WEST DERBY HUNDRED 



knight, by whom he had two sons. By his will (l 369) 

 he desired to be buried in the priory church of Bur- 

 scough. 1 



Sir Thomas de Lathom, the younger, succeeded his 

 father in 1 370. He was the Sir Oskell of the Lathom 

 legend.* He made an enfeoffinent of his estates in 

 1376." He paid his quota of the aid to make the 

 duke of Lancaster's son a knight in 1378.' Two years 

 later he was pardoned certain offences committed within 

 the forest of West Derby, Joan his wife and Edward 

 their son being included in the grant. 5 His wife Joan 

 was daughter of Hugh Venables of Kinderton ; 6 his 

 children were Thomas, Edward, Isabel, Margaret, and 

 Katherine. 7 He died at the beginning of 1382, having 

 been lord of Lathom for twelve years. 8 



His son and heir Thomas had a shorter tenure, 

 dying about eighteen months afterwards ; his heiress 

 was a daughter Ellen, born two months after his 

 death. 9 The widow afterwards married Sir John de 



ORMSKIRK 



Dalton. 10 The heiress became a ward to the duke 

 of Lancaster; she was still living in 1387, but died 

 before the end of 1390, when the duke ordered John 

 de Audlem and Richard de Longbarrow to continue 

 in possession until further orders." 



After her death the Lathom manors reverted to 

 the younger children of Sir Thomas, and Edward 

 having died, Sir John Stanley received them in right 

 of his wife Isabel." 



The manor continued to descend in the Stanley 

 family a until the sale about 1717. Lathom was 

 their principal residence until its destruction in the 

 Civil Wars, after which Knowsley took its place, 

 though William, the ninth earl of Derby, had some 

 intention of rebuilding it." 



A very complete survey of the manor is contained 

 in the compotus rolls of 1314 Henry VIII, when 

 the family estates were in the king's hands through 

 the minority of Edward, the third earl of Derby." 



1 Scarisbrick D. (in Trans. Hist. Soc. 

 New Ser. xiii), n. 102. He bequeathed 

 to the prior and canons loos, to pray for 

 him, and other sums to the friars of 

 Warrington, Preston, and Chester ; also 

 / 20 for a chaplain to celebrate divine 

 offices for him for five years. To the 

 bridge of Douglas and Cal'der he gave two 

 marks. After legacies to his [younger] 

 son Edward, servants, and others, he 

 desired that the residue of his goods 

 should be spent in alms for the souls of 

 himself and Eleanor his wife. 



Bishop Stanley's poem in Halliwell's 

 Palatine Anthology, 217; Seacome's His- 

 tory of the Stanley Family, 46 ; Harland 

 and Wilkinson, Legends and Traditions, 19. 



3 Final Cone, ii, 190. There is said 

 to have been a supplementary fine, to 

 which Sir Thomas and his wife Joan 

 were parties, providing that, failing the 

 issue of his son Thomas, their daughter 



succession ; Lanes. Inj. (Chet. Soc.), ii, 

 p. iv. Some such entail was the basis of 

 the claim by Sir John Stanley in 1385 ;see 

 below. 4 Harl. MS. 2085, fol. 421. 



3 Dep. Keeper's Rep. xliii, App. I, n. 3. 



Dods. MSS. Ixxxvii, 10, n. 

 Edward was probably still living in 



Lathom, her reasonable dower of the 

 manor of Lathom, except in a parcel 

 which she claimed to have held jointly 

 with her husband. She was to take 

 oath not to marry without the duke's 



Pal. of 'Lane. Chan. R. 3, 191 ; Lanes. 

 Inj. (Chet. Soc.), i, 20. The exccpted 

 tenements, which she afterwards ob- 

 tained, were Horscar, Deep meadow by 

 Rufford, Robinfield in Horscar, Calver- 

 hey, and Walton Riding, and a yearly 

 rent of 8 marks of the freeholders of 

 Newburgh ; Journ. Arch. Assoc. vi, 416. 

 Sir John de Dalton and Isabel, having 

 knowingly contracted matrimony within 

 the fourth degree, incurred excommuni- 

 cation, and after separation and licence to 

 re-marry they were dispensed by Boni- 

 face IX in 1391, their issue to be 

 legitimate ; Cal. Papal Letters, iv, 412. 



11 Lanes. Inq. (Chet. Soc.), i, 20, 21. 



"He had put in a claim in 1385, 

 probably on his marriage with her ; ibid. 

 21. She had previously been the wife of 

 Sir Geoffrey de Worsley, but the union 

 was declared unlawful ; see the account 

 of Worsley. 



13 See the account of Knowsley. 



14 Seacome, House of Stanley, 405 (ed. 



the works of 69 ploughs ploughing for 

 one day on the lord's land ; and id. was 

 the price of each workman and his food 

 for the 70 days' work to be done one 

 man giving one day. The money value 

 was 461. id. in all. No courts had been 

 held during the year for Lathom or New- 

 burgh, so that no profits had to be 

 accounted for. There were no swarms 

 of bees, and no casuals ' for gressums, 

 wardships, marriages, or reliefs. The fair 

 at Newburgh at the feast of St. Barnabas 

 showed a profit to the lord of 31. id., but 

 the expenses of the bailiff and two under- 

 bailiffs, collecting tolls and keeping order, 

 amounted to 31. 3^. ; there was thus a 

 net loss of id. 



The various ancient rents paid are also 

 of interest. To the king, for the lordship 

 of Lathom, 201. was duly paid ; also 8j. 

 for Scarisbrook and Hurleton ; to the 

 abbot of Cockersand for Birkinshaw Place 

 i id. ; to the prior of Burscough for 

 Edgeacre 31., for Cross Hall 3,., and for 

 Walmer's lands in Lathom 6d. 



The rents which showed a decrease 

 were next considered. The fulling mill, 

 formerly yielding 265. 8</., had been in 

 ruins for many years past ; and the fishery 

 in the Douglas, which should have brought 



