A HISTORY OF LANCASHIRE 



Henr)', earl of Lancaster, granted a charter at 

 Knowsley in i 343.' 



The manors held by Uctred in 1066 

 MANOR take precedence in Domesday after the 

 royal manor of Derby ; and the first of 

 them were Roby and KNOlf'SLET. These were 

 together rated at i hide, Knowsley by itself being 

 4 plough-lands.* 



Before 1 2 1 2 the whole parish of Huyton had 

 become part of the barony of Widnes, as the Lanca- 

 shire part of the Halton fee is called. Its four manors 

 were by the lords of Halton considered as one only — 

 Knowsley ; so that this must very soon have become 

 the principal residence of those lords or their under- 

 tenant. The superior lordship of Halton is recognized 

 in all the inquisitions ; Knowsley with its members, 

 Huyton, Roby, and Tarbock, being considered as one 

 knight's fee, and rated at 1 2 plough-lands in all.^ 



Knowsley and its members were held by the 

 Lathom family from before the year 1200, but how 

 they acquired it is unknown. In 1 199 Amabel, 

 widow of Robert son of Henry de Lathom, sued her 

 step-son Richard for her reasonable dower from her 

 late husband's estate, and the whole of Knowsley was 

 assigned to her, as well as Anglezark.* Her sons 

 appear to have taken Knowsley as a surname, and to 

 have divided Huyton among themselves. Tarbock 

 was held by another of the Lathom family, while 

 Roby remained manorially part of Knowsley, though 

 as a township it became merged in Huyton. 



In the survey of 1 2 1 2 it was found that the 

 Knowsley knight's fee was held by Richard son of 

 Robert.* One alteration had been made since the 

 Conquest ; for Henry II had placed Croxteth Park 



within the forest, so that at the inquest made in 

 1228 it was returned it ought to be given back to 

 Knowsley.* This, however, was not done ; Croxteth 

 Park remained a royal park and extra-parochial. 

 The service for the manor is not stated quite 

 uniformly in the inquisitions — apart from its being 

 that of one knight's fee.' 



Of the Lathoms' dealings with Knowsley there is 

 not much record.^ Sir Thomas de Lathom about 

 1355 obtained a grant of free warren in Knowsley 

 and Roby with liberty to empark, and in 1359 ^'^* 

 allowed to enclose an adjacent place called Grims- 

 hurst.^ It was probably at Knowsley that his son 

 Thomas's melancholy death took place in 1382. He 

 lay feeble and decrepit for three months before his 

 death, and during this time his wife Joan refused to 

 pay him any attention, living in open adultery in the 

 high chamber at Knowsley with Roger de Fazakerley. 

 There was no reconciliation, 

 and immediately after her hus- 

 band's death Joan sent his body 

 to Burscough to be buried, 

 there being present neither 

 priests nor gentry, as there 

 should have been. Immedi- 

 ately afterwards she married her 

 paramour.'" 



It was Joan's children by Sir 

 Thomas de Lathom who were 

 in the end the heirs of the 

 family estates. The eldest 

 daughter Isabel marrying Sir 

 John de Stanley brought Knows- 

 ley into the possession of the family which still holds it.' 



Stanley of Knows- 

 ley, Argent, on a btnd 

 azure three bucki' heads 

 cabosied or. 



1 Knowsley D. bdle. 1402, n. 10, 



■■' r.CM. Lanes, i, 283/7. 



■* The plough-laads were not always 

 divided among the members in the same 

 manner. In other parts of Widnes barony 

 10 plough-lands seem to have formed a 

 knight's fee. 



** Final Cone. (Rec. Soc. Lanes* and 

 Chcs.), i, 8. 



^ Lanes. Inq. and Extents (Rec. Soc. 

 Lanes, and Ches.), 40. In 1242 it was 

 found that Robert de Lathom held one 

 fee in Knowsley, Huyton, and Tarbock 

 of the earl of Lincoln, then lord of 

 Halton; ibid. 148. In 1302 Robert de 

 Lathom paid 401. to the aid for marrying 

 the king's daughter, for one fee in 

 Knowsley; ibid. 312. 



6 IVballey Coucber (Chet. Soc), ii, 372. 

 Thus it appears that the Alt was the 

 original boundary of Knowsley on the 

 south. 



*" This is changed to a knight's fee and 

 a half in the De Lacy Inq. of 1 3 1 1 (Chet. 

 Soc), 24. 



After the death of Sir Robert de Lathom 

 in 1324-5 it was found that he and his 

 wife had held the manor of Hugh le 

 Despenser as of the fee of Widnes, by the 

 service of one knight and doing suit at the 

 monthly court of Widnes. At this time 

 there was at Knowsley a messuage worth 

 2j. a year; the lands were 116 acres 

 arable, worth 6d. an acre, and 3 acres of 

 meadow each worth is. 6d. ; there was a 

 park with herbage worth zos. The 

 water-mill and windmill were valued at 

 26i. %d. The rents of the free tenants 

 amounted to ^^30, and there were also 

 pleas and perquisites of courts worth 

 lis. 4^. a year. Inq. p.m. (18 Edw. II), 

 n. 72 i fyhalley Coucher^ ii, 553. He 



had a wood * which was called a park ' 

 In 1292, but claimed no right of warren ; 

 Plac. de quo Warr. (Rec Com.), 387. 

 The mill is mentioned in an early grant 

 to Burscough. 



Of about 1320 also is the Halton 

 feodary, which records that Sir Robert de 

 Lathom held Knowsley, Huyton and 

 Roby, and Tarbock for one fee, giving 

 for relief when it should happen ^5 ; 

 Ormerod, Ches. (ed. Helsby), i, 708. 



The extent of Halton made in 1328 

 records that Thomas de Lathom held the 

 manors, performing suit at Widnes for 

 the vill of Knowsley from month to 

 month ; Inq. p.m. 42 Edw. Ill ( ist nos.), 

 n. 61. 



His grandson Sir Thomas, who died in 

 I 382, held it as the fee of one knight by 

 the service of 155. per annum and suit of 

 court at Widnes from three weeks to 

 three weeks ; he held Knowsley and Roby 

 in demesne and Huyton and Tarbock in 

 service ; Duchy of Lane Inq. p.m. ii, 7 ; 

 Lanes. Inq. p.m. (Chet. Soc), i, 17. 



^ Robert son of Henry gave to his 

 foundation at Burscough ' the place of 

 St. Leonard of Knowsley ' with its appur- 

 tenances ; Lanes. Pipe R. p. 350. A 

 lease of common of pasture in Knowsley 

 (early thirteenth century) is in Had. 52, 

 1,44. In 1223 Robert's grandson Richard 

 was found dwelling there by the four 

 knights who had been sent to Lathom to 

 discover whether his excuse of sickness in 

 answer to a summons was a valid one or 

 not ; Cur, Reg. R. 82, m. 3. 



Amabel, widow of Robert, calling her- 

 self 'de Knowsley,' granted to St. Wer- 

 burgh's of Warburton certain of her land 

 called Bury. This was all the land 

 between two doughs coming from the 



carr by Waterhurst and running down to 

 the head of Stockley, where they met 

 each other ; also the clearing which used 

 to belong to William son of Gamel, the 

 bounds starting from the rise of the brook 

 at Watercarr, across to the road to Glest 

 (in Eccleston), along this way up as far as 

 the cross, then at right angles to the syke 

 between the clearing aforesaid and the 

 land of St. Nicholas (of Burscough), down 

 the syke of the brook, and up the brook 

 to the spring of Wetecarr, guided by the 

 meres and crosses of the canons ; Cocker- 

 sand Chartui. (Chet. Soc), ii, 606. 



* Cart. Misc. Edw. Ill, n. 209 ; Lanes, 

 and Ches. Rec. (Rec. Soc. Lanes, and 

 Ches.), ii, 312; also Dep. Keeper's Rep. 

 xxxii, App. 346. See also Duchy of Lane. 

 Forest Proc 1-17, m. 6 (8 Edw. Ill), 

 where Thomas de Lathom claimed free 

 park in Knowsley, There was a park at 

 Knowsley much earlier, as is shown in a 

 preceding note. 



10 Lanes. Inq, p.m. (Chet. Soc), i, 19. 



^* Her husband is supposed to be the 

 John son of William son of John de 

 Stanley who in 1378 was pardoned for 

 the death of Thomas de Clotton at 

 Storeton in Wirral, the pardon being 

 granted at the prayer of Sir Thomas 

 Trivet in consideration of the good 

 service of the said John done and to be 

 done in Aquitaine, whither he was about 

 to depart in Sir Thomas's company ; 

 Dep. Keeper's Rep. xxxvi, App. 44^. 



If this identification be correct, Sir John 

 de Stanley was a younger son of one 

 William de Stanley of Storeton ; brother 

 of the next William de Stanley of the 

 same, who married Alice daughter of 

 Sir Hamlet Masey of Timperlcy and 

 died in 1397 ; and uncle of Sir William 



.58 



