55 



and a special Service was held in the Church, at which the Bishop 

 of Beverley preached. Atkinson was then getting very feeble, 

 and there was many a watery eye in the Church, as, in a broken 

 voice, he pronounced the Benediction at the close of the Service. 

 From the Church we adjourned to the school room for tea, and 

 afterwards a presentation was made to their venerable vicar by 

 the parishioners. 



As I have mentioned already, Atkinson wrote a " History of 

 Cleveland." Most unfortunately, however, this work was never 

 published in its entirety. It was to consist of two volumes, but 

 only a little more than half has seen the light, though the whole 

 was actually written. Histories of Cleveland had been published 

 previously by Graves in 1808, and by Ord in 1846. To the late 

 Mr H. W. F. Bolckow, M.P. for Middlesbrough, there occurred 

 the idea that there ought to be a new History of Cleveland — or 

 rather, the History of a New Cleveland — the Cleveland which, 

 as a pioneer of the iron industry^ he had been largely instru- 

 mental in making. He accordingly summoned to his residence 

 at Marton Hall, Joseph Richardson, printer, of Barrow-in-Fur- 

 ness, who was then issuing a work entitled, "Furness, Past and 

 Present." Richardson, however, expressed his unwillingness to 

 undertake a work on " Cleveland " until his "Furness " should 

 be completed. Mr. Bolckow replied that he supposed it was 

 merely a matter of money. Richardson confessed that that was 

 so, and Mr. Bolckow thereupon undertook to supply whatever 

 money was needed, and on that understanding Richardson took 

 the matter in hand. Shortly afterwards Mr. Bolckow gave 

 Richardson a cheque for ,£200, saying " If the work is well done 

 you shall have sufficient to turn your hand in." Atkinson under- 

 took to supply the manuscript, but, tor some reason or other, he 

 appears to have made a difficulty subsequently about doing this. 

 On the advice of Mr. Bolckow, who undertook to pay the costs, 

 Richardson brought an action against Atkinson to compel him to 

 furnish the MSS. The case came on for trial at the Liverpool 

 Assizes in 1872. On the advice of the Judge, however, a juror 

 was withdrawn, and the case was settled in court. The reason 

 for his giving this advice was that the case was one which could 

 not be settled at Liverpool, but would have to be sent to London 

 to be adjudicated upon, and that this would involve great ex- 

 pense. The judge gave it as his private opinion that there was 

 no agreement. It was arranged that each party should pay their 

 own costs, and that Atkinson should receive £6 instead of £5 

 per part. The agreement drawn up in court, and approved by 

 the coQnsel on either side, was a much more stringent one upon 



