A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE 



jcars of age.' Robert, marrieJ to Alice daughter 

 of Robert Booth in 145+,' died in 1491,' leaving a 

 son Thomas, who, in default of legitimate Issue,* 

 bequeathed his manors to his natural son Robert, with 

 remainders to Charles and Ellen, brother and sister 

 ol Robert.' Thomas Hesketh appears to have added 

 very largely to the hereditary possessions of his family, 

 and died at Ruflbrd on 14 August 1523.' 



Robert Hesketli, aftenvards knighted, thus suc- 

 ceeded to RufFord, and, after defeating the claim put 

 forward by the heirs-at-law,' died in February i 540-1 



holding much the same posie^sions as his father, but 

 Ruftbrd was now held of the king, ' by reason of the 

 surrender of the Abbot of Chester,' the ancient rent 

 of 40.'. being p.iyable. The heir w.is his son Thomas, 

 then fourteen )e.irs old.' Thomas Hesketh was 

 made a knight at the coronation of Queen Mary in 

 1553,' and he and his family are stated to have 

 adhered to the Roman Catholic religion for some 

 time after the accession of Elizabeth.'" He died in 

 June 1588, leaving a son Robert, then about forty 

 years old," who had in 1567 been contracted to 



Lawrence of Ashton, but there is probably 

 some confusion with the former Thomas ; 

 Dods. MSS. cilii, fol. III. 



' Lanes. Inj. f.m. (Chet. Soc), ii, 67. 

 The writ of diem cl. eitr. was issued in 

 1460 ; Dep, Keeper i Rep. xjcxvii, App. 

 177- 



In 1445 Thomas Hesketh was exempted 

 from sen-ing on juries, &c. ; ibid, x!, 

 App, 5^8. A few years later a num- 

 ber of disputes occurred regarding the 

 bounds of RufFord ; depositions made in 

 14^0 and later are given in Townclcv 

 MS. GG (Add. MS. 152107), no. iiqS, 

 1318, 144; 5. A ' slaking-out ' made 

 in 1652 is given ibid. n". 1442. See 

 also CcckiriJn.l Cl'Jrrul. (Chtt. Sue), ii, 



470. 



Thomas Hesketh on his tomb at RufFord 

 is stated to have died 18 Dec. 14I'; 

 (Ixiii for Iviii) — the present inscription 

 is a faulty copy of the old one. llu 

 wife's name was Mirparet and they had 

 eleven children ; Doit. MSS. cxlii, foU 

 81 A. Letters dimissory for the ordina- 

 ti. n of Georrrcv, one of the sons, were 

 given by the Biihip of Lichfield in 1446 j 

 Add. MS. 52104, no, 140-. 



- IbiJ. nn. I410. 



' The wr.tof diem cl. extr. was issued 

 I Mar. 1490-1 ; Tuwnclev MS. CC 

 (Chet. Li:.i, no. 57;. According to his 

 epitaph (Dods. loc. cit.) he died on the 

 preceding New Vcar's Day. 



An inquisition made in 1^00 shows 

 that he held the manor of RiWorJ, the 

 advowson of the chantrv', the reversion 

 of the lands held by .Mirgaret his mother, 

 "ith the manor of M irtholme and lands 

 in Har« oi, &c, Ihe dale of his death 

 is given at 29 Sept, 1490, at which time 

 Thomas hi* ton and heir wat over twenty- 

 l<j ir years old ; Duchy cf Lane. Inq. 

 p,m. iii, no. -2. 



-Alice widow <f Robert Hesketh and 

 their sons Hugh and Richard in 1490-1 

 came to an agreement with Thomas the 

 heir as to dower, ic. ; Towneley MS. 

 Ht, Hen. \TI, no. 3. She died in 1498 

 and was buried at RufFord. 



' Thomas first (in 1471) marrieJ 

 Elirabeth younger daughter and co-heir 

 of William Fleming of Croston ; later 

 she confessed to adulterv- and a divorce 

 was procured, she afterwards marr)-ing 

 Thurstan Hall. .-V confirmation of the 

 divorce was given by Alexander VI in 

 149- ; HarL MS. :o--, fol. 2S- (im- 

 perfect) ; Towneley MS. HE, Edw. IV, 

 no. 4. A portion of the Fleming inherit- 

 ance was retained by Thomas Hesketh 

 and his heirs ; ibid. Hen. VII, no. i;. 



Thomas Hesketh seems to have manied 

 Grace ToK-nciey in 1501 ; ibid. no. 12. 

 She died in I 510. 



' His last will is in Add. MS. 32104, 

 no. l^Oj. It mentions that he haj been 

 accountant to the Ejrl of Derby and his 

 grandfather. Pro\ision is made for the 

 chjntrics at HarwocJ, Ruffbrd, Croston 



and Longton ; for masses for his Eoul and 

 gifts to the poor ; for almshouses and 

 school at Rut^ord ; for building a bridge 

 of stone where there was a ' hyngand 

 brigge* over the Douglas j for paving the 

 roads and repairing the * bridges called 

 the Cour bridge, the Fisher tree, the 

 market bridge in Croston, the bridge 

 called South brook bridge next Croston, 

 the bridge next the house where William 

 Holme late dwelled, the bridge at the 

 north nook of Church carr, the bridge 

 over SoUom pool nigh the stone cross 

 there in the parish of Croston.' 



He seems to ha^c settled his manors 

 and landt on his natural children already 

 by a preceding will, made on the occasion 

 of the marrijjc of his b.i^tard son Robert 

 with Grace T' wnclcy, but tome further 

 prrnisions are made for Robert, Charles 

 and E l<-n, and also for Alice Haward, 

 their mother. 



Other \nlls are ..ofied in Tov\neley 

 MS. HE, Hen. \'lll, no. 9, 10; the 

 former of these (dated 15 May 1521) 

 makes a settlement of his manors, lands, 

 &c. 



' Duchy of Lane, Inq. p.m. v, no. 16. 

 In addition to the manor of Riifi ird, held 

 (as formerly) of the .Abbot of Chester by 

 a rent of 40i, and valued at ^20 clear, 

 he held lands, Ac, in Harwood, Tottle- 

 worth, Croston, .Mawdesley, Longton, 

 Hutton, Penwortham, Howkk, Brcther- 

 ton, Ulnes \\'alton, and a great number 

 of other places in the county, with the 

 advowsons of chantries at Croston, Ruf- 

 Ford, Harwood and Longton. The will 

 of 2 July 1,22 it given, tettling the 

 estate upon R.bert Hesketh, and several 

 feofFmentt are recited. Alice Haward 

 had married William Tarleton of RufFord. 

 The lawful heirs were Henry Kighlcy 

 (son of Richard son of Margery), Richard 

 Aughton (ton of Maud), Roland Kighley, 

 clerk (ton of .M irgaret), Roger Nowcll of 

 Read (ton of John Nowell by Dulcia), 

 which Margery, &c., were sisters of 

 Thomas Hesketh. 



' Henry Kighley and the other heirs 

 named in the inquisition put forward 

 their claim in 1525. They alleged that 

 Thomas was brother and heir of Richard 

 Hesketh, who it not named in the inqui- 

 tition after the death of Robert Hesketh 

 ('49>)> t""' " »a'd to have been an 

 official of the Crown ; L. and P. Hen. 

 nil, i, 1781 ; Dods. loc. cit. Richard is 

 called a younger brother in 1 51 1; 

 Kuerden MSS. iii, H 8i, Thomas is 

 again described as brother and heir of 

 Richard Hesketh, deceased, in a grant of 

 his in 1523; Towneley MS. DD, no. 

 392. The defendants in 1525 were the 

 feofFees and executors of the will of 

 Thomas Hesketh, and showed that they 

 had due authority for their action ; Duchy 

 of Lane Dep. Hen. VIII, xv, K 2. 



' Duchy of Lane, Inq, p.m, vii, no, 

 14. The tenure of the lands is recorded 



122 



in but few instances, A pedigree wat 

 recorded in 1533, a bendlet sinister on 

 the arms indicating the illegitimate 

 descent ; yUif. (Chet. Soc), 1 20. 



The memorial brass of Sir Robert and 

 his wife (recently found) gives the date 

 of his death as Feb. 1539-40, but he was 

 certainly living in Oct. 1 540 ; Duchy 

 Plead. (Rcc. Soc. Lanes, and Ches.), ii, 

 141. 



The wardship of the heir was given to 

 Thomas Holcroft in Nov. 1541, and 

 lively of lands was allowed to Thomas 

 Hesketh in 1547; Dep. Keeper's Rep. 

 xxxix, App. 514. 



Gabriel and George Hesketh contri- 

 buted to the subsidy of 1542-3 for lands 

 in RufFord; Subs. R. Lanes, bdle. 130, 

 no. 126, 



" Metcalfe, Book of Knigliis, ill ; a 

 coat of five quarters is given, 



A settlement of lands in RufFord, 

 Mawdcsley, Ac, was made by Tiiomas 

 Hesketh in 1551 ; Pal. of Lane. Feet of 

 F. bdle. 14, m. 1 99. 



Sir Thomas was sheriff of tlic county 

 in 1562-3 j P.R.O. /./If, 73. 



'" Some time about 1584 Sir Thomas 

 Hesketh wrote to the Earl of Leicester 

 asking to be released trom tlie custody of 

 Sir Edmund Trafford, sheriff of the 

 county, to whom he had been committed 

 for not keeping strict rule in liis own 

 household; Cal. S. P. Dom. 1581-90, 

 p, 220, Lady Hesketh was in 1591 said to 

 have entertained a missionary priest at 

 Martholme ; ibid, 1 591-4, p, 149. It 

 had been reported that Sir Thomas's 

 * wife and eldest son seldom or never 

 resorted to the church and communicated. 

 The tame son gave countenance to Wor- 

 thington, the seminary priest. And the 

 now baron of Walton's wife daughter 

 was corrupted in that house and refused 

 to resort to church, who before her com- 

 ing thither was very well disposed in 

 religion'; Gibson, Lydiaie Hall, 257 

 (from S, P, Dom, Eliz. ccxl), 



Thomas Hesketh, deicribed at 'esq.,' 

 was a recusant in 1594 ; Abram, Black- 

 burn, 536, quoting Great Harwood 

 Church Bks, 



The wife of Thomas Hesketh and 

 other recusants are named in Rufford in 

 1628; MUc. (Rec. Soc. Lanes, and 

 Ches.), i, 174, Holcroft wife of Roger 

 Dodsworth the antiquary wat presented 

 as one in 1622; Visit. Rec, at Chester 

 Dioc. Reg. 



" Duchy of Lane. Inq. p.m, xv, no, 

 56. Sir Thomas had married Alice 

 daughter of Sir John Holcroft, who sur- 

 vived him at Martholme. See Ducarui 

 Lane. (Rec, Com,), i, 278. 



A F^'Jigrce was recorded in I 56- : 

 A'/i/>. (Chet. Soc), 80. 



Sir Thomas appears 10 have hal a 

 dispute with his son Robert shortly be.'ore 

 his death, for he complained in I 587 that 

 divers deeds concerning the manors ana 



