nine
actions were instituted by Arkwright in 1781
against infringements of the second patent, and
an association of Lancashire spinners was forme1
to defend them. As a result of the one that
came to trial the patent was set aside on the
ground of obscurity in the specifications. This
decision was upheld in 1785 when Arkwright
made a second attempt. The first patent ran
out in 1783. After the first trial mentioned
above Arkwright drew up a petition to Parlia-
ment (which was never presented) in which he
asked for both patents to be continued to him
for the unexpired period of the second, that was
until 1789. Arkwright and his partners (at that
time Samuel Need and Jedediah Strutt) began
work at Nottingham; in 1771 they started the
mill at Cromford. In his ‘Case’ (i.e. his peti-
tion above mentioned) Arkwright stated that he

sold to numbers of adventurers residing in the different
counties of Derby, Leicester, Nottingham, Worcester,
Stafford, York, Hertford, and Lancashire many of his
patent machines. Upon a moderate computation
the money expended in consequence of such grants
(before 1782) amounted to at least £60,000. Mr. Ark-
wright and his partners also expended in large buildings
in Derbyshire and elsewhere upwards of £30,000, and
Mr. Arkwright also erected a very large and extensive
building in Manchester at the expense of upwards of

£4,000.
Thus

a business was formed, which already (he calculated)
employed upwards of five thousand persons, and a
capital on the whole of not less than £200,000.”

Water-power was so important an economy
in the case of spinning by rollers, the
machinery being heavy, that the sites of the
factories for this spinning were almost imme-
diately confined to the banks of streams (hence
the term water-frames), though Arkwright in his
specification spoke only of the power of horses,
which was used at his first mill at Nottingham,
but not at his second mill at Cromford in Derby-
shire. It is interesting to read the following

British Association in 1858 (reprinted as an appendix
to the first edition of French’s Life of Crompton) urges
the claims of Paul, but Paul Mantoux in his La Revolu-
tion Industrielle au xviii‘ Siécle, after studying the
Wyatt MSS., inclines to assign to Wyatt the leading
position. Arkwright was assisted in making his
machine by Kay, a clock-maker of Warrington.
Kay is said to have told him of an invention by
Highs.

*8 Arkwright died in 1792.

® Case, quoted from Baines, op. cit. 183.

2 385 49

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

note in Baines’ History of the Cotton Manufacture
(published in 1835) :—

On the river Irwell from the first mill near Bacup,
to Prestolee, near Bolton, there is about goo ft. of
fall available for mills, 800 of which is occupied. On
this river and its branches it is computed that there
are no less than three hundred mills. A project is in
course of execution to increase the water-power of
the district, already so great and so much concen-
trated, and to equalize the force of the stream by
forming eighteen reservoirs on the hills, to be filled
in times of flood, and to yield their supplies in the
drought of summer. These reservoirs, according to
the plan, would cover 270 acres of ground and con-
tain 241,300,000 cubic feet of water, which would
give a power equal to 6,600 horses. The cost is
estimated at £59,000. One reservoir has been com-
pleted, another is in course of formation, and it is
probable that the whole design will be carried into

effect.”

The economical application of steam ulti-
mately reversed the trend of events, and con-
centrated the scattered throstle-spinning in groups
on the slopes of the hills rising to face the west,
for in the towns all the external economies con-
nected with a collection of businesses could be
enjoyed, and these were great in days of imper-
fect machinery and costly transport. As early as
1788 there were 143 water-mills in the cotton
industry of the United Kingdom which were
distributed as follows among the countics which
had more than one :—"

Lancashire. . 41 Flintshire 3
Derbyshire . . 22 Berkshire 2
Nottinghamshire. 17 Lanarkshire. 4
Yorkshire... II Renfrewshire 4
Cheshire . . . 8 Perthshire . 3
Staffordshire . . 7 Midlothian. 2
Westmorland. . 5 Isle of Man.

Preston got its first power-factory in 1777,
but no considerable industry was carried on
there until the undertakings of John Horrocks.
Oldham’s first power-factories were started just
before that date. The earliest in Manchester
were the following :—1™

Messrs. J. & R. Simpson’s Mill, erected 1782

Mr. Thackeray’s Mill, erected 1785

Messrs. Fog & Hughes, Portland Street, erected 1791
Messrs. B. & W. Sandford, New Islington, erected

1791

™ Op. cit. 867.

"These figures are quoted from a pamphlet pub-
lished in 1788, entitled 4n Important Crisis in the
Calico and Muslin Manufactory in Great Britain Ex-
plained. Many of the estimates given in the pamphlet
are worthless, but there seems no reason why the
figures quoted should not be at least approximately
correct.

Printed in an appendix to the pamphlet, 4
Examination of the Cotton Factory Question, 1819. The
pamphlet is reprinted in Earwaker’s Local Gheanings,
1, 80.

Messrs. Smith & Townley, Oak St., occupied by
present tenants in 1792 ;
Mr. Wm. Mitchell, Old Mill, Holt Town, ditto,
1792
Mr. Wm. Mitchell, New Mill, Holt Town, ditto,

1792
Messrs. Phillips & Lea, Salford, erected 1793
Messrs. Parry, Seaton & Co., Oak Street, erected

1794

Some of these factories may have been used
for jennies or other cotton machinery, to be
referred to later. Baines speaks thus of the
introduction of the steam-engine :—

The first engine which they (Boulton & Watt)
made for a cotton mill was in the works of Messrs.
Robinsons, of Papplewick, in Nottinghamshire, in
the year 1785. An atmospheric engine had been
put up by Messrs. Arkwright & Simpson for their
cotton mill on Shude Hill, Manchester, in 1783 ; but
it was not till 1789 that a steam-engine was erected
by Boulton & Watt in that town for cotton-spinning,
when they made one for Mr. Drinkwater, nor did
Sir Richard Arkwright adopt the new invention till
1790, when he had one of Boulton & Watt’s engines
put up in a cotton mill at Nottingham. In Glasgow,
the first steam-engine for cotton-spinning was set up for
Messrs. Scott & Stevenson in 1792... . The number
of engines in use in Manchester before the year 1800
was probably 32, and their power 430 horse.

Apart from Baines, the earliest reference that
we can find to a steam-engine is in a paper read
before the Literary and Philosophical Society of
Manchester by Thomas Barnes, on g January,
1782, from which we quote the following
extract :— 1

The power of steam in producing effects to which
hardly any powers of mechanism are equal, has long
been observed in the fire engines. . . . But we have not
heard till lately that this active and potent principle
has been applied in any other instances, though there
are many in which a principle so powerful, and it is
presumed so manageable, would be of unspeakable
advantage. The extension of it to machines for
spinning cotton and for grinding corn, is now, I am
informed, under contemplation.

In a foot-note the writer adds :—

A machine for spinning cotton has now been
worked for some time upon this principle at Man-
chester, and the other for grinding corn is said to be
in considerable forwardness, near Blackfriars Bridge,
London.

It would appear from the context and other
evidence set forth above that Barnes refers to
the atmospheric engine and not the steam-engine
of Boulton & Watt. The steam-engine was
introduced into Oldham about 1798, according
to Mr.S. Andrew." By 1825 the mills in Staly-

1 Op. cit. 226.

"Mem. of the Lit. and Philosophical Soc. of Man-
chester, i, 79.

" Annals of Oldham—a series of extracts from Row-
bottom’s diary, with notes, which began to appear
in the Oldham Standard on 1 Jan. 1887.

386

INDUSTRIES

bridge were run by twenty-nine steam-engines
and only six water-wheels, and by 1831 the
former had increased to 38.1% Here we may
notice that a new motive power is now beginning
to be applied, just about a century after Watt’s
steam-engine was coming into use. The first
electric-driven spinning-mill in Lancashire was
opened in 1905. It is the mill of the ‘Acme’
Spinning Co. at Pendlebury, the work of which
is confined to the ring frame. Power is obtained
from the stations of the Lancashire Power Co.,
at Outwood, near Radcliffe, some five miles
distant. The extension of electric driving may
mean great economic changes for Lancashire.
Ring-spinning, it should be observed, is a de-
velopment from throstle-spinning (the method
used by Arkwright in his water-frame). The
ring-frame appears to have been invented simul-
taneously by Thorpe in the United States and
Lee in the United Kingdom: the patent of the
former is dated 1828.

Spinning by rollers related almost entirely to
the production of warps, and its effect was to
cause the substitution of cotton warps for the
linen or woollen warps previously used. Ring-
spinning has since been substituted almost entirely
for throstle-spinning on the Arkwright frames.
The invention relating to weft-spinning corre-
sponding to the water-frames was the jenny
introduced by James Hargreaves, a weaver of
Stand Hill, near Blackburn, probably about 1764,
and first tried in a factory four years later.” It
was lighter than the water-frames, and therefore
continued to be worked by hand and horses for
many years. Crompton’s mule, which combined
the principles of the rollers and the jenny, was
perfected somewhere about 1779.1 Jennies and
mules were for long termed ‘wheels’ because
they were worked by the turning of a wheel by
hand. Power weft-spinning began with the
semi-self-actor mule (1825), the invention of
Roberts, of the firm of Sharp, Roberts & Co.,
machinists of Manchester, who afterwards brought
into the market the complete self-actor (1830),
the labour engaged upon which, when the
machinery had been set working satisfactorily,
was confined to the piecing of broken threads.
Roberts’ original self-actor mule of 1825 was
the first of any economic value, though not the
first of any kind invented. Others had been
put forward by William Strutt, F.R.S. (son of
Arkwright’s partner), before 1790; Kelly, for-

106 Edwin Butterworth, Hist. of Ashton, 144.

107 Guest, in his Hist. of the Cotton Industry, attributes
this invention also to Thomas Highs, but no satisfac-
tory reasons are advanced to disprove the claims of
Hargreaves. ‘The latter was unable to maintain his
patent as he had sold jennies before protecting them.

108 Samuel Crompton was a weaver living at Hall-
in-the-wood near Bolton. His invention was not
patented. He received in recognition of its value
about £500 (subscribed) in 1802 and a grant from
Parliament of £5,000 in 1812.

merly of Lanark Mills, in 1792; Eaton of
Wilne in Derbyshire; Peter Ewart of Man-
chester ; de Jongh of Warrington ; Buchanan
of Catrine Works, Scotland ; Knowles of Man-
chester ; Dr. Brewster of America ; and others.’
From 1825 to March, 1834, Sharp, Roberts
& Co. had turned out 520 self-actors carrying
200,000 spindles," but these machines did not
win supremacy until after the cotton famine,
and even for some years thereafter the number
of hand-mules remained high. As late as 1882
the late secretary of the Bolton Operative Spin-
ners’ Society wrote in his annual report that in
the previous five years the pairs of hand-mules
in his district had declined from 1,300 to 516.
There were many other inventions relating to
subsidiary processes, but their mention is im-
possible in the space at our disposal ; we ought,
however, just to refer to the scutching machine
for opening and cleaning cotton, invented by
Mr. Snodgrass of Glasgow, in 1797, and intro-
duced by Kennedy ™ to Manchester in 1808 or
1809, and the cylinder carder invented by Lewis
Paul. Paul’s carder was first tried in Lancashire
about 1760 by a Mr. Morris, who lived near
Wigan.” Robert Peel was one of the first to
buy it, but he was compelled to set it aside be-
cause of its defects. It was ultimately improved
by Arkwright and others. Arkwright’s son, we
may notice, constructed the first lap-machine.
There is plenty of evidence to show that
jenny~ and mule-spinning were carried on for
years In small businesses. Hargreaves worked a
tiny factory at Nottingham in partnership with
Thomas James. Crompton’s first factory con-
sisted of two adjoining houses in Great Bolton
and the attics of a third in which he lived.
Later, in 1800, he ‘rented the top story of a
neighbouring factory, one of the oldest in Bolton,
in which he had two mules—one of 360 spindles,
the other of 220—with the necessary prepara-
tory machinery. The power to turn the
machinery was rented with the premises.’ !%
Edwin Butterworth gives several illustrations of
the growth of large businesses from very small
undertakings. In these circumstances it would
be futile to attempt to particularize beginnings.
In twist-spinning and power-manufacturing it
would be easier, but even in these branches of
the industry the numbers are so great that the
results would be but a string of names and a

1 See Baines, op. cit. 207.

"Stated by the patentees to Baines.
op. cit. 207.

"' James Kennedy, one of the pioneer factory-
masters, wrote a memoir of Crompton and an
account of the rise of the cotton trade in Lancashire.
They are printed in the Trans. of the Manchester Lit.
and Philosophical Soc. He also wrote his early recollec-
tions, which were issued with the above papers for
private circulation.

™ Kennedy, Memoir of Crompton,

"8 French, Life of Crompton, 80.

See Baines,

387

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

quantity of uninteresting facts." Arkwright,
however, ought to be specially mentioned as
a creator of businesses (as well as an adapter
and improver of inventions), and also the
Peels. Arkwright entered into several partner-
ships, and was responsible for the establishment
or growth of numerous firms—the Strutt partner-
ship terminated in 1783. One of his partners
was David Dale of the Lanark Mills,4® which
were afterwards sold by the latter to Robert
Owen, who had been manager to Drinkwater,
a Manchester spinner.4® Robert Peel, grand-
father of the statesman, and his sons were
great business projectors, but as the name of
the family is chiefly connected with calico-
printing, though the Peels undertook spinning
and manufacturing on an impressive scale,
the account of their work will be reserved for
the section. on calico-printing. It might be
mentioned here that a commercial society, out
of which the Chamber of Commerce ultimately
evolved, was started in Manchester in 1794.1”
The new machines, whether for weaving or
spinning, were not admitted without protest from
the operatives and some masters. Many peti-
tions were presented to Government (chiefly by
weavers) praying for the taxing or suppressing of
machinery, and for the enforcement of appren-
ticeship rules or of a minimum wage.''® The
operatives feared loss of work, and the masters
feared the competition of better-equipped rivals.
Arkwright was confronted with a combination
of masters, who were not willing that the laws
should be a'tered to permit of an extension of
the British all-cotton manufacture.!!® Infuriated

"Some details relating to the first factories are
given above, p. 3865.

4S \rxwright’s remark that ‘he would find a razor
in Scotland to shave Manchester’ is an allusion to this
partnership and his business dealings with Scotland.

"8 Robert Owen married David Dale’s daughter.

4” Elijah Helm, Chapters in the Hist. of the Manches-
ter Chamber of Commerce, 13. Much of this work is
based on an old minute book.

"8 See e.g. Paper 38, 1780, p. 6 (in vol. v of
Parl. Papers, containing those from 1778 to 1782) ;
Parl. Papers 1808, ii, 95-134 ; also 1809, iii, 311,
and 1810-11, ii, 389-406.

"N° Some notice ought to be taken of fiscal regulations
directly affecting the British cotton industry. In
1700 an Act had been passed (11 and 12 William
III, cap. 10) prohibiting the importation of the
printed calicoes of India, Persia, and China. In 1721
the Act 7 George I, cap. 7, interdicted the use of any
‘ printed, painted, stained, or dyed calico,’ excepting
only calicoes dyed all blue, and muslins, neckcloths,
and fustians. In 1774, the remainder of the Act
7 George I, cap. 7, which was not set aside by the
Act 9 George II, cap. 4 (allowing British calicoes with
linen warps), was modified, in spite of the opposition
referred to above, by the Act 14 George II, cap. 72.
The manufacture, use, and wear of cottons printed
and stained, &c. was permitted subject to the payment
of a duty of 3¢. per square yard (the same as the
excise on cotton-linens) provided they were stamped

weavers smashed Kay’s loom. Hargreaves’
jennies were destroyed by organized mobs, and
he himself was compelled to leave Lancashire for
Nottingham to work his invention. Far into
the nineteenth century machine-wrecking was to
be feared ; the rioting during the strikes of 1810,
the Middleton fights in 1812, the campaign
against power-looms in particular in 1826, and
the ‘plug’ riots of 1842 (so called because
factories were forcibly stopped by the with-
drawal of the plugs from the boilers) ought
specially to be mentioned.’ The opposition to
machinery was not without reason, and the
hand-loom weavers were driven into terrible
straits, though the cause of the extremity of
distress to which they were reduced would seem
to have been chiefly their unwillingness to enter
factories ; an extended demand for cotton goods
consequent upon their being cheapened appears
to have counteracted largely, if not entirely, the
saving of labour by the machinery. ‘The state of
the hand-loom weavers was investigated by a
House of Commons committee which reported .
in 1834 and 1835, and by a commission with
assistant commissioners, from whom reports ap-
peared from 1839 to 1841. Spinners had not
suffered in the same way. The water-frame
created a new industry (water-twist displacing
linen and woollen warps, which were in part
imported), and jenny-spinning was not commonly
a man’s trade until the jennies became large.
To work the latter and the mules much skill
was needed before the self-actor was perfected,
which was not until fairly late in the nineteenth
century. The shifting of some of the agricultural
population to the manufacturing districts of
Lancashire by the Poor Law Commissioners
between 1835 and 1837 is itself indicative of the
augmented demand for labour.}#!

The improvements in machinery, which ulti-
mately affected every process from cleaning the
cotton to manufacturing, gave rein to the cotton
industry and soon rendered Lancashire pre-
eminently the workshop of the world for cottons.
The following figures of imported cotton are
significant of the rapid expansion that took place :
the enormous rate of growth between 1771 and
1801 is particularly noticeable :—

174I-St. 2. . . «81 sper cent.
175IHOie we we ah RT Gy
1761-71. 2 1 ww. 25h,
i con ee a a a ie
1781-91. . 3194,
1791-1801 674,
1801-11 . 394 ~=Cs,
ISUN-2T 2 ee Rk, ee G3 59
1829312 6. ow ew BE #5

‘British Manufactory.” The duty was varied from
time to time until repealed in 1831.
™ On machine-wrecking see Radcliffe, op. cit. 118;
Letters on the Utility of Machines, 1780 ; Bamford, Life
of a Radical ; Andrew, Fifty Years of the Cotton Trade, &c.
™ See Parl. Papers, 1843, xlv, 119-70.

388

INDUSTRIES

It would be as well, perhaps, to supplement this
table at once with more recent figures, the reader
being reminded at the same time that the yarns
produced have been getting finer on an average.
In 1816-20 the annual amount of cotton re-
tained for home consumption had been about 130
million lb.; in the semi-decades 1831-5, 1851-5,
1876-80, and 1896-1900 it became respectively
290, 750, 1,275, and 1,575 million lb. The
total annual value of our exports of manufactures
for the same periods beginning with 1816-20
were 16, 19, 32, 68, and 67 in millions of
pounds. In interpreting these values the great
fall in general prices between 1876 and 1880 and
1898 and 1900 must be borne in mind; had
general prices been constant the value of the
export in 1896-1900 would have been about
£90,000,000.

The numbers of operatives employed and their
ages and sex are displayed in the following
tables. The first (taken from the census returns)
shows the male and female operatives engaged in
different processes in Lancashire side by side

with those in other parts of the country. Some
confusion is caused by the census classification
having been altered twice in the period. Dealers
in cotton goods are not now separately specified.
The second and third tables give the numbers of
each sex engaged at different ages; the former
table is compiled from the returns of the Factory
Inspectors (first appointed under the Factory Act
of 1833), and the latter, which is put forward to
supplement it, from the census returns. The
former table refers to the United Kingdom and
the latter to England and Wales, but the
percentages of each class ought to be typical
generally of Lancashire. ‘The fourth table
shows distribution of operatives by sex and age
between the two chief branches of the industry.
This, too, covers the whole industry, and not
only the part contained in Lancashire, but it is
not quite exhaustive. Other tables relating
to the distribution of cotton operatives at
different times and between the various towns
of Lancashire will be found on pages 382
and 392.

From THE CENsUs RETURNS

(The figures in italics relate to married and widowed women)

In Txousanps

1901 1891 1881
Lancashire TPegae = Lancashire si — Lancashire sa a
M F M F M F M F M F M F
Cotton : card and ee 11-4} 28°7]| 13°8! 3470] — — —; —| —| — se lf) ees
ing-room processes —|7077| — | 12-2) — — tt gece ee | Sees ee Pas
Cotton : spinning oe 49.5| 19°6| 64°1| 28°6} — — =|) os = peed) Pres
cesses —i| 43! —| 6o| — oes ee eee peed, eg esl) tes
Cotton: winding, Mag 14°8| 38°6| 18:3] 48:9) — = Sa) es) ees] eae? ee:
ing, &c., processes — | 73:0| — 15-8] — we fs) eee Wey | Pa ae ae
Cotton : weaving pro-{| §7°6.113°5| 6671 |130°8| — — es ee ee ees Ps) eee
cesses { — | 38°71 SS | Aes) = = _— —_— — —_—_; —
|___
Toran 133°3 ak Hea 320°7 |178°2 |281°8 |213°2 3308 150°7 249 8 |185°4 302°4
|
Cotton workers in other{| 29°0]} 6°7| 34°5| 94| — = ot) ate a pes ee
processes or sera | — 7-8) — 2-3, — — = =e Es = == =
Tape : manufacturer} — | — | —|] — 47 25 g} 1's 4 ‘24, 7] 12
dealer
Thread : manufacturer,] —- | — _ —_ 2 9 6| 21 I 9 5} 17
dealer
Fustian : ny 6) rez} ar] 26] «1 2°9 3:2} so) 17] 3°5 sol s-2
dealer _ 55 70; — — Sh eee Smee le ell] dae
Cotton, calico: ware-] —/| —| —] —] — — —| —|] 25 3 3°2 +38
houseman, dealer

OPERATIVES EMPLOYED IN COTTON Facrorigs IN THE UNITED KINGDOM AND PERCENTAGE:

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

EACH Ciass. (FRoM RETURNS OF Factory INsPECTORS)

S OF

— | 1835 1838 | 1847 1850 1856 1862 1867
Male and female under 13, or half- 13°2 475 58 4°6 6°5 8:8 10"4
timers
Male, 13 to 18 | 12°5 16°6 11°8 11‘2 10°3 gil 8°6
Male, over 18 ; : : .| 264 24°9 271 287 27°4 26°4 26°0
|
Female, over 13 | 49 1 RAR | SPR | Shoo] Sse pees | oe
Total number of cotton operatives 218,000 259,500 | cy 331,000 | 379,300 | 451,600 | 401,100
a 1870 | 1874 1878 1885 1890 1895 1go1
wo re ed 6 =
Male and female under 13, or half- 9°6 14'0 12°8 9°9 git 5°8 4'1
timers
Male, 13 to 18 B°5 8:0 72 79 8-2 79 70
Male, over 18 26°0 241 25°3 26°4 26°9 27°6 25°83
Female, over 13 See © aye) eee | GES) | See Be |) eres
i ; — epee ee
| | |
Total number of cotton operatives 450,100 | 479,600 } 483,000 504,100! 528,800 | 538,900 | 513,000
| | |

Numer (in THousaNnps) OF Operatives oF DIFFERENT AGES ENGAGED IN SPINNING, Manu-

FACTURING, AND SuBSIDIARY PROCESSES (EXCLUDING LaACE-MAKING, BUT INCLUDING THE

Fustian MANUFACTURE) IN ENGLA

ND AND WALES.

(From Census Returns)

Mates Femaces Maces AnD FemMaces
Under 15 to | Over All Under 1§ to Over All Under 15 to Over All
15 20 20 ages 15 20 20 ages 15 20 20 Ages
i i —
' |
1881 29 39 120 | 189 40 | 81: 189 310 69 120 310 500
| | f ‘
1891 6 | a
9 3 | 45 | 137 218 5° | 94 | 197 | 341 86 139 | 334 | 560
1901 2 6 | | |
9 ae pa ee oe lags 335 | 6o | 128 | 346 | 535

Discrepancies between this and the previous table—which are especially noticeable in absolute
quantities—are due to the branches of work covered by the figures not being identical,

390

INDUSTRIES

OprraTives oF DIFFERENT AGES ENGAGED IN THE Two CHIEF BRANCHES OF THE COTTON

InpusTRY IN THE Unirep Kincpom.

(From Rerurns oF Factory InsPecrors)

Mazes 1n Tuousanps FEMALES IN THOUSANDS ——
—_ Half- Under 18 and Half- Under 18 and Total in
timers 18 over timers 18 over Thousands
SPINNING AND Preparatory Processes
1896 : 5°58 22°24 744 4°40 30°12 78°69 212
1898-9 . 5°42 atsy | 71°37 3°86 | 3044 | 77°64 | 210
1901 . . . 4°98 21°10 68°98 3°10 30°98 81°68 211
WeavinG anD Preparatory Processes
1896 . 7°54 18°79 75°81 11°87 49°19 | 15134 315
1898-9 6-21 17°29 72°74 10°38 48°38 | 150°99 306
1901 4°72 14°86 73°81 8:0 45°66 | 155°03 302

The figures in this table are not quite complete, except for 1901; the relations between
the changes shown for each class should nevertheless be accurately represented.

Machinery in the United Kingdom has been
returned officially as follows :—

In Tuousanps

Spinning Doubling Power
Years Spindles Spindles looms
1874 . « 37,516 45366 463
1878 . «39,528 4,679 515
1885 . . 40,120 4,228 561
1890 . . 40,512 3,993 616
1903. «43,905 3,952 684

After the absorption of the cotton industry by
the factory system, an interesting process of dif-
ferentiation took place. Weaving and spinning
had been more or less united in the industry in
its earliest form; the inventions of machinery
brought about specialism and disunion, which,
indeed, was practically necessary when spinning
was done by power and weaving by hand.
Cartwright’s invention caused the two processes
to be brought together again, each power-factory
tending to become a cotton industry in minia-
ture. Mr. W. R. Grey stated in 1833 to the
Committee of the House of Commons on Manu-
factures, Commerce, and Shipping, that he did
not know of any single person then building a
spinning mill who was not attaching to it a
power-loom factory. After some years, how-
ever, the split again reappeared. The cause was
partly the economies of industrial specialism,

, partly improvements in marketing which ren-
dered dissociation less hazardous than it had
been, and partly the development of qualitatively
dissimilar markets (the cotton market, the yarn
market, and the market for fabrics) in varying
degrees, so that much manufacturing (as weaving

12 Average for 1898 and 1899.

is termed) became a business of a type different
from spinning. Further, the specialism of busi-
nesses has evolved also in each of these broadly
contrasted branches of the cotton industry, and
the specialized sections have tended to localize as
well as the two main groups. This specialized
localization is referred to as follows by the late
Elijah Helm (sometime secretary of the Man-
chester Chamber of Commerce), the extent of
whose local knowledge was such that his utter-
ances on this question are peculiarly authori-
tative :—

Spinning is largely concentrated in South Lanca-
shire and in the adjoining borderland of North
Cheshire. But even within this area there is further
allocation. he finerand the finest yarns are spun in
the neighbourhood of Bolton, and in or near Man-
chester, much of this being used for the manufacture
of sewing-thread ; whilst other descriptions employed
almost entirely for weaving, are produced in Oldham
and other towns. The weaving branches of the
industry are chiefly conducted in the northern half of
Lancashire—most of it in very large boroughs as
Blackburn, Burnley, and Preston. Here, again, there
is a differentiation. Preston and Chorley produce
the finer and lighter fabrics ; Blackburn, Darwen, and
Accrington, shirtings, dhooties, and other goods exten-
sively shipped to India; whilst Nelson and Colne
make cloths woven from dyed yarn, and Bolton is
distinguished for fine quiltings and fancy cotton dress
goods. ‘These demarcations are not absolutely ob-
served, but they are sufficiently clear to give to each
town in the area covered by the cotton industry a
distinctive place in its general organization.!”

Manchester has become more and more the
commercial centre where the dealing in yarns

Printed in British Industries (edited by W. J.
Ashley).

391

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

and fabrics takes place (on the Exchange) and
arrangements are made for export. In the
cotton trade there is almost complete separation
between the businesses of manufacturing and
distributing. The bulk of the export passes out
through Liverpool—London used to be the
leading port—and Liverpool is still the chief
English cotton market, though now from one-
sixth to one-eighth of our cotton supplies come
up the Manchester Ship Canal. In the first full
cotton crop year (1 September to 31 August) of
the canal’s working 66,000 bales of cotton
passed direct to Manchester. The amount
steadily rose, exceeded 500,000 in 1899-1900
and amounted in the succeeding years up to
1904-5 to 550, 546, 626, §19 and 737 in thou-
sands of bales. At the end of 1904 a cotton
association was formed in Manchester to
encourage inter alia shipments through the canal.
To-day the membership of this association repre-
sents 20,000,000 spindles.

Having observed the main characteristics of
local specialism we may now notice the distribu-
tion of machinery and operatives among the
chief centres: the estimates as to machinery
upon which the table below is based are those given
by Worrall, while the figures as to the operatives
are taken from the census returns of 1g01.

Distrisution of Corton Operatives in LANCASHIRE
AND THE VICINITY ACCORDING TO THE Census
RETURNS OF IGOI, TOGETHER WITH THE NUMBER
oF SpinDLes AND Looms accorpinc To WorRALL.

No. of No. of No. of
Operatives Spindles Looms
(In thousands)
Blackburn 41,400 1,325 753300
Bolton 29,800 5,035 20,100
Oldham 29,500 11,603 18,500
Burnley . 27,900 687 79,300
Manchester
and Salford 27,200 2,666 4 34,200
Preston . 25,000 2,036 57,900
Rochdale 14,800 2,168 25,100
Darwen . 12,500 336 28,700
Nelson . 12,400 23 39,000
Glossop '* — 968 15,400
Bury . 10,700 818 22,200
Stockport 3700 1,803 8,700
Ashton-
under-Lyne 8,600 1,839 11,500
Accrington . 8,300 417 36,400
Colne 7,300 140% 20,500
Heywood . 7,300 869 6,4.00
Stalybridge . 7,100 1,106 7,100
Todmorden. 6,900 261 15,800
Rawtenstall. 6,600 356 8,800
Hyde . . 6,500 353 7,900
Chadderton. 6,400 — ae
Haslingden . 6,100 148 12,000

‘4 Manchester only.

* The number of operatives in places in Derbyshire
is not separately specified.

8 Includes Foulridge with Colne.

No. of No. of No, of
Operatives Spindles Looms
(In thousands)

Bacup 5,900 315 9,300

Chorley . 5,900 547 17,900

Farnworth . 5,700 738 10,600

Leigh . 5,000 1,667 5,900
Great Har-

wood . . 4,900 72 12,400

Middleton . 4,900 Sir 2,500

Radcliffe 4,800 157 8,900

Two other features of the recent economic
history of Lancashire are the formation of the
Fine Cotton Spinners and Doublers’ Association
in 1898, which is practically co-extensive with
fine spinning and doubling, and the creation in
1902 of the British Cotton Growing Associa-
tion which has received a royal charter. The
latter association is not the first of its kind in
Lancashire: a Cotton Supply Association was
formed in 1857 with the same general objects,
but it long ago ceased to exist.1

Dealing and production lie in such close
organic relation with one another that an
account of the development of the one necessi-
tates a corresponding account of the develop-
ment of the other. The two chief markets of
Lancashire related to the cotton industry are, as
we have already observed, the cotton market at
Liverpool and the market for yarns and fabrics
at Manchester. The cotton market used first
to be in London and Manchester, and even when
Liverpool took the place of London, Manchester
continued to be the place where spinners
effected their purchases. It was the success
of the Manchester and Liverpool Railway which
transferred the buying of cotton by spinners to
Liverpool. In 1815, according to Mr. Robert
Ellison, who has written a detailed history of
the cotton market, there were upwards of one
hundred cotton dealers in Manchester. The
first circular giving imports and sales of cotton
was that of Messrs. Ewart and Rutson, the issue
of which (weekly) began in 1805, but Hope’s,
which appeared later, was the first trade circular
devoted exclusively to cotton. Soon after,
numbers of such budgets of information were
being circulated : the first joint circular of any
importance appeared in 1832. The Cotton
Brokers’ Association was founded in 1841, but
it was not until 1864 that it undertook the issue
of a circular and daily table of sales and imports :
in 1874 the more complete daily circular began
to appear. Since then have been added the
annual reports, issued in December, American
Crop reports, and daily advices by cable, issued
each morning. A rival to the Cotton Brokers’
Association was set up by the cotton importers

‘7 It published The Cotton Supply Reporter (weekly)
and issued numerous publications, of which some will
be found in the Manchester Public Library (many in
the volume marked 677, 1, C. 1 1).

392

INDUSTRIES

in the Liverpool Cotton Exchange after the
creation in 1876 of the Cotton Clearing House,
from which the importers were excluded. Later
an amalgamation of the rival institutions in the
Liverpool Cotton Association took place.!8 In
connexion with cotton buying we ought to
notice the establishment of the Cotton Buying
Co., a limited company of spinners which repre-
sented in 1904 about five and three-quarter
million spindles, the object of which was to
eliminate much of the cost of transactions
through middle-men.

Passing on to dealing in yarns and fabrics, we
must observe firstly that in the foundation days of

FELT-HAT

This industry is now carried on just outside
the county, in such towns as Stockport, Hyde,
and Denton; formerly it centred round three
Lancashire towns, viz., Oldham, Manchester,
and Rochdale. It is impossible to say when
the industry settled in south-east Lancashire.
The earliest reference to it appears to be the
petition presented to Parliament from this
district in 1482, requesting the prohibition of
some new machinery for thickening and fulling
hats,! of which use was accordingly forbidden
for two years by 22 Edward IV, cap. 5. A
century elapses before we find another reference ;
on 7 March, 1586 or 1587, were buried the
two children of ‘ one David a hatter dwelling at
Facyde.’* Amongst the earliest felt-hat makers
of whom there is any record in the Oldham
parochial books was a Thomas Hibbert, living
in 16542

The great increase in the Oldham hat indus-
try appears to date from the beginning of the
eighteenth century, and is particularly associated

with the Cleggs of Bent Hall.

The manufacture of hats never became a business of
importance till it was extensively revived by Mr.
Abraham Clegg, who died in 1748 . . . His sons,
Messrs. John and Abraham Clegg, entered largely
into the business . . . The other hatting manufac-
tories in the place were extremely small, and in 1765
the number of hatting workshops in the village of
Oldham and its immediate vicinity was only five.‘

The industry materially extended from 1780 to

1% See T. Ellison, Cotton Trade of Great Britain, in
which will be found also a detailed history of some
of the more notable firms of cotton brokers and
dealers.

1 Baines, Hist. of Lanc. ii, §83, and Butterworth,
Hist. Sketches of Oldham, 86.

‘i.e. Facit, near Rochdale.
Fishwick, Hist. of Rochdale, 44.

> 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.

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.

" 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

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

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

© 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

=
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.

425

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.

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.

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.

* 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: —

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 :—

——— 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 <Whych all the kynges tenauntes and fermours in hys forest of Rossendale have had alweyes amonge
them in commen.’

459

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

Old Farm New Rent

Wolfenden Booth (vachery) with 2 pastures called £6 L4 o8 74.

Cowhope and Wolfeclose 5 : : ‘ 1135. 4d.
Gamelsheud (vachery) . : : : ‘ é 445. 8d. £4
Herleyhead alias Bacopbothe (vachery) . ‘ : L8 135. 4d. £u
Tunstead (vachery) . : d ‘ ‘ ; 765. 84d. 8m.
Hodlesden (vachery) and Newhey . : ‘ : £10
High Ryley alias Horleyhead (vachery) . : ‘ £5 135. 4d. £8.
Anteley ' (vachery) : z , 2 < £10
Baxtonden (vachery) . : ; : : ‘ £6
Crawshaw Booth (vachery) . : : ; : Lo'®
Godshaugh (vachery) . 2 : , ; : £L5
Fulclough (vachery P ; : : : ; LS
Prymerosefeld (pasture) . : ‘ 2 : , 435. 4d.
Newhallhey(vachery)and . . ‘ . ‘i £6 165. 8d.

Over Lynche and Hallecarre . ‘ ‘ A L4 65. 8d.

165.18

Wolfenden '’ (waste) . : 4 : : . £L13 65. 8d.
Musbury park’ (470 acres) . F ‘ ‘ : £L9 Ws. £13
Emottes More (waste) in the forest of Trawden'? . 205.
The moyte [moiety] of Rusheton Thornes (pasture) . 265. 8d.
Rowcliffe Wood (pasture). ; : F 135. 44. 165. 84.17

For over a century the copyhold tenants of these lands enjoyed their tenements in complete
security, but in 1607 the crown lawyers of James I pretended to discover a flaw in the tenure by
the ‘new hold.’ The subsequent negotiations between the tenants and the crown are illustrated in
the following extracts :—

1607, Apl. 5.—A letter from the Privy Council addressed to Mr. Auditor Fanshaw pointing out the
difference in status between the tenants of copyhold lands enjoyed time out of mind by custom and of
improvements out of his Majesty’s forests and chases, called lands of the newhold, which have only been
granted by the steward and by warrants made by the steward for the admittance of those enjoying them,
which are only of the nature of assart lands and cannot be claimed by any custom or prescription to be copy-
hold, nor any right claim thereunto by any former grant without licence from his Majesty according
to the forest laws, which was not obtained.

The king is graciously pleased, not only to make offer to the ancient copyhold tenants for to
enfranchise their copyhold estates and to grant them the inheritance of the said copyhold in fee farm by
free socage whereby they should be freed from all incertainties of fines and other bound services and
charges, but also to have offer made to them of the assart lands.

The auditor was requested to report what description and willingness he might find to accept his
Majesty’s most gracious offer.

‘4 ¢In Acryngton Foreste.’

‘8 The tenants ‘to stond chargeable and to be collectours of xx marc yerelie of and for the ferme of
Wolfenden lande which is laten to al tenauntes of the seyd forest’ of Rossendale. See below.

16 For half of the Hall carr.

7 «Grete large wast ground in the myddes of the seyd Forest of Rossyndale callid Wolfenden with a feir
logge [a fair lodge] therein set, whych ground was never arrented ne set to no certen ferme but hath bene
reservid for socour of dere and to releve al the kynges tenauntes in the seyd Foreste as a commen amonge them.’

‘8 «A wast ground . . . whych was sometymea park in dede and now the closure is downe and is
laid to pasture savyng the dere of the forest of Rossindale hath recorse therein amonge.’

169 ¢ Every man depastureth it that wyll.’

" MS. at Huntroyde. It is interesting to compare these values with the farms received in 1324.
Blakey close, 20s. ; 2 vacc. of Barouford, 28s. ; another, 13s. 4¢.; 2 vacc. of Rughelegh, 56s. ; vacc. of Whit-
halgh, 285.3 vacc. of Bayrlegh, 28s.; 2 vacc. of Goldiauebothis 56s.; vacc. of Haghebothe 183s. ; herbage of
Westeclose and Hegham, 40s.; herbage of Roel and Filicloos, 20s.; 2 vacc. of Wycolure, 14s. and 16s.; vacc. of
Wynwell, 28s. ; 2 vacc. of Berdeshaw, 56s.; vacc. of Bacstanden, 30s.; vacc. of Gamelesheuid, 205.3 vacc. of
Hoddesden with herbage of the forest there, 245. ; vaccaries of Croweschagh, Dedequenclogh, Wolfham dene
Tunstede, and Bacop, besides the keep of the deer 26s. each—{6 135. 4d. ; vacc. of Neuhall Routonstall,
Godischaw, and Lufclogh, besides the keep of the deer 20s. each—£4 ; vacc. of Constabillegh, besides, etc :
135. 4d.; vacc. of Hegham and Penhill, besides, etc., 20s. ; vacc. of Rilay, besides, etc., 26s. 82. ; wae. of
the Couhous in Accrington, 40s. ; vacc. of Anteley, 30s. ; herbage of Musberi Park, 205, 5 herbage of
Romysgreve, 14s. ; white rent of § vacc. and 8 cows put to farm at 35. 4d. each cow—{16 65. 8d. ; vacc
of Brenand in Bouland, 30s. ; vacc. of Swynylhirst, 20s. ; vacc. of Whitleghdale, 20s. ; herbage of Wytwalle,
12d. ; vacc. of the Trogh, 6s. 8¢. ; vacc. of Galsterdale, 65. 8¢. 3 vacc. of Heghoke, 205. ; vacc. of Randolf-
bothe, 265. 8¢.; herbage of vacc. of Bathirarghis besides, etc., 3s. 4¢.; white rent of 5 vacc. and 7 cows
each at 3s. 2d. and an aged cow at 15. 7¢.—£15 85. 9¢. Mins. Accts. bdle. 1148, No. 6.

460

FORESTRY

This was followed by ‘the humble petition of a multitude of his Majesty’s tenants and copy-
holders of Rossendale, Pendle, Trawden and Accrington’ which set forth the terms under which their
predecessors had obtained grants and demisés of the premises under the commissions of Henry VII
whereby the same were demised by copy of court roll unto them and their heirs for ever: that ever
since much labour has been expended in inclosing, manuring and tilling the lands which were
‘extremely barren and unprofitable and as yet capable of no other corn but only oats and that but
only in dry years and not without the continual charge of every third year’s new manuring, but also
in building their houses and habitations thereon, having no timber there nor within many miles
thereof,’ and having enjoyed the same and ‘paid a rent and fine at the first as much, or more,
and now very near the value thereof have nearly disposed, imployed, and placed all the fruit and
increase of their ancestors and their own labours and industries and the estates and maintenance of
theirselves, their families and posterities upon the same copyholds:’ they pray that possession of their
copyhold estates may be continued, and the ordinary administration of right in their copyhold court
restored. ,

On 22 March, 1607-8, Richard Towneley and other ‘ foresters’ wrote to Ralph Assheton of Lever,
one of the commissioners, informing him that although an instrument had been drawn up and signed
by the most substantial persons of all the forests to apportion the charges of the business to London
and especially for legal advice ‘it is now so fallen out—through the fantastical persuasion of the vulgar sort
that hands set on Instrument will bind them to they know not what inconveniences—as that now the
instrument being cancelled we are enforced to rest only upon promises . . . we therefore thought
fit to certify you what was done humbly beseeching . . . your advice, which advice by God’s grace
we shall not fail with our pains and purses to follow accordingly with this persuasion . . . that the
vulgar sort may indifferently bear our charges of money and we only lose our pains, for as it is unrea-
sonable that the backward peevishness of some few should disadvantage or discredit the undertaking
. . . 80 we are of opinion that this .. . made known unto the Privy Counsell will work such
effect that as according to the proverb the friers shall not be beaten for the nunnes fault.’

1608, May 16. It was thought convenient by the Lord High Treasurer and the chancellor of
the Duchy of Lancaster ‘that such . .. of the tenants as shall... agree to... pay unto
the King’s Majesty the full sum of twelve years’ rent . . . at three several payments shall have con-
firmation of their estates by decree and further by act of Parliament.’

Negotiations on the part of the copyholders were principally carried on by the mediation of
Thomas Walmsley of Dunkenhalgh and Ralphe Assheton of Great Lever, who wrote to Mr. Wood-
roofe, the steward of the honour, to assemble the foresters to consult upon a decree and ascertain
the names of all such as yield to the composition. On 17 November, 1608, a commission was
issued for calling together the copyholders of the four forests and determining what sum each
copyholder ought to pay in contribution towards the said payment of 12 years’ rent.

The assembly was held at Whalley on 15 December following, and adjourned to 4 January
when agreement was made as to the rate of payment by tenants for life of various ages, and tenants
for terms of years.

A few weeks later the tenants petitioned for a decree and Act of Parliament for confirmation
of their estates and tendered the sum of £3,763 representing 12 years’ rent to be paid at three
equal payments within a year after the time of such decree.

The decree—a lengthy document—was duly issued on 15 February, 1608-9, and was followed
by the Act of 7 Jas. I, 4 sess. (Private Act 1. 3) entitled an ‘ Act for the perfect creation and confirma-
tion of certain copyhold lands in the honour, castle, mannor and lordship of Clitherow, &c.’ 17

Little now remains to illustrate the ancient character of the Blackburnshire chases, except the
names of the vaccaries or booths, and of the pastures once reserved for the support of the young stock,
both cattle and horses. ‘These have remained as the description of the townships into which the
chases were divided after 1507. The various occupations of the former inhabitants are also reflected ©
in the prevalence of such names as Parker, Cockshutt, Driver, Folds, Boothman, Hird, Stuttard,
Calvert, and the almost extinct Gelderd and Oxnard. Weare also reminded of some of the physical
features of this district during the Plantagenet period in the very prevalent names of Greenwood,
Shaw, Nutter, Hargreaves, Ridehalgh, Holt, Hayhurst, Hartley, Harrop, Pickup, and Wood.

The frequent reference to woodlands in the pleadings of the thirteenth and fourteenth cen-
turies points to an abundance of timber in all parts of the county, except near the sea coast, and in
the more elevated regions. About the year 1286 Dame Joan dé Dacre had 700 customary acres
of woodland in Over Kellet, a figure which suggests that the township at that time contained
nearly equal areas of arable and pasture, woodland, and moorland.” ‘There are also indications
of considerable areas of woodland in those townships which lay near the principal rivers of the
county in the accounts of religious houses and in the Ministers’ Accounts of the Earls and Dukes of
Lancaster, to which reference has been frequently made.

11 MS. penes W. Farrer.
1” Cockersand Chartul. (Chet. Soc. New Ser. lvi) g10.

461

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

In 1537 the lands of the dissolved monastery of Whalley were surveyed and from this record
a few extracts are subjoined :—

Elker Wood, in Billington, of about 60 acres is well replenished with oaks and fair young trees
and much underwood of < hasell and eller ;’ the Nab of 40 acres is replenished with oak timber and
many fair ash trees, and but small underwood.

Whalley Park, having a circuit of 2 miles, is well replenished with timber and underwood for
three parts of the same ; through it runneth a fair river called the water of Calder wherein is taken
Salmon trout with other fish. There is in the park at this vision 30 deer. Crow Park of 4 acres,
well replenished with ashes . . . breedeth herons hewes ; Oxhey Wood of 16 acres is well replenished
with timber and underwood which hath been accustomed to be felled once at every 20 years.

Romesgreve Wood is well replenished with old oaks and fair timber and containeth in circuit
14 mile. 1%

From a survey of Bowland Chase, made in 1652, it appears that several tenants were ‘ bound
to suffer the deere to goo unmolested into their several grounds : they are also fyned if anie without
lycens keep anie dogg bigger than will go through a stirupe to hunt the deere out of the corne.’!’4
There were then of red deer twenty stags, hinds and calves, and forty fallow deer, the herbage
reserved for their sustenance being valued at £28 10s. The woodlands were valued at £52 per
annum.!76

This herd of wild deer was destroyed in 1805, an act of undoubted benefit as regards the
improvement of woodlands and the successful conduct of agriculture.

Burton CHASE

Almost immediately to the north of Bowland Chase lay that of Burton-in-Lonsdale. Before
1218 William de Mowbray conceded to his free tenant, Adam de Staveley, the right to take hare
and wolf with dogs in the forest of Lonsdale, whilst the latter released to his chief lord all claim
to take wild deer or falcons.!”® Roger de Mowbray had vaccaries in the wood of Mewith in
Bentham before 1298, one of which he gave to John de Creppinges.” In 1307 a commission
was appointed to make inquiry touching the bounds of the free chase of Burton, by which the
ancestors of John de Mowbray had held it, and later an inquest was held by which the right
boundaries were duly declared.”

Horny

Reference is made to the forest of Roger de Montbegon in a royal charter of 1199.7 In
the time of Edward I the marches of the forest of Dame Margaret de Nevill in Cawood are thus
described.

Where Serelfal brook falls into Kere, following eastward unto Sandyford, thence to the Febryth
and from thence following the Rusell unto Threpholme between Holrys and Helangrysse, so by the
moor unto the Loghlangrygg and following the Ronekersyke to West Storth brook, following the
brook to the Blaksyke thence following to the Howath and from the head of Howath following
the Russell into Lune, following Lune to Aubras pool, thence to Blakmelez upon Qwytmore, from
thence unto Warne-beckheuid, from thence unto Mychel Sucinsete, from thence to Lytell Sueinsete
from thence to Litell deenalaunt, so to Fauch edge and from thence ascending unto Stevensete and
from thence to Wolfhole cragge.'”

In 1301 Dame Margaret gave liberty to the monks of Furness to have free passage for their
animals through her lands of Hornby, save in her parks and in her several pasture of Roeburndale.!#!
In 1584 there were two parks adjoining Hornby Castle, the old and new parks. In the latter
which had an area of 172 acres (customary), there were both red and fallow deer.}8 ‘

Ps Whalley Coucker (Chet. Soc. Old Ser. xx), 1196 et seqq.
‘A representation of this gauge preserved at Browsholme is given in Whitaker’s Hi
Ree cer given in itaker’s Hist. of Whalley
% Ibid. 331. “8 Whitaker, Hist. of Richmondshire, ii
"7 Cal. Pat. 1292-1301, p. 369. i # fee pee
Thid. 1301-7, p. 540; Yorks Ing. (York. Rec. Soc.), xxxvii 149. ‘From Caldestane b
’ 5) . +)» . 1,
Harlaw to the Tonge of Brounmore, so by Fourstanes to Kirk Beck and thence to Whonyae Wace wad
Littel Wath, from thence below Ravencross to Ald Weryngton [Old Wennington] and Grythawe, thence
to Langbrig or Langebrege, and to Dowegill and from the head of Dowegill to the Pyke of Gragrete formed
the boundary from south to north against co. Lancaster. ome .
"° Rot. Chart. (Rec. Com.), xl.
* Lansd. MSS. 599, fol. §9. This corresponds with the western bounda i
ry of the lordship of .
*) Add. MSS. 33244, fol. 29. *? Whitaker, Richmondshire, ii, 257. eer

462

FORESTRY

In 1637 Lord Morley took steps to check the destruction of the woods within the lordship by
the customary tenants. In answer to a bill of complaint lodged against him by his tenants he
deposes that—

The great store of timber trees growing in Hornby has been destroyed by the unreasonable
felling of trees and the refusal of the tenants to preserve the underwoods of the woods so felled, by
the continual felling of woods for the building of new edifices under pretence of their custom of
tenant-right and for selling at various market towns adjoining the manor. He is still willing to
allow his tenants sufficient timber and stone for the repair of their dwellings, so be it that the trees do
not come from within the parks of the manor. He hopes that the court of Duchy Chamber will
not admit that the tenants have a right to take ‘when, where and what quantity of wood’ they
please, for if this is allowed he and future lords will soon be despoiled of wood for their own
particular use. He confesses that he has felled and hopes to fell in future such trees as are necessary
for his private use and especially for the working of his iron works.’

There was an ancient inclosure or dyke between the lordship of Hornby and Bowland Forest
in Dr. Whitaker’s time denominated ‘ Harrington Dike.’ 1*4

The woodlands belonging to the barony of Manchester were at one time of some importance.
In Horwich Forest there were in 1282 some eight vaccaries worth {19 a year. On the outskirts of
Manchester was a small park called Aldeparc and Litheak, later known as Aldport, and at Blackley
a park yielding ten marksa year in issues."®° In the latter could be agisted 240 cattle at 6d. per head,
and 200 fallow-deer in 1322, at which time the vaccaries of Horwich were farmed for nearly £24 a
year. In 1473 Horwich and the parks of Blackley and Aldport were held in fee-farm.'®
Leland observed that in times past iron was made at ‘Orwike’ (Horwich), and at Blakele
(Blackley) ‘ wild bores, bulles and falcons bredde in times paste. . . . Now for lakke of woodde
the Blow-shoppes (bloomeries) decay there.’ 1°

Writing about 1805, Mr. G. A. Cooke makes but trifling reference to the woodlands
observed during his tour through the county, but he notices the rapidly increasing demand for
alder wood in connexion with machinery for (producing and) drying cotton yarn, and for the bark
as an article for dye. The alders planted on the banks of the Duke of Bridgewater’s canal had
proved a profitable plantation, whilst the osier willow was in such demand for hampers (or skeps)
that more than £20 a year had been made out of a single acre of land planted with it.’

In 1750 the woods belonging to Mr. Braddyll’s estates at Samlesbury, Portfield, Whalley,
Braddyll, Brockhall, Billington, and Dinckley were surveyed and valued by James Bigland.’”
The total value amounted to £2,933, the greater part of which lay in Samlesbury and Billington,
as the following particulars show :—

SAMLESBURY
Bushels of
Tenant and TENEMENT No. of Oaks Feet Bark No. of Ashes Feet Aggregate Value
Ls dad
Greenhurst, Jas. Thonoch . 62 325 108 34 295 24 1 0
3 John Ainsworth . 549 4,995 1,333 71 428 312 10 oO
» Hugh Haydock . 337 35752 953 35 274 247 15 7
Jas. Anderton . 2 ws 57 325 127 4 16 25 4 5
Wid. Heatley . . . . . 112 1,435 347 25 239 99 7 6
Dunkirk—
High Wood . . . . 149 1,521 319 16 76 6
Low Wood . . . . . 270 2,489 579 52 457 } ios fae
Old Hall—
Near Huntley . . . . 198 2,501 682 29 211
Far Huntley. . . . 234 2,828 736 | 16,1 elm 135 } gare ee
21 other tenements . . . 838 5,962 1,835 176 1,077 367 10 7
Total .| £1,657 17 5
18 Duchy of Lanc. Plead. 13 Chas. I, bdle. 152. 1 Richmondshire, ii, 262.
18 Lancs. Ing. (Rec. Soc. xlviii), 244-7. 18 Thid. liv, 56.

187 Mamecestre (Chetham Soc.), 501-2.

18 Teland, Itin. vii, 57. Dr. Whitaker records a tradition that the wild cattle from Blackley were
transferred to the abbot’s park at Whalley, whence they were removed after the Dissolution to Gisburn
Park, where their descendants remained until last century ; Hist. of Whalley (ed. 1876), i, 282.

9 Cooke, Descript. of co. Lanc. 58. ™ Croston, Anct. Hall of Samlesbury, 208, 239.

463

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

In 1799 Huntley Wood of 385 customary acres (seven and a-half yards) contained 4,188 feet
of timber valued at £314 25., the bark valued at £188 6s. Heatley contained 370 trees, containing
2,060 feet, valued at £107 65., the bark valued at £148.

BILtincTon }°}

Woops pe Value i ae Value ee Value
fo te od. Lo ted Lo as vd
Braddyll Mill. . . . . 151 69 3 2 388 76 18 4 — _—
y Great We ne 245 191 16 10 296 48 5 6 3 Oo 12 9g
» WestCopy. . . 62 24.17 6 53 5 0 4 7 4 2 6
Brockhall Eyes . . . . 111 40 3 2 70 12,0 § 7 219 3
3 Boat: -'59 5! 1s 4 166 71 10 6 129 21 0 4 10 a ae)
i Cockglade. . . 12 7 2 94 12 17 0 —_—
i Barnfield Larkhill . 7 12 1 6 53 514 4 6 217 0
7 other tenements. . . . 68 21 19 3 120 19 3 4 6 116 0
920 | £436 9 1] 1,203 | £200 19 9] 39 £1g 10-3
Woops Tree Feet Value
Ls d.
1 50 3.15 0
The largest oaks were in Braddyll Great Wood I 36 214 0
1 34 211 0
Brockhall Boat Wood . . 2. 1. ww ee { : 45 ae
I 36 214 0
The largest ash trees—
Brockhall Eyes Wood . { 1 40 110 0
I 36 I 7 0

On the Grizedale Hall estate in the parish of Hawkshead the following trees were planted by
Mr. Ainslie upon 296 acres of woodlands between the years 1786 and 1821 :—QOaks 76,000,
ashes 14,500, larches 280,000, Scotch firs 65,000, and about 10,000 various. The coppice-
woods were felled every fourteen years, and as an average example of the value of the produce the
following may be given :—Riddings Wood of 214 acres felled in 1827—charcoal 854 dozens of
sacks, £131 19s. ; bark, 18 tons 164 cwts., £169 85.; 130 oaks, £57 135.; ash wood, swill wood,
clog wood, and prop wood, 640 feet, £27 ; rods, winter hoops, smart hoops, spiles, and spokes, £64 ;
total, £450.19

At the present time forestry appears to be at a low ebb in the county, excepting in Lonsdale
north of the sands, and one or two other districts. In South Lancashire the woodlands are asa rule
of trifling extent and of very inferior character, partly owing to neglect and partly to the deleterious
effects of smoke and chemical fumes. Along a great part of the coast-line the effect of gales from
the seaand the inborne salt are destructive of the growth of timber, and what exists may be described
as lop-sided scrub, Within many miles of the coast line, save in very sheltered and favourable sites
it is impossible to grow good larch. In the Windermere and Coniston basins this tree flourishes up
to an elevation of 1,000 feet above sea level, but the difference in value per acre of the timber grown
between 200 feet and 1,000 feet of elevation will vary 80 per cent.

On the Hapton, Towneley, and Worsthorne estates in the north-east of the county, and on the
ceeaaare estate the woodlands are for the most part sadly neglected, and very little planting is

one.

On the Hoghton Tower estate of about 5,150 acres the woodlands extend to 270 acres and lie

chiefly on the steep declivities bordering the River Darwen, consisting of sycamore, beech, and oak,

*) Hist. Soc. of Lancs. and Ches. xxv, 223.

‘* The greater part were planted between 1800 and 1810,
' Forestry Bks. at Grizedale Hall.

464

FORESTRY

with some ash and alder. TThereare no trees of any great age or size. Planting and thinning have
been greatly neglected!

On the Clifton Hall estate around Lytham the woods are of small extent and have been planted
for the sake ofshelter, There is little coppice or underwood.

Between 1817 and 1830 a large amount of planting was done by the late Mr. Thomas Fitz-
herbert-Brockholes on the Claughton estate, near Garstang. These well-managed woods cover an
area of 260 acres and contain some well-grown oaks, while ash grows well toa certain age, but hasa
tendency to incipient decay before reaching any great size. Alder is said to be the wood of the
district, growing well and coming to maturity much more rapidly than other wood.!°

On Capt. Ormrod’s estate in Nether Wyresdale the woodlands approximate to 300 acres, and
on Lord Sefton’s Over Wyresdale estate to 275 acres. On the latter the timber for the most part
is not of great age or growth, although fine specimens of Scotch fir and beech are to be found. For
some years the original coppice woods have not been felled, but oak and ash have been left to grow
from the stools, the spray being thinned at intervals with the intention of converting the former
coppices to woodland. ‘Tvhis practice is becoming general in north Lancashire, and promises to con-
vert what has lately been the most unprofitable part of an estate into a revenue-producing adjunct.
Larch does not thrive in this locality, but oak, alder, beech, and sycamore flourish.’** Scotch firs
were a notable feature of the district as far back as the days of the itinerant Leland.

On the Hornby Castle estate the woodlands consist of hardwood timber and coppice mixed
300 acres, hardwood and larch 45 acres, the same with Scotch fir and coppice intermixed 71 acres,
coppice 128 acres, hardwood timber 28 acres, and larch intermixed with coppice or Scotch and spruce
41 acres. Total 613 acres. The hardwood timber is mostly of 40 to 60 years’ growth. Larch
disease is more or less prevalent, and in consequence Japanese larch is now being planted in the
expectation that it will better resist disease. About 30 acres of mixed woods have been planted
within the last few years, containing some larch with Scotch firs as nurses." The coppices are
undergoing gradual conversion to woodlands by having the best poles or standards left; an inferior
method to that described above, but the only alternative where the coppices consist mostly of
hazel.

On Colonel Sandys’ Graythwaite Hall estate in Furness the woodlands extend to 3,000 acres,
of which 460 are larch plantations and the whole of the remainder coppice wood, the principal parcels
being :—

Ravenscar Wood of 45 acres containing oak, hazel and birch of eighteen years’ growth and a
few larch and oak trees of about twenty-five years’ growth ; Great Oregate of 44 acres containing
similar coppice of ten years’ growth and a few oaks of ninety years’ growth ; Holme Well Wood of
21 acres containing similar coppice of six years’ growth ; Black Brows Coppice of 130 acres, contain-
ing principally oak and birch of seven years’ growth covering 70 acres, the remainder being ‘ intake’
with scattered oak, larch and Scotch firs ; Devil’s Gallop of 80 acres, hazel and oak coppice of seven
years’ growth ; Hawthorn Riggs of 86 acres, containing hazel, oak, birch, and alder coppice of six
years’ growth ; Causey Wood of 54 acres, the same of five years’ growth ; Wood Close of g2 acres,
hazel, oak, and birch coppice of twelve years’ growth ; Low Wood Close of 38 acres, similar to the
last ; Bishop Woods of 300 acres divided into 14 falls of similar coppice, and besides about 100 well-
grown larches scattered over it. The other coppice woods have a very slight sprinkling of timber
trees of oak, beech, larch, and Scotch fir.

Of the plantations the two principal parcels are :—

Low Dale Park Plantation of 81 acres, containing good larch of fifty years’ growth; and
Middle Dale Park of 180 acres, containing good larch of forty-five years’ growth.

During the last ten years 120 acres of coppice have been converted into plantations and 80 acres
of rough moorland planted with larch, oak, ash, and sycamore. The native larch and the Quercus robur
thrive the best on this estate. The Japanese larch has been a great success, the trees thriving well
directly they are planted. This is done at a distance apart of 5 feet instead of the usual 4 feet, this
species being a quicker grower than the ordinary larch. A trial of the Siberian larch proved a
failure.)

On Mr. Harold Brocklebank’s Grizedale Hall estate the woodland extends to an area of 1,630
acres, of which 680 are larch plantations of over thirty years’ growth, now worth fully £35 per
acre, 464 of coppice mainly consisting of oak with a sprinkling of ash and birch, 386 of felled larch,
15 of mixed hardwood planted in 1904 and 85 of gaps in the larch plantations.

Of the Plantations :—Low Carron Plantation of 133 acres contains larch of sixty-five years’
growth; Quinea Hill of 80 acres, larch of thirty-five years’ growth ; Four Oaks of 25 acres, larch of

1% Information supplied by Mr. Walter de H. Birch. 1 Tbhid. Mr. W. Fitzherbert-Brockholes.
16 Thid. Mr. W. S. Hornby. 17 Thid. Mr. J. Jowitt.
#88 Ibid. Mr. John Banks, jun. :

2 465 59

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

forty-three years’ growth ; Park’s Plantation of 120 acres; Jack Gap of 37 acres; and Ormandy

Wood of 85 acres, all contain larch. :
The coppices are being gradually converted to woodland by allowing the oak saplings to the

number of about 4,000 to the acre to grow from the stools, the useless spray being periodically cut
or wrenched out until the saplings are well established.

Beech and Douglas fir be.ng the only shade bearers of any value as a crop are used in under
planting to fill the gaps.!%

The official Agricultural Returns for 1895 give a total area of 41,906 acres of woodlands in
Lancashire, including 879 of plantations planted since 1881. The returns made on § June, 1905,
are advantageously subdivided into three classes, coppice, plantations, and other woods. By coppice
is meant woods such as oak, hazel, ash, alder, and birch, which are felled at periods varying from
fourteen to twenty-five years, and reproduce themselves naturally by stool shoots ; and by plantation
is signified land planted or replanted within the ten years ending 1905. Lancashire is returned as
having 17, 391 acres of coppice, 3,114 of plantations, and 23,958 of other woods, the total of 44,463
acres showing a gratifying increase during the decade.

™ Information supplied by Mr. H. Brocklebank. * Agric. Ret. 1905, Pp. 44.

466

SPORT ANCIENT AND
MODERN

ANCASHIRE is perhaps the county
of England of which it is most
difficult to obtain ancient records of
its various sports. Even as late as the
year 1803, when Colonel Thornton

made his famous tour in the north of England,
his account of Lancashire reads more like a story
of wanderings through the jungles of Central
Africa than a visit to an English county.

In the time of the Plantagenets Lancashire had
great forests, the principal of which were those of
Quernmore, Wyresdale, Bleasdale, Bowland, Pen-
dle, Trawden, and Rossendale. These forests?
contained all the wild beasts that then inhabited
this country : red and fallow deer, wolves, wild
boar, wild cattle, fox, and hare. As cultivation
spread and population increased the wild creatures
gradually disappeared. The only beasts of the
chase mentioned in those days which now exist
in the county are the red and fallow deer, fox,
and hare.

Hunting is now practically confined to the
chase of the hare, and there is not a single pack
of foxhounds that has its kennels in the county.
Of the many venerable harrier packs the Hol-
combe is the oldest. —TThese hounds were honoured
by royalty in the days of James I, an account
of whose connexion with them will be found
below.

The shooting in the county is excellent, and
this is a very extraordinary thing when one con-
siders the numerous large towns that are in it.
Partridges and pheasants do very well, and the
county is noted for its numerous and fine hares.
Wild pheasants are extremely partial to the
county, and as many as 150 have been killed in
a day on a shoot * where no birds are put down.

Lancashire used to boast of two duck decoys
in the olden days. Now there is only one, namely
that at Hale near Liverpool. Traces of the
other, at Orford Hall near Warrington, can be
seen, though much overgrown ; unfortunately,
there are no records of this decoy.

1 By the word ‘forests’ was meant ‘a certain territory
of wooded grounds and pastures privileged for wild
beasts and fowls of forests, chase, and warren to rest
and abide in, under protection of the King for his
princely delight and pleasure.’

? Lord Newton’s shoot at Newton-le-Willows.

Fishing in Lancashire has sadly deteriorated
during the last seventy years, owing chiefly to
the pollution of the waters caused by chemicals,
sewage, and other filth which the towns reck-
lessly pour into them. All the rivers in the
county had fish in abundance in the olden days,
the Mersey being specially famous for the spar-
lings caught in the estuary. Windermere and
Coniston are noted for a fish called the charr,
introduced by the monks of Furness, which
is peculiar to these waters. The male, which
is known as the milting charr, has a red
belly, and its flesh is somewhat white; the
female has no red on the belly, but its flesh is
very red. This fish is sometimes called the
alpine trout.

Horse-racing has been carried on in Lanca-
shire from very early days; but when we see
the steeplechase of to-day, the Grand National
for which Lancashire is so justly famous, it
seems strange to read the following extract,
entitled ‘Curious Horserace,’? from a sporting
magazine of a hundred years ago :—

A wager betwixt Captain Prescott and Tucker of
the sth Light Dragoons was determined on Friday
the 2oth instant, by a single horserace which we
learn is denominated ‘Steeplehunting.’? The race
was run from Chappelhouse on the western pike road
to the Cow-gate, Newcastle, a distance of about three
miles in a direct line across country. The mode
of running such races is not to deviate more than
15 yards from the direct line of the object in view,
notwithstanding any impediments the rider may meet
with, such as hedges, ditches, &c. The leading horse
has the choice of road, to the extent of the limits,
and the other cannot go over the same ground, but
still preserving those limits, must chose another for
himself.

Horse-racing was carried on at Manchester,
Preston, Liverpool, Newton, and Heaton Park.
The earliest recorded race-meetings were those
held at Manchester in 1730; but they only
continued for fifteen years, and were not re-
sumed till 1750, and then only in the face of
much opposition.

The race-meetings in those days generally
lasted for two days, and not more than one race

3 Sporting Magazine (1803), 120.

467

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

was run in each day, these races being run in
heats. About 1805 races, instead of being run
in heats, as was the general rule, were mingled
with single races in equal proportion, but it was
not until 1849 that the running of races in
heats ceased.* In addition to the flat-race meet-
ings, steeplechases are held in Manchester,
Liverpool, and Haydock Park.

Besides flat-racing and steeplechasing, trotting
meetings are also held in Lancashire at Liver-
pool, Wigan, Blackpool, and Manchester.

The English trotting records were made for
the following distances on these tracks: 1 mile,
by Rowley, at Greenwich Park, Liverpool ;
2 miles, at the same place, on 20 March 1893;
4 miles, at Manchester Racecourse, on 1 June
1896; 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, to 20 miles, by Lady
Combermere, on the Manchester Racecourse in
1894 and 1895.

‘There were never more than two polo clubs
in Lancashire, and one of these has now joined
forces with a Cheshire club, and therefore lost
its identity. The Liverpool Polo Club, however,
still exists in a very flourishing condition, and is
the largest provincial club in England. This
club won the County Cup in 1891.

Bowls is a game that is universally played in
Lancashire, and what some of the men who look
after the greens do not know about the game is
not worth knowing. The principal tournament
takes place at Blackpool every year. There is
also an association of amateurs, called the Lanca-
shire and Cheshire Association ; but this associa-
tion does not allow its members to play in the
Blackpool tournament.

There is in the county only one tennis-court ;
it belongs to the Manchester Racquet and Tennis
Club, and many famous players have learnt
the game there. There is a Racquet Club at
Liverpool, where there are two excellent courts
and a squash racquet court ; and Rossall School
has also a racquet court.

Wrestling has lost its popularity in the
county, and although local interest may be keen
in some places, yet the great meetings for
which the county was once famous no longer

take place. Its loss of popularity is most likely
due to the enormous interest now taken in
football.

Cock-fighting, no longer legal as a sport,
was extremely popular in the olden days. The
strain of Lancashire cocks—notably those of the
former Earls of Derby—was noted throughout
the country, and the Lancashire feeders were
reckoned amongst the best. There were four
cock-pits in Liverpool, and the like number in
Manchester. As late as the year 1849 cock-
fighting was still a favourite sport of the Lanca-
shire colliers. Numerous cock-pits still remain
in the county, but they have fallen from their

“W. Proctor, One Turf, One Stage, One Ring (1882).

high estate, and are now used for stores and
other purposes.

Whippet-racing is most popular amongst the
working-men of Lancashire, and every Sunday,
near the large towns, the owners try their dogs
one against another. The whippet is very often
the chief bread-winner of the family. He must
accordingly be looked after properly, and, when
in course of training for a match he is getting
good food, his master’s family often has to go
short. The chief value of a fast dog to his
owner is at the stud, the fees demanded being as
much, occasionally, as three guineas. Regular
whippet race-meetings are held at some of the
large towns, those of Oldham and St. Helens
being specially noted.

Pigeon flying, or ‘ fleeing,’ as the Lancashire
man terms it, is a favourite pastime,° and a very
pretty sight is often to be seen at the railway stations
in the north of England, when a hamper arrives
by train with a notice on it requesting that the
birds may be let loose at a certain time. When
this is done instantly the air is alive with perhaps
thirty or more pigeons, which, after circling
above the station for a few minutes, get the
bearing of their destination and set off in a
straight line for it.

Lancashire had many quaint customs, and prob-
ably the ‘wakes’ and rush-bearings of various
towns were the most interesting. ‘These ‘ wakes’
are still kept up in the county, but the form they
take now is a week at the sea-side, and it is a
wonderful sight to see a place invaded by these
‘wakes.’ Much good money is brought into the
town selected ; at the Oldham ‘ wake’ in 1906
no less than £100,000 was taken into Blackpool.
These ‘wakes’ in the olden days were accom-
panied by regularly organized sports, and the list
of the festivities was a long and varied one, as
may be seen by the following copy made from
one of the earliest posters known, which is
preserved in the Free Reference Library at
Manchester :—

ECCLES WAKE

Will be held on Monday, Tuesday, 30th & 3 1st
August, and Wednesday and Thursday, 1st and 2nd
September, 1819.

On Monday the Ancient Sport of bull baiting
may be seen in its various evolutions,

Same Day.

A Dandy race for a purse of silver—the best of
heats, the second to be entitled to 5s.

* This pastime seems to have been of an international
nature at one time, as we read (Sporting Magazine,
1824, p. 371) that in 1825 the Lord Mayor of
London was waited upon by a Frenchman, named
Keijeux, who presented a letter from the Amateurs
des Pigeons of Verviers, wherein they requested his
Lordship to let fly in the city thirty-two pigeons,
which Keijeux had brought with him.

468

SPORT ANCIENT

Same Day.

A footrace for a hat, by lads not exceeding 16 years
of age, three to start, or no race,

Tuespay.

A Jackass race for a purse of gold value £50—the
best of heats: each to carry a feather—the racers to
be shewn in the bull ring at 12, and to start at 2.
Nothing to be paid for entrance, but bringers of each
steed to have a good dinner gratis, and a quart of
strong ale to moisten his clay.

Same Day.

A footrace for a hat by lads that have never won a
hat for a prize before Monday ; three to start or no
race.

SaME Day.

An apple dumpling eating by ladies and gentlemen
of all ages. The person who finishes repast first to
have 5s., the second 2s., third, ts.

WEDNESDaY.

A pony race by tits not to exceed 12 hands high,
for a cup value {50—the best of heats, three to
start or no race.

Same Day.
A footrace for a hat value 10s. 6¢. by men of every
description ; three to start or no race.
Same Day.

A race for a good holland smock by ladies of all
ages—The second best to have a handsome satin
riband ; three to start or no race.

Tuurspay,

A game at prison bars.

ALso

A grinning match thro’ a collar for a piece of fat
bacon—no crabs to be used on this occasion.

AND MODERN

Same Day.

A young pig will be turned out, with its ears and
tail well soaped. The first person catching and
holding him by either will be entitled to same.

Smoking matches by ladies and gentlemen of all
ages.

To conclude with a grand fiddling match by all
fiddlers that attend the Wake, for a purse of silver.

A note adds that there were several small
trees from which the ladies and gentlemen could
watch the bull baiting in safety.

Golf is played a great deal, and although the
Royal Liverpool Golf Club has its links in
Cheshire at Hoylake, yet Lancashire can boast
of being the second club in England to have
made sea-side links, and Hoylake is now reckoned
to be the premier course in England. Among
other noted clubs are Lytham and St. Annes,
Formby, Preston, and Manchester.

Another game which Lancashire favours is
Lacrosse. This game is still in its infancy in
England, and until the great public schools take
it up—which might be easily done in the Lent
term—it will never become a national game,
though perhaps the visit of the Canadian team
in 1907 will give it a start.

It is interesting to recall that The Book of
Sports, published in 1618 by order of James I,
was written chiefly on account of the people
of Lancashire, as may be seen from the follow-
ing extract :’—On Sunday, 16 August, 1617,
the king being at Hoghton, a petition was pre-
sented to the king signed principally by Lanca-
shire peasants, tradespeople, and servants, repre-
senting that they were debarred from lawful
recreation on Sunday until after evening prayer,
and upon holy days, and praying that the restric-
tions might be withdrawn. ‘The king assented,
and in the following year the bishops were
ordered to cause this Book of Sports to be read
and published in all parish churches, of their
respective dioceses, on pain of punishment.

HUNTING

In the olden days the north and north-east
parts of the county of Lancaster were covered
with vast forests. In these forests all kinds of
game existed, but as the population of the
county increased these forests were cleared, and
the beasts in them destroyed, and now only in
the direction of Clitheroe does the wild deer
remain.

It is strange but true that there is not a
single pack of foxhounds whose kennels are in
Lancashire, though Mr. Gerard’s staghounds

6 The Royal North Devon was the first to do so
at Westward Ho!

occasionally hunt fox. ‘There are three packs
of staghounds, and eight of harriers; there is
also one pack of beagles.

The relatively large number of harriers is due
to the fact that Lancashire is such a wonderful
county for hares. The difficulty as a rule is
not to find a hare, but to kill her, as the pack so
frequently after running their hare change on to
a fresh one. The record of the Rochdale
harriers in the season or 1896-7 of having
killed 133 hares with meets on only two days a
week is therefore exceptionally good.

” Baines, Hist. of County Palatine (1836).

469

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

STAGHOUNDS

Mr. Gerard’s hounds, established in 1863,
have their kennels at Wrightington Hall, the
residence of the master, the Hon. Robert Joseph
Gerard-Dicconson. The pack consists of twenty
couples of hounds, and they hunt twice a
week. Their quarry is the wild deer—not the
red-deer of the West Country, but the fallow-
deer—and their country extends nearly to the
Ribble.

The Oxenholme Hunt was established in
1887 and has its kennels at Endmoor, Kendal.
The pack consists of twenty couples of hounds
which are a cross between the bloodhound and
the foxhound. They hunt the carted deer and
escaped deer ranging at large. The meets are
held twice a week throughout the season.

Lord Ribblesdale’s pack was started in the
season 1906-7 by Lord Ribblesdale and Mr.
Peter Ormrod, and the quarry is neither the
red, fallow, nor roe-deer, but a kind of black
deer which has been turned down for that
purpose.

The pack formerly known as Mr. Peter
Ormrod’s, which had its kennels near Scorton,
and was established in 1899, is now dispersed.
It consisted of thirty couples of hounds, and
hunted three days a week. ‘These hounds also
paid periodical visits to North Devon for the
purpose of hunting a part of the Devon and
Somerset country.

HARRIERS

The following extract! on hare hunting
clearly shows the difficulties that are referred
to above :—

A hare had for several years frequented a particular
corner of Maghull. ‘This hare was repeatedly seen in
the garden belonging to Henry Meadows, the
village blacksmith. She had many times beaten the
greyhounds, and in the winter of 1824~5 she was
repeatedly run by the harriers of R. Seed esq., as
well as coursed by greyhounds. The writer, who
generally followed the harriers above mentioned,
was upon one occasion accidentally afforded an
opportunity of observing this hare’s manoeuvres. She
was one day pressed so hard by the staunch little
harriers that, after a long and hard run, she was
under the necessity of crossing the canal, which saved
her life. She was always to be found at home, and
when the harriers were at the loss for a diversion
they knew where to procure a run.

One of the murderous coursing crew who lived in
the neighbouring township was very fond of his
greyhounds ; he visited Maghull, and found the hare
but was beaten by her. A few days afterwards he
ran her with a leash of greyhounds, and two couple of
beagles, but she yet escaped. Bent on her destruction,
however, the courser, a few days afterwards again
visited Maghull, this time accompanied by two

1 Johnson’s Sporting Dictionary, 1831.

couples of greyhounds, and three couples of beagles.
Six beagles and four greyhounds against one poor
little hare! The hare as usual was easily found, and
beat the four greyhounds handsomely, but the business
was not to end here ; the poor hare was again put
up by the beagles, and again she beat the tremendous
odds against her. Again the beagles were put upon
her foot, again she was viewed, and as a last re-
source made her way to the garden of Henry
Meadows. Here she was surrounded, and the poor
animal thus unfairly lost its life, was thus miserably
murdered.

The Holcombe Harriers are kennelled at
Holcombe, Ramsbottom. The pack, consisting
of twenty couples of hounds, meet three days a
week, and the master is Major W. M. Hard-
castle.

This is a very ancient pack, having been in
kennels for over 200 years, and trencher fed
before that for 100 years. ‘There is a tradi-
tion? that James I, while resting at Hoghton
Tower on his way to York, hunted one day
with the Holcombe, and was so pleased with
the sport that he granted to these hounds per-
mission to hunt three days a year for ever in
the township of Quarlton, which was part of
the manor of Tottington. This fine old-
fashioned pack has rather a curious custom in
that the huntsman, as well as the whip, are
pedestrians, whereas the northern packs, which
hunt a great deal in hilly country, usually have
the kennel huntsman on foot, as well as a
mounted huntsman. The attire of the
Holcombe huntsman consists of cord breeches,
cord leggings, buttoned down the side, a cut-
away red coat, and tall hat. He carries a horn,
shaped like a coach-horn, measuring 3 ft. in
length, which has been in the possession of the
hunt for over 200 years.

There are no records of the Kirkham Harriers
before 1822, in or about which year they seem
to have been established. The kennels are at
Treales, Kirkham, and the master, to whom the
pack now belongs, is Mr. Charles Addison
Birley of Bartle Hall. The country hunted is
entirely in Lancashire, roughly speaking from
the Wyre to the Ribble, from Chipping in the
north-east to Lytham in the south-west. The
greater part of this country is known as the
Fylde. There is but little difference, between
the number of hares killed now and _ those
accounted for before the Ground Game Act
came into force. ‘The season of 1897-8 was
the best that the pack has had under the
present master, whose property it has been for
forty years.

The pack consists of twenty couples of hounds,
and they hunt over a country which is almost
entirely pasture land with a number of ditches,
especially in the Fylde district. The meets
are fairly well attended, and the fields as a rule

? Hon. A. Bryden, Hare Hunting and Harriers.

470

SPORT ANCIENT

average about eighteen in number on each day
that the hounds meet.

The following extract from The Sporting
Magazine of 1825 is of interest as referring to
these hounds :-—

The Kirkham harriers are the joint property of
Mr. H. Hornby of Ribby, and Mr. Bolton King ;
both are yet young in the sporting world, but the
establishment would do credit to an older hand...
The hounds are a remarkably fine pack showing great
breed and power, and very active in getting together.
I have never seen hounds better calculated to show
sport, from the fine head they carry with a good
scent, and their excellent noses and steady hunting
when scent fails. ‘The handsome appearance of the
hounds and men must have been very gratifying to
Mr. King, whose exertions in the field are very great,
and his manner quiet and gentlemanly ; the hounds
are hunted by Dick Lowe, son of the veteran Abra-
ham, the huntsman of the Liverpool Harriers ; he
has been trained under the old one, and does him
credit. He is one of the best workmen on a horse I
ever saw. The whipper-in is a lad. The country
we were in yesterday was good, but the greater part
that they hunt over in the Fylde is deep with stiff
fences ; it carries however a good scent, and as the
pace of these hounds is, if anything, too fast for
harriers, the horses must often be distressed.

The writer goes on to describe the hunting
of a bagged fox and concludes his notice of this
pack as follows :—

I finished the week at Broughton with the Kirkham
Harriers and we only mustered a small field. I had a
better opportunity of looking over than on the pre-
ceding day, and was much pleased with their condition
and discipline. Chorister 1 I consider a perfect bitch,
as if she had been modelled for a model. This pack
has been established three seasons, and was grafted on
that which formerly hunted the north of Preston
under the name of the Goosnargh Harriers, and which
were parted with, very opportunely for Mr. Hornby
and Mr. King, at the time they were filling their
kennel.

The Fylde has seen several packs. It was at one
time hunted by Mr. Clifton of Lytham, and another
time by some Kirkham gentlemen, joined by Lord
Strange. All agree it was never done as well as by
the present managers.

Since 1897 an annual point-to-point steeple-
chase meeting has been held in connexion with
the hunt, which has proved most successful.

The Pendle Forest Harriers were in existence
in 1776, The kennels are at Waddington, and
the hounds as a rule meet two days a week, with
every now and then an extra day thrown in.
Their master is Mr. Ralph John Aspinall of
Standen Hall near Clitheroe. The country over
which this pack hunts is entirely pasture land
with a little moorland ; after Christmas, one day
a week, they hunt deer. ‘The pack at the
present time consists of twenty-two couples of
hounds.

AND MODERN

The date of the establishment of the Rochdale
Harriers is unknown. In 1879 the whole pack,
with the exception of the puppies which were out
at walk, had to be destroyed, owing to dumb
madness breaking out; but for these puppies, all
the famous old blood would now have been lost.
The usual number of hares killed during the sea-
son averages about one hundred, the record season
being that of 1896-7, when one hundred and
thirty-three hares were killed. The kennels are
at Crankyshaw near Rochdale: the hounds meet
two days, and occasionally three, a week. ‘The
country hunted is both pasture and moorland,
and there is no plough or woodland; the pack
consists of eighteen couples of hounds, and the
master is Mr. Benjamin Heap, of Rochdale.

The Rossendale Harriers have been kennelled
at Newchurch in Rossendale for the last sixty
or seventy years, but for many years before that
they were trencher-fed. They formerly hunted
three days a week, but now only twice. The
master is Mr. Harold M. Kenyon. ‘The country
consists chiefly of pasture land inclosed by stone
walls in place of hedges; a very small area of
the country hunted is moorland. The pack
consists of nineteen couples of hounds.

The Vale of Lune Harriers have their kennels
at Hornby and they hunt two days a week.
The master is Colonel William Henry Foster of
Hornby Castle. Their country, which consists
mainly of pasture with some plough, moorland,
and woods, lies partly in Lancashire, Yorkshire,
and Westmorland. ‘here is a great deal of
wire. The pack consists of twenty couples of
hounds.

Mr. F. Woods’ Harriers were founded in
1897; they have their kennels at Newton-le-
Willows, and hunt on foot. Their country is
that previously hunted by the Hon. R. Gerard’s
harriers, and extends from the Mersey to the
Douglas in the north, and to the Glaze on the
east. It contains a fair sample of all sorts, in-
cluding pasture, plough, moor, and woodland.
The great difficulty this hunt has to contend
with is that the country over which they hunt
is intersected with railways, and every year some
of the hounds are run over. The pack, which
consists of twelve couples, is a good one for music,
but the hounds are very apt to over-run the
line.

BEAGLES

The only pack of beagles in Lancashire is
that at Hulton. It was established in 1898,and |
has its kennels at Brakesmere, Little Hulton.
It is a private pack owned by the master,
Mr. Leonard Lockhart Armitage, who hunts
them himself. The country hunted does not
carry a good scent, and is much cut up by rail-
ways. ‘The pack consists of sixteen and a half
couples of Stud Bcok beagles.

4700

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

OTTER-HOUNDS

There is no pack of otter-hounds actually
kennelled in Lancashire, but the Wharfedale

have hunted the Lune and its tributaries
since 1903. Of recent years the Carlisle
Otter-hounds have hunted the Ribble and

its tributaries, and in 1906 the Ceimq Otter-
hounds, which had been started that season,
visited the Wyre. The Kendal Otter-hounds,
hunted by the late Sir Henry Bromley for
many years, used to hunt in Lancashire, but
the pack was broken up and the hounds sold
in 1900.

COURSING

The sport of coursing has long been established
and popular in the county of Lancaster. One
need only refer to such works as Goodlake’s
Manual, Thacker’s Remembrancer and Annual,
and later to the Coursing Calendar and the Grey-
hound Stud Book for all that is necessary to afford
abundant evidence of the strong hold this
ancient sport has always had in Lancashire.
The main reasons for the popularity and main-
tenance of the sport in the county seem to be
the suitability of the soil, in many parts of the
county, for the sport of coursing itself and for
the preservation and provision of a sufficient stock
of hares ; the willingness and readiness of land-
owners and lessees to place their lands at the
disposal of the courser and, in many instances,
to take part in the sport themselves. A not less
important factor is the goodwill that exists
between landlords and tenantry, and the support
the latter generally give to coursing. A glance
at a map of the county shows over how wide an
area the sport of coursing is distributed. From
Holker, Heysham, and Hornby Castle in the
north to Barnacre, Winmarleigh, Pilling, Fleet-
wood, and Singleton; then on to Lytham,
Southport, and Altcar—the scene of the greatest
of all coursing meetings—through Tarbock and
Hale, even to Old Trafford and Worsley, we find
how general the sport has been along the western
side of the county. Other places such as
Cockerham and Rawcliffe, St. Michaels and
Blackpool, may be mentioned ; and in the south-
western part of the county, where the sport
most strongly holds its own to-day, we must
name as coursing grounds, Halsall, Haskayne,
Scarisbrick Bridge, Barton, Ince, Rufford, Tarle-
ton, Treales, Bickerstaffe, Downholland, Bur-
scough Bridge, Hesketh Bank, Ince Blundell,
Formby, Sefton, and Aintree. From the places
named it can be seen how great landowners such
as the Duke of Devonshire, the Earls of Derby,
Sefton, Lathom, and Ellesmere, the late Lord Win-
marleigh, Sirs P. H. Fleetwood, H. B. Hoghton,
T. G. Fermor-Hesketh, and H. de Trafford, the
Rev. C. Hesketh, and county gentlemen such
as Messrs. Clifton, Scarisbrick, Blundell, and
Blackburne, have most consistently supported
coursing by allowing their lands to be coursed
over, and in some cases by running greyhounds
themselves. Of the many estates that have

provided and still provide much sport those of
the Earls of Sefton demand special mention, for
not only is the great event of the coursing world
—the Waterloo Cup—held over the Altcar
portion, where also the meetings of the Altcar
Club are held, but the other portions at
Haskayne, Downholland, Kirkby and Simons-
wood, Tarbock and Aintree are famous for
their meetings. Nor must lessees and shooting
tenants be forgotten, and in several instances in
Lancashire the thanks of coursers are due to
tenants who permit the holding of meetings and
keep and run greyhounds. With all these
favouring circumstances and the appreciation of
the sport by a large section of the Lancashire
public there seems no reason why coursing
should not flourish in the county in the future
as it has in the past.

The great event of the coursing world is,
of course, the Waterloo Cup,! and a list of
winners from its start to the present day may be
found in the Coursing Calendar and the Greyhound
Stud Book.

A glance at the winners of the Waterloo Cup,
&c., from the commencement shows that the
first cup run for in 1836 was won by Lord
Molyneux’s Milanie, trained by Mr, Lynn,
secretary of the meeting. Not till some ten
years later does the name of Lord Sefton appear,
though in the intervening years the names of
Mr. T. Bake and Mr. N. Slater—in their day
great supporters of the sport—are to be found.
Mention of Mr. Slater reminds us of the office
of flag-steward which he often filled, and for
some time it was a rule of the Altcar Club that
a member of the club should fill the office. For
years at the Waterloo the post has been held by
those who, following Mr. Slater, were in the
habit of acting for the club. Mr. J. Bayly
long acted and was followed by such well-known

‘In the Encychpaedia of Sport there is a most
interesting article on coursing with especial reference
to many of the greyhounds which have taken part in
this great event. For an amusing and interesting
account of a Waterloo Cup day one need only turn
to that given by ‘The Druid’ in Saddle and Sirhin,
remembering that since the days to which that author
refers many changes have taken place in the manage-
ment and conduct of a Waterloo meeting, and no
doubt for the better in the main.

472

SPORT ANCIENT

coursers of their day as Messrs. A. Brisco,
J. Hutchison, T. Stone, H. Brocklebank, and
H. Charles. Some seven years ago a change was
made and the office has since been filled by a
professional, A further glance at the list shows
how in succeeding years the names of some of
the most prominent owners of the day and the
most famous dogs are to be found. The re-
peated successes of Mr. Cooke and Cerito, Lord
Lurgan and Master McGrath, Col. North and
Fullerton are of course notable, as are those of
Messrs. Fawcett with their kennel, though in
this connexion the lucky nominator has on three
occasions been Mr. J. H. Bibby, the present
secretary of the meeting. As against such suc-
cesses, probably there never will fall to the lot
of a good and keen courser such tantalizing luck
as befell the Duke of Leeds in owning the run-
ner-up in three successive years.

There probably never has been so great a
number of good dogs as were running during
Master McGrath’s first season or two. If one
looks simply at the return of the winners of the
Cup, Purse, and Plate of his years and adds a
few other dogs of the period, sixteen or more
could probably be found to excel any sixteen of
any other time. Some may prefer Fullerton
and his period. We do not deny Fullerton’s
excellence and his great success over Altcar,
but good judges believe that Master McGrath
in his time had to compete against better
greyhounds than any pitted against Fullerton.
In recent times the finest deciding course in the
opinion of the greatest judges of coursing was
that between Miss Glendyne and Penelope II.

Of late years great improvements have been
effected in the state of the Altcar ground
by draining, levelling, and filling up ditches; and
for these and other advantages the thanks of
all coursers are greatly due to the present lord
of the soil. We know how readily their thanks
are given in our own day whenever opportunity
offers ; and it is noticeable that in Thacker’s
Coursing Annual in the account of the Water-
loo meeting of 1858—especially interesting
as the meeting at which the formation of the
National Coursing Club took shape—it is re-
corded, as showing the feeling of the coursing
community of that day towards the fourth
Earl of Sefton, that the toast which Mr. A.
Graham proposed—

The health of one who is a thorough sportsman
and a generous courser—of one whose greyhounds
are to be found competing for honours over the downs
of Wiltshire and Berkshire and amongst the hills of
Lanarkshire—and, best of all, who stands forth in
Lancashire the obliging and highly valued patron of
the greatest coursing meeting in the world. You
know that I refer to the Earl of Sefton, who is
worthy of the Waterloo meeting and the Waterloo
meeting is worthy of him—

was most enthusiastically received.
2

473

AND MODERN

Since the Waterloo Cup started in 1836 as an
eight-dog stake, changing the next year to a
sixteen, to a thirty-two in the year following,
and to a sixty-four in 1857, the management or
the secretarial work has been in few hands.
Prior to 1869 there does not seem to have been
any committee such as at present exists. Mr.
Lynn acted as secretary for many years. ‘Then
came Mr. T. D. Hornby, who held office for a
long period. He was succeeded by the present
writer, followed in 1894 by Mr. J. Hartley
Bibby, who still holds office. In the report of
the Waterloo meeting of 1869, in volume xxiii
of the Coursing Calendar, there are some
interesting comments on the changes made
during the thirty-three years the cup had then
been in existence. It was only in 1857 that the
Waterloo Collar was established, and it is only a
few years ago that the sixth Earl of Sefton made
the cup a reality by adding a piece of plate of
the value of £100 for the winner. This his lord-
ship has continued to do, and nowadays a winner
has something to show in token of his victory.
The collar, a medallion with links attached, was
neither ornamental nor useful, and was held for
the year only.

Comparing the present with the past, one
cannot help noticing the great increase in the
attendance at a Waterloo meeting, and, while
probably there never really are so many spec-
tators present as stated, the very large at-
tendance generally shows clearly that coursing
has not lost its hold as an interesting and popular
sport in Lancashire.

The Altcar Club, or Society as it was then
called, was founded in 1825 and its early record
until the publication of Thacker is preserved in
a volume compiled by Mr. J. W. Swan, who
was secretary for some years. ‘This record, with
Thacker and the Coursing Calendar, aided Mr.
David Brown, the keeper at that time of the
Greyhound Stud Book, to publish a very interesting
sketch of the club in its sixth volume; and the
writer of a book entitled 4/tcar Coursing Club,
1825-1887, published in the latter year, followed
in Mr. Swan’s steps. Further records up to
the present can be traced in the Coursing
Calendar. At the club’s first meeting no
stakes were run for, the programme consisting
of 23 matches. For some seasons small stakes
and a number of matches made up the
programmes. A letter to the Editor of the
Annals of Sporting in February 1826 gives an
interesting account of the meeting at which
stakes—though very small—were first run for :

I beg to hand you the results of the second meet-
ing of our Club, which was held on the 14th of this
month, and, considering we are yet but young in our
progress, it went off with much spirit and created a
sufficiency of interest. HH. B. Hoghton and E. G.
Hornby, Esqs., were the stewards and to their good
arrangements (made the eve of the meeting, at the

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

Waterloo Hotel) are we indebted for the propitious
sport. we enjoyed. The Union Coursing Cup at
the great Wiltshire meeting induced Lord Molyneux
to send Mountain, Medlar, and two or three others
of his long tails to compete with the ‘ Moonrakers’
and, consequently, we were deprived of some of the
best of his stud, having with us only Magic, Merry-
man and Metal. But three brace of dogs contended
for the Sefton Stakes. They were won by Mr.
Hornby’s Helen, beating Mr. Rigby’s Reveller and
Lord Molyneux’s Magic. The Croxteth Stakes
brought but a short field ; they were thus run out—

Mr. Formby’s Alderman beat Mr. Ebsworth’s
Udolph.

Mr. Alison’s Mentor beat Mr. Hoghton’s Stingo.
After this Mr Alison’s dog was taken ill, so as not to
be capable of being again slipped, consequently
Alderman won the stakes without a second contest.
There were also as many as thirty matches run. In
these Sir Thomas Stanley’s dogs greatly distinguished
themselves. Lord Molyneux’s Merryman was beat
in fine style by Mr. Unsworth’s Umpire, as was Mr.
Hornby’s Hun by his Lordship’s Metal. Next
season we are in great hopes of raising a Cup; in
the meantime, Mr. Annals, pray drink success to our
new legion of longtails in yours and believe me to be,
Your well wisher, J. W..... s.

At the November meeting in 1835 Lord
Molyneux’s Milanie, the first winner of the
Waterloo Cup, won the Croxteth Stakes for
eight dogs, and though sixteen-dog stakes became
general at most of the meetings it was not till
March 1852 that there was a thirty-two-dog
stake. This was called the Members’ Plate
and was won by Mr. (later Sir) Thomas
Brocklebank’s Britomart, Sally Gray, the pro-
perty of the Earl of Sefton, running up. The
following March the Members’ Plate, again
a thirty-two, was run for and won by
Mr. B. H. Jones’ Junta, the runner-up being
Mr. Borron’s Brighton. There seem to have
been no more Members’ Plates, but at the
meeting in January 1857 a thirty-two, called the
Champion Prize, was run for and won by
Mr. G. F. Cooke’s Athnalpa, Mr. Peacock’s
Protest running up. In the succeeding March
the Members’ Cup was won by Captain
Spencer’s Seagull, Protest again being the runner-
up. From this time forward there have been
cups at each meeting. ‘That run for at the
November meeting is known as the Altcar Club
Cup, while the cup offered in January is known
as the Members’ Cup. For a good many years,
too, it has been the custom to add plate to the
Sefton and Croxteth Stakes, for dog and bitch
puppies respectively, run for at the Autumn
meetings.

In past times a pair of silver couples or added
money went to the winner of the Veteran
Stakes, if there were a certain number of entries.
The Produce Stakes were instituted in 1852 and
reached high-water mark, as far as acceptances
are concerned, in 1867, when no fewerthan 121
of the 182 entered ran. This was a year

famous for good greyhounds. Bethell and
Ghillie Callum were first and second for the
Sefton, whilst Brigade and Bab-at-the-Bowster
(sister to Bethell) divided the Croxteth. In
1875 the acceptances amounted to 102 out of
181 entered, and since then the entries have
often topped the two hundred without producing
relatively any better acceptances. Mr. T.
D. Hornby used often to say that if the
acceptances were over seventy he was quite
satisfied, as with average entries in other stakes
a sufficient number of runners to make a good
meeting was assured. Mr. Hornby held for many
years the honorary secretaryship of the club,
which he coupled with that of the Waterloo
meeting. The present writer did the same
for some years, and Mr. J. Hartley Bibby now
fills the same position. It is interesting to
note that in addition to the three above-men-
tioned secretaries the club has only had
two others, Mr. Unsworth and Mr. J. W.
Swan. For president the club has had suc-
cessive Earls of Sefton except for the short
time when Sir Thomas Brocklebank filled the
position.

In the report of a meeting in the season
1839-40 one reads:—

the sport was truly excellent both days, and it was the
opinion of all present that the selection of greyhounds
was the most splendid the eye ever fell upon at Altcar,
Mr. H. Hornby’s and Mr. Lloyd’s in particular.
Fifty-four hares were killed in the two days’ sport,
which for its prime character will long be remembered
by every spectator . .. The hares were abundant
and the arrangements on the ground, like the club,
“slap up.’

A few years later we find that in addition to
the meetings of the club there were two open
meetings during the season and a sapling meet-
ing, so that, including the Waterloo, no fewer
than six meetings were held over the Altcar
estate. Club and open meetings continued to
be held for some years ; and later, club meetings
only, one in November and another in January
of each season, have been held. It might be
thought that the holding of two club meetings
and the Waterloo over the estate was a sufficient
tax of its resources. Thanks, however, to the
liberality of the Earl of Sefton these resources,
coupled with those of his lordship’s neighbouring
estate of Aintree, have also provided the ground
and the fur for the Ridgway Club to hold its meet-
ings during the past season or so, since that club
was unable to hold its meetings over the Lytham
estate (where it has been welcomed for many
years) on account of a disease among the hares
which almost annihilated the stock. This is not
the first time, however, that the Ridgway Club
has enjoyed such a privilege, as it is noticeable
that a stake begun at their February meeting
was completed at the Altcar Club Meeting in

474

SPORT ANCIENT AND MODERN

March, 1860. Referring to this stake, the pro-
gramme of the meeting says :—

by permission of Lord Sefton and the Altcar Club the
seven dogs which divided the Talbot Stakes at the
February meeting of the Ridgway Club, will run off
the ties for the piece of jewellery added to that stake,
with a fresh entry of £4 1os. each.

Though the Altcar Club is essentially Lancas-
trian in its origin and its home, and has had many
supporters from within the county, it has also had
many from without. A look through lists of mem-
bers of various dates gives names so well known
in Lancashire as Molyneux, Stanley, Formby,
Hesketh, Hornby, Willis, Ireland-Blackburne,
Hoghton, Blundell, Legh, and Rawstorne, and its
first list of members includes as ‘honorary
members’ the Earl of Sefton, Mr. Creevy, Mr.
Hopwood, and Mr. Heywood. To the foregoing
may be added the names of Fleetwood, Brock-
hole, Patten, Horrocks, Pedder, and Weld-Blun-
dell, Amongst well-known coursers of their
day can be found the names of Borron, Ridgway,
Sir James Boswell, Sir Piers Mostyn, Capt.
Spencer, G. E. Cooke, A. Graham, and probably
the full list of members for 1878 will give as
strong a membership? as the club has ever had.
The strength, too, of the club in the past is-evi-
denced by the successes gained in the great
matches against ‘the world’ held at Ashdown Park
in 1860 and at Amesbury in 1864. In the former
the contest was confined to the Craven Chal-
lenge Cup, and the club obtained first and second
places, Mr. C. Randell’s Rosy Morn winning
and Lord Sefton’s Sweetbriar* running up. In
the match at Amesbury there were three stakes,
and the club members were first and second in
the bitch puppy Challenge Bracelet and the all-
aged Challenge Cup, whilst ‘the world’ divided
the Challenge Bracelet No. 2, for dog puppies.
The names of the club-winning owners were
C. Randell, G. A. Thompson, T. T. C. Lister,
and W. G. Borron and their dogs respectively,
Rising Star, Theatre Royal, Cheer Boys, and Bit
of Fashion.

? The Duke of Hamilton, the Earls of Sefton, Stair
and Haddington, Earl Grosvenor, Lords Lurgan,
Calthorpe, and Fermoy, Sir T. Metcalfe, bart. and Sir
C. Molyneux, bart., Messrs. R. W. Abbotts, G. T.
Alexander, and R. Anderton, Capt. Archdale. Col.
Bathurst, Messrs. J. Bayly, S. J. Binning, G. Blan-
shard, W. G. Borron, J. Briggs, T. Brocklebank, J.
Brundrit, T. H. Clifton M.P., J. Coulthurst, W. D.
Deighton, M. Fletcher, Col. Goodlake, Messrs. T.
Henderson, E. G. S. Hornby, T. D. Hornby, W.
Irving, R. Jardine, F. Johnston, J. Johnston, A. H.
Jones, W. J. Legh, M.P., 8. C. Lister, T. T. C. Lis-
ter, C. E. Marfleet, W. Mather, D. J. Paterson, L.
Pilkington, T. L. Reed, G. Robinson, T. Stone, J.
R. Thomson, R. C. Vyner, A. Walker, and C. Weld-
Blundell, with C. Randell an honorary member.

5 Sweetbriar, Theatre Royal, and Cheer Boys were
winners over Altcar.

Since these matches took place we find among
others such well-known coursers and their dogs as
G. Robinson and Raphoe, B. H. Jones and Jem
Mace, J. Brundrit and Blue Violet, R. Jardine
and Progress, T. H. Clifton and Canteen, T. D.
Hornby and Handicraft, T. Stone and Stitch in
Time, Lord Haddington and Hornpipe, R. F.
Gladstone and Greentick, Sir W. C. Anstruther
and Anguish, T. Brocklebank and Bacchante as
winners of some of the chief events. During the
last twenty years other names and other dogs can
easily be found, but perhaps we need only note
the great success of Mr. Pilkington and the
Messrs Fawcett. Waterloo Cups, Club Cups,
Members’ Cups and Plate, each have won in
plenty, and as accounting for Mr. Pilkington’s
successes we need only name Burnaby, Thought-
less Beauty and her sons and daughters, Pene-
lope II with Don’t be Headstrong, Jack o’ the
Green, Picnic, and Palmer.

As to the Messrs. Fawcett and their well-
named F.F.’s, space permits no more than a bare
mention of Fabulous Fortune, Fearless Footsteps,
Farndon Ferry, and Father Flint amongst their
many winners.

Their renowned brood bitch, Fair Fortune,
must not be forgotten. One has only to name her
famous litter to Herschel, consisting of Fortuna
Favente, Fair Floralie, First Fortune, Fortune’s
Favourite, and Fabulous Fortune, to see how she
has contributed to the success of the kennel.
In like manner how much in Mr. Pilkington’s
case is due to his little wonder ‘Thoughtless
Beauty. The list of his stud dogs out of her at
the present time : Paracelsus by Under the Globe,
Prince Plausible by Boswell, Pateley Bridge,
Priestlaw, and Prince Charming, all three by
Mellor Moor, makes as interesting reading as the
list of Fair Fortune’s litter above named. In
justice too to Thoughtless Beauty, her daughters,
Pensive and Peerless, should not be forgotten.

It seems certain that the Ridgway Club* can-
not have been formed much after the Altcar,
though from the list of meetings of which returns
are given from 1828 to 1890-91 it seems that it
was not till the December meeting of 1839 that
it was called the Ridgway Club. In the early
days meetings seem to have been held mostly at
Southport, but later the club held three meetings
each season, the first at Lytham in November, the
second at Southport in December, and the third
at Lytham again, in February. This state of
things continued till 1866, from which year
the meetings have been at Lytham. Three
meetings a season continued to be held till
1881-2, when the holding of two meetings, one
in October and the other in January, commenced,
and has since continued. In the history of this
club there is much that is interesting relating to
the coursing over the Southport ground, but here

* A most interesting sketch of this club appears in
the tenth volume of The Greyhound Stud Book.

475

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

we can only quote the details of the patrons and
Ist of members from 1828 to 1832 furnished by
Mr. Borron to the keeper of the Stud Book :—

Patrons.—Sir Hesketh Fleetwood, bart., and
Squire Scarisbrick of Scarisbrick, joint lords of the
manor of Southport. The former kept a large
“kennel of greyhounds at Churchtown and bred from
the bulldog cross. The produce were slow until
the seventh or eighth generation, but possessed
strong spirit and determination. He had a private
club, which dated back to a more remote period
than either Altcar or Ridgway, at North Meols on
his own land, and erected stages for the judge to
stand on. He ran regularly at Ashdown Park and
Newmarket. The squire was a great cross-country
or steeplechase rider, never rode along a public road
if he could avoidit. He left instructions in his will
to be carried to his grave by his tenantry across
country in defiance of hedge, ditch or any other
obstacle, and his request was duly carried out by
his executors, but as the history of Southport relates,
‘with much difficulty and through breaking down
fences and even walls.’ Bold Hoghton, subsequently
a baronet, of Bold Hall near Warrington, and pro-
prietor of Birkdale lands at Southport, supported
the Ridgway either as patron or honorary member.
He preferred cock-fighting to coursing, and was very
antagonistic to Lord Derby in this then fashionable
sport. Sir T. Hesketh of Rufford also patronized
coursing at Ridgway, meetings being held adjoining to
his own lands. He is said to have been the first to
introduce a blue greyhound (reputed to be of Lord
Rivers’ breed) into Lancashire. Another patron was
Mr. Legh of Lyme and Haydock, who gave per-
mission to the club to course over his grounds near
Newton-le-Willows. Names of members—

T. Ridgway of Wallsuches

Jos. Ridgway of Ridgmount

J. Knowles, town clerk of Bolton, secretary
and treasurer

James, Robert and John Smith of Chadwick
Hall, near Tyldesley (the first-named being
vice-president of the club)

— Allanson of Liverpool

E. Allison of Croston Hall, Ormskirk

T. Allison, his brother, of Knotty Ash, Liverpool

— Thompson of Wigan (of racing celebrity,
cock-tailed horses chiefly)

Aaron Lees of Stockport (more given to play
whist than coursing)

Messrs. Bellhouse, two brothers, of Manchester
(capital singers of sporting songs)

— Orrell of Liverpool

— Ackers of Liverpool

Brewer Allan of Manchester (a Scotsman and
for some years amateur judge for the club)

J. Pedder, banker, Preston

S. Horrox, Preston

— Easterby, Preston

G. Andrew, Chorley

Hulton of Hulton, honorary member

Sir T. Hesketh, bart., honorary member

Messrs. Brydson (father and son) of Southport

— Eden of Astley and Lytham (celebrated for
collection of pictures, and a very successful
courser)

Daniel Broadhurst, Manchester (subsequently
stipendiary magistrate for Manchester and
secretary to the club after Mr. Knowles)

— Anderton, Rochdale (had first-class dogs from
Sir Bellingham Graham's breed)

In the foregoing it is interesting to read of
Mr. Knowles and Mr. Broadhurst as successive
secretaries of the club. Probably the latter was
succeeded by Mr. James Bake (for long secretary
of the National Coursing Club), who in 1879
was succeeded by Mr. Percival. Then came
Mr. Mugliston, who has held office for upwards
of a quarter of a century, so equalling, even if
not exceeding, Mr. T. D. Hornby’s tenure of
the secretaryship of the Altcar Club. The
presidents of the club have been Mr. Ridgway,
Mr. Hardman, Mr. B. H. Jones, Mr. T. H.
Clifton, Mr. Mallabey, Mr. C. I. F. Fawcett,
and Mr. G. F. Fawcett holds the office at the
present time. A look through such lists of
members as are available and the returns of the
meetings shows that, like the Altcar Club, the
Ridgway Club has always had the support of the
best coursers of the day. In fact many of the
best supporters of coursing in the three king-
doms have been and are members of these two
Lancashire clubs. The Ridgway Club seems
to have been always generous with its cups and
added prizes—some given by members, some by
honorary members, and others from the funds of
the club. In a copy of the rules for 1859
it is laid down that :-—

The Ridgway Club Challenge Cup shall be run
for at the meeting in December, added to a sweep-
stakes of £3 each. The winner of the cup three
times to be entitled to it. No double nomination
to be allowed.

The rule for the Crinoline Stakes ordains
that—

This stake added to a sweepstakes of {£3 each,
shall be run for at the meeting in December. The
winner of the stake three times to be entitled to the
picture of ‘The Morning of the Twelfth,’ most
liberally presented by G. F. Cooke, Esq., to the
Ridgway Club. No double nomination allowed.
The picture shall be deposited at the house where
the club meet, and remain there as the pro-
perty of the club, until finally won. The name of
the winning dog each year shall be placed under-
neath the picture.

Then follows the Champion Collar—

This stake added to a sweepstakes of £5 each
(single nomination). The winner of the Stakes
to retain the collar until won by some other
member, unless called in by the members by a
resolution at a general meeting; to be run for
annually at the meeting in February.

The Champion Collar appears to have been
first run for in 1863 at the Southport meeting
in December, and won by Lord Sefton’s Sampler.

476

SPORT ANCIENT

The Crinoline Picture Stakes was run at the
Southport meeting in December 1860, and won
by Mr. Peacock’s Penrith, and the Challenge
Cup at the Southport meeting in December
1861, when Mr. Spink’s Sea Pink won. What
the end of these prizes has been we can-
not say : unfortunately all the documents and
books belonging to the club went astray or
were destroyed when the secretaryship of the
club passed from Mr. Bake to Mr. Percival.
From 1863 onwards we find such owners and
their dogs as Campbell and Coodaveena, Blan-
shard and Boanerges, Johnston and Fieldfare,
Brundrit and Barlochaw, Legh and Lobelia,
Brocklebank and Brigade, Jones and Jolly Greer,
Lord Binning and Bendimere, Briggs and
Blarney, Carruthers and Contango, Anderton
and Amity, Jardine and Mentor, Brisco and
Ben-y-lair, Stone and Skittles, Pilkington and
Penelope II., Russel and Restorer, Jones and
Jolly Colleen, Col. North and Troughend,
Fletcher and Fine Sport at the finish of good
stakes ; and during the last fifteen years the
Messrs. Fawcett have made their- mark at
Lytham even more strongly than at Altcar. So
much of the later coursing must be fresh in
the minds of all that we need scarcely continue
to show in detail how the Ridgway Club has
for years run—so to speak—alongside of the
Altcar, and does so to-day.

The only inclosed coursing this county has
indulged in was at Haydock Park. This took
place over the ground on which the Ridgway
Club held their meeting in 1832. Just fifty years
later we find Alec Halliday, the property of Mr.
G. J. Alexander, a member of both Altcar and
Ridgway Clubs, winning the Haydock Park
Cup, and repeating the process in the following
year; and we meet with great greyhounds such
as Greentick, Gay City and Delvin, Herschel
and Huic Halloa, Simonian and Young Fuller-
ton at the end of the principal stakes run for
during the time such coursing lasted. “Though
of the best of its kind genuine coursers never
really took to the sport afforded, and doubtless
most owners preferred coursing in the open as
giving any kind of dog some chance. Anyhow,
inclosed coursing has entirely gone out at Hay-
dock Park, as, with one or two exceptions, at
other places of the same kind. Few sportsmen
will be found to regret its disappearance. In-
closure coursing may be very well for trials,
a meeting for puppies early in the season or a
meeting for fast bad dogs at the end of the
season; but asa help towards the maintenance
or improvement of the breed of greyhoundsand
the sport of coursing it is of little use. Per-
haps the only excuse for its trial may have been
the idea that it might take the place of meetings
abandoned or given up in consequence of the
Ground Game Act.

In the year 1840 there seems to have been a

AND MODERN

South Lancashire club holding five meetings, in-
cluding one at Chatsworth which was abandoned
on account of snow. This club in1842 again had
five meetings: at Chatsworth, Southport, Fleet-
wood on Wyre, Southport, and Broughton near
Skipton. This appearsto indicate that the club had
invitations to course in counties other than its own. -
Coursing was very general in the Southport and
Lytham districts, and meetings such as the Game-
keepers’ Day with the Publicans’ Puppy Cup are
found taking place at Southport in December,
1842, and after many meetings at Lytham in the
1844-5 season the last one in March is called
the Lytham Finisher. As far back as 1838 great
stakes were run for at Southport, and it is written
of a dog called Sultan, a winner of the All Eng-
land Stakes of 178 dogs at Southport in that year,
after running for the Gold Snuff Box for 8 runners
at Tarleton in December 1842—

Sultan won his course but was found dead. By
running so extremely well in his old age that fine gal-
lant old dog was thought sure to win the Gold
Snuff Box ; but in his second course for it, which he
ran in superior style, he was so exhausted by the
length and severity of it, that he was found dead by
his owner and a friend who first got to him; yet in
his last gasp of breath, when he could not kill the hare
by his grips he secured her by laying his fore foot or
feet upon her and in that state was found dead—nobly
doing his duty to the last moment.

Reference to coursing at Southport reminds us
of the Scarisbrick Cups of 128 dogs, run in
former times under the auspices of Mr. Stocker,
and later of Mr. Pont, who was lessee of the
shooting. Of course, such a programme was
all against getting the running on the best
ground, and many a long tramp was necessary
to complete it. Nevertheless, among the com-
petitors were to be found many of the best
greyhounds of the day, the best of all over the
ground being, perhaps, the famous Bab-at-the-
Bowster.

Probably the South Lancashire coursing meet-
ings of to-day, held at Southport, are second to
none. Excellent ground, good management
and the best of hares are provided, and if the
dogs are good enough, sport is assured. In
the season 1847-8 we find a large but curious
programme at the Lytham Spring Champion meet-
ing, viz., three cups for 48 dogs each, a Veteran
Stakes for 16, a cup for 16 and two Sapling
Stakes, one for 4 and the other for 3. The
Liverpool Union Club comes on the scene in the
1848-9 season, holding some half dozen meetings
a year, the majority at Ince Blundell. Since the
days of this club there have been very pleasant
meetings at Ince Blundell with a suitable pro-
gramme, as there have also been over Lord Derby’s
Bickerstaffe estate. Many other meetings might
be named, and we need only add that their success
has been due to the support derived from Liver-
pool and Manchester gentlemen, who seem to

477

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

pe ever ready to find greyhounds to run at them.
A perusal of the lists of members of the Altcar
Club for the years 1852 and 1855 shows that of
forty-six members in each year considerably
more than half were of Liverpool and Man-
chester and the immediate neighbourhood.

Of the officials well known in connexion
with the sport we must name first John Bell,
a famous flag steward, secretary of the South-
port Coursing meeting and assistant secretary of
the Waterloo meeting. His was a welcome
and familiar figure on many a coursing field.
So too is that of Ellis Jolly,* of late years and still
either flag or slip steward and previously interested
in the training of Mr. Briggs’ s dogs.

Next we may mention the brothers Booti-
man: Tom for years a slipper of renown and
now acting at times with his brother John as flag
or slip steward.

Of the trainers of earlier days Sandy Grant,
who trained the Earl of Haddington’s greyhounds,
John Irven, for years trainer for Sir Thomas
Brocklebank, his brother, Joe Irven, who trained
for Mr. H. Jefferson, the owner of Judge,
Java, Imperatrice, and others, J. Weaver, trainer
for Mr. Randell, and Amos Ogden, trainer for
Mr. B. H. Jones and later for the Earl of Sefton,
were notable men. J. Deans, the trainer of
Bab-at-the-Bowster, is still alive and well. As
a link between the past and present let us name
Archie Coke and his son John—with what
good dogs and great successes have they not
been identified! At the present time the many
successes of Mr. Pilkington and the Messrs.
Fawcett stamp the Wright family (Jack, Joe,
and Tom, with Robert, now a slipper) as great
trainers. Of slippers, so far as Lancashire is
concerned, we need only name the Wilkinson
family, though Tom Bootiman, and Raper of a
still earlier time, who was the finest slipper we

"ever saw, must not be forgotten.

Lastly we come to judges, and as the Waterloo
covers the other meetings in this respect we will
only name Messrs. Nightingale, McGeorge, and
Dalzell as the principal ones till the time of Mr.
Warwick, who judged the Waterloo from 1861
to 1873. He was succeeded by Mr. Hedley, who
judged for years, and it is needless to write here
of the great reputation he so justly earned. He
was succeeded by Mr. R. A. Brice, who has
filled the position for some years with the
greatest success. Judging from the ladder is
still the custom at Southport and some other
meetings. It used to be so at Lytham too not
so very long ago, and it is fortunate for all
concerned that nowadays there is not often need
to discard the horse.

*Ttis only recently that Jolly has given up wearing
clogs, and he will probab’y never forget the day when,
shortly after taking to boots, he came out with two
right-foot boots instead of a pair, and had to hobble
about all day with a wrong boot on a wrong foot.

In bringing these notes on Lancashire coursing
to a conclusion we must say a few words about
Lancashire greyhounds, or such as have been
very successful in Lancashire. To quote from
‘ Stonehenge ’—

Intended for a totally different country to that
of Newmarket or Wiltshire, the Lancashire grey-
hound has been bred exclusively for the plains of
Altcar and Lytham. Here it is not only necessary
that the dog shall be fast to his game, but he must
also be high enough on his legs to see it while
running at one hundred yards distance and up to his
elbows in high stubble, as is often the case at
Lytham. Much has therefore been sacrificed to size
and speed, even more than at Newmarket ; and, as
the judge is generally unable to follow the course
on horseback, the first point is often all that is seen
by him.

And again—

Still even taking the last ten years, the Lanca-
shire blood has been greatly triumphant on its own
peculiar ground, and the success of Cerito alone in
having thrice won the Waterloo Cup, must stamp
this strain as well fitted for the plains of Altcar.

Blacklock, Dressmaker, Titania, and Cerito
are all considered to be of pure Lancashire
blood, and of the last it has been written in
Altcar Coursing Club, 1825-87 :—

As an Altcar greyhound Cerito must be held to
have been in the front rank, for in addition to her
three Waterloo Cups we find she won two Altcar
Cups, and in the year she suffered defeat in the
Waterloo Cup ran second to Dalton for the Altcar
Stakes, which at that time occupied the same position
as the Purse now does.

Altogether Cerito won twenty-six courses over
Altcar and was twice beaten. At the time
she won her last Waterloo she gained great
praise for a performance which was at the
time considered wonderful ; but good though
it was, it has since been eclipsed by Master
McGrath and Fullerton. Of the dogs owned
or bred by Sir Thomas Brocklebank Clarina,
who in her day won two eights, a sixteen, and a
four, besides getting into the last four in a thirty-
two in a season ; Britomart, winner of the first
Members’ Plate for thirty-two dogs as well as
other stakes; and Border Boy, who won a
good many courses consecutively, must certainly
be called Lancashire greyhounds; and later
Briar, her daughter Bacchante by Reveller I],
and her grandchildren by Cavalier out of
Bacchante—Beeswing, Brown Stout, and Beer,
the latter a divider of a couple of Craven
Cups at Ashdown Park—might also be con-
sidered Lancashire greyhounds. The kennels of
Lord Sefton and Mr. B. H. Jones produced
many winners, of which we may name Sack-
cloth, the sisters Jeannie Deans, Jenny Coxon,
and Jenny Denison, Sampler, Jeopardy, and

478

SPORT ANCIENT

others which without doubt are Lancashire
greyhounds,

We may conclude by mentioning the in-
teresting fact that the Altcar Club has in the
present Countess of Sefton its first lady member,
and all hope that the victories of Submarine and

AND MODERN

others may be speedily followed and a substantial
addition made to the Croxteth successes of old.
Though a Waterloo Cup nominator her ladyship
is not the first lady nominator. In the Waterloo
Cup of 1857, won by King Lear, Miss M.

Borron held a nomination and ran Blackness.

RACING

FLAT RACING

The first mention that we have found of
racing in Lancashire is in the diary of Nicholas
Blundell of Great Crosby—

April 3rd, 1704, I saw a race on Crossby marsh,
between Mr. Hay’s mair, and a horse of Mr.
Molyneux, him of Liverpool.

Again on 1 July the same year he was present
at races at Great Crosby. Another extract from
the same diary reads—

I went to Crossby races, there were five starters for
the plate. A mair of Maikins of Prescot won it.

The same year he went to Knowsley Park,
where he saw a Galloway race, which was won
by a horse belonging to Lord Derby. There are
records of horse races held at Lancaster in
1764, and at Preston Moor in 1765, and the
following is the programme of races at Newton

in 1753 :—

On 11 June a gold cup of £50 value was run for
on Golborne Heath near Newton, for horses
carrying 12st. and won by the Hon. J. S. Barry’s
Foxhunter.

On 12 June £50 were run for free for any horse
carrying weight for age, viz. four years old, 8st.;
five years, 9st.; six years, 1ost.; full aged, 11 st.
The winner was the Hon. J. S. Barry’s Fearnought,
six years.

On 13 June £50 were run for, horses of 14
hands carrying g st. and all above or under weight
for inches. ‘This race was won by Mr. Hudson’s
White Nose.

The Newton course was a triangular one,
about one mile two furlongs round, with a
straight flat of nearly half a mile. The
Golborne Cup course was five furlongs.

There were also races at Heaton Park. The first
meeting held there was in September 1827, and
was limited to two days; in the year 1829 the
meeting was extended to three days. The last
meeting at Heaton was held in 1838, when
a cup, value 200 sovs. presented by the town
of Manchester, was offered for competition.
Prior to 1835 only gentlemen riders, who

‘were members of some racing or fox-hunting
club, were allowed to compete ; after this year
however, professional riders were allowed, and
tickets for admission were dispensed with,

all decent people being allowed to enter the
grounds.

Manchester Races were started in 1730, and
run at Kersal Moor. ‘They were discontinued
in 1745 for fifteen years, but in 1760 they were
firmly established, and meetings took place on
the same site till 1846. In 1792 there was
four days’ racing, and the stake was 100 sovs. ;
the following year racing for five days was com-
menced, the stake being run for in_ heats.
Between 1795 and 1804 there were two prizes
daily, and between 1805 and 1815 heats,
instead of being the rule, were mingled with
single races in equal proportion. In 1816 a
gold cup appears for the first time on the pro-
gramme, and was won by Mr. Rushton’s grey
colt Friend Ned, ridden by M. Noble. In 1819
a grand stand was built and a second gold cup,
value 100 guineas, added.

On 26 May 1847 the first race took place on
the new course on the low flat ground surrounded
by the River Irwell. In 1849 heats ceased at
the Whitsuntide meeting, then meetings con-
tinued there till 1885. A new course was
constructed in 1886 under the auspices of the
Manchester Racecourse Company in the borough
of Salford on 120 acres of the Castle Irwell
estate on level landin rear of the militia barracks.
The course is a right-hand one, 1% miles in
circumference, but its width is very narrow.
T.Y.C. is six furlongs straight and joins the
round course about the five-furlong post. The
Manchester meeting brings the flat-racing season
to a close, and the last important race in the
year is the Manchester November Handicap.

The Manchester Cup was first offered in .
1834, and was won by Giovanni. There were
five runners only. In the year 1842 there was
no race for the cup, and in the years 1844,
1862, 1864, and 1870 there were only three
runners. ‘The year 1864 was a memorable one,
for though there were but three starters the cup
was only won after a dead heat between Trust
and Old Minster, Trust eventually winning
the run off. The cup course is 14 miles.

The Haydock Park course is a left-hand oval,
of about one mile and five furlongs in circum-
ference, six furlongs being straight. It is of
very old pasture and of fine quality for racing.
It is situated about 14 miles from Newtown, and
nearly midway between Liverpool and Man-
chester.

479

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

Liverpool meetings are held at Aintree, near
Liverpool. When the Queen’s plates were
reduced in number and increased in value to
two hundred sovs. notice was given by the
Master of the Horse, that until further orders
they would be given in alternate years at Liver-
pool and Manchester.

The course at Aintree 1s a left-hand oval of
one mile three furlongs and one hundred yards
—on the far side of the course the ground
gently declines, and on the near side rises from
the canal to the winning post. The cup course
is one mile and three furlongs in length, and
there is a straight run-in of about one thousand
yards. The Anchor Bridge course is six fur-
longs ; and a new five-furlong course was opened
in November 1907.

The Liverpool meetings are famous for the
cups which are run for in spring, summer, and
autumn. The oldest is the Summer Cup, insti-
tuted in 1828, in which year it was won by
Jupiter from seven other runners. ‘The Spring
Cup, first offered in 1848, when it was won by
Mr. Blades’ Ballinaford, is a handicap sweep-
stake of fifteen sovs. each—ten forfeit, and five
only if declared, with a cup or £100 added at
the option of winner, and subscribed by the
licensed victuallers of Liverpool and their
friends. The Autumn Cup was instituted in
1856, and was won by Maid of Derwent.

Lord Derby’s stable always lays itself out to
win these cups, and very well it has succeeded,
the stable having carried off no fewer than eleven
cups in the last eleven years. Once in that
period only has Lord Derby won the Autumn
Cup, when in 1898 he did so with Alt Mark.
Lord Stanley and Lord Farquhar however won
it in 1897 with Chislehampton ; in 1898 the
stable won both the Spring and Summer Cups,
and in 1902 repeated the performance. Since
the year 1893 they have won seventy-four
races on this course, the smallest number for the
year being two in 1899, and the greatest nine
in IgOl.

STEEPLECH ASING

In the year 1836 Mr. Lynn, the proprietor of
the Waterloo Hotel and a keen sportsman, con-
ceived the idea that steeplechasing in Liverpool
would be a good speculation financially. After
consultation with some friends Mr. Lynn laid
out a course partly over the flat race-course at
Maghull (some 24 miles from the present
course) and partly over some adjoining land.
The first great steeplechase in Lancashire was
advertised to take place on 29 February 1836.
There were two jump races, and the big race,
which was then unnamed, was won by The
Duke ridden by Captain Becher. This race was
twice round a two-mile course, and was a sweep-
stake of 10 sovs. each with 80 sovs. added ; the
winner to be sold for 200 sovs.

In 1837 the race was won again by The
Duke, ridden by Mr. Potts. There were only
six starters, and the favourite, an Irish horse by
name Dan O’Connel, started an odds-on chance,
He did not however complete the course. In
1838 the race was still run on the course at
Maghull, but 1839 saw great changes. The
meeting passed out of the private ownership of
Mr. Lynn, and the present Aintree course was
instituted.

A syndicate was formed, with a property of
one thousand shares,! the trustees being Lord
Stanley, Sir T. M. Stanley, Messrs. W. Blundell,
J. Aspinall, and Earle, with a £25 share each;
the committee of the syndicate was comprised as
follows :—the Earls of Derby, Sefton and Eglin-
ton and Winton, Lord Grosvenor, Lord Stanley,
and Lord George Bentinck, Sir John Gerard,
Sir T. Massey Stanley and Sir R. W. Bulkeley,
the Hon. E. N. Lloyd-Mostyn, and Mr. E. G.
Hornby. These gentlemen had the fixing of all
races, while a third body, called the directors,
elected from a general meeting of the subscribers,
managed the race-course and its finance.

The first great steeplechase took place on the
present course on 24 February 1839, and was
won by Mr. Elinore’s Lottery, ridden by
J. Mason. ‘There were seventeen starters.

In 1840 Lord Sefton was begged to make one
of the obstacles on the course a stone wall, so as
to encourage the Irish owners. ‘This his lordship
consented to do on condition that an ox-fence were
put up to give the Leicestershire horses a chance.

In 1842 the winner was Gay Lad, ridden by
T. Oliver. In this race not one of the fifteen
starters fell, a record which never yet has been
beaten, nor is it likely that it ever will be.

After this race one of the jumps became known
as ‘Becher’s Brook.’ It is the sixth and thirty-
second obstacle, and consists of a thorn fence
spruced 4 ft. 11 in. high, and 3 ft. wide, and a
breast rail 2 ft. high, with a ditch on the far side
6 ft. wide and 3 ft.deep. Captain Becher was
riding Conrad, and seems to have made the run-
ning from the start. However the first time
round, his mount never rose at this jump, which
he broke through and tumbled into the ditch ;
Lottery and two or three other horses jumped
over the horse and his jockey, luckily missing
them. ‘The weight for the race had, up to this
date, been fixed at 12 st. but in 1843 it
became a handicap, and was called ‘ The Lan-
cashire and National Steeplechase.’ In that year
T. Oliver again rode the winner, Vanguard,
carrying 11st. 10 lb, In 1847 Mathew, the
favourite, was the first Irish horse to win the
race. ‘The starters for the Grand National have
never fallen below ten, except in 1883, Zoedone’s
year. In 1850, to take the other extreme, no
less than thirty-two faced the flag.

This is an interesting fact to note, because it was
the first proprietary race-course to be organized.

480

SPORT ANCIENT AND MODERN

The present National course is twice round
the Aintree course, making a total length of
about 44 miles, and the competitors have to take
fourteen of the jumps twice, the water and the
open ditch being taken only once during the
race. Altogether there are thirty obstacles to be
negotiated before the winning-post is reached,
and the severity of the course is shown by the
fact that, out of the great number of starters,
those that finish may usually be counted on the
fingers of two hands.

There are several things worth recording in
connexion with the Grand National Steeple-
chase, and they may be stated briefly. No horse
has ever won more than twice. Of these there
are only five, and two of this number have won
in successive years, namely Abd-el-Kader in 1850
and 1851, and The Colonel in 1869 and 1870.
Mr. J. G. Bulteel’s Manifesto won the race
twice, and besides doing this he no less than
three times finished in the first three ; the last
time he ran he was seventeen years old. Of the
riders who have won more than twice G. Stevens
heads the list with five wins, and on two occasions
he rode the winner in successive years, in 1863
and 1864, and in 186g and 1870. The race in
1907 is noteworthy for the fine performance of
A. Newey, the rider of Eremon, the winner.
Going into the country for the second round he
had the misfortune to lose a stirrupleather. This
was caused by a riderless horse which interfered
with him for the rest of the race, and ultimately
finished almost with him. When one looks at
the enormous jumps, and remembers that owing
to the riderless horse he had to take most of the
jumps sideways, one is able to estimate this great
achievement at its full value.

The Grand National Steeplechase is worth
3,000 sovs, including a trophy value
125 sovs. It is a handicap for five-year-

olds and upwards. The conditions of the race
were a little altered in 1906, and they now read
as follows :—‘ A winner, after publication of the
weights (last Tuesday in January), of a handicap
steeplechase of three miles and a half or over, to
carry 4 lb, extra ; no penalties for horses originally
handicapped in this race at 11st. or over.’

Before this, horses handicapped at 12 st. or
over were exempt, and in 1907 the race was run
for the first time under the new condition. It
wasa good move, as owners now are not afraid to
enter their horses for other ’chases, knowing that
in the event of winning no extra penalty will be
incurred, if they were originally in for the
National at 11 st. or over.

The Great Lancashire Steeplechase, which is
run at Manchester, is a very different race from
the Grand National; the distance is 34 miles,
and the jumps are not nearly so stiff.

The Manchester course is more a galloping
course than Aintree, and it is the exception in-
stead of the rule, as at Aintree, for horses to fall.
This is a course that is more suited to horses
which, so to speak, chance their fences, and this
is probably the reason why Grand National
horses do not do well here. Several of them are
seen out for the race, and amongst the number
generally the National winner; yet only twice
in the history of the race has the Aintree hero
proved successful.

In 1907 Eremon won the Lancashire Steeple-
chase with almost as much ease as he did the
Grand National. It was very strange to see the
horse jumping this course after seeing him per-
form at Aintree. ‘There he took his fences as
if he understood that a touch meant disaster, but
at Manchester he brushed through his jumps,
as if he knew he could do so with impunity.
The only other horse to win the dual distinction
was Ilex in the year 1890.

POLO

The game of polo is but little played in Lan-
cashire, and of the only two clubs in existence,
the Liverpool and the Manchester, the latter has
now joined forces with the Bowdon Club, whose
ground isin Cheshire. The Liverpool Club was
founded by the late Mr. Hugh Gladstone in the
autumn of 1872, when poloin England was still
in its infancy. The officers of the regiment
stationed in those days at Liverpool took no little
interest in the game, and played at Childwall on
the ground of the Liverpool Polo Club. Some
of the officers were included in the teams that
the Liverpool Club sent to Lillie Bridge when
that place was looked on as the head quarters of
polo. After a few years, however, the polo-spirit
waned, and the Liverpool Club ceased to exist,
though a few of the members kept the game alive
at Lark Hill.

In 1885, however, the club rose phoenix-like
from its ashes, and to Mr. W. Lee Pilkington, its
secretary for many years after, the present
Liverpool Polo Club owes its renaissance.
The idea originated at a dinner at the Liverpool
Racquet Club. ‘The terms of a match between
two ponies were being discussed, when Mr,
Pilkington suggested that the polo club should
be restarted. Several of those present fell in
with the proposal, and he, knowing that no
time was like the present, took down the names
of those acquiescing, and the existence of the
Liverpool Polo Club was a fait accompli. The
club since those days has prospered greatly, and
is now the largest county club in England.

It now consists of fifty members, to which
number it is limited, but besides these there are
over two hundred honorary members who pay

2 481 61

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

a yearly subscription of one guinea each. The
club ground at Childwall is fairly level and is
laid in such a way that close inside the boards the
turf is slightly raised. This prevents the ball
from hanging on the board, and causes it to roll
back into play, a most excellent system which
might be copied everywhere. The length of
the ground is 255 yards and its width 127 yards.
There is a splendid ladies’ pavilion arranged with
a balcony, from which an excellent view of the
play can be obtained; there is also a members’
pavilion fitted with dressing rooms, and other
conveniences, and seats on the roof; attached

to the pavilion and in prolongation of the line
there are extensive stablings. The Liverpool
Polo Club has sent a team annually to play for
the County Cup at Hurlingham, winning in
1891, and getting into the finals in 1892, and
1897, and the semi-final in 1905. The club
plays many home and out matches, and has annual
fixtures with Wirral, Edinburgh, and Bowdon.

The polo club started a most successful pony
race meeting in 1885, and now also annually
holds a gymkhana meeting on the ground at
Childwall. There is a show in connexion with
the club.

SHOOTING

The shooting in this county of great contrasts
is perhaps the most varied in the British Isles.
In the south the country is flat and highly
cultivated, and game of all sorts can be seen on
the stubble. North of Preston, however, the
scene changes. On the right of a line going in
the direction of Lancaster the country becomes
wild, with endless moors and Bleasdale in the
distance ; on the left the land though cultivated
is broken with great woods and _ coppices.
Farther north again, in the Lake district, we get
amongst the hills and broad stretches of moor-
land.

Lancashire is not of course able to compete
with the more famous eastern counties of
England in the numbers of game killed, yet if
we deduct from the total acreage of the county
the huge manufacturing cities, the mining
districts, and those parts where mills abound, it
is probable that the county can show as good
an average head of game per acre as any in
England.

The principal moors in the county are
Abbeystead, Grass Yard, Bleasdale, Anglezarke,
and Towneley Moors; in addition to these
there are several smaller moors, of about a
thousand acres or so, among which we may
name Tatham Fells, Claughton, Pendle Hill,
and Boulsworth, where excellent sport can be
obtained. There are a few mosses still left
in the county, which though barely above the
level of the sea, yet hold grouse. There
are two, Rixton and Holcroft, within only a
few miles of Manchester, on which grouse are
still to be found, though of course not in any
numbers.

The Abbeystead Moor, about six miles south-
east of the town of Lancaster, is the biggest and
the best moor in the county. It is about eight
thousand acres in extent, and was brought by
the late Lord Sefton from Mr. Garnett of
Wyreside, for the sum of £110,000. This
moor used to yield about a bird to two acres,
and a total head of game of 5,000, which is

a wonderfully good record. Contrary to all
expectations, the moor was improved in_ its
grouse-carrying capacity by the drainage opera-
tions of the Lancaster Corporation, an indi-
cation that though grouse like moisture, they
do not care fora water-logged ground. ‘Towne-
ley Moor yields about fifteen hundred brace in a
good season.

Anglezarke Moor, two miles east of Chorley,
is a good one ; and in a good season between
four hundred and fifty and five hundred brace
have been shot here. ‘This moor now belongs
to the Corporation of Liverpool, and is let toa
syndicate ; it is 1,050 acres in extent. The
adjoining moor of Rivington, also the property
of the Corporation, was a good little moor, but
as far as grouse shooting is concerned it is now
ruined by the drives and walks which have been
cut across it in various directions.

Bleasdale, situated about six miles east of
Garstang, is the property of Mr. William Garnett
of Quernmore Park, and consists almost entirely
of moorland, the moor being over 5,000 acres
in extent. The record bag of grouse in one
season for this moor is 1,600 brace, but the
average bag for the season works out at about
1,300 brace,

Unfortunately old records are not to be
obtained, though some go back nearly one
hundred years. Lancashire shootings as a rule
are not very extensive, yet there are many small
shoots, on which many enjoyable days are spent
and excellent mixed bags are taken. Let us
take a small one, Holcroft, perhaps one of the
best in the south of the county, as an example.
This shoot is 1,700 acres in extent, but it carries
every description of game with the exception of
black game. It is situated about eight miles
from Manchester, and seven from Warrington,
and though the neighbourhood has an evil
reputation the shoot suffers but little from
poachers, owing to the fact that the farmers
take so keen an interest in legitimate sport that
they practically act as keepers. About three

482

SPORT ANCIENT

hundred acres of this shoot consists of heather
land, or, as it is termed in Lancashire, a moss,
Through the middle of this moss runs a railway,
and although it is not fifty feet above sea level
yet grouse are found on it. The grouse are fine
healthy birds, and sickness has not yet been
known here; the best bag for one day is fifteen
brace. The heather is never systematically burnt,
and the occasional fires are caused by the sparks
of a passing engine. The remainder of the
land is devoted to potatoes and clover, the
fields running between fifteen and twenty
acres, with only the merest apology for hedges
dividing them. The Ground Game Act has
not affected the head of game killed. Partridges
are particularly fond of this land, and the record
bag of 103 brace to four guns speaks very well
for it; as the hedges are so small, driving is out
of the question, and all the birds obtained are
got by walking them up. The only covert is
on the moss, and about two hundred birds are
put down annually, yet the average bag of
pheasants for the season works out at 350, and
not many shoots can show such a return for so
small an outlay. Besides the birds already
mentioned, snipe, woodcock, wild duck and
green plover are shot here; occasionally golden
plover are obtained, but they are very scarce.
Rabbits swarm, and the average number of hares
killed in the season is about four hundred. The
great charm of this little shoot lies in the varied
bag obtained. On one day in 1905, partridges,
pheasants, green plover, snipe, woodcock, hares
and rabbits, with one golden plover, were killed.

At Newton-le-Willows, another small shoot
in the south of the county, no pheasants are put
down, yet in several years the present writer has
been at the death of over one hundred and fifty
pheasants in the day, all of them really good
birds. Hares are very numerous, and run toa
very large size ; one has only to go near Altcar,
and see the beating up of the hares for the
Waterloo Cup, to get an idea of their remark-
able numbers.

The first shoot of importance in the south is
that of Hale! near Liverpool. It consists of 5,000
acres, and belongs to Colonel Ireland Blackburne,
C.B. The crops are nearly all potatoes, and the
hedges are very fairly respectable in size. A few
days early in the season are devoted to walking up
the partridges, but from October onward driving
is the order of the day; some of these drives
are rather long ones, in order to get as many
hares in as possible. Huge flocks of golden

1Tt was at Hale that the writer saw an answer
to the vexed question whether driven partridges or
pheasants are the faster. It was about the middle
of October, and a drive for the little brown birds was
taking place. A covey was seen coming from some
distance, and after they had been travelling some time a
cock pheasant got up behind them ; he, however, came
over the guns first.

AND MODERN

plovers are often seen, but not many pay toll,
for like their common relative they are too
wary to come within shot. ‘The average bag of
pheasants for the last twenty years works out at
about two thousand, cocks and hens being very
fairly divided.

The largest covert on this estate, that of Mill
Wood, takes more than half the day to shoot;
the birds as a rule come fast and high, but there
is one famous beat which is generally the
third in the wood ; the guns and beaters first
walk in line, and on coming to a drive cut
through the wood the guns stop, and the beaters,
who have already drawn out on coming to a
stream some fifty yards in rear of the drive, are
sent to the end of the covert, and the birds are
driven back over the guns. Here one gets
pheasants coming as fast and as thick as heart
could want; but the shooting is by no means
easy, for the trees are high and very numerous,
and the openings between them but small.
Another good covert is the Old Plantation, but
it is difficult to show the birds well, owing to the
excessive undergrowth.

As a rule the hares killed in the season come
to about seven hundred odd, though in 1906-7
over eight hundred were obtained. ‘The total
bag for the season ranges between six and seven
thousand. The Ground Game Act has prac-
tically made no difference to the bag.

Another good shoot is that at Speke, which
adjoins Hale. ‘The hares here are even more
numerous than they are on Colonel Black-
burne’s estate, but in a way it is not such
a good sporting property as Hale, owing per-
haps to its being too neatly farmed. Birds
do not love too well-brushed hedges. Another
typical small shoot in the county is that of
Winmarleigh, about six miles from Preston.
Here no big bags are made, but the average
works out at about three thousand head for the
season. Excellent sport, however, is had with
the rabbits, and in the season 1889-90 2,772
were killed. Hares are not nearly so numerous
in this part of the county as in the south-west,
and the yearly total only averages about two
hundredand twenty. ‘There is a mention in the
game records of one wild goose killed here in
1891.

Lytham, the property of Mr. John Talbot
Clifton, was at one time one of the best
sporting estates in the county, but the head of
game obtained has diminished of late years.
The total area of the estate is some 16,000
acres, but various outlying beats have for many
years been left off, and there is no authentic
record of the game killed on these beats. The
home shootings are 10,270 acres in extent, of
which about 400 acres are covert; this shoot
has been let since 1894. The wild pheasants
are few, and the number killed depends almost
entirely on hand-reared birds. During the

483

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

years from 1856 to 1887 many more rabbits
were slain than are shown in the game book, as
only those killed on shooting days are entered ;
as many as 20,000 rabbits were killed in one
season in traps, wires, &c. The reduction in
numbers is due to the loss of the Sandhills
for sporting purposes, as these were formerly a
large warren. The Ground Game Act has
never affected the shooting on this estate ; the
tenants have always behaved well and, owing
to the good feeling which has always existed
between them and the Clifton family, have
seldom if ever availed themselves of their rights
under the Act.

The game book has been carefully kept since
1856, and that year shows a total of 12,196 head,
but this probably includes trapped rabbits, as the
numbers read 9,250 rabbits. The best total
bag of game shot at Lytham appears by the
records to have been 12,162, of which 2,756
were pheasants, obtained in the season 1893-4.
We learn from the same source that the season
1859-60 was the best for partridges, the total
bag being 1,652; in no other season has the
total reached 1,000 birds—never, indeed, during
the last ten years (with the exception of 1901-2,
when 589 partridges were killed) have more
than 357 been obtained in one season. This
reduction is principally due to the growth of
building on the estate, as the Sandhills and
much of the land adjoining, which was in
former days the best partridge ground, is to-day
either covered with buildings or occupied by golf
courses, and thus rendered useless for sporting
purposes. Another reason for the reduced
head of partridges is that a large area of land
formerly under cultivation is now laid down in
grass.

The Lytham estate was till quite recently
famous for its large stock of hares, the largest
number killed being in the season 1893-4,
when no less than 1,756 were accounted for.
Owing to a disease of a most serious nature,
which first made its appearance in 1902 and
spread through the stock, it has been found
necessary to reduce the stock very materially, as
being the only effectual means of stamping out
the disease.

Very good shooting is obtained over the Earl
of Lathom’s property, which is about 43 miles
from Ormskirk. This estate is about 5,000
acres in extent, and of this a little more than
500 acres consists of coverts, the largest of
which, known as Spa Roughs, is 368 acres in
extent with a length of about three miles. It
lies about three-quarters of a mile from Lathom
House, and extends along the whole of the
eastern side of the park. ‘The next best covert
is the Beacon Covert on Dalton Hill, so named
from the beacon to which it is quite close.
There are many other smaller coverts in which
excellent sport can be obtained. ‘This shoot is

most excellently situated as regards its accessibility,
no part of it being more than four miles away
from the house; the most distant coverts are
those at Dalton.

The partridges at Ormskirk are not so nume-
rous as they once were; the land which was
formerly under cultivation being now laid for
grass, birds are not able to get the same amount
of food. The record bag of partridges was made
in the season 1867-8. In this season on one
day 100 brace were shot by three guns, and the
birds were all obtained by walking them up.

Although this is the record for one day’s
sport, yet the season of 1897-8 heads the list of
partridges killed, the number being 896. At
the present time the partridge bag averages
from 400 to 500.

The number of pheasants killed depends
chiefly on the number reared, as there are not
many wild birds at Ormskirk. The pheasants
on this estate require a deal of stopping, and
from the fact of the guns being well placed
away from the coverts, and the trees being lofty,
the birds give really high sporting shots. The
best stand in the covert shoots is that known as
the High Rise in the Spa Roughs. The guns
and beaters in line make a turning movement
until a place called The Trenches is reached,
when the beaters are drawn out, and the guns
placed ; the beaters then fetch all the birds back
from the end of the wood over the guns. The
birds come well over the tops of the trees, and
on seeing the guns give an awkward curl which
makes the killing of them very difficult.

On looking through the records in the game
book, which has been most carefully kept since
1869, it is noticed that the record bag for the
three days’ covert shoot was made in November
1904, when 4,492 head of game were killed,
of which number 4,032 were pheasants. This
bag was made in spite of the fact that on the
third day the wind was blowing a gale, and the
only way to obtain the pheasants was to beat the
coverts in the opposite direction, which wasdirectly
off Lord Lathom’s land, and this meant that over
500 birds were lost. The season of 1904-5 also
shows the largest results of game killed, the
total obtained being 10,225 head; the fol-
lowing season shows almost as good an average,
though the total killed only realized 7,667, yet
in this season three beats had been given up.
Hares are very numerous on the estate, and the
records show that between fourteen and fifteen
hundred are accounted for in a season.

Particulars of the Knowsley and Croxteth
shoots have, we regret to say, not been obtainable.

There is only one place where black-game
are obtained in the county, and that is in
Winster Districts, where they are fairly nume-
rous ; an attempt made in 1864 to introduce
the species in Bowland resulted in failure. The
great snipe or Lancashire snipe has been noticed

484

SPORT ANCIENT

all over the kingdom, but it is probably found
more frequently in Lancashire than in any other
county, though even here it is of rare occurrence.

DUCK DECOYS

The word ‘Decoy’ comes from Holland,
where duck decoys originated. It is an
abbreviation of the words ‘ Ende-kooy,’ i.e.
the duck’s cage, and was used to represent
the cage of nets into which the wild-fowl were
driven in earlier times. At the present day the
birds are not driven, but enticed to their doom
in the pipe decoys, either by means of a dog or
by scattering of food.

The present system is a great improvement on
the old one. Apparently in olden days vast
numbers of duck bred in England, and from the
copy of an old print in Sir Ralph Payne-
Gallwey’s book on Duck Decoys, it is evident
that the fowl were driven into the pipes of
nets, which were shaped like an inverted V, and
placed at the narrow end of a mere.?

In 1854 an Act was passed forbidding the
capture of wild-fowl between 31 May and
31 August, and, since between those dates the
birds had to be enticed and not driven, this
caused the building of decoys with pipes at
various distances round the pond. The artists
who planned these decoys were chiefly of one
family, of the name of Shelton, who came from
Friskney in Lincolnshire at the beginning of the
nineteenth century, and various members of it
remodelled nearly all our best decoys, one of
them partly reconstructing that at Hale in
Lancashire.

Lancashire has never had more than the two
famous decoys at Hale and at Orford Hall near
Warrington ; the latter no longer exists and the
moat and the pool are both dry, but the remains
of the decoy, though much overgrown, can still be
traced. Of this decoy unfortunately there are
no records in existence.

The Hale decoy, the property of Colonel
Treland Blackburne, is situated nine miles to the
south-east of Liverpool on a small peninsula on
the right bank of the River Mersey, almost
opposite to Runcorn, It is only 125 yards from
a main road along which there is constant traffic,
while on the seaward side it is not more than a
quarter of a mile from the Mersey estuary, where
noisy steamers are constantly passing up and
down ; yet the birds, strangely enough, do not
seem to mind these very things which would
have prevented most people from placing a decoy
in such a position. Its exact age is unknown,
but there is conclusive evidence to prove that it
has been in use for over 170 years.

* Sir Ralph Payne-Gallwey, bart. Book of Duck
Decoys, 5.

AND MODERN

In 1854 the decoy was much improved by
Mr. Blackburne, who came that year from
Orford Hall to live at Hale Hall. The extent
of it is some five acres, with a pool of one acre.
It has five radiating creeks, called ‘ pipes,’ and is
surrounded by a moat filled with water, which
serves the double purpose of keeping out vermin
and of giving greater privacy to the decoy.
This moat is about 18 ft. wide, and is crossed
by a small footbridge, which is easily swung
across, and when not in use lies parallel to the
bank of the moat.

The pipes are placed at about equal distances
from each other, radiating outwards from the
pool like the arms of a starfish, and their length
is some seventy yards. ‘They are so constructed
that they bend away from the main pool. The
ends are consequently out of view of the pool,
so that when a person shows himself to the birds
in the pipes those on the pool cannot see him.

These pipes are covered with netting, stretched
over dome-shaped wooden frames about 10 ft.
high, The netting does not come right down
to the banks of the pipes, and though it seems
as if the birds might escape through the gap of
about one foot between the netting and the
ground, as a matter of fact they very rarely do
so, their natural tendency being to fly upwards.
The pipe gradually diminishes in height until it
terminates in the tunnel net. This net is semi-
circular, and held in position by hoops set about
one foot apart. When the decoy is not in use
the tunnel-nets are removed, and the end of the
pipe closed by means of a sliding piece of wood,
so that the birds may get accustomed to moving
about in the decoy, and may not regard it as a
trap. On the left of each pipe, looking up it
with one’s back to the pool, there is a small path
for a dog to run along when engaged in decoy-
ing the wild fowl; on the left of this path are
high wooden palings built obliquely and over-
lapping each other at regular distances, and
connected by low barriers about two feet high.
These low barriers form what are termed ‘ show
places,’ and it is here that the decoy-man shows
himself to the birds when he considers they
have gone far enough up the pipe for a catch;
in these barriers small openings with shutters
on the outside are made, through which the dog
is put. In the wooden palings before referred
to are cut small slits, both vertical and horizontal,
and through them the pool and the pipe can be
viewed without alarming the birds. On the
right side of the pipes are trees and bushes ; the
sides of the pipes are about a foot deep, and cut
vertically to prevent the birds from getting
on to the banks; at the mouths of the pipes,
however, the banks slope gradually to the
water. This allows the birds to sit near the
mouths of the pipes, and these resting-places are
termed ‘chairs.’? Another reason for the steep-
ness of the sides of the pool is that there may

485

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

be no resting-place for the ducks except on the
chairs.

Inside the decoy are two small wooden huts,
one used for keeping the food for the ducks, the
other for the boat, which has to be used in hard
weather when it is necessary to break the ice
on the pool. A certain number of tame duck,
the offspring of wild duck which have been
hatched out under hens, are kept on the pool.
They are useful for decoying their wild brethren
into the pipes, as they come to the decoy-man’s
whistle to be fed; these birds, however, are
rarely caught in the pipes.

It was on an extremely wild day in February
that the present writer was allowed, through
the courtesy of Colonel Blackburne, to visit the
Hale decoy and witness a catch. The birds
on the pool had been a good deal disturbed by
large branches of trees which had been blown
on to the water ; the hour was four in the after-
noon—generally the best time for a catch. The
head keeper, who also acts as decoy-man, met
us at the footbridge; and having swung this
across, we cautiously entered the decoy. The
first pipe we visited was drawn nearly blank, as
we could see on looking through the slits in the
paling only seven birds resting on the chairs,
and none in the pipe itself. There were, how-
ever, between five and six hundred birds on the
pool, the majority of these being teal, with a
few mallard and wild duck, and about half a
dozen pintail. It was pretty to see these
wild-fowl swimming about and chasing each
other, in blissful ignorance of the proximity of
their inveterate enemy, man. When we visited
the second pipe, the keeper had no sooner
looked through the slit than he at once ran to
the first show place and began to wave his arms.
Several small birds were to be seen flying up the
pipe towards the tunnel-net, which the keeper
had previously fastened to the end of it. The
birds were smaller than teal and larger than
snipe. ‘While they were flying it was difficult
to determine what they were, but our doubts
were quickly settled when they were all in
the tunnel-net, which was then taken off the
end of the pipe and turned over at the last hoop,
while we proceeded to examine the catch. There
were nine birds in the net; at first the keeper
said they were ‘ yellow-lezs,’ meaning, of course,
yellow-shanks, which are very rare now in
Lancashire; but having quickly killed them,
and taken them from the net, we saw that they
were dunlin, the only difference between them
and the yellow-shank being in the feet, the
former having a small web between the toes.
Strangely enough, the keeper then produced
a dunlin from his pocket, saying that he had
brought it to show us, as he had caught
sixteen of these birds the day before, but
never previously in his four and twenty years’
experience at the decoy had he caught any in

the nets. Having again fastened the tunnel-net,
we went to the next pipe; but that and the
next two were drawn blank. These two latter
the keeper visited by himself, as he feared if we
both went the birds on the pool might wind us
and fly off. It was accordingly determined to
try the first pipe, where we had seen a few birds
on the chairs, and to try with the dog. This
animal, which was now to do the work for us,
is a sort of Irish terrier, some eight years old,
with a short tail, contrary to the received theory
that the dog should be of a reddish colour with
a long bushy tail. Having arrived at the pipe,
we were bidden to wait about half-way down
and look through the slit in the paling. The
keeper meanwhile went back nearly to the
pool, and raising the shutter in the barrier he
put the dog in. The scene was immediately
changed: confusion and terror reigned. The
birds which had been sitting quietly on the chairs
hastily flew to the water, and those swimming
near the mouth of the pipe scuttled away as fast
as they could. The dog, however, took not the
slightest notice of all the excitement he was
causing, but trotted quietly along the path away
from the birds till he came to an opening in the
barrier, which had been prepared for him ;
through this he passed, and returned to the
keeper.

After the first shock of this rude breaking into
their quiet retreat the wild-fowl soon observed that
the dog did not takeany notice of them as he trotted
away from them up the path; curiosity over-
came their terror, and birds from all parts of the
pool came swimming fast as if to see what this
strange creature might be. From the peep-
holes we could see about a hundred wild fowl
swimming up the pipe; on the dog’s disappear-
ance, however, they turned back and began to
swim back to the pool out of the pipe. The
dog was put in once again at the same place as
before. This time there was not the same dis-
turbance, and on the dog pursuing the same
tactics, the birds came more boldly after him.
There were now about sixty birds of all sorts
some little way up the pipe, and the dog was
put in at another opening in front of the birds
farther up the pipe. The birds swam farther
up, following him, until the keeper thought they
were far enough up for a take. He then
showed himself at the first show place and
waved his arms; the birds at once rose, and
some of them flew up the pipe, though to our
surprise the greater number flew past him out of
the pipe. The remainder continued flying on
straight into the tunnel-net, where they were
quickly secured. All, with the exception of a
mallard, were noiselessly killed. The mallard the
keeper took from the net, and having pinioned
his wings, put him into a sack, telling us that
he had orders to take all mallard alive, as they
were to be sent away to another part of the

486

SPORT ANCIENT

county. It was amusing to see the interest the
dog now took in the dead birds. When they
were swimming in the pipe one would have
imagined that he did not know that there were
such things as ducks in the neighbourhood ;
but now he pushed his nose into each one of
them, as much as to say that their present
state was due to him. The catch consisted of
sixteen teal and the mallard whose life had been
spared.

The keeper, on being asked why so large a
proportion of the birds had flown down out of
the pipe, said that those that had escaped were
led by some tame birds which had gone into the
pipe with them, but that this was a very unusual
occurrence. As the evening was now drawing
in, we decided to stop work.

Although teal now considerably outnumber
the other wild fowl taken in this decoy, wild
duck at one time were much more numerous, as
may be seen by a comparison of the records

AND MODERN

which have been kept since 1801. In the
beginning more teal were caught ; between the
years 1812 and 1825, however, the wild duck
were more numerous. The following extracts
taken haphazard from the records confirm this
statement :—

Wild Duck Teal
1806 73 334
1813 304 108
1820 227 2
1825 123 fo)
1877 191 563
1895 44 408

The decrease of wild duck is probably due
to the draining of the various mosses which
used to abound in Lancashire, and were famous
breeding places for the duck; another theory
is that perhaps some decoy-men had not been
careful to leave at the end of the season enough
birds to bring a lead back in the following
year.

ANGLING

Lancashire no longer holds the proud position
it once had with regard to the fishing in its
rivers. We read in the Angler’s Vade-mecum of
200 years ago of the quantity of fish there were
in the Lune and the Ribble ; but a visit to these
rivers now reveals a sadly different state of things.
The immense destruction of fish that has taken
place in recent years is entirely due to the pollu-
tion which these rivers have had to endure. It
is astonishing that any fish can live at all in the
discoloured water ; yet fish there are in the Ribble,
as the writer has seen. One day, on arriving
at this river, he found the water in splendid
order, and fish were to be seen moving, yet in a
quarter of an hour the river was stained with a
dark purple colour, which had been discharged
into it from the dye-works above, and the only
thing to do was to put the rod together and go
home.

In the eighteenth century the salmon rights
on Lancashire rivers were let for hundreds of
pounds ; nowadays the Ribble and the Lune
are practically the only ones that contain game
fish, and a run of the former is rented by a
Manchester angling association. The river that
has perhaps suffered most in the way of fish de-
struction is the Mersey. As late as the year
1735 the value of the fishing in the reaches
near Warrington was estimated at no less than
£400 per annum, salmon being very plentiful.
A writer in 1824, however, mentions that the
perpetual disturbances and depredations to which
the river was subjected had greatly reduced the
number of salmon, and the fine-flavoured smelts
(‘sparlings’ is the local term for these fish) had

greatly diminished. Pollution in more recent
times has completed the work of destruction.
Warrington Weir is still there, but the water
pouring over it is, at its best, the colour of dirty
coffee. Yet a very keen fisherman who has
lived in the town for over sixty years told the
present writer that he remembered seeing a
sturgeon caught at the weir not more than
twenty years ago.

Another death-blow to Lancashire angling
has been the draining of the rivers for the water
supply of the various large towns. Streams
which from their appearance ought to be full of
fish are now almost dry, and to catch the few
fish that still remain in them one has to go out
at night with a large white moth, as was most
forcibly brought home to the writer on his visit-
ing the Hodder, a river which runs into the
Ribble. This is a beautiful stream with nice
overhanging banks, and it was with great expec-
tations that the rod was put together and a
start made by wading up the stream. After,
however, having tried every conceivable place
that looked likely for trout, and having flogged
for a distance of three miles, the writer had
the disappointing experience of taking only a
few small fry, which were, of course, returned
to the river. A halt was made at the inn at
Whitewell, where several anglers were stay-
ing, but they all agreed that it was only
waste of time to try for a fish in the daytime,
and that they went at dusk and fished for
several hours at night; the largest individual
bag for the season had been three sea-trout in
one night.

487

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

The Ribble is the best angling river in Lanca-
shire to-day, but that is only in its upper reaches
near Clitheroe, and most of the fish taken in this
river are caught outside our county. The Lune
was noted for its salmon later than the Mersey,
as can be seen in the records of R. Brock in the
year 1740, in which he says that the River Lune
in Lancashire is so overstocked with salmon that
servants were not to be fed on it more than
twice a week. There is very fair fishing to be
obtained near Liverpool in the Rivington Reser-
voirs belonging to the corporation; fly only is
allowed except in the Lower Rivington Reser-
voirs and the Lower Paddlesworth and Rake
Brook Reservoirs; no wading is allowed, and
Sunday fishing is taboo. In these reservoirs are
Loch Leven trout, and the season is from
15 March to 30 September. The Liverpool
Angling Association has private fishing in a lake
of Knowsley, where there are principally coarse
fish, with a few trout and grayling. There is
good fishing to be obtained from the association
in the neighbourhood of St. Helens; and there
are trout in the strictly-preserved New Dam at
Garswood, and in the Carr Mill Dam, the pro-
perty of Sir David Gamble.

A pretty little stream called the Loud joins
the Hodder about one mile below Dorford Bridze,
and some good-sized brown trout live in it.
This fishing is strictly preserved. Nice bags of
small trout can be had from Ellenbrook, a
tributary of the Douglas, near Rufford.

Though the fishing in the rivers has thus
deteriorated, bright spots still remain, and these
are to be found in Windermere and Coniston
Water. Though Windermere really belongs to
Westmorland, three-quarters of its banks are
in Lancashire, and may be considered in our
survey of Lancashire angling. “There are quan-
tities of trout in both these lakes, but they are
more notable for a fish which is peculiar to these
waters. This fish is the charr (Sa/mo /f i/lughbit).
Itismentioned by Willoughby, Pennant, Donovan,
and other writers as being caught in nets, and
much esteemed for the table. A very closely
allied species is found in Loch Bruiach, in the
north of Scotland. There are two species of
charr, the red and the silver, and they spawn at
different times and under different conditions.
Before the application of the fishing law, con-
siderable quantities of the fish were taken in the
net when, in the months of October and Novem-
ber, the charr sought the shallower portions of
the lake for spawning.

A writer in Land and [Vater speaks thus of
the charr of Windermere :—

Though charr exists in other lakes, Windermcre
is doubtless its headquarters. The largest charr I have
ever seen exceeded two pounds in weight, though about
half a pound may be set as its average full-grown size,
anda fish of 3 oz. will often take the bait. They are
bold biters at fly, spoon, or minnow. ‘Though this
implies that they feed on the surface, the conjecture
that they feed chiefly on the bottom is not thereby re-
futed, for a practice has lately been introduced of tra:l-
ing a revolving bait from a plummet sunk deep in the
water, the revolution being kept up, in the depths as
on the surface, by the motion of the boat. The fish-
ing for charr by bait, though best in the spring, is
carried on successfully for the whole of the summer.
The favourite places for fishing are the deepest parts
of the lake. They also run up the rivers, or, as it
would be more correct to say, into a river, for though
two rivers fall into Windermere at its head, forming
a junction half a mile above the lake, the charr never go
up the Rothay, yet in myriads turn off at the fork into
the Brathay. Any cause for its preference has hitherto
been sought in vain. The rivers run through two
neighbouring valleys, the geological formation of which
is the same.

The flesh of the charr, when fried like a trout, is
pink. Potted charr is a regular institution in Lanca-
shire and is highly prized. The difference of the
Windermere charr, and the allied Welsh one is thus
described by Dr. Gunther:—‘ The base of the pectoral
is entirely free, and not overlapped by the gill covers
apparatus. The nostrils are situated immediately be-
fore the eye: posterior is wider and the cutaneous
bridge between the two is not developed into a flap.’

Mr. Palmer does not hold with the theory
that the two kinds of charr are two different
varieties of the fish, as he states that ‘though they
are supposed to spawn in November and Febru-
ary respectively, yet the information then, and
now, hardly justified the idea.’

The charr loves cold water, and feeds at
varying depths ; to-day it may be in a shoal
within ten feet of the surface, and to-morrow as
much as one hundred feet below. During mid-
summer the charr are bottom-feeders, and the
only way to catch them is with a long
central line heavily weighted, to which two
smaller lines are attached at intervals ; this is not
at all an easy bait for a tyro to use, because of
the way the smaller lines have of twisting them-
selves round the central one.

Besides these two lakes, there are several
smaller waters, or tarns as they are called. The
best of these is Esthwaite Water, which is about
four miles west of Windermere.

488

SPORT ANCIENT AND MODERN

CRICKET

Few counties possess a finer record in cricket
than Lancashire, and no other county has more con-
sistently engaged the attention of the community.
The characteristic of the team has always been
keen cricket—too keen was the stricture at one
time passed on the side, when the action of cer-
tain bowlers came in for invidious criticism. No
other county has, however, benefited so much
from the system of qualification ; among the more
notable of those whose services have been thus
obtained being Mr. L. O. S. Poidevin and Ker-
mode from Australia, Paul from Ireland, while
Baker, Barnes, Briggs, Crossland, Cuttell, Hal-
lam, McIntyre, Mold, Nash, Oakley, Pilling,
Robinson, Tinsley, Albert Ward, Frank Ward,
Watson, and Webb are immigrants from other
counties. ‘This is in marked contrast to the rule
of Yorkshire and Notts, which for the last fifteen
years have only played cricketers born within their
ample area.

The Lancashire County Club, formed in 1864,
was the direct outcome of the Manchester Club,
which possesses a fine historical record. To this
day Lancashire county cricket is mainly connected
with that city, for though a couple of matches
are played at Liverpool, it is always felt that the
head quarters are at Old Trafford, where a very
large ground-staff and a finely appointed ground
are maintained.

The only county fixtures of 1865 were out
and home engagements with Middlesex, the latter
fixture being won by 62 runs, after each side had
tied on the first innings with the then large total
of 243. Mr. V. E. Walker with his lobs claimed
all ten wickets for 104, whilst Mr. A. B. Rowley
compiled 60. At Islington a reverse was sus-
tained by ten wickets. Middlesex was again
opposed in 1866, Coward scoring 85 in the first
match and 52 in the return, when Mr. A. B.
Rowley contributed 63 not out. It was ten years
before these sides again met. At the Oval the
then prodigious aggregate of 938 for 28 wickets
was obtained. After Jupp had been six hours
at the wicket for 165 runs, R. Iddison responded
with 49 and 106 and Holgate with 52 and 65.
The return was played at Edge Hill, Wavertree,
Liverpool, and in this match Mr. A. Appleby, a
fine fast round left-handed bowler, made his first
appearance. Chosen for the Gentlemen in the
following year he was the first Lancastrian in-
vited to play in a fixture of the first importance.

In 1867, when Lancashire first appeared at
Lord’s, no one in the team except Coward had
ever played on the ground, and Wootton, Grundy,
and Shaw were far too good for the opposing
bats. Again there was made at the Oval the huge
score of 969 for 27 wickets. I. Ricketts on his
first appearance for Lancashire scored 195 not out,

the biggest innings ever compiled at a county
début. Mr.E. B. Rowley, the county captain, who
died in February 1905, was responsible for 78.

The aggregate of the return match was 794 for
38 wickets, R.Iddison making 71 and 64 not out,
whilst Tom Humphrey for the visitors scored 56
and 144. There were three matches against
Yorkshire, in one of which L. Greenwood and
Freeman bowled unchanged. A Harrovian aged
twenty scored 2 and 3. This was Mr. A. N.
Hornby, the most famous amateur who ever
played for Lancashire. He was a magnificently
forcing bat, gifted with tremendous hitting powers
as well as exceptional impetuosity between the
wickets, a superb field, a wonderful judge of the
game, a splendid captain, and the most cheery of
cricketers.

At the first meeting with Notts in 1868, Daft
scored 96 and Wootton claimed ten wickets for
g6 runs against Lancashire. Our county in the
second match needed only 69, but were dismissed
for 53, Alfred Shaw claiming 6 for27, At Man-
chester Iddison and Hickton sent back Surrey for
42, but at Leeds Lancashire could only get 30
and 34, Emmett and Freeman carrying every-
thing before them. In those days the ball gene-
rally beat the bat. At Lord’s in 1869, when
Lancashire against M.C.C. and Ground lost by
two wickets, no one made more than 21 in an
innings, Mr. Appleby and Hickton being un-
changed. The amateur also claimed 8 for 68
in the match against Surrey. Against Sussex
the Rev. F. W. Wright compiled 120 not out.

The programme of 1870 was restricted,
Hampshire and Surrey being the only counties
that Lancashire met. Surrey was beaten by
eight wickets at Manchester in a match that only
lasted ten hours. Against Hampshire Mr.
A. N. Hornby made his first score of three
figures, and Hickton, a fast straight bowler,
took all ten wickets in the second innings for
46.

In 1871 Lancashire were all out for 25
at Derby. Against Kent at Gravesend the
County Palatine, for the only time yet re-
corded, was represented by eleven professionals.
At Sheffield, when Mr. Appleby accumulated
99, by far his largest score, Barlow made
a first appearance, scoring 28 not out. He
was one of the best all-round professionals
of any period; an extraordinarily steady bat,
an excellent point, and a capital medium-paced
left-handed bowler, though there was at first
little need for his skill with the ball. Only
three bowlers were put on by Lancashire in
their four matches of 1872, and forty wickets
were obtained for 236 runs, Mr. Appleby was
now supported by Watson, an excellent slow

2 489 62

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

round bowler with a peculiar flick, and McIntyre,
a fast bowler, particularly formidable on a bad
pitch, Against Surrey in 1874 in the two
matches, never being taken off, Watson claimed
20 for 101 (five for 13 once) and McIntyre 20
for 140. This is the earliest occasion on which
Mr. A. N. Hornby took Barlow in first with
him.

The year 1875 witnessed some slack cricket
between Kent and Lancashire, as many as five
substitutes being at one time in the field. Though
Lancashire as a side was no match for Yorkshire,
Barlow personally exhibited his patience by
batting 150 minutes for 17 runs. But in 1875,
when 148 were needed to win against the
same team, Mr. Hornby and Barlow obtained
them without being parted. There was some
devastating bowling against Leicestershire, Mr.
W. S. Patterson taking 5 for 23 and McIntyre
5 for 13. The latter with Watson bowled
unchanged in both matches with Derbyshire
in 1876. Barlow was at the wickets ninety
minutes for 5 runs against Sussex ; and a couple
of close finishes were those resulting in a
victory at Hove by 12 runs anda defeat from
Notts bya wicket. The same margin caused the
loss of the match with Kent in 1877. That
season McIntyre had some fine analyses, in-
cluding 7 for 16 and 8 for 31 against Derby-
shire and 7 for 23 against Notts, whilst
Mr. Appleby captured 9 for 25 in the second
innings of Sussex at Brighton.

Having thus sketched the principal features of
Lancashire county cricket up to the advent of
the first Australian team, we may here indicate
the share that Lancashire has had in great
matches against them. The following have
been on tours to Australia: the Rev. V.F. Royle,
Messrs. A. N. Hornby and S. 8. Shultz in 1878 ;
Barlow in 1881, 1882 and 1884; Mr. A. G.
Steel in 1882; Pilling in 1881 and 1887; Briggs
in 1884, 1887, 1891, and 1897; Mr. A. C.
McLaren in 1894, 1897, and 1901; Albert
Ward in 1894; Mr. H. G. Garnett in 1gor ;
Barnes in 1901 and 1907; and Tyldesley in
1go1 and 1904. At the Antipodes the majority
of these played in their very best form. The first
Test Match at Manchester took place in 1884,
and since then on each tour the Australians
have there played a national engagement. In
1886 England won by four wickets. On first
hands there was only a difference of 48 runs,
but Barlow then captured 7 for 44, and by
scoring 30 and 38 not out was practically
responsible for the success. In 1888, on a soft
wicket, England won by an innings and 21
runs, Peel taking 11 wickets for a little over
6 runs each, while Pilling’s wicket-keeping was
marvellous. The Australians were victorious in
1896 by 3 wickets, although K. S. Ranjitsinhji
scored 62 and 154 not out, and Richardson
took 13 wickets for 242 runs. The closest

contest of the series was in 1903, when after
many fluctuations the Australians won by 3 runs.
The Hon. F. S. Jackson and Braund had made
a fine effort with the bat, and Lockwood sub-
sequently sent back five of the visitors for 28
runs. Rain then came down, and Messrs.
Trumble and Saunders bowled exceedingly well.
In 1890 rain prevented play, and on the other
occasions the match was drawn, except in 1905,
when England won the rubber by an innings
and 80 runs in the match at Manchester.
Mr. Spooner played delightfully, and Mr.
Brearley bowled with tremendous energy on a
wicket too slow to suit him. In this country
the following Lancashire cricketers have repre-
sented England : Messrs. A. N. Hornby, A. G.
Steel, A. C. McLaren, R. H. Spooner, and
W. Brearley, with Barlow, Barnes, Briggs,
Mold, Pilling, Sugg, Tyldesley, and Albert
Ward. In addition to these Mr. George Kemp
appeared for the Gentlemen, McIntyre, Baker,
and Sharp for the Players, and the Rev. V. F.
Royle for the North against the Australians.

In Test Matches, Messrs. A. G. Steel and
A.C. McLaren, Tyldesley and Albert Ward, have
all made three-figure contributions, The North
have six times met the Colonials at Manchester,
winning twice and losing on three occasions.
Lancashire has been curiously unfortunate
against the Australians, partly, no doubt,
because somewhat unrepresentative sides were
on occasions put into the field. Ten defeats
have to be set againt a single victory by 23
runs, obtained in 1888, the bowling on a bumpy
wicket of Briggs and the Rev. J. R. Napier,
who never obtained his colours at Cambridge,
being responsible for the favourable result.

The side which could have been collected
against the earliest teams of the Australians was
more particularly strong in bowling, for though
McIntyre gave up, Crossland and Nash were
both most successful with fast deliveries. A
storm of controversy, in which Lord Harris
took a prominent part, arose over the legality
of Crossland’s action; but the discussion finally
fizzled away on the discovery that the resi-
dential qualification of the professional had
lapsed. Nash enjoyed a somewhat shorter
career, There can be no harm in now stat-
ing that while the umpires never penalized
either of them, public opinion, outside the
adherents of the county, was in the main
adverse to their fairness, a feature which is also
true, though possibly less demonstrable, in the
cases of Watson and Mold. Briggs, who later
rivalled Peel for the honour of being the best
left-handed bowler, in his first five seasons only
had 312 runs hit off him for 18 wickets,
the attack of Watson, Crossland, Nash, and
Barlow being all that was required, with occasional
assistance from Mr. A. G. Steel. Ardent sup-
porter of his county as this great cricketer has

490

SPORT ANCIENT AND MODERN

always been—to allude to such superb merit in
every department is superfluous—he was not
able to assist Lancashire nearly as much as was
desired, nor was his form on most occasions—
except in 1881—commensurate with the
magnificent displays he gave for other teams.
Three other brothers at different periods attracted
attention by their ability, though their play
never approached his standard.

The batting of Mr. A. N. Hornby and Barlow
needs no commendation, and they have passed
into the list of famous pairs who opened the
innings. It may be mentioned that in 1881
Mr. Hornby was responsible for almost a third
of the runs scored for Lancashire. He scored
1,531 runs with an average of 41, which was
far ahead of any other cricketer in the season,
his 188 against Derbyshire being also the largest
individual contribution. That summer the side
was never beaten, and six of the ten victories
were with an innings to spare. A match
between Cambridge University and the county,
arranged to open the Aigburth ground at
Liverpool, ended in a reverse by 7 wickets,
though Mr. A. G. Steel claimed 6 wickets for
22 against his old comrades. But apart from
Messrs. Hornby and A. G. Steel with Barlow,
the batting was not of greataccount. With more
experience Mr. R. Wood should have made a
really excellent run-getter. The Rev. V. F. Royle,
though at timesa hard hitter, was really notable
as being the finest field in the world, and to-day
on better grounds his superior cannot be named.
Mr. F. Taylor, a steady bat, was somewhat
uncertain on first going in, and Robinson, a
punishing hitter, gave possibly the most useful
support. Pilling was the last and emphatically
the greatest of the P. brigade of wicket-
keepers, his predecessors being Pinder, Pooley,
Plumb, and Phillips. The high standard of the
fielding of Lancashire at this epoch deserves a
cordial tribute.

In 1882 there was doubt whether Lanca-
shire or Nottinghamshire was champion. In the
inter-county matches each only lost one match,
Nottinghamshire being defeated by Yorkshire by
8 wickets and Lancashire by Nottinghamshire
by 34 runs. Barlow carried his bat through
that last innings for 5, which took him two and
a half hours to accumulate. Crossland clean
bowled 5 for 1 run at the Oval amid a most
hostile demonstration, renewed on occasions to
a lesser degree in subsequent seasons. The
next year was notable, because the County
Palatine started with seven victories off the reel
and then failed. Mr. 8. M. Crossfield, a
capital field and an attractive bat, first appeared,
but it was not until 1884 that Barlow played
his first three-figure innings. ‘The other feature
was the refusal of Notts to meet Lancashire on
the ground that the latter employed bowlers
whose delivery was unfair, The controversy

on this topic overshadowed 1885, but Briggs
then developed into the wonderful slow bowler
he showed himself until the tragic end of his
career. He was a cricketer full of animation,
cleverness, and enthusiasm, a magnificent cover-
point and a lively bat.

It was not until 1888 that Lancashire again
attained second place. F. H. Sugg, a powerful
hitter, and Mr. J. Eccles,a sound batsman, both
came into the side, and only three defeats, from
Surrey, Notts, and Yorkshire, were recorded,
but all these three were with an innings to spare.
Again in 1889 there were brilliant performances
by that destructive fast bowler Arthur Mold,
while the head of the batting was taken by Albert
Ward in his first season under qualification.
Possessing great judgement, and playing with
praiseworthy care, Ward remained for years one
of the best bats in the county. The side,
which was most consistent in 1890, under-
went further transformation, as ill-health caused
Pilling to give up the gloves to Mr. A. T.
Kemble, while in August Mr. A. C. McLaren
obtained his first trial. Gifted with confidence
and judgement Mr. McLaren proved in after
years alike brilliant and judicious, whilst in
the field he has hardly had a superior. Mention
must be made of the match with Sussex in which,
after scoring 246 for two wickets, Lancashire
twice dismissed Sussex for an aggregate of 59,
Briggs and Watson being the bowlers.

Mold and Briggs divided 315 of the 453 wickets
captured in 1891. ‘Though the batting was
uncertain, runs were generally obtained, so that
against the four defeats could be set not only
eight victories but also eight additional successes
in the eight extraneous fixtures. Albert Ward
finished in fine form, Mr. S. M. Crossfield
showed spirited cricket, and Mr, A. T. Kemble
kept wicket successfully. “The stern logic of facts
disproved the agreeable theory that on paper the
side of 1892 was considerably stronger. The
fact that Mr. Hornby had handed over the
captaincy to Mr. Crossfield had little to do with
the decline, for the new captain was keen
as well as in capital run-getting vein. Mr.
McLaren, Ward, and Sugg all seemed out of
form, but Smith by watchful cricket rendered
genuine service, and Baker showed himself one
of the most improved bats in the county. Ward
batted for five hours for 180 in the match
against Yorkshire, when Briggs took only two
and a half hours to hit up 115. With the ball
Watson did wonders considering his advancing
years.

In 1893 Lancashire again took second place,
though there was not much superiority over the
achievements of both Middlesex and Kent, the
actual results showing nine victories against seven
defeats. Opponents always kept wondering
what would happen if either Briggs or Mold
should be disabled, but both stuck to their work

491

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

admirably, taking 297 wickets for 14 runs apiece,
out of a total of 376 wickets ; Watson having
entered into honourable retirement, Oakley, a
slow bowler with an easy action, was almost the
only change. Tinsley, yet another Yorkshireman
playing under residential qualification, showed
consistent form. Albert Ward was magnificent ;
and, with only two centuries, actually amassed
1,273 runs. Sugg dealt punishment to Sussex
in compiling 169. Against Yorkshire, Briggs
took eight for 19 at Leeds, and eleven for 60
at Manchester. For the North against the
Australians, Mr. McLaren and Ward put up
120 for first wicket in eighty minutes.

During the winter Mr. McLaren had been
playing grand cricket in Australia, where, after
compiling 228 in the Victoria fixture, his
second match, he was recognized as one of our
finest bats. Returning he accepted a mastership
at Harrow, but in the middle of July he
amassed the record score of 484 against Somer-
setshire at Taunton, being nearly eight hours at
the wicket, and making 62 fours. Victories
were gained over both Yorkshire and Surrey,
whilst Mold, by taking 8 for 20 when he
had an injured hand, largely assisted in dis-
missing Notts for 35. In this year Tyldesley,
the most brilliant professional bat of modern
cricket, began his fine career. At the close of
the summer Mr. McLaren made three con-
secutive centuries, and Hallam showed promise
of being a useful bowler—a forecast fulfilled in
1896, when he took 58 wickets. Cuttell, an-
other Yorkshireman, appeared. Beginning first-
class cricket rather late, he proved extremely
clever with the ball and was a dangerous bat.
Mr. McLaren, who only came into the team
when the weather broke, scored 713 runs in
fifteen innings, while Sugg, hitting harder than
ever, made 220 against Gloucestershire, 150
against Leicestershire, 110 against Sussex, and
averaged 40.

Lancashire obtained the coveted championship
in 1897 thanks to Surrey’s defeat at Taunton,
All through the year the northern side showed
admirable consistence, and when Mold was in-
jured, Cuttell bowled splendidly. The county’s
performance was sixteen victories against three
defeats. With a quartet of bowlers—Briggs,
Hallam, Cuttell, and Mold—and such fine batting
as was shown by Mr. McLaren, Albert Ward,
Baker, and Tyldesley, the side had a great
nucleus. Tyldesley, in Pallett’s benefit match,
achieved the then rare distinction of getting two
separate hundreds, previously only accomplished
by Dr. W. G. Grace, K. S. Ranjitsinhji, Mr.
McLaren, Mr. Stoddart, Mr. Brann, and
Storer, Smith, who had kept wicket safely and
batted well for years, found, when hurt, a
clever substitute in Radcliffe.

From the first to sixth place was the serious
decline of Lancashire in 1898. With Hallam

too ill to play and the other bowlers compara-
tively ineffectual, whilst rain interfered with all
the home fixtures, the reason of the decline is
not difficult to ascertain. The bright spot was
the batting of Tyldesley, who ten times exceeded
50, twice exceeded go, and wound up his
season by making 200 against Derbyshire.
Ward was a model of patience and Cuttell’s
batting improved at the expense of his bowling.
Misfortunes multiplied in 1899, for Briggs dur-
ing a Test Match suffered aseizure. Moreover,
it was not possible to obtain a regular captain,
and no less than four officiated in an unfortunate
year. Mr. R. H. Spooner, who had scored
69 and 198 for Marlborough against Rugby
and 158 against Surrey 2nd XI (then notoriously
strong), showed brilliant promise, but business
prevented him from playing often. Sharp
as a useful fast bowler and plucky bat made a
good impression, while Webb, who had qualified
from Middlesex, took some wickets. Tyldesley,
after making 56 and 42 against the Australians
when no other Lancastrian could get a dozen
runs, was chosen in two Test Matches. He
rattled up 249 in the Leicestershire match.
Mr. J. L. Ainsworth, a slow bowler, received a
trial because he had taken 75 wickets for 6 runs
each for the English team in America in the
previous September.

After a big bid for first place, Lancashire had
to be content with second in 1900; but fine
cricket was shown. Briggs reappeared with
marked success, and Hallam also returned to the
field, so there really were five excellent bowlers,
and, except when Surrey hit them for 463 and
Kent for 420, the bowling was never collared.
To praise the work of Ward, Mr. McLaren,
and Tyldesley would be superfluous; and against
Leicestershire the captain scored 145 in two hours.
Mr. C. R. Hartley enormously improved and
ran into four figures with three centuries to his
credit. The no-balling of Mold by James
Phillips created a great stir. Several other
bowlers were promply penalized, and the fairness
of cricket was thereby enormously improved.

Lancashire had not such a good result to show
in 1901, and three defeats before the end of June
put them out of the running for the champion-
ship. ‘The reasons for the falling-off were easy
to discover. James Phillips had again no-balled
Mold, who subsequently did little work; Cuttell
broke a bone in his hand, and a recurrence of his old
illness finally dismissed Johnny Briggs from the
side. Sharp filled the gap, and Mr. E. E. Steel’s
slow bowling was effective, but Sidney Webb
fielded clumsily if he bowled well. Tyldesley
showed the glorious average of 60 for 2,605
runs, among his great scores being 221 in the
Notts match, 119 against Somerset, 170 against
Middlesex, 161 in the fixture with Notts, 158
against Derbyshire, and 149 against Surrey, while
in the Gentlemen and Players match at Lord’s

492

SPORT ANCIENT

he displayed superb form for 140. Mr. H. G.
Garnett came into prominence as one of the
most attractive left-handed bats of the day. At
the close of the summer Mr. McLaren resigned
the captaincy and announced he would play for
Hampshire, but in 1902 he appeared as usual,
playing a particularly fine innings at Trent
Bridge.

Encouraged by the success that had attended
his fast bowling in Australia, Barnes was brought
into the side, but like Webb, who now disap-
peared, he never seemed able to bowl] with spirit
when the luck was at all against his side.
Several bowlers were effective, the attack being
more diversified but less excellent than when
Briggs and Mold bore the burden. Deficiencies
in bowling still gave trouble in 1903, when fourth
place was taken in the championship list. Barnes
at Leyton claimed 8 for 37 and 6 for 33, but
he proved unequal and eventually declined to
renew his engagement. Mr. W. Brearley, an
energetic bowler of yet greater pace, came into
the team, and the county had the joy of seeing
Mr. R. H. Spooner once more in the field. He
obtained 247 at Trent Bridge and generally dis-
played most brilliant power on the off side.
Tyldesley and his captain did magnificent work,
averaging 44 for 1,618 and 40 for 1,565 respec-
tively. Each exceeded the second century, each
oddly enough at Liverpool.

In 1904 Lancashire had its finest season, win-
ning the championship and showing an unbeaten
record. Until the endof July the side was one of
the best that ever played. In August they were
stale and lucky to escape defeat. “They had last
attained unbeaten honours in 1881. Hallows now
bowled with splendid judgement; Mr. Brearley
showed amarked advance; and Cuttell regained his
finest form. With them in June, by qualification,
was joined Kermode, a powerful man who sends
down a fast ball. Tyldesley claimed eight cen-
turies, hitting with greater power than ever, and

AND MODERN

Mr. Spooner became the English Trumper. He
made four centuries by the middle of June ; then
three consecutive zeros, and after that 215 at
Leyton. Hallows took 108 wickets and scored
1,058 runs, a fine contribution, Yet another
Australian came into the team, Mr. L. O. 5S.
Poidevin, a diminutive batsman possessing con-
siderable judgement. The secret of Lanca-
shire’s success was all-round efficiency.

Unbeaten until July 1905, Lancashire had
ultimately to be content with second place,
Yorkshire alone being superior. The huge total
of 627 was compiled at Trent Bridge, Mr.
Spooner obtaining 164 and Tyldesley 250. The
same couple against Yorkshire at Old Trafford
added 257 in two and a half hours, during which
the amateur’s wicket was struck without the bails
being removed. Sharp displayed ability in every
department, and Mr. W. Findlay—subsequently
secretary at the Oval—proved admirable at the
wicket. The year 1906 saw the County Palatine
in the fourth position, the loss of Mr. Brearley
—through dissension—being much felt. Tyldes-
ley’s benefit beat every financial record except
that of George Hirst. Useful results came from
the bowling of Huddleston on sticky wickets, of
Harry, a medium-paced bowler, and of Dean,
left-handed with a swerve. Against Kent
Tyldesley scored 295 not out and Sharp was
redoubtable. Excellent fielding and an apparently
inexhaustible reserve of efficient bowlers are
valuable adjuncts towards winning matches.

Altogether, Lancashire has won 365 and lost
177 matches, beating every county, with the
exception of Middlesex and Yorkshire, more fre-
quently than it has hauled down its own flag.
Since the county became first class the following
is the run-getting result to the end of 1907 :—

Lancashire has scored 201,887 runs for 9,958
wickets averaging 22°7354.

Their opponents have scored 197,116 runs
for 11,064 wickets averaging 17°9028.

RUGBY FOOTBALL

The hereditary rivalry between the County
Palatine and Yorkshire found expression in the
first instituted inter-county football fixture on
record. This was played at Leeds in 1870, and
with the exception of the year 1879 the match
has been repeated in unbroken continuity ever
since. In the first twelve matches Lancashire
showed marked superiority, winning seven to
Yorkshire’s one. Of the remaining four, which
resulted in draws, two, according to the present
methods of scoring, would have increased Lanca-
shire’s wins, as at that time a match could not be
won by a superiority of tries unless a goal were
scored. During the period of Yorkshire’s supre-

macy in the football field Lancashire had to put
up with a sequence of defeats, but of recent
years honours have been fairly equally divided.
The record to date between the two rivals reads :
matches played thirty-seven, Yorkshire sixteen
wins, Lancashire eleven, drawn ten.

By 1875 the number of Lancashire clubs had
so largely increased that the county was
awarded two seats in the English governing
body, Messrs. J. McLaren and E. Kewley being
the two representatives chosen. At the time of
the institution of the great annual match
between Lancashire and Yorkshire, and for some
years afterwards, the Manchester Club, being the

493

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

oldest and paramount organization in the country,
controlled the selection of the teams. In1881,
however, owing to the development of the
vame, it was felt desirable by the other clubs
that they should have some hand in the manage-
ment of county affairs and a voice in the selec-
tion of the team. The initiative in this
movement was taken by Mr. W. Bell of the
Broughton Club, who was supported by Mr. A.
M. Crook, Free Wanderers; F. C. Hignett,
Swinton ; G. C. Lindsay, Manchester Rangers ;
and F, Hunter, Birch. Prolonged discussion
ensued, the Manchester Club being unwilling to
give up what they considered their prerogative.
Failing to come to an agreement the other
clubs took the law into their own hands, and on
17 May 1881 formed the Lancashire Football
Union.

Subsequently the Manchester Club adopted a
more conciliatory attitude, and all parties acquies-
cing in a joint meeting the following were elected
on 22 December 1881 as the first officers of the
county club :—

President, James McLaren, Manchester ;
Vice-Presidents, W. Brierley, Manchester, E.
Kewley, Liverpool ; Hon. Secretary and Trea-
surer, W. Grave, Manchester ; Committee, two
representatives for Manchester, and one each for
Liverpool, Broughton, Cheetham, Preston, Man-
chester Rangers, Rochdale Hornets, Oldham,
Swinton, and Free Wanderers.

The new executive worked well together, and
additional county matches, including a fixture
with the Midland Counties, were played. On
12 March 1887, previous to the institution of
the County Championship Competition, Lanca-
shire had the honour, as the strongest county in
the north, of playing against Middlesex in the
presence of H.R.H. the Prince of Wales. The
match was arranged in commemoration of the
Jubilee of her late Majesty’s reign, and the pro-
ceeds were devoted to charity.

The game, which was played at Kennington
Oval, attracted a large attendance. After a hotly
contested match Lancashire won by the bare
margin of a try. Directly after this match
another Lancashire club, Preston North End,
stepped into the arena and engaged the famous
Corinthian team. The Lancastrians showed
brilliant form and drew with their rivals, each
side scoring a goal.

At the commencement of season 1889-90
the constitution of the county executive under-
went a change. It was decided that representa-
tion on the committee should go by districts
instead of by clubs. By this arrangement the
county was divided into four groups with the
following representations : The north one, south
four, north-east three, and north-west four. The
season 1890-91 was a brilliant one for the
Lancastrians ; not a goal was obtained against
them in county fixtures, and for the first time

since its official institution in 1889 they gained
the County Championship. In virtue of their
position the County Palatine played the Rest of
England at Whalley Range on 18 April 1891.
The English side just won after a splendid
struggle by a goal and a try toa goal. Some
20,000 spectators watched the match, and the
proceeds, amounting to some { 600, were dis-
tributed among the medical charities of the
county. In the following season Lancashire
lost the championship to Yorkshire, who luckily
won by a penalty goal.

Since the institution of the Northern Union
and the consequent bifurcation which has taken
place, Lancashire have perceptibly weakened,
and though they have fairly held their own with
the other northern counties they have never
regained championship honours.

We must not fail to record the fact that it is
to the energy of Lancashire that the inception
of the historic North and South match is due.
Of the twenty players who formed the North
side in the first match of the series at Rugby in
1874 more than half were Lancastrians. The
result of the match not only brought home to
the English governing body the excellence of
the north-country play, but also consolidated the
interests of the northern counties in seeking
adequate representation in the English teams and
Committee.

Among Lancashire football clubs Manchester,
founded in 1866, naturally occupies first place,
both on account of its age and the important
part it played in the early spread and develop-
ment of the game in the north of England,
The game in a primitive form had undoubtedly
existed in the town for centuries, as this entry
in the Manchester Lete Roll of 12 October
1608 shows :—

That whereas there has been heretofore great dis-
order in our toune of Manchester, and the inhabitants
thereof greatly wringed and charged into makinge and
amendinge of their glass windows broken yearlie and
spoiled by a companye of lewd and disordered psons
vsing that unlawful exercise of playing with the ffote-
ball in ye streets of ye sd toune breakinge many men’s
windowes and glasse at their pleasures and other great
inormyties, Therefore we of this Jurye doe order that
no manner of psons hereafter shall play or use the
footeball in any street within the sd toune of Man-
chester subpoened to evye one that shall so use the
same for evye time xii’.

The pioneers, however, of modern football in
Manchester and district were chiefly alumni of
the large public schools, who were anxious not
to relinquish the game when school-days were
over.

Foremost among the early Manchester players
were the brothers McLaren. The elder, James
McLaren, father of the famous cricketer, was
largely instrumental in bringing about the insti-
tution of the annual North and South match.

494

SPORT ANCIENT

His services to the game were not long allowed
to go without recognition, and he was given a
seat on the Rugby Union Committee in 1875, a
position he retained up to the time of his death,
occupying the presidential chair in 1882.

Other famous International players hailing
from Manchester were R. R. Osborne, A. S.
Gibson, Roger Walker, E. E. Marriott, and
W.E. Openshaw. Atalater date A. N. Hornby
the famous cricketer, the Hunts, H. C. Rowley,
and J. Scofield added lustre to the powerful
city club.

The Liverpool Football Club, for many years
the most formidable rival of Manchester, was
founded in the same year, 1866, and matches
between the two have been played ever since.

E. Kewley, an old Marlburian, was for many
years captain of Liverpool, and after playing in
numerous international matches was elected
captain of the English team in 1877, being the
first north-country man to attain that distinction.
Two years previously he had been given a place
on the Rugby Union committee.

F. Tobin, an old Rugbeian, and the Hon. S.
Parker, from the same school, did yeoman service
for Liverpool in the seventies, and both played
for England. The club was one of the first
northern combinations to visit the Metropolitan
district. In season 1875-6 they played both
Richmond and the United Hospitals in London ;
the former match is still played annually. Other
Internationals contributed by the Liverpool Club
are C. W. H. Clark, Hay Gordon, now well
known on the golf links at Nice, H. H. Spring-
man, C. L. Verelst, and A. T. Kemble.

The Broughton Rangers is another club
which until the formation of the Northern
Union played a conspicuous part in Lancashire
football. Founded in 1869 it has numbered
among its ranks such famous players as C. M.
Sawyer, J. H. Payne, A. Teggin, and R. L.
Sedden. All of them played for England, and
the last-named captained the first English team

AND MODERN

to visit Australia, but was unhappily drowned
during the tour.

Though dissolved some years ago, mention
must be made of the once famous Preston Grass-
hoppers, at one time one of the most powerful
teams in the north. Founded in 1869, the club
in its prime was a formidable rival to Man-
chester, and on occasions beat them. From
this club were trained such Internationals as
the Hunts and A. N. Hornby, to say nothing
of the Hultons, Marriage, and others. Subse-
quently these famous players drifted into the
Manchester ranks and the old club broke up.
After having been in abeyance for some years
it has recently been re-started. Other clubs
which did much to popularize and further the
game in the early days were the Rochdale
Hornets, Rochdale Athletic, Manchester Free
Wanderers, Southport, St. Helens, Swinton, and
Salford, which produced respectively the famous
Internationals James Valentine and T.. Kent.

Among clubs still flourishing are the Liverpool
Old Boys, who for many years have kept up the
best traditions of the game as a strictly amateur
body. Of the distinguished players they have
turned out, R. P. Wilson, who gained his Inter-
national Cap in 1891, may be mentioned.

In addition to those already named the
more prominent teams of the present day in
Lancashire comprise Bolton, Brighton House
College, Eccles, Parkfield Old Boys, and the
Engineers, late Trafford Rovers. In 1907 the
county contributed two forwards to the English
team in the persons of L. A. N. Slocock and
G. Leather. The secretary to the Lancashire
County Union is Mr, I. W. Fletcher, and Mr.
A. M. Crook of the old Manchester Free Wan-
derers has been the county representative for
many years on the English governing body. Mr.
Crook, who did much to place the county foot-
ball union on a constitutional basis, has this
season (1907) been elected a vice-president of the
English Rugby Union.

GOLF

The county of Lancaster possesses more golf
clubs than any other shire in England, and is
adding to the number every year. The ma-
jority of the Lancashire golf courses are inland ;
but on the seaside links may be found golf as
good as any in England, while three members of
the most famous of the Lancashire clubs have
won the Amateur Championship nine times in
the twenty-one years since its institution.’
One of these has won the Open Champion-

1 Mr. John Ball, jun., in 1888, 1890, 1892,
1894, 1899, and 1907; Mr. H. H. Hilton in
1goo-o1 ; Mr. C. Hutchings in 1902.

ship twice,’ and on five occasions members of the
premier club have been runners-up for the
Amateur Championship.

It will be convenient to divide Lancashire
golf clubs into those whose courses are by the
water-side, and those which are inland; and in
the first place, both by reason of its antiquity
and the fact that it owns the finest links in this
country, must be set the Royal Liverpool,’

* Mr. H. H. Hilton in 1892 and 1897; Mr.
John Ball, jun., was open champion in 1890.

® Royal in 1871, when H.R.H. the Duke of
Connaught became its president.

495

—————

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

founded in 1869. The course, indeed, is not in
Lancashire, but at Hoylake, on the Cheshire side
of Mersey estuary ; and typographical exigencies
forbid us to give a detailed description of this
very fine 18-hole course.* We must content
ourselves with quoting the dictum of a fine judge *
of golf, that as far as his experience goes Hoy-
lake is the best test of golf in England. The
amateur record for the links is 71, held by
Mr. J. Graham, jun.,and Harry Vardon has come
within one stroke of this score. The Liver-
pool club was the first in England after the
North Devon to recognize the importance of
playing on seaside links. It owns another title
to fame in having been mainly instrumental in
instituting the Amateur Championship, and, as
is fitting, the course at Hoylake is one of the
number of selected courses on which in due
rotation the championship is decided. The Open
Championship in 1897 and 1902 was played on
the Royal Liverpool links, and in the former
year the title of champion was won from the
flower of professional golfers by Mr. H. H.
Hilton, a member of the club.

The West Lancashire Golf Club, founded in
1873 by Mr. R. Finley Miln, Mr. Alex. Stod-
dart, and others, has its excellent 18-hole course
among the undulating sand-dunes at Blundell-
sands, 8 miles from Liverpool. The course has
been rearranged several times under the super-
vision of Mr. H. H. Hilton and Alec Herd.
The spacious club-house, built in 1893, and the
accessibility of the links from Liverpool combine
to render this club one of the most convenient
and popular in the county. The record of the
course is held by T. Ball, the club professional,
who has been round in 71. Another seaside
course close at hand is that of the West Lanca-
shire Ladies’ Golf Club, instituted in 1891,
whose sporting links are on the coast half-way
between Liverpool and Southport.

The Barrow-in-Furness Club, which was
founded in 1874, has an excellent 18-hole course
on the seaward side of the Isle of Walney.

Formby Golf Club is ten years younger. It
was instituted in December, 1884, by Mr. J. S.
Beauford and others, and has a large membership
of 600, with a ladies’ club attached to it. The
18-hole course ® is on the sandhills at Freshfield,
to the west of the town. The holes vary in
length from 140 to 472 yards, and the par
score of 75 has been beaten in 71 strokes by
W. McEwan, the club professional.

The finest seaside course in Lancashire is,
without doubt, that of the Lytham and St.
Anne’s Club, at St. Annes-on-the-Sea, on the

‘The curious in these matters may find a special
article on the links of Hoylake in vol. x of The Golfing
Annual.

5 Mr. J. L. Lowe.

° There is a detailed description of the links in vol.
xi of The Golfing Annual.

north bank of the estuary of the Ribble, some three
miles west of Lytham, and five south of Black-
pool. This famous club, founded in 1886, has
a grand course of 18 holes, whose putting greens
are perhaps the most remarkable of its many
excellences. It has been called an easy course,
but accuracy is imperative not less at the flat
holes than amid the lofty sandhills. The record
of the links, both amateur and professional, is 69,
held respectively by Mr. H. B. McCarthy, of
Ilkley,’ and Harry Vardon.

Birkdale has a very sporting course of 18
holes, laid out in 1889, on the south coast be-
tween Formby Point and Southport. David
McEwan, the club professional, holds the record
of 68 strokes for these links. Mr. F. W. H.
Campbell is the only amateur who has come
within eight strokes of this great score.

Rossall School has a g-hole course on the
school property 3 miles from Fleetwood, which
was laid out in 1890. It is somewhat flat, with
ditches and ponds as hazards, but the greens are
good, and the turf is of the right golfing quality.

Of the two courses at Blackpool, the elder is
that of the Blackpool Golf Club, founded in 1894
by Mr. A. H. Doleman and others at Squire’s
Gate, South Shore. ‘The new 18-hole course,
opened in 1905 when the fine club-house was
built, is on pasture land with true seaside turf on
a sandy subsoil, 3 miles south of the town, where
there is also a full course for ladies. “The men’s
links are about 34 miles round, with two short
holes of 180 yards each, and a long hole of 460
yards. Bogey is a somewhat liberal 78, a score
which Mr. E. E. G. Terry has beaten with 71.
The club offers for competition two gold medals,
the Ridley and the Club, and three challenge
cups.

Among the sand dunes at Ansdell, between
Lytham and St. Annes, is the sporting 18-hole
course of the Fairhaven Golf Club, instituted in
1895. The club is in a flourishing condition in
spite of the close proximity of the powerful
and attractive Lytham and St. Annes, and the
5,000 yards course, with its large and keen put-
ting greens, its natural bunkers, and fine turf,
compares not unfavourably with many better
known links. Bogey is 74, and the green records
are—professional 70 by Daniel Poole, and ama-
teur 74 by Mr. A. L. Poole. The principal
prizes are the Brooks Prize, the Riley Cup, the
Newbigging Prize, and the Captain’s Prize.

The St. Annes Old Links Golf Club, founded
by Mr. J. W. Mackland and Mr. H. Foster in
the summer of 1901, has a course near at hand,
situated on the most bracing part of the Lanca-
shire coast. “The course, over which the Lytham
and St. Annes Club used to play, is 3} miles
round, with one terrific long hole of 520 yards,
and is laid out on light sandy soil among sand-
hills and over pasture land. ‘The par score is an

7 Twice winner of the Yorkshire Championship.

496

SPORT ANCIENT AND MODERN

easy 81, as is shown by the amateur and profes-
sional records of 76 and 70, made respectively
by Mr. D. Jones and Harry Simpson. There
is a good club-house, and the trophies for compe-
tition include the Captain’s Cup and the Mack-
land Challenge Cup.

The Hesketh Golf Club, with which is amal-
gamated the original Southport Club, established
in 1885, was founded in the autumn of 1902.
Its long course of 6,300 yards ison the sea front
of the borough of Southport, on the property of
Mr. C. H. Bibby-Hesketh of North Meols, and
is laid out over the sandhills of the seashore with
some holes on agricultural land and sea marshes.
All the hazards are natural, the greens are good,
and the holes are of admirable length, the longest
being nearly 500 yards. ‘The par score for this
long course is 78 ; the record of 70 is held by
Peter McEwan, the club professional, the best
amateur return being Mr. W. Henderson’s 73.
The Hesketh Ladies’ Club play over the men’s
course, but from shortened tees. Among the
club trophies are the Hesketh Silver Shield and
the Buckley and the Pilkington Gold Medals.
The links of the Southport and Ainsdale Club
in the immediate neighbourhood were opened in
April, 1907.

The youngest of the seaside courses is that of
the Dunnerholme Club at Askam-in-Furness, on
the coast 6 miles north of Barrow, overlooking
Duddon Sands. Instituted in 1906 this club
has an 18-hole course of good seaside turf, with
a length of close on 6,000 yards.

Turning now inland we find that the oldest
of the many golf clubs is the Old Manchester,
notable as being for half a century the only
upholder of the royal and ancient game in the
county of Lancaster. Founded as long ago as
1818, it is old in years and in constitution rather
than in its links, for its g9-hole course was
opened in 1903 at Kersal Edge, with a ladies’
club as a branch of it. The Old Manchester
possesses a valuable collection of prizes, chief
among which are the Bannerman Gold Medal,
the Atherton Silver Medal, the Holdsworth
Medal, and the Club Cup.

The course of the Haydock Park Golf Club
adjoins the well-known race-course at Dean Dam
Moor, near Newton-le-Willows. The club was
founded in January, 1877, by Dr. Lister, Dr.
Watkins, the Rev. H. Siddall, and others, and its
original links of 9 holes have never been extended
to the regulation 18. The links are charmingly
situated in a wooded district, and the pasture land
on which they are laid out is slightly undulating.

At Trafford Park, with the Hall as its club-
house, are the links of the Manchester Golf
Club, instituted in 1882 by Mr. John Macalister.
It is claimed for this 18-hole course that it is the
best in the neighbourhood of Manchester, and
its sandy subsoil gives good going all the year
through, though best perhaps in the summer

months. The putting greens are large and ex-
cellently kept, and the numerous hazards and
made bunkers are artfully disposed. The course
is 3t miles round, with holes varying in length
from 150 to 490 yards. The professional
record for the green is held by P. J. Gaudin,
who did a 65 in 1905 ; Mr. Norman Macbeth’s
73 is the best amateur effort. Of the many
prizes which this club owns the most important
are the Macalister Challenge Shield, the Hogg
Challenge Cup, the Mafeking Cup, the Houlds-
worth Challenge Cup, and the Balfour Cup.

The Rochdale Club was founded in May,
1888. Its course of 18 holes, 5,500 yards in
length, is on undulating pasture land at Bag-
slate near Rochdale. Bogey is 80, and the
record score is 76 by A. Herd.

In 1889 the Wilpshire and District Golf Club
was started through the instrumentality of Mr.
James Bertwistle, with links on moorland pasture
at Wilpshire near Blackburn. It has a 9-hole
course of 2,700 yards, and the hazards are stone
walls, ditches, and made bunkers.

At Redvales is the 9-hole course of the Bury
Club, made in the summer of 1890, on undu-
lating pasture on the road between Bury and
Manchester. The hazards here are roads and
artificial bunkers.

The year 1891 was a time of great golfing
activity in Lancashire. Nine-hole courses were
laid out on the moorside at Smithhills for the
Bolton Golf Club ; at Didsbury, 5 miles from
Manchester ; and at Grange Park, St. Helens,
on sandy ground on the Liverpool road between
Prescot and St. Helens.

The Pleasington Club, founded a year later,
has another g-hole course on undulating and
sandy ground—partly pasture and partly heath
—under Hoghton Tower. ‘These picturesque
links were laid out by G. Lowe, of St. Annes.
The hazards are trees and ponds, with a number
of artificial sand-bunkers. The par score—a
liberal 84—for the double round has been well
beaten by more than one member of the club in
79 strokes.

In 1892 also were instituted the Darwen
Golf Club, which is singular in having a course
of 12 holes about a mile from the town; the
Fairfield Club, with its 9-hole course, 4 miles
from Manchester ; and the Oldham Golf Club,
whose 18-hole links are at Lees, with a short
course for ladies affiliated to it. ‘The links of
the Withington Club, initiated in the same year
by Mr. J. M. Eaton, are on rich alluvial meadow
land on a bend of the Mersey between Didsbury
and Northenden. ‘The course of 18 holes is
rather flat, but the artificial hazards are well
arranged, the turf is of fine quality, and the
greens are remarkably good. ‘The par score of
76, erring perhaps on the side of leniency, has
been beaten by Mr. H. C. R. Horkheimer’s 72
and G. A. Cassidy’s 68.

2 497 63

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

In 1893 three more golf courses were opened—
one on hilly moorland near Accrington ; another
on meadowland at Flixton, each of 9 holes ; the
third being the 18 holes of the Anson Golf Club
at Rusholme by Manchester. Mr. A. MI. Crook
was the leading spirit in the foundation of the
last-named club. Its course, though on pasture
over a clay subsoil where summer play is natu-
rally to be preferred, is an interesting one, with
hazards of brooks and made bunkers, and the
par score is 78. F.G. Renouf, the club pro-
fessional, has been round in 70 ; Mr. F. Morris’s
record is 74 strokes. The many prizes of this
club include the President’s, the Captain’s, and
the Victoria Cups.

The next year, 1894, saw 9-hole courses laid
out at Burnley, at Fellgate in very stony country
for the Grange over Sands Golf Club, and at the
foot of the slope leading up to Longridge Fell
for Stonyhurst College. Within the same season
18-hole courses were instituted for the North
Manchester Club at Crumpsall, and at Worsley.
The Worsley Club has its course on some-
what heavy ground, which, however, is well
drained, in Broad Oak Park near Manchester.
Lowe was the designer of this, as of so many
other courses in the county. The total length
of it is some 5,500 yards, and the chief hazards
are of a watery nature—ponds and a stream
which has to be crossed at four of the 18 holes.
There is a very fine club house. Bogey’s score
of 78 has been lowered by Mr. W. Nelson in
76, and by W. J. Leaver in an excellent round
o

During the next two years golf clubs were
opened in quick succession at Ulverston, Preston,
Horwich, Great Harwood, Failsworth, and Traf-
ford.

The 9-hole links of the Ulverston Golf Club
are on pasture land a mile and a half from the
town, whence glorious views of hill and lake are
obtained. The principal obstacles are stone
walls. The Swan Cup and the Kennedy Coro-
nation Cup are the most valuable of the club
prizes.

The Preston Club, under the captaincy of
Dr. J. E. Garner, absorbed the existing Fulwood
Golf Club in November 1895, and has its 18-
hole course at Fulwood Hall near Preston. The
links are on pasture land with clay subsoil, and
the hazards, consisting of a brook, hedges, and
ditches, are all natural. The par score is 75, and
the amateur and professional records are each 72.
The club is rich in prizes, of which the Galloway
Bowl, the Hermon Cup, the Healey Cup, and
the Galloway Cup are the most important.

At Horwich, five miles from Bolton, is a
g-hole course, laid out by Lowe on hilly pasture
with a clay subsoil.

In January 1896, Dr. Chearnley Smith and
others founded the Great Harwood Club with
a course on moorland at Bellmount. The

hazards are all natural, and comprise hedges and
ditches, stone walls, and a quarry. Mr. B.
Stahlknecht holds the record of 36 for the
g holes.

The Failsworth Golf Club, in whose founda-
tion in June of the same year the late Dr. Beattie
was chiefly instrumental, has an 18-hole course
laid out by Mr. Merry on hilly pasture about a
mile from Manchester. Though the subsoil is
clay, the configuration of the ground allows of
play all the year round. The Mellor Cup is
the chief prize of the club, and the record of 75
strokes for the green is held by Mr. J. W.
Crossley.

Manchester added yet another to its many
golf clubs in the same year, when the 9-hole
course of the Trafford Club was opened on land
adjoining the county cricket ground on the
Warwick Road.

The Blackburn Club instituted its links with
the unusual number of 13 holes on Revidge in
1897, in which year the pretty little course of
the West Derby Golf Club was made in Deys-
brook Park, hard by Croxteth and Knowsley.

The Chorley, Dalton in Furness, and Wigan
Clubs have each a g-hole course opened in 1898.
The last-named, founded by Dr. Brady, Mr. A. P.
White, anda few others, has its links on the Arley
Hall estate at Red Rock, and the club is fortunate
in having the old moated Arley Hall as its house.
Among its prizes for competition are the Powell
Cup, the Medical Cup, and the Woodcock Cup.

In the New Park at Lathom are the links of
the Ormskirk Club, founded at the instance of
Mr. R. C. Ivy in 1899. The subsoil is sand,
and the turf and conditions of play approximate
closely to those of seaside golf, so that this club
possesses, in the opinion of good judges, one of
the best of inland courses. Mr. H. H. Hilton
was the architect of this fine 18-hole course,
which has a length of close on 6,000 yards ;
and his round of 72 is the best amateur return.
The club possesses four challenge cups and a
scratch prize with gold medal.

The Woolton Golf Club was founded in
November 1900, and has its links between
Hunt’s Cross and Speke. The green is on the
short side at present, but is in process of being
extended.

At Moss Hall, a mile and a half from Bolton,
is the g-hole course of the Farnworth and Dis-
trict Club, instituted in 1901 ; and at Kibble
Bank, Brierfield, is the home of the Nelson Golf
Club. This club was founded in 1903, and its
course of g holes, 2,210 yards in length, has Lowe
as its sponsor. Play is good throughout the
year on its dry old pasture which has a stone
subsoil. The Davies Cup is the most import-
ant prize of this club.

Chorlton cum Hardy also instituted a golf
club in 1903, with links on good pasture land
with sandy subsoil on the banks of the Mersey,

498

SPORT

a mile from Chorlton. The hazards of ‘this
18-hole course, where bogey is 74, are for the
most part artificial, except for some few dykes,
intersecting fields, and one lofty mound on which
two holes are placed. ‘The club is very proud
of its magnificent house, a fine old mansion said
to be more than 500 years old.

The links of the Warrington Golf Club are
just across the border in Cheshire. This club
was founded by Mr. J. E. Birtlees, Mr. E. J.
Hall, Mr. C. D. Parkinson, and Dr. Peacocke in
1903. That year saw also the institution of
the Rossendale Club, which has a tricky g-hole
course between Ewood Bridge and Helmshore,
a little more than a mile due south of Has-
lingden.

The Fleetwood Golf Club was founded in
1904 by Dr. D. Abercrombie and others, and
its g-hole course, covering an area of some
45 acres, is another of George Lowe’s designing.
It is on the Fleetwood estate, on pasture with a
marl subsoil, and the putting greens are large
and kept in remarkably good order.

The Blackpool North Shore Golf Club,
also founded in 1904, had a course at its
inception of 9, but recently lengthened to 18,
holes—not, as its name would seem to imply, on
the seashore, but on high ground at Bispham on
the north side of the town. The holes are of
good length, and the numerous hazards are hedges,
a road, and sand-pits.

The youngest of the Manchester clubs is the
Gymkhana Golf Club, founded by Mr. William
King in 1904. Its 18-hole links, whose length
is about 4,500 yds., are on 85 acres, mainly
very hilly pasture land with a sandy subsoil, at

ANCIENT AND MODERN

Hilton Lane near Prestwich on the Bury New
Road. Hazards are both natural and artificial,
and many of the holes are blind. ‘There is a
fine club-house. The course, owing to the
nature and configuration of the ground, dries
very quickly, and play is possible, even in the
wettest weather, all the year round. The par
score is 72, and the professional record is.
R. Greig’s 69. The club has many valuable
prizes, including the Captain’s Cup, the Gym-
khana Cup, and the Scratch Prize. Nearer still
to Bury are the links of the Stand Golf Club, in-
stituted in the same year. On this interesting
little g-hole course the going is always good.

It was not until 1905 that the county town
awoke to its deficiencies in the matter of golf.
Then a g-hole course was laid out at the initia-
tive of Mr. W. M. Duncan and others on the
banks of the Lune, a mile from Lancaster. This
course, recently extended to 18 holes, is on hilly
pasture land with beautiful turf on a gravel soil
where play is possible throughout the whole
year, although mowing is necessary in the
summer months.

The links of the Deane Golf Club, on Lady
Beaumont’s estate within two miles of Bolton,
were opened in June 1906. All the hazards
are natural, and the committee, under the presi-
dency of Mr. Jessop Hulton, has arranged an
excellent inland course.

With the bare mention of this thriving club
we must bring our necessarily scanty survey of
Lancashire golf to a close, and in doing so the
Editor desires to express his very cordial thanks
to the secretaries of many clubs for the particulars
which they have been good enough to supply.

WRESTLING

Wrestling and boxing, owing perhaps to the
present-day increase of football, have greatly
declined from the popular favour in which they
were held in olden days. Lancashire had many
a champion in the days of yore in both these sports,
and to-day the catch-as-catch-can, or Lancashire
style, is reckoned as the English style of wrestling.

The first champion of this county of whom
we can find any record was Isaac Perrin. He
was born in 1751 and died in 1801. ‘The next
was R. Gregson, who was born 21 July 1778.
Standing nearly 6 ft. 2in. high, he was reputed
to be the model of a perfect man, and was selected
by Sir Thomas Lawrence as a life study, and by
the professor of anatomy at the Royal Academy
to illustrate the beauties of masculine proportion.
Gregson twice essayed for the championship of
the world in London, in the years 1807 and
1808, but was unfortunate in meeting J. Gully.
He also tried against Cribb on 25 October, 1808,
and was again unsuccessful, though the merest

whim of fortune turned the scales against him.
He fought no more after this and died in 1824.

Edward Painter, who was born in 1787 and
died in 1852, was another great wrestler ; but
John Carter, born 13 September 1789, was
probably the most famous whom the county has
produced in this sport. He defeated Oliver in
1816 at Gretna Green and designated himself
champion of England. He issued challenges to
all and sundry, but his gage was not taken up till
1819, when he was beaten by Spring ; he died in
1844.

There are no big meetings now held in Lan-
cashire, and, to see the sport as it was, one must
go to Grasmere, where is practically the only
meeting that survives of the many that were
once held in the north of England. ‘Though its
admirers call the Lancashire style the best, it is
undoubtedly the roughest of British styles owing
to the fact that unlimited action is allowed, such
as struggling on the ground and catching hold of

499

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

the lezs. Throttling and breaking of arms are
not allowed, but still such little details as the
breaking of fingers would not be considered a
disqualification, if such an accident took place
solely in the struggle, and not through any un-
fair play. The Lancashire style closely resem-
bles the Graeco-Roman,! the only difference being
that the latter does not permit of tripping and
catching hold of the legs, while both are allowed
according to the rules of Lancashire. “To consti-
tute a fall both shoulders must be down on the
ground.

The principal ‘chips’ (as the tricks of the art
are termed) in the Lancashire style are as
follows :—

The Double Nelson. This is now generally
barred, owing to the dangerous results when it is
successful. It is accomplished by getting behind
your opponent and placing both arms under his ;
then clasp your hands behind his neck, and bend
his head down in such a way that, if he does not
previously measure his length on the ground, his
breast bone will give way.

The Half Nelson. Grasp your opponent by
the right wrist with your left hand, place your
right hand under his arm and seize him by the
neck, pressing his head forward, then leave go of
his right hand, and clasp him round the waist ;
he can then be easily heaved.

The Heave. Place your righthand under your
opponent’s right shoulder, and reach over to his
left loin; at the same time slip your left arm
under his so as to get hold of his left elbow ; this
being successfully accomplished he can be made
to turn a complete somersault.

The Lancashire Lock. Each wrestler grasps
the other by the thigh, when both struggle to
get on all fours. If you catch your opponent by
the thigh, and get underneath his body before he
is down, you can lift him up bodily and throw
him down. This is also called The Lancashire
ham and leg.

The Three-quarter Nelson is probably the most
useful of the Lancashire chips. Grasp your op-
ponent round the neck with both hands, without
letting him get a similar hold, and you have him
in a good position for the Buttock or Cross-But-
tock.

The Flying Man. This is also common to the
Cornwall and Devon style. Seize your oppo-
nent’s left wrist with your right hand, then im-
mediately turn your back on him; at the same
time grasp his left elbow with your left hand and
swing him over your head.

If the wearisome wrestling on the ground were
abolished there would be nothing to say against
the Lancashire style. It certainly calls for great
skill and science, and is most useful for self-defence.

BOWLS

It may be questioned whether the game of
bowls should be classified as a sport, but it is so
universally played in Lancashire that this article
would not, it is thought, be complete without
some reference to it.

The most important event of the year in the
bowling world is the annual tournament at
Blackpool.2 This event was established about
the beginning of the last quarter of the nine-
teenth century by Mr. Herbert Nickson, of the
Talbot Hotel. It had a very humble beginning,
being limited to sixteen players in its first year.
From that modest start, however, has grown a
contest which ranks as the premier meeting of

' The Lancashire style has also a great resemblance
to that of the ‘Mahrattas which the present writer has
often seen in India, in that the half-stooping attitude
is assumed on commencing the rounds ; the opponents
then seize each other by the wrists, or if possible get
into head holds, and eventually fall struggling to the
ground. Then the real contest begins. The spec-
tacle is not a particularly interesting one, and is very
often a lengthy and protracted business. When judg-
ing in India, the writer had to make a time limit, or no
prize ; this generally had a good result.

* This tournament generally begins on the second
or third Monday in September, and usually lasts for
about a month. While it is in process matches are
to be seen daily between all the best-known pro-
fessional bowlers.

the season for this favourite pastime. It was
during the lifetime of the late Mr. John Nickson,
son of the founder of the handicap, that the
tournament reached its present great importance.
By dint of his great personal influence, and a
substantial increase to the prize money, Mr.
Nickson gave so great an impetus to the game
that in the year 1903 there were no fewer than
704 competitors, and in 1906 the tournament
extended over a period of six weeks. Play was,
however, impossible during one week of the
meeting on account of bad weather.

Interest in this event is by no means confined
to the County Palatine, although the majority
of the players are drawn from this county.
Trundlers come from the West Riding of
Yorkshire and Cumberland, from the midland
counties and the Isle of Man, and on two or
three occasions entries have even been received
from London.

The ground itself is one of the best kept and
most carefully preserved of the many bowling
greens in the country, the smooth, even, velvety
turf being kept in the pink of condition. This
green, including asphalt, measures 47 yds. 1 ft. by
36 yds. 2ft., the asphalt being 6 ft. 3in. in
width. On this green almost every bowler of
note has tried his skill in the annual effort to
secure the coveted blue ribbon of the bowling turf.

500

SPORT ANCIENT

The name of the late Tom Hart will probably
go down to posterity as the finest and most
expert bowler that Lancashire has seen. Hart
had the distinction of being the only competitor
who has ever secured the championship starting
from one behind scratch, winning from this
mark in 1882, and only twice has the handicap
been won by scratch men, viz. by J. Green and
D. Greenhalgh.

In 1906 the championship was won by W.
Taylor, more familiarly know as ‘Owd Tess,’
who was looked upon as the doyen of bowlers.
Although he has regularly taken part in
the tournament for the last thirty years, and
has probably played more matches than any
other bowler, Taylor had never previously
figured in the final. ‘Taylor is well over sixty
years old.

In marked contrast to his success may be
mentioned the victory of G. Farrington, who
carried off the premier honours in 1904. In
that year he competed for the first time in his
life in the big handicap, and although only a
novice, yet actually ran right through the tourna-
ment and carried off the championship from no
less than 576 entries. Mention ought to be
made of George Beatty who, although he has
never yet won the championship, has twice been
the runner-up.

An account of the tournament would be
incomplete without reference to one or two very
extraordinary finals which have been witnessed.

AND MODERN

In the year 1891, during the finals between
H. Rutter and H. Brocklebank, the game had
been called twenty to nineteen in Brocklebank’s
favour (the game being 21 up). Brocklebank
was then lying up with a wood on each side of
the jack, when Rutter, putting all he knew into
his last throw, delivered his wood with such
effect that he actually not only knocked his
opponent’s woods off the green, but also left
himself with two in, thus winning the champion-
ship after one of the most exciting games ever
witnessed.

On another occasion, while the last end was
being played, a child unwittingly lifted the jack
before anyone could interfere. How the
problem as to the winner was settled is not
recorded, but it was after this incident that a
rule was passed forbidding any children to come
on the green.

So important has the game of bowls become
in Lancashire, that a few years ago an associa-
tion of professional bowlers was formed for the
settlement of any matter that might arise in
dispute among them, and an association of
bowling-green proprietors was also formed at the
same time.

The Lancashire and Cheshire Bowling Associ-
ation, whose members consist solely of amateurs,
at present do not permit their members to enter
for the Blackpool tournament, though the
majority of the competitors in this tournament
are amateurs and not professional bowlers.

TENNIS

The only public tennis court in Lancashire
belongs to the Manchester Tennis and Racquet
Club, and was opened in 1879.

It has witnessed many famous struggles, and
several noted players have learnt the game in this
court, the greatest being Peter Latham. Messrs.
Percy Ashworth and E. M. Baerlein, ex-amateur
champions, both started playing the game in this
court, and they both still play in it. The Rt. Hon.
A. J. Balfour, when member of Parliament for the
East Division of Manchester, often played here,
and amongst other notable persons who have
played here are Sir Edward Grey, Lord Alverstone
(Lord Chief Justice), and the present Bishop of
Manchester.

The most famous matches played in this court

were those between P. Latham and G. Lam-
bert (champion of the world), and between
P. Latham and Saunders in 1895, when they
played for the championship of the world, and
Latham won.

Besides the tennis court, there are two racquet
courts in the Manchester Club, and here also
some great games have been witnessed, the
best being that which was played in 1889 be-
tween Latham and Gray for the racquet cham-
pionship. The Oxford and Cambridge match
was played here in 1887, and the first winners
of the Military Racquet Cup were practised
and trained here by Mr. Feildon, the present
manager, who has been at the club for twenty
years.

501

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

COCK-FIGHTING

Although at the present day it is extremely
difficult to get any details, it is certain that in
former times Lancashire was famous not only for
its breed of cocks, but also for its feeders. The
thirteenth Earl of Derby possessed a breed of
cocks that was famous throughout the country,
the pedigrees of these birds being most carefully
recorded. Even now some of this famous strain
can be met within Lancashire. The most noted
feeder that Lancashire boasted was Potter, who
was feeder to the above-mentioned Earl of Derby.
It was doubtless due to this earl that ‘ cocking,’
as it was termed, was so popular in the county.
It is said of him that he was so enamoured of
the sport, that he would have cocks fighting on
his counterpane when he was ill in bed.

The training of the cock was carried out with
great elaboration of detail. Diet was of course
most carefully attended to; the birds had their
wings and tails trimmed, and when properly con-
ditioned were made to spar daily with each other,
pads something like tiny boxing gloves being tied
to their heels, so that they might not do any
damage to each other. It required about one
month to get a bird ready fora heavy fight, some
birds requirine an even longer time than this.

A cock lovesa fight of any description, and the
story of the cock in the battle of the glorious
1st of June fully bears out his character.) Liver-
pool and Manchester boasted of several cock-pits,
and some of these are still in existence, though
now used for other purposes. Of the other cock-
pits in the county the most famous was probably
thatat Winwick near Warrington.

The first mention of cock-fighting in Lanca-
shire that we have been able to trace is made in
the case of Thomas Boteler against Sir Thoma.
Gerard and others for assault at a cock-fight in
1514 at Winwick, Bewsy, and Ashton Edge, in
which Thomas Boteler, esq., complains that he
‘was in God’s and the King’s peace at Wynwhik
in the county of Lancashire the Saturday in
Easter week last past, accompanied by divers
gentlemen and others at a cock-fight there, after
the manner of the country there used.’

The said Thomas says, that... he, Sir Richard
Bold, knight, and others being together at Manchester
. . the Bishop of Ely” appointed to meet at Wynwhik

This bird on board of one of our ships chanced to
have his house broken to pieces by a shot or some fall-
ing rigging, which accident set the bird at liberty, and,
perched on the stump of the mainmast, which had
been carried away, he commenced crowing and flapping
his wings during the remainder of the engagement as
if he thoroughly enjoyed the thundering horror of the
scene,

's James Stanley, sixth son of Thomas, first Earl of
Derby Among his many high ecclesiastical dignities
he held that of warden of Manchester College. He

the following Saturday to see their cocks fight, as was
customary there every Saturday. Accordingly, not
knowing that the said Sir Thomas Gerard was going
to the said town that day, they met at the cockfight
about 10 0’clock, the said Thomas Boteler having with
him about 12 persons, and some children who carried
the cocks, the said Richard Bold about the same num-
ber, and other gentlemen, servants, and children
amounting to about $0 persons ; they sat about their
gamyn in the said cockfeight place about the space of
ij howrys.

Again in the same case :—

Thomas Boteler sent 2 priests to Sir Thomas to
ask why he had come, and to offer him half the cock-
fight place. This Sir Thomas confesses, and adds,
that the priests said he should have the best game that
the said Thomas Boteler could make him.’

John Sutton of Warrington was a noted
cock feeder in the middle of the eighteenth
century. Giving evidence in an action™ between
Thomas Cust of Danby Hill, plaintiff, and
Ralph Thompson and Martin Dunn, defendants,
17 October 1748, at Ripon, this deponent
said that he knew the rules of cock-fighting and
had known them for many years. When both
cocks left off fighting until either of the handers
count forty, then the long law was in, and both
handers brought the cocks together. If one cock
refused to fight after counting ten, then the
hander of the fighting cock counted ten more ;
the cocks were set together again, and if the
same cock refused again to fight the hander of
the fighting cock again counted ten. If he still
refused when ten times ten had been counted he
was taken away, and the fighting cock was
deemed the winner. It was usual for the hander
to call out aloud after each time the cock refused,
‘once,’ ‘twice,’ or ‘thrice refused,’ until he had
refused ten times. When two cocks were set
together, after the long law of forty was told,
and both refused fighting for ten times, then a
fresh cock was brought into the pit, and set down
to each of the cocks. If one of them fought,
and the other refused to fight, it was a victory
for the fighter. In case a bet of ten pounds
to five shillings was offered, and there were no
takers, then the hander of the cock on which
the odds were offered counted forty, but if no
person accepted the offer, then the battle was

was elected Bishop of Ely in 1506, and at his death,
22 March 1514~15, was buried in the chapel of St.
John Baptist, which he had built, in the collegiate
church of Manchester. His moral character, which
was not above reproach, made him an easy mark for
the attacks of his enemies.

* Pleadings and Depositions, Duchy Ct. of Lanc. (Lancs.
and Ches. Rec. Soc. xxvii), 61-7.

°° Dep. Keeper's Rep. xiii, App. 236-7.

502

SPORT ANCIENT

won by the cock on which the odds were laid,
and he was immediately taken away. If the
wager were taken, then the hander continued
counting as if no such bet had been laid, and
the cock refusing ten times was the losing cock.
If a cock was taken away without the hander
counting ten times ten, the cock so taken away
lost the battle.

At Manchester on 15 March 1753 and follow-
ing days Sir Lynch Cotton fought Mr. Robert
Stansfeld a cock match for 10 guineas and 100
guineas the main, which main consisted of four-
teen battles, nine of which were won by Sir L.
Cotton, and five by Mr. Stansfeld.$

On the same day and at the same place there
was a main between Lord Strange and Mr. Wil-
liam Ratcliff for 10 guineas a battle and 20 guineas
the main. This main consisted of thirty-three
battles, seventeen of which were won by his lord-
ship and sixteen by Mr. Ratcliff There is
also a record of a cock-fight at Newton when
on 14 June 1753 Mr. Peter Legh fought
Mr. Basil Eccleston a main of cocks, which was
won by Mr. Legh by one battle, but the number
of battles is not recorded.® There is an interest-
ing old poster, dated g and 10 May 1791, in
the possession of the Free Reference Library in
Manchester which announces :—

A Welch main of cocks to be fought at Salford Pit
for £42 by 32 cocks. None to exceed 4 lbs. 8 ozs.,
and to weigh on Saturday, 29th December, 1791, and
to fight on Monday 31st and Tuesday Ist January,
1792 ; topay §/- when they put down their names ;
remainder when they weigh in. Fighting is to com-
mence at nine o’clock in the morning, and to fight all
day by daylight ; and to be drawn by ticket on the sod
which fight together, and no more than ten minutes
are allowed to spur in.

‘Cocking ’ was esteemed a noble sport even in
the nineteenth century, and a great main was
arranged between the thirteenth Earl of Derby,
who had the celebrated Potter as feeder, and
Mr. Henry Bold Hoghton, with Woodcock as
feeder.6 This fight commenced on Tuesday,
g June, and ended on 20 June 1829 in a
win for Mr. Hoghton. The terms of the match
were for 10 guineas a battle and 200 guineas the
main; the wager standing good for thirty-five
mains and five byes, Monday in each week was
a blank day, and on Saturday, 13 June, the scores
stood as follows :—Potter, 14 mains, 2 byes;
Woodcock, 7 mains, 1 bye. The match
aroused widespread interest, as may be seen by
the following extract from Be/l’s Life of 21 June
1829 :—

To such decisive conclusion had the knowing ones
come respecting this main on Thursday night, Potter
for Derby being 7 ahead, that 20 to 1 was often laid
and as often went abegging. On Friday Woodcock

* Heber, Historical List of Horse Matches, etc. in
1753- ‘ Ibid. vol iii.
5 Ibid. ® Collecting, 1997, p. 9.

AND MODERN

had the lead in the day’s fighting, however he still
had six battles out of the remaining seven to get to win
the main on Saturday, and the odds ran exceedingly
high against him ; but strange to say, he was success-
ful, thereby proving his superior skill as a feeder, or his
better judgment in selecting the birds; it being the
third or fourth time he has beaten Potter in succession ;
the odds being at starting always 6 to 4 against him.

This fight was an interesting one, as it practically
represented a battle between the counties of Lan-
cashire and Cheshire ; Potter being the Lancashire
and Woodcock the Cheshire feeder.

Cocking as arule took place at the same time
as the various race meetings. The places at
which these meetings were held were en féte for
the week, and as the races did not usually last
for more than three days, with a day intervening
between each, cocking was indulged in on the off
days. Accounts of these fights were duly recorded
in the sporting magazines of the day, from one
of which the following extracts are taken’ :—

Preston.—During the races a main was fought be-
tween the Earl of Derby (Potter, feeder) and J. Whites
Esq. (Gilliver, feeder) for 10 guineas and 200 guineas
the main. Potter won by five mains. At Lancaster
a main of cocks was fought between the gentlemen of
Lancashire and the gentlemen of Yorkshire for
Io guineas a battle and 200 guineas the main. The
gentlemen of Lancashire won by seven mains.

The Newton Races were well attended this year.
The main of cocks (11 battles for 10 gs. each, and
100 gs. the main) remains undecided, from a dispute
that arose during the ninth battle, each side having
previously won four. One of the cocks was killed,
and while counting him out, the other ran away.
Each party claiming, and neither giving way, the main
was not proceeded with.

Young cocks were called ‘stags,’ and a bird
having attained two years was held to be at his
best for fighting purposes. In fighting a match,
the number of cocks to be shown on either
side was agreed upon, and the day before the
match the cocks were shown, weighed with the
greatest nicety, and matched according to their
weights. Their marks were also carefully set
down in order to prevent any trickery in changing
the birds after they had been weighed. The
cocks which were within an ounce of each other
were said ‘to fall in’ and were matched, those
which did not ‘fallin’ were matched to fight what
were called ‘byes.’ Those which fell in came
into ‘the main.? The main was fought for a
stake upon each battle and a certain amount for
‘the main,’ that is for the winner of most battles
in the main ; the ‘ byes’ had nothing to do with
the ‘main’ and were usually fought for smaller
sums. Ifthe numbers of the results of the battles
fought were equal, so that the main could not
be decided, it was usual to separate two or more
cocks of equal weight which were matched
to fight, and to give or take an ounce either way,

” Sporting Magazine, 1825, p. 53.

593

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

with one of the birds which fell into the byes, so
as to make an uneven number.

Part of the income of the head master and the
usher of the grammar school at Lancaster con-
sisted of a gratuity called ‘cock penny,’ paid at
Shrovetide by the scholars who were sons of
freemen. Of this money the head master had
seven-twelfths and the usher five-twelfths. Cock
penny was also paid at the schools at Hawkshead
and Clitheroe, and at Burnley it was in existence
till about 1845.8

WHIPPET

There are no very ancient records of whippet
racing in this county, but there is no doubt of
its popularity to-day amongst the people of Lan-
cashire. Week in week out the sport takes
place in most of the large towns, St. Helens and
Oldham being perhaps the most noted for their
meetings.

The whippet is now practically a distinct
breed ; it may even be called a Lancashire one.’
Originally the outcome of a cross between the
Italian greyhound and the fox-terrier, this dog
has the appearance of a miniature greyhound.
In 1845 Mr. Sutcliff Whittar of Burnley pos-
sessed a celebrated black greyhound dog, Sailor.
It was mated with a rather leggy, broken-
haired terrier bitch, and from this cross came the
celebrated whippet stud dog, Spring. The
terrier strain still shows itself in the head and
coat of the whippet ; the head is shorter and
the coat harsher than in the ordinary greyhound.

Whippet racing is essentially a working-man’s
sport, although a few years ago an attempt
was made to make it fashionable, when a handicap
was arranged to take place at the show of the
Ladies’ Kennel Association held at Ranelagh.
The result, however, was a failure.

This sport is made a great medium for betting;
but to give the Lancashire man his due, it must
be confessed that he is really devoted to his dog.
The dog is often the chief bread-winner in the
home, and a good fast whippet is a source of
income to its owner not only for the stakes won
at the races, but also when he goes to the stud.
The worst trait of the whippet is that he is an
inveterate scavenger, and for this reason he
is nearly always muzzled when at exercise.

For its size there is no dog faster over a short
distance up to about 200 yds., and this distance
is usually fixed for the length of arace. In the
IV hippet and Race Dog by Freeman, dated 1894,
there is an account of a race between a whippet
and a pigeon in Lancashire for 200 yds. Both
were trained to do the distance straight, and the

® Brand’s Popular Antiquities, 1849, i, 72.
* Tbid. 79. 'H. Dalziel, British Dogs, 1882.

A curious notice of cock-fighting is contained
in a letter from Sir Henry Saville, dated 1546,
printed in the P/umpton Correspondence, p. 251.
He invites all his relations to

se all the our good cocks fight, if it plese you, and se
the maner of our cocks. Ther will be Lannckeshire
of one parte, and Derbyshire of another parte, and
Hallomshire of the third parte. I perceive your
cocking varieth from ours, for ye lay but the battell ;
and if our battell be but £10 to £5, thear will be
£10 to one laye or the battell be ended.’

RACING

pigeon beat the dog by a couple of yards only.
The true whippet should weigh from 12 lb. to
20 |b., though in former days dogs of 16 Ib. to
24 lb. were preferred.

The races are all handicaps, and the handicap-
ping is based on the weight of the dog, its size, and
its pace against the clock. The bitch is faster than
the dog, and has to allow him a considerable start,
but this varies according to the relative weights.
A bitch of 20 Ib. for instance would concede two
yards to a dog of the same weight, but a bitch of
15 lb. would have to give a dog of 15 lb. four
yards start. The handicap for size is a yard an
inch. ‘Timing the dog against the clock is done
with great accuracy, and stop watches registering
a sixteenth of a second are used. This accounts
for the strange sight which is often seen of a
working man wearing a watch that probably cost
£20 or so. Owners are pretty smart in reckon-
ing up the chances their animals may have in the
final by judging of their running in the pre-
liminary heats. Although it is the easiest thing
in the world to give a dog some little dainty tit-
bit just before racing, and so make certain of his
not winning, this is very rarely done. Cheating
in fact is most uncommon, for a dog whose
public performances are known to have been
good is of much more value when he goes to the
stud, and more money may be made by his
services than by betting against him.

Large meetings such as those held at Oldham
have their courses properly arranged, with rail-
ings to keep the spectators from interfering with
the dogs and the slipper. A small weighing
tent is erected near the starting point, and the
dogs are most carefully weighed before and after
racing. About four ounces are allowed over
the weight at which the dog is entered to run,
and as much as six extra in the final heat.
Directly a dog has been weighed in he is taken
to his handicap mark by the slipper. The
course should be made of cinders, and well rolled
when wet. If the surface gets hard the dogs
are almost certain to get lamed.

The length of the course should be 220
yds, and its width 10 yds. This allows

504

SPORT ANCIENT

about 14 yds. to each dog, eight being the
usual number in each heat. The course is
divided in some places lengthways by tapes or
strips of canvas about 18 in. high. For thirty
yards from the start, the course is marked with
parallel lines a yard apart, every fifth line having
the distance from scratch clearly marked. The
winning post is 200 yds. from the scratch line,
and 15 yds. beyond is the over-mark line, beyond
which the ‘runners’ must have passed before
the dogs have breasted the tape. Each dog on
reaching the starting point is given a distinguish-
ing colour to be worn round the neck. In some
courses there is a telegraph board showing the
colours of the dogs running in each heat, but
more often the colours are shown at the judge’s
box. The judge’s box should be if possible
below the level of the ground, as the distances
dividing the dogs at the finish are often only
inches. When on their marks the dogs are
stripped of their clothing, and held by the slipper.
Some slippers hold their charges by the loose
skin of the neck, and hind feet, others by their
hind quarters ; the method of holding depends
upon the temper of the dog. The ‘runners,’
whoare generally the owners, now wave in front
of their respective dogs either a bit of rag or rabbit
skin, and then run off to the over-mark line.
When they have all passed the 200 yard line
the starter fires his pistol, and the slippers throw
their charges into their stride, the runners all
the time whistling and calling their own dogs.
Babel at once reigns, and on the winning dog
passing the judge, his colour is immediately

2 505

AND MODERN

shown. ‘The dog goes straight to his runner
and seizes the rag in his mouth; he is then
generally taken away to some neighbouring cot-
tage, carefully rubbed down, and if successful is
prepared for the next heat. A very pleasing
element in this sport is the absence of cruelty,
and the little dogs seem to enjoy racing as much
as the spectators. The older dogs are of course
more used to the game than their younger rivals,
and seem to run with more judgement. On
the race card there is a full description of the
dogs, their handicaps, weights, and the colours
under which they run, together with the rules
for slippers and cautions to owners against cruelty.
Owing to the action taken by the Royal Society
for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals the
following rule is also printed on the card:
‘ Anyone running with live bait will be expelled
from the ground.’

The training of the dogs is, of course, a serious
matter, and there is a great diversity of opinion as
to the best method. Some trainers maintain that
a whippet requires a month or six weeks to be
got ready for a race ; others consider that only
half that time is necessary. The whippet, being
a delicate animal, is difficult to train, and kindness
is absolutely essential. He walks about five miles
a day with an occasional gallop, and this is
found sufficient if a dog is taken over the
country. Dieting is of course most important.
Biscuit or bread soaked in broth is the chief
food given to the dog, but as the day of the
race approaches, he is fed on the very best meat
that can be obtained.

Reference

SLAP

show ing A Promontory Fortresses

EARTHWORKS
LANCASHIRE

B Mi -lop Fortresses
C Rectangular or simple enclosures
DE Mounts and Mounts with Baileys
F Homestead Moats
Stronger Moated Works

Wie

H Fortitied Villages

XK WUnelassified Earthworks
Zz

Dykes

f
Roeburndole
an aa
t
7
Age oo
y at
\ i, eee
\ = 3
| ’ F a
\ Poh x FON a ise
} oN ba ms
: “| Riochester® jarsden ~
| Whithingham ¢ 7
| \ Uitte. with #
OrRughto Cha sile r eo ae:
\ F \ Asbaldeston j ¢
SEA <il Clifton with : Worsthorne
ws Salwick _p \ F Mel/lor x il
Rre at BI Hurstwood
of\% = Tif Perwortham hae Cliviger 7
Moegen as gM
SS ee CRE Oe Newchurch ‘“,
ie: 2 A ioe)
aa irate S ClaytonieWoods *,
149 fecleston F .
Va 4 Y ( F ~ meapey Blatchinworh,
Ny G F 4 Calderbrook *
Ruffoxd } é ey /
PPON Sy
Charm
Scarisbrich J : Sst ty
wrigntington f, BBKTOA Haft; >
=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

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\\\ <Ek rome B.

SECTION fom A foB.

met rr

SECTION from C fo OD.

Sager martes BR fae aa
a wo * = a

ENLARGED SECTION E foF.
Pranes Woop Camp, WHALLEY

2 513 65

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

only conclude, therefore, that at the time when such tribal strongholds as
those of Classes A and B were in vogue, the population of this district was
exceedingly sparse. The two prominent examples in the county are at
Marsden and at Tintwistle.

Marspen, GreaT anp Littte (34 miles north-north-east of Burnley).—
There is an interesting oval earthwork within this parish, a couple of miles
east-north-east of the village, and a little over a mile south-south-west of the
town of Colne ; it caps the summit of a high hill which bears the name of
Caster Cliff. This imposing eminence attains a height of 920 ft. above sea
level. It isa spur of the great Pennine Range, which rises many hundreds
of feet higher a few miles away to the east. It is a magnificent position, well
adapted for defensive purposes ; its views are most extensive on all sides,
ranging far down the valley of the Calder to the south-west, and up to the
Craven district in the north. From the top of the hill the ground falls
rapidly on all sides except the south-east, where a neck of land, which drops
in height some 60 ft. from the summit, connects it with almost equally high
ground about 400 yds. away; from near this watershed two brooks have their
origin, and the deep valleys which they have cut, especially that to the south
of the fortress, afford additional protection to it. The command from the
stronghold is, of course, complete. The surrounding districts have always
probably been wild regions, sparsely inhabited ; the great Forest of Pendle
stretched across the highlands opposite on the west, and on the east the ancient
Forest of Trawden extended upwards far away over the hills.

The fortified area is an oval, lying approximately east and west,
measuring 300 ft. by 240 ft. across its interior plateau. The earthworks
consist, apparently, of three tiers of ramparts, one above another up the
slope, with three external ditches. They cover a total oval ground space
measuring about 600 ft. by 500 ft., or probably an area of about five acres.
The entrenchments are now very vague in outline, and are difficult to plan with
any exactitude ; for, in the first place, they have evidently suffered much
from weathering, which has reduced the height of the banks and filled up
the ditches; and, secondly, they have been sadly mutilated by numerous
excavations made upon the site in search of minerals. In former years they
were described as much more perfect, and in the 6-in. Ordnance Survey,
made in 1848, all the three ramparts are shown unbroken in their circum-
ference. As now seen, the inner vallum only rises about a foot above the
interior area ; outside this the fosse varies from 3 ft. to 5 ft. in depth. The
second rampart rises about 3 ft. in height from the bottom of the first fosse,
and its outer ditch is in places as much as 12 ft. deep from its summit. The
height of the third rampart again is 3 ft. above the bottom of the second
fosse, and outside of it there are traces of a third fosse all round except upon
the south side, where the steep natural scarp above the valley cut by the
brook seems to afford ample protection without one. Quantities of loose
stones lie about the place, but whether they have ever been used for wall-
ing is difficult to determine; some have the appearance of being semi-
vitrified, after the manner of the ramparts of certain hill-fortresses in
Scotland and elsewhere.

Several ancient roads are described by Mr. Thompson Watkin as radiat-
ing from Caster Cliff. One, which ran westward, crossing the Calder, was

514

Zor feta.
“Qe ” = >
: “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

t)
%,

4”

ony

“Orr egI 7,

Nii CNY)

SCALE oF FEET
-100°"" 200 300 _..*

ei
* ; o'Q00-.

ae eeoe®

| a OT am UNG

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

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

~ 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

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

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 ‘ <a
Ey, | ot -
‘gabe ‘ Homestead moats, consisting of simple

SCALE OF FEET

inclosures formed into artificial islands }
e190 2908 390 z ss :

water moats.’

SECTION from A to B c i
Enlarged double scale of Plan These works have tates cucusly
- elevated mounts within their interior areas
FOMUUIMA I ronnty as in the previous Class (E). The earth
Asuton 1v Maxerrietp: Sitz or Otp Brynn dug out from the fosse was either spread
over the surface of the inclosure, raising
it slightly above the level of the surrounding land, or else, but more rarely, it
- Baines, Hist. of Lancs. (ed. 1868), ii, 627 ; Ord. Surv. 1-in. 49, old 98 SE.; 6-in. 19 NE. ; 25-in.
19, e
546

ANCIENT EARTHWORKS

was used to form a rampart round the ‘island’ platform. The first method
is seen at Bewsey in Burtonwood, Bradley in Burtonwood (vie plan), The

Peel in Heaton Norris, Old Brynn in Ashton in Makerfield (vide plan)
Rufford (vide plan) and Sefton ;

the second at the moat in eae ake i
Hornby with Farleton parish = : :

(vide plan). Homestead moats,
as they are called, inclose areas
ranging from one-tenth of an
acre, as at Rufford (vide plan)
and Wright’s Moat in Hale-
wood, to one and a half acres,
as at Bewsey (vide plan), though
they are occasionally more ex-
tensive. They were usually

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

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
<s Pref beg
RS tifa,
SS i 4a,
SSC Mites,
ss A d Ing,
ss = “fi, "20
Cae y >
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-

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. <u , ae
square, and is rounded Pot
and humpy, not level. Avoianau Mone

On the subject of
remains at Aldingham, the wildest theories have been mooted, but they need
no notice here. At the time of Domesday, one Ernulf had six carucates to
be taxed at Aldingham, and at the least as early as 1127 the le Flemings seem
to have had the manor, since the lands of Michael were specially excepted in
Stephen’s foundation Charter of Furness Abbey. There is also the tradition
that the early lords moved their habitation from Aldingham to Gleaston Castle
on account of the encroachments of the sea, and it certainly seems reasonable
to suppose that fear of such an encroachment might prompt such a migration.

There is reason indeed to believe that a portion of the cliff has gone
since Close published his notes in 1804. He says that the ‘Mount is some-

557

A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE

what oval at the base,’ and that ‘the sea has resumed its destructive ravages,
and has already swept away a part of the Mount,’ and the present writer’s
measurements (taken about 1889), when compared with those of Close’s
plan’ seem to show that the cliff has lost, since that time, about 20 ft. to
30 ft. with a portion of the ditch and mount. West’ himself records the
tradition that the parish church, now also on the cliff edge, stood at one time
in the centre of the parish.

The Mote or Mount itself was in any case the earliest castle of Alding-
ham, and it belongs to a class the history of which is now being considered
by antiquaries. The square plot is a homestead moat, probably of later
times. Apparently neither mount nor square ever contained stone buildings.

(CLass H)
‘Ancient village sites protected by ramparts or fosses.

As already stated there are in this district numerous village sites and
walled inclosures, but in the absence of definite exploration they can hardly
be claimed as defensive works. At the same time it seems desirable to
mention the sites of examples fully described and for the most part illustrated
in Archaeologia.

Bannishead Moor, on the moor near Coniston.

Birkrigg Common, Appleby Slack, about two miles from Ulverston.
Scrow Moss, near base of Coniston Moor.

Dunnerdale Fell, on the slope of Great Stickle to the west.

Heathwaite Fell, about half a mile south-west of Blawith Knott.
Heathwaite Fell, Stone Rings, about half a mile north of Heathwaite Fell
Seathwaite Stone Walls, Long House Close.

Urswick, Holme Bank, about three miles south of Ulverston.

(CLass X)

‘Defensive earthworks
which fall under none of the

i above enumerated headings.’
oo DattTon-1n-FournEss:
=> (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

QS
x >

A
»

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

>
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.

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—

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.

* 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,

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,

‘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

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 #

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,

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,

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,

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,

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

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,

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,

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,

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,

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,

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

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

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-

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

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:

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 ”,

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,

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

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

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,

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,

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,

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,

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,

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

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,

‘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

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

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "The Victoria history of the county of Lancaster;"

See other formats