AMOUNDERNESS HUNDRED 



and one moiety or share was obtained by Lea and 

 the other by Haydock. 44 The Lea portion descended 

 like that manor to the Hoghtons, 46 and ceased to 

 have any distinct history. Of the Haydock portion 

 a part was given to a younger son, ancestor of the 

 Haydocks of Cottam, and the remainder came to 

 Alice and Aline, daughters and co-heirs of John 

 de Haydock, and thus was divided between the 



PRESTON 



families of Travers of Nateby and Lawrence of 

 Ribbleton. 48 The Travers manor was in 1625 sold 

 to Hugh Rigby. 47 The history of the Lawrence 

 share is unknown. 48 The Waltons of Preston also 

 seem to have had part of the manor. 49 TVLKETH 

 in Ashton, where the monks of Savigny resided before 

 they settled in Furness, 60 became a seat of the Travers 

 family till the 1 7th century. 51 Afterwards it passed 



(Hoghton) and Avice his wife 5 Dods. 

 MS. cxlii, fol. 30A. It appears that Avice 

 was the widow of Roger de Ashton j De 

 Banco R. 316, m. 466. 



44 The Hoghton charters have been 

 given in the preceding note. The pro- 

 portions held by the different lords seem 

 to have varied. In 1324 Richard de 

 Hoghton held a moiety of Ashton by the 

 service of 51., while Lawrence Travers 

 and William Lawrence (in right of their 

 wives) held the other moiety by 51. also ; 

 Dods. MSS. cxxxi, fol. 396. 



In 1346, however, some readjustment 

 had taken place, and while Sir Adam de 

 Hoghton held a moiety of the manor (by 

 the twelfth part of a knight's fee) he paid 

 only 35. 9</. ; Edmund de Haydock, 

 Thomas Travers and William Lawrence 

 held a plough-land in socage by rents of 

 2j. 6d. 9 35. \d. and 5</. respectively ; 

 Sari;, of 1346 (Chet. Soc), 46-8. Thus 

 the xoj. rent was contributed by four 

 partners, three of whom held the ' plough- 

 land' in socage while the other held a 

 * moiety of the manor ' by knight's ser- 

 vice. At the same time Lea was stated 

 to be two plough-lands instead of one. 

 Cottam seems to have been regarded as 

 held of the lords of Ashton, so that Hay- 

 dock contributed is. 3^. for the Hoghton 

 moiety and is. t,J. for that held of 

 Lawrence and Travers. In 1 3 54 William 

 Lawrence held a fourth part of the 

 manor ; Final Cone, ii, 141. 



In 1356 Sir Adam de Hoghton claimed 

 his part of the manor, alleging that John 

 son of Thomas Travers of Tulketh, Alice 

 widow of William Lawrence and Thomas 

 son of Geoffrey de Hackinsall had occupied 

 parts of it ; Assize R. 441, m. 4d. 



The extent made in 1445-6 shows a 

 distribution of the lordship like that of 

 1346 ; Duchy of Lane. Knights* Fees, 

 bdle. 2, no. 20. Roger Travers of Nateby 

 had the fourth part of the manor in 1403 ; 

 Kuerden MSS. iv, G zb. 



In 1301 various agreements were 

 made by the partners in the vill. Robert 

 de Haydock released to William de Lea, 

 Henry his son and Richard de Ashton all 

 right to their homage and services ; Add. 

 MS. 32106, no. 474. William de Lea 

 conceded a moiety of the manor to 

 Robert de Haydock, viz. that moiety 

 which Richard son of Roger de Ashton 

 had given to Henry son of William de 

 Lea ; ibid. no. 509. A partition of the 

 manor-house seems to have accompanied 

 these agreements ; the chamber to the 

 east was given to Richard de Ashton, the 

 whole of the hall to Robert de Haydock 

 and the chamber to the west to William 

 de Lea ; ibid. no. 507. Robert de Hay- 

 dock was probably acting as trustee for 

 his nieces. 



In 1324 an agreement was made be- 

 tween Sir Richard de Hoghton, William 

 Lawrence and Alice his wife on one side 

 and Lawrence Travers and Aline his wife 

 on the other ; ibid. no. 759. Another 

 agreement was made in 1330 between 

 Sir Richard de Hoghton on the one side 

 and Lawrence Travers and William Law- 



rence on the other as to the partition of 

 certain meadows previously held by Avice 

 de Howick ; Dods. MSS. cxlii, fol. 30. 



40 The Hoghton family continued to 

 acquire fresh portions of Ashton. In 

 1329 William son of Richard del Greaves 

 released all title in his father's lands to 

 Sir Richard de Hoghton ; Add. MS. 

 32106, no. 450. Robert tie Graveson 

 of Ashton in 1348 transferred his lands 

 (formerly Ralph the Tailor's) to Sir Adam 

 de Hoghton ; ibid. no. 479. Four years 

 later Cecily widow of Thomas de Ham- 

 bleton and Thomas son of Henry son of 

 John de Sidgreaves sold to Sir Adam lands 

 which had belonged to Cecily's father ; 

 ibid. no. 480-1. She was daughter of 

 Henry del Greaves, and *her land lay in 

 Dawfield in the hamlet of Greaves in the 

 vill of Ashton ; ibid. no. 484, 61. 



John son of Gilbert son of Adam de 

 Ashton in 1370 released to Sir Adam de 

 Hoghton all claim on the inheritance of 

 Roger de Ashton j ibid. no. 477. 



Sir Richard Hoghton in 1422 held a 

 moiety of the manor of Ashton by the 

 twelfth part of a knight's fee and 31. yd. 

 rent ; Lanes. Inq. p.m. (Chet. Soc), i, 

 145. In 1580 Thomas Hoghton's tene- 

 ment in Ashton next Preston and Greaves 

 was said to be held of the queen as of her 

 Duchy of Lancaster by the third part of a 

 fourth part of a knight's fee ; Duchy of 

 Lane. Inq. p.m. xiv, no. 26. 



The remainder of the manor of Ashton 

 seems to have been acquired by 1595, 

 when 'the manor' is named among the 

 Hoghton estates ; Pal. of Lane. Feet of 

 F. bdle. 57, m. 178. Sir Richard Hoghton 

 died in 1630 holding the manors of Lea 

 and Ashton of the king by the third 

 part of a knight's fee ; Duchy of Lane. 

 Inq. p.m. xxvii, no. 13. The manors of 

 Lea and Ashton appear together in later 

 Hoghton settlements, e.g. Pal. of Lane. 

 Plea R. 554, m. 12. 



46 The origin of the Haydock interest 

 is not known. In 1285 Joan widow of 

 John son of Henry de Haydock claimed 

 dower in various lands against Henry de 

 Haydock in Stainall and against Henry 

 son of Henry de Haydock in Cottam, 

 Ingol and Ashton ; De Banco R. 59, 

 m. 3 ; 64, m. 122. In 1292 inquiry was 

 made as to whether Robert and Henry 

 sons of Henry de Haydock had disseised 

 Paulin de Preston of land, aldergrove and 

 marsh in Ashton, but plaintiff" was non- 

 suited ; Assize R. 408, m. 49 d. 



It thus appears that Henry de Haydock 

 the father had part of Ashton, and that 

 he had three sons, John, Robert and 

 Henry, of whom John died before him. 

 Henry was dead in 1290, when his widow 

 Alice claimed dower inRibbleton,iStainall, 

 Haydock (against Hugh son of Richard 

 de Haydock) and Ravensmeols ; De 

 Banco R. 86, m. 174. 



In 1338 Adam son of Richard de 

 Hoghton claimed a third part of the 

 manor of Ashton as heir of Henry son of 

 William de Lea. The holders were 

 William Lawrence, Alice his wife, Law- 

 rence TraverB and Aline his wife, Alice 



133 



and Aline being daughters of John 

 brother of Robert de Haydock, whose 

 right, it was alleged, was derived from a 

 grant by William de Lea ; De Banco 

 R. 316, m. 4.66 ; 333, m. 374^ 



Two years later Alan de Marhalgh, in 

 right of his wife Isabel, claimed a fourth 

 part of the manor of Ashton against 

 Lawrence and Travers ; ibid. 321, m. 

 199 d. The suit was continued in 1345, 

 Isabel being described as daughter of 

 Adam son of Roger de Ashton $ ibid. 

 342, m. 250; 345, m. 21; 350, m. 

 20. An agreement of 1339 represents 

 Sir Richard and Sir Adam de Hoghton 

 as recovering three parts of the manor 

 from Alan de Marhalgh and Isabel his 

 wife, while claims were put in by Law- 

 rence, Travers and Haydock j Final Cone. 

 ii, 112. 



47 William Travers' messuages, &c, in 

 Ashton were in 1524 held of the king as 

 of his Duchy of Lancaster in socage by a 

 rent of 35. %d. yearly ; Duchy of Lane. 

 Inq. p.m. v, no. 62. In 1559 the service 

 was said to be %d. only; ibid, xi, no. 68. 



In 1625 the manor of Ashton, with 

 lands in Ashton, Ingol, Clayton and Ley- 

 land, and a free fishery in the Ribble, were 

 sold to Hugh Rigby by William Travers, 

 Richard Travers and William Werden j 

 Pal. of Lane. Feet of F. bdle. 107, no. 32. 



48 The fourth part of the manor of 

 Ashton was held by William Lawrence in 

 1354 5 Dep. Keeper's Rep. xxxii, App. 331. 

 As shown above, it appears again in 

 1445-6 j but Robert Lawrence of Ribble- 

 ton, who died in 1524, had no lands in 

 Ashton. 



49 Mabel daughter of Adam de Ashton 

 gave her sister Avice a messuage, &c, in 

 Ashton in 1 35 1. In 1404 a third part 

 of the manor was claimed by John de 

 Walton and Agnes his wife (for her life) 

 against Henry de Preston, Maud his 

 wife, Robert Paslew and Alice his wife. 

 Later the Waltons are found holding in 

 Ashton ; Kuerden MSS. ii, fol. 224-7. 

 Richard Walton held lands in Ashton of 

 Queen Elizabeth ; the tenure of his suc- 

 cessors is not recorded ; Duchy of Lane. 

 Inq. p.m. xiii, no. 26, Sec. 



Henry Walton was vouchee of the 

 manor of Ashton in 1721 ; Pal. of Lane. 

 Plea R. 515, m. 7. 



50 Stephen Count of Boulogne, after- 

 wards king, in 1123 gave Tulketh to the 

 Abbot of Savigny to found an abbey of his 

 order there ; Simeon of Dur. Opera (Rolls 

 Ser.), ii, 267. The monks resigned it in 

 1 127 on going to Furness. 



51 It became the manor-house of the 

 Travers family for their part of the manor 

 of Ashton ; Duchy of Lane. Inq. p.m. 

 xi, no. 68 j xii, no. 22. 



Thomas Preston in 1577 demised the 

 capital messuage called Tulketh in Ash- 

 ton, lately in the tenure of Richard 

 Travers, deceased ; Kuerden MSS. ii, fol. 



239^ 



It is stated that Tulketh was subse- 

 quently held by Werden, Rawstorne, 

 Hesketh (1687 to 1836), Bray, Johnson, 

 and Thompson (1876) j Fishwick, Preston, 



