THE PARISH OF BISPHAM.
Biscopham was the appellation bestowed on the district now called
Bispham at and before the era of William the Conqueror, in whose survey
it appears as embracing within its boundaries eight carucates of arable
land. The original name is simply a compound of the two Anglo-Saxon
words _Biscop_, a bishop, and _Ham_, a habitation or settlement, the
signification of the whole being obviously the ‘Bishop’s town,’ or
‘residence.’ Hence it is clear that some episcopal source must be
looked to as having been the means of conferring the peculiar title
on the place, and fortunately for the investigator, the annals of
history furnish a ready clue to what otherwise might have proved a
question difficult, or perhaps impossible, of satisfactory solution.
In a previous chapter it has been noted that for long after the reign
of Athelstan Amounderness was held by the See of York, and nothing can
be more natural than to suppose, when regarding that circumstance in
conjunction with the significance of the name under discussion, that the
archbishops of the diocese had some residence on the soil of Bispham. It
is quite possible, however, that there may have been merely a station of
ecclesiastics who collected the rents and tithes of the Hundred on behalf
of the bishopric, acting in fact as stewards and representatives of the
archbishop for the time being, but in either case it is evident that
the name and, consequently, the town, are of diocesan origin, doubtless
associated with the proprietorship above mentioned. The presence of
priests in residence within the manor of Bispham would necessarily lead
to the establishment there of some chapel or oratory, and the absence
of any allusion to such a structure by the investigators of William I.
seems, at the first glance, a serious obstacle to the episcopal theory,
but Bispham was located between the two Danish colonies of Norbreck
and Warbreck, a people whose hostility to all religious houses was
almost proverbial, and hence it is scarcely likely that a church so
conveniently situated, as that of Bispham would be, could long escape
spoliation and destruction after the prelates of York had removed their
protection from the neighbourhood, at some date anterior to the arrival
of the Normans in England. The ravages of the Danes indeed, throughout
the Hundred of Amounderness are usually the reasons assigned why the
district was relinquished by the See of York, so that the non-existence
of a sacred pile of any description at the period of the Domesday Survey,
is in no way contradictory of such a building having been there, at an
earlier epoch. At the close of the Saxon dynasty the number of acres
in cultivation in the manor of Bispham exceeded those of the five next
largest manors in the Fylde by two hundred, thus Staining, Layton,
Singleton, Marton, and Thornton, each contained six hundred acres of
arable soil, whilst Bispham had eight hundred in a similar condition.
About thirty years after the Norman Survey, Geoffrey, the sheriff,
bestowed the tithes of Biscopham, upon the newly founded priory of St.
Mary, in Lancaster, being incited thereto by the munificent example of
Roger de Poictou. In this grant no allusion is made to any church, an
omission which we should barely be justified in considering accidental,
but which would rather seem to indicate that the edifice was not erected
until later. The earliest allusion to it is found in the reign of Richard
I., 1189—1199, when Theobald Walter quitclaimed to the abbot of Sees,
in Normandy, all his right in the advowson of Pulton and the church of
Biscopham, pledging himself to pay to the abbey ten marks a year during
the period that any minister presented by him or his heirs held the
living.[120] In 1246 the mediety of Pulton and Biscopham churches was
conveyed to the priory of St. Mary, in Lancaster, an offshoot from the
abbey of Sees, by the archdeacon of Richmond; and in 1296 the grant was
confirmed to the monastery by John Romanus, then archdeacon of Richmond,
who supplemented the donation of his predecessor with a gift of the
other mediety, to be appropriated after the decease of the person in
possession, stipulating only that when the proprietorship became complete
the conventual superiors should appoint a vicar at an annual salary
of twenty marks. At the suppression of alien priories the church of
Bispham was conveyed to the abbey of Syon, and remained attached to that
foundation until the Reformation of Henry VIII.
The original church of Bispham, subsequently to the Norman invasion,
was built of red sandstone, and comprised a low tower, a nave, and one
aisle. A row of semicircular arches, resting on round, unornamented
pillars, supported the double-gabled roof, which was raised to no great
altitude from the ground; whilst the walls were penetrated by narrow
lancet windows, three of which were placed at the east end. The pews were
substantial benches of black oak. In 1773 this venerable structure was
deprived of its flag roof and a slate one substituted, the walls at the
same time being raised to their present height. During the alterations
the pillars were removed and the interior thoroughly renovated, more
modern windows being inserted a little later. There is a traditional
statement that the church was erected by the monks of Furness, but beyond
the sandstone of which it was built having in all probability come from
that locality, there appears to be nothing to uphold such an idea. Over
the main entrance may still be seen an unmistakable specimen of the
Norman arch, until recent years covered with plaster, and in that way
retained in a very fair state of preservation.
In 1553 a commission, whose object was to investigate “whether ye belles
belongynge to certayne chapelles which be specified in a certayne shedule
be now remayning at ye said chapelles, or in whose hands or custodie
the same belles now be,” visited Bispham, and issued the following
report:—“William Thompson and Robert Anyan, of ye chapell of Byspham,
sworne and examyned, deposen that one belle mentioned in ye said shedule
was solde by Edwarde Parker, named in ye former commission, unto James
Massie, gent., for ye some of XXIIIˢ. IVᵈ.” Nothing is known respecting
the number or ultimate destination of the peal alluded to. The belfry can
now only boast a pair of bells.
Formerly there were many and various opinions as to the dedication of
the church, Holy Trinity and All Saints having both been suggested, but
the question is finally set at rest by a part, in fact the sole remnant,
of the ancient communion service, the chalice, which is of silver gilt,
and bears the inscription:—“The gift of Ann, Daughter to John Bamber, to
ye Church of Allhallows, in Bispham; Delivered by John Corritt, 1704.”
Within the building, fastened to the east wall, and immediately to the
right of the pulpit, are four monumental brasses inscribed as under:—
“Here lyes the body of John Veale, late of Whinney Heys, Esq.,
who dyed the 20th Jan., 1704, aged sixty.”
“Here lyes the body of Susannah, wife of the late John Veale,
Esq., of Whinney Heys, Esq., who departed this life the 20th of
May, 1718, aged 67 years.”
“Here lyes the body of Edward Veale, late of Whinney Heys, Esq.,
who departed this life the 11th of August, 1723, aged 43 years.”
“Here lyes the body of Dorothy Veale, eldest daughter of John
Veale, late of Whinney Heys, Esq., who departed this life the 9th
day of January, in the year of our Lord, 1747, and in the 77th
year of her age.”
Beneath these tablets, the only ones in the church, was the family vault
of the Veales, of Whinney Heys, now covered over by pews. During the
year 1875 the nave was re-seated, and at the time when the flooring was
taken up numerous skulls and bones were found in different parts of the
building, barely covered with earth, plainly indicating that interments
had once been very frequent within the walls, and causing us to wonder
that no mural or other monuments, beyond those just given, are now
visible, or, indeed, remembered by any of the old parishioners. None
of the stones in the graveyard are of great antiquity, and the most
interesting object on that score is a portion of an ancient stone cross,
having the letters I.H.S. carved upon it, on the broken summit of which
a sun-dial has been mounted. Tradition has long affirmed that Beatrice,
or Bridget, the daughter of Oliver Cromwell, who espoused General Ireton,
and after his death General Fleetwood, lies buried here, but this is
a mistake, probably arising from the proximity of the Rossall family,
having the same name as her second husband; the lady was interred at
Stoke Newington on the 5th of September, 1681. There are no stained glass
windows, and the walls of the church are whitewashed externally.
PERPETUAL CURATES AND VICARS OF BISPHAM.
------------+--------------------+-------------------+------------------
Date of | NAME. | On whose | Cause of Vacancy.
Institution.| | Presentation. |
------------+--------------------+-------------------+------------------
Before 1559 |Jerome Allen |Abbey of Syon |
About 1649 |John Fisher | |
In 1650 |John Cavelay | |Resignation of J.
| | | Fisher
Before 1674 |Robert Brodbelt | |Death of J.
| | | Cavelay
” 1689 |Robert Wayte | |
” 1691 |Thomas Rikay | |Death of R. Wayte
In 1692 |Thomas Sellom |Richard Fleetwood |Death of T. Rikay
About 1715 |Jonathan Hayton | |
Before 1753 |Christopher Albin |Edward Fleetwood |
In 1753 |Roger Freckleton |Roger Hesketh |Death of C. Albin
” 1760 |Ashton Werden |Roger Hesketh |Death of Roger
| | | Freckleton
” 1767 |John Armetriding |Roger Hesketh |Death of A. Werden
” 1791 |William Elston |Thomas Elston |Death of John
| | | Armetriding
” 1831 |Charles Hesketh, |Sir P. H. Fleetwood|Death of W. Elston
| M.A. | |
” 1837 |Bennett Williams, |Rev. C. Hesketh |Resignation of C.
| M.A. | | Hesketh
” 1850 |Henry Powell, M.A. | Ditto |Resignation of B.
| | | Williams
” 1857 |W. A. Mocatta, M.A. | Ditto |Resignation of H.
| | | Powell
” 1861 |James Leighton, M.A.| Ditto |Resignation of
| | | W. A. Mocatta
” 1874 |C. S. Hope, M.A. | Ditto |Resignation of J.
| | | Leighton
” 1876 |Francis John Dickson| Ditto |Resignation of
| | | C. S. Hope
------------+--------------------+-------------------+------------------
The living was a perpetual curacy until lately, when it was raised to the
rank of a vicarage. The Rev. Charles Hesketh, M.A., of North Meols, has
been the patron for almost half a century. Divine worship, according to
the ritual of the Roman Catholics, was last celebrated in Bispham church
during March, 1559, immediately after the death of Queen Mary, when
her protestant successor, Elizabeth, ascended the throne. The pastor,
Jerome Allen, a member of the Benedictine brotherhood, assembled his
flock at nine in the morning of the 25th of that month, and previous
to administering the holy sacrament, addressed a few words of farewell
and advice to his congregation. “Suffused in tears,” records the diary
of Rishton, “this holy and good man admonished his people to obey the
new queen, who had succeeded Mary, the late one, and besought them to
love God above all things, and their neighbours as themselves.” It is
said that after vacating his cure at Bispham, the Rev. Jerome Allen,
retired to Lambspring, in Germany, where he spent the remainder of his
life in the strictest religious observances enjoined by his creed. In
1650 the following remarks concerning Bispham were recorded by the
ecclesiastical commissioners of the Commonwealth:—“Bispham hath formerly
been a parish church, containing two townships, Bispham-cum-Norbreck
and Layton-cum-Warbreck, and consisting of three hundred families; the
inhabitants of the said towns desire that they may be made a parish.” In
the survey of the Right Rev. Francis Gastrell, D.D., bishop of Chester,
the annexed notice occurs:—“Bispham. Certif. £8 0s. 0d., viz., a parcell
of ground, given by Mr. R. Fleetwood, worth, taxes deducted, £5 per
year; Easter Reckonings, £3. Richard Fleetwood, esq., of Rossall Hall,
settled upon the church in 1687 a Rent Charge of £10 per ann. for ever.
Bispham-cum-Norbreck, and Layton-cum Warbreck, for which places serve
four Churchwardens, two chosen by the ministers and two by the parish.”
In 1725 Edward Veale, of Whinney Heys, gave £200 to augment the living,
and a similar amount was granted from Queen Anne’s Bounty for a like
purpose. Three years later £400 more were acquired, half from the fund
just named, and half from Mr. S. Walter. The parish registers commence in
1599.
William le Botiler, or Butler, held the manors of Layton, Bispham, and
Warbreck, according to the Duchy Feordary, in the early part of the
fourteenth century, and in 1365 his son, Sir John Botiler, granted the
manors of Great and Little Layton and Bispham, to Henry de Bispham and
Richard de Carleton, chaplains. Great Bispham probably remained in the
possession of the church until the dissolution of the monasteries.
Norbreck and Little Bispham appear to have belonged to the convent of
Salop, and were leased by William, abbot of that house, together with
certain tithes in Layton, to the abbot and convent of Deulacres, by an
undated deed, for eight marks per annum, due at Martinmas.[121] In 1539
the brotherhood of Deulacres paid rent for lands in Little Bispham and
Norbreck, and an additional sum of 2s. to Sir Thomas Butler, for lands in
Great Bispham.[122] After the Reformation, Bispham was granted by Edward
VI., in the sixth year of his reign, to Sir Ralph Bagnell, by whom it was
sold to John Fleetwood, of Rossall; and in 1571, Thomas Fleetwood, the
descendant of the last-named gentleman, held Great and Little Bispham and
Layton.[123] The manors remained invested in the Rossall family until the
lifetime of the late Sir P. H. Fleetwood, by whom they were sold to the
Cliftons, of Lytham, John Talbot Clifton, esq., of Lytham Hall, being the
present lord.
The subjoined account of a shipwreck on this coast is taken from the
journal of William Stout, of Lancaster, and illustrates the uses to which
the church was occasionally put in similar cases of emergency:—
“Our ship, Employment, met with a French ship of some force,
bound to Newfoundland, who made a prize of her. The French
were determined to send her directly to St. Malo; when John
Gardner, the master, treated to ransome her, and agreed with the
captors for £1,000 sterling. The French did strip the sailors
of most of their clothes and provisions; and coming out of a
hot climate to cold, before they got home they were so weak
that they were scarce able to work the ship, and the mate being
not an experienced pilot, spent time in making the land, and
was embayed on the coast of Wales, but with difficulty got off,
and then made the Isle of Man, and stood for Peel Fouldrey, but
missed his course, so that he made Rossall Mill for Walna Mill,
and run in that mistake till he was embayed under the Red Banks,
behind Rossall, so as he could not get off; and it blowing hard,
and fearing she would beat, they endeavoured to launch their
boat; but were so weak that they could not do it, but came to an
anchor. She struck off her rudder, and at the high water mark
she slipped her cables and run on shore, in a very foul strong
place, where she beat till she was full of water, but the men
got well to land. But it was believed if they had been able to
launch the boat and attempted to land in her, the sea was so high
and the shore so foul, that they might have all perished. This
happened on the 8th month, 1702, and we had early notice of it to
Lancaster, and got horses and carts with empty casks to put the
damaged sugars in, and to get on shore what could be saved, which
was done with much expedition. We got the sugar into Esquire
Fleetwood’s barn, at Rossall, and the cotton wool into Bispham
chapel, and in the neap tides got the carpenters at work, but a
storm came with the rising tides and beat the ship to pieces. The
cotton wool was sent to Manchester and sold for £200.”
In the early years of this century Bispham contained a manufactory for
the production of linsey-woolsey. The building was three stories in
height, and employed a considerable number of hands. Subsequently it
was converted into a ladies’ school, and afterwards pulled down. Two or
three residences in the township near the site of the old manufactory
still retain the names of ‘factory houses,’ from their association with
it. There is a small Nonconformist place of worship in the village,
surrounded by a wall, being partially covered with ivy and overshadowed
by trees. This edifice is called Bethel Chapel, and a date over the
doorway fixes its origin at 1834. In 1868 a Temperance Hall, comprising
a reading room, library, and spacious lecture and assembly room, was
erected here by subscription, and forms one of the most striking objects
in the village. The Sunday school connected with the parish church, and
situated by its side, was erected also by subscription, in 1840, and
rebuilt on a larger scale in 1873.
The hamlet of Norbreck is situated on the edge of the cliffs overhanging
the shore of the Irish Sea, and consists of several elegant residences
tenanted by Messrs. Swain, Burton, Harrison, Wilson, and Richards. None
of the houses present any features calling for special comment, but
appear, like others at no great distance, as Bispham Lodge, the seat
of Frederick Kemp, esq., J.P., to have been built within comparatively
recent years as marine retreats for the gentry of neighbouring towns, or
others more intimately associated with the locality.
POPULATION OF BISPHAM-WITH-NORBRECK.
1801. 1811. 1821. 1831. 1841. 1851. 1861. 1871.
254 297 323 313 371 394 437 556
The area of the township includes 2,624 statute acres.
The Free Grammar School was established in 1659, when Richard Higginson,
of St. Faith’s, London, bequeathed unto the parish of Bispham sundry
annual gifts in perpetuity, and especially the yearly payment of £30 for
and towards the support of a school-master and usher at the school of
Bispham, lately erected by him. From a subsequent deed it appears that
the annual sums were made chargeable on two messuages in Paternoster
Row, London, belonging to the dean and chapter of St. Pauls, but as the
interest Higginson possessed in such property was acquired at the sale
of the dean and chapter lands during the Commonwealth, it followed that
on the restoration of Charles II., the rentals forming his bequest were
not forthcoming. Further, the document recites that John Amburst, of
Gray’s-inn, esq., and Elizabeth, his wife, who was the widow and sole
executrix of Richard Higginson, being desirous that the object of the
founder should be carried out, paid to John Bonny and others in trust
£200, to be invested in land and the annual income thereof devoted to the
maintenance of an able and learned schoolmaster at the before-mentioned
school of Bispham. The costs of a chancery suit in 1686 reduced the
donation to £180, but the trustees made up the sum to the original
amount and reimbursed themselves by deducting £5 per annum from the
salary of the master for four years. In 1687, Henry Warbreck conveyed
in consideration of £200, to James Bailey and five other trustees of
the charity, elected by a majority of the inhabitants, the closes known
as the Two Tormer Carrs, the Two New Heys, the Great Hey, the Pasture,
the Boon Low Side, the Little Field, and 35 falls of ground on the west
of the Meadow Shoot close, amounting to about 14 acres, and situated in
Layton, “for the above-named pious use; and it was agreed, that when any
three of the five trustees, or six of any eight which should hereafter be
chosen, should happen to die, the survivors should convey the premises
to eight new trustees to be chosen, two out of each of the respective
townships of Layton, Warbreck, Bispham, and Norbreck, by the consent of
the major part of the inhabitants of those townships, and that the said
trustees should from time to time employ the rents for and towards the
maintenance and benefit of an able and learned schoolmaster, to teach
at the school at Bispham.”[124] In 1817, Thomas Elston, and George
Hodgson, of Layton, Robert Bonny, and William Bonny, of Warbreck, William
Butcher, junior, and James Tinkler, of Bispham, and Thomas Wilson, and
Joseph Hornby, of Norbreck, were appointed trustees at a public meeting
convened by William Bamber and William Butcher, the two surviving
trustees. The newly elected governors were directed “to permit the
dwelling-house and school to be used as a residence for the schoolmaster
and a public school for the instruction of the children of the parish of
Bispham-with-Norbreck, in reading, writing, arithmetic, English grammar,
and the principles of the English religion, gratuitously, as had been
heretofore done, and to hold the residue of the premises upon the trust
mentioned in the last deed.”[125] The commissioner who visited the
school in 1868 remarked:—“The building is an old house, through whose
thatched roof the rain penetrates in winter, dropping all over the desks,
and gathering in pools upon the floor; the room is very small, 30½ by
14½ feet and 7½ feet high to the spring of the roof, and the air being
so foul that I was obliged to keep the door open while examining the
children.” The use of the dilapidated structure here alluded to has been
discontinued, and the scholars assemble in a room in the Temperance Hall
until a fresh school-house has been erected.
LAYTON-WITH-WARBRECK is the second of the two townships comprised in
the ancient parish of Biscopham or Bispham. The Butlers, barons of
Warrington, were the earliest lords of Layton. In 1251, Robert Botiler,
or Butler, obtained a charter for a market and fair to be held in “his
manor of Latton.” The estate descended in the same family with some
interruptions, until the reign of Henry VIII., when it was sold by Sir
Thomas Butler to John Brown, of London, who on his part disposed of it,
in 1553, to Thomas Fleetwood. The manor was retained by the Fleetwoods up
to the time of the late Sir. P. Hesketh Fleetwood, of Rossall, by whom it
was conveyed, through purchase, to the Cliftons, of Lytham. The following
abstract from the title deed touching the transfer of the property from
John Brown to Thomas Fleetwood will not be without interest to the
reader:—
“By Letters Patent under the Great Seal of England, bearing date
the 19th day of March, in the first year of the reign of Queen
Mary. After reciting that Sir Thomas Butler, Knight, was seized
in fee of the Mannour of Layton, otherwise Great Layton, with the
Appurtenances, in the county of Lancaster, and that his estate,
title, and interest therein by due course of Law, came to King
Henry the Eighth, who entered thereon and was seized in fee
thereof, and being so seized did by his letters patents under
the seal of his Duchy at Lancaster, bearing date the 5th day of
April, in the thirty-fourth year of his Reign, (amongst other
things) give, grant, and restore unto the said Sir Thomas Butler,
his heirs, and Assigns, the said Mannour and its Appurtenances,
by virtue whereof the said Sir Thomas Butler entered and was
seized in fee thereof, and granted the same to John Brown,
Citizen and Mercer of London, his heirs and assigns, and that
Brown entered and was seized thereof in fee, and granted and sold
the same to Thomas Fleetwood, Esq., his heirs and Assigns, and
that the said Thomas Fleetwood entered thereon and was at that
time seized in fee thereof. And further reciting that the said
Sir Thomas Butler held and enjoyed the said Mannour, with its
Appurtenances, from the time of making said Grant until he sold
and conveyed the same to the said Brown without disturbance, and
that the said Brown held the same until he sold and conveyed to
the said Thomas Fleetwood without disturbance, and that the said
Thomas Fleetwood had held and enjoyed the same for near four
years without disturbance, and was then seized in fee thereof.
But because it had been doubted whether the said Letters Patent
and Grant made by King Henry the Eighth to Sir Thomas Butler
were good and valid in the Law, because they were under the
Seal of the Duchy of Lancaster, and not under the Great Seal,
and because it appeared unto her said Majesty, that the said
King Henry the Eighth, her Father, had promised that the said
Sir Thomas Butler, should have the said Grant either under the
Great Seal or the seal of the Duchy of Lancaster, She willing
to perform her Father’s promise and to remove all doubts, and
for greater security of the said Mannour, unto the said Thomas
Fleetwood and his heirs, and in consideration of the faithful
services done by the said Thomas Fleetwood to her said Father,
and to her Brother King Edward the Sixth, and to her, did give,
grant, and confirm unto the said Thomas Fleetwood, his heirs and
assigns, the Mannour of Layton, otherwise Great Layton, with
its rights, members, and Appurtenances, in the said county of
Lancaster, and all and singular the Messuages, Houses, Buildings,
Tofts, Cottages, Lands, Tenements, Meadows, Feedings, Pastures,
&c. &c. &c., Fishing, Wrecks of the Sea, Woods, Underwoods, &c.
&c. &c., commodities, emoluments and Hereditaments whatsoever,
with their Appurtenances, situate, lying, and being in the Vill,
Fields, or Hamlets of Layton, otherwise Great Layton, aforesaid,
which were of the said Thomas Butler, and which the said John
Brown afterwards sold to the said Thomas Fleetwood as aforesaid,
To hold the same unto the said Thomas Fleetwood his heirs and
assigns for ever.”
Reverting to the market and fair above-mentioned we find that in 1292 Sir
William le Botiler was called upon to show upon what right he laid claim
to free warren in Layton, and two other places. In proving his case, the
knight stated that his privileges extended to markets, fairs, and assize
of bread and beer, in addition to which he affirmed that wreck of the
sea had been the hereditary rights of his ancestors from the accession
of William the Conqueror. The jury acknowledged the title of Sir William
in each instance, ordaining that the same markets, fairs, etc., should
continue to be held or exercised as aforetime. It would appear that
the market took place each week on Wednesday, the chief merchandise
offered for sale being most likely cattle and smallware. There are now
no remnants of the market, which must at one era have been an assembly
of no mean importance, beyond the names of the market-house and the
market-field. The cross and stocks have also succumbed to the lapse of
years, the latter being a matter of tradition only, with all, even to the
oldest inhabitant.
In 1767 a petition was presented to the House of Parliament, setting
forth that within the manor of Layton and parishes of Poulton and
Bispham there was situated an extensive tract of land containing about
2,000 acres, called Layton Hawes, and begging on the part of those
concerned, for permission to enclose the whole of the common. The
document states “that Fleetwood Hesketh, Esquire, is Lord of the Manor
of Layton aforesaid; and Edmund Starkie, Esquire, is Impropriator of
the Great Tythes arising within that part of the Township of Marton
called Great Marton, within the said Manor of Layton and Parish of
Poulton, and of One Moiety of the Great Tythes arising in that part of
the Township of Bispham called Great Bispham, within the said Manor and
Parish of Bispham; and Thomas Cross, Esquire, and others, his partners,
are proprietors of the other Moiety of the Great Tythes arising within
Great Bispham aforesaid; and Ashton Werden, Clerk, present Incumbent
of the Parish Church of Bispham aforesaid, and his Successors for
the time being, of the Great Tythes, arising within the Township of
Layton-with-Warbreck, within the said Manor and Parish of Bispham. Also
that the said Fleetwood Hesketh, Thomas Clifton, and other Owners and
Proprietors of divers ancient Farms, situate within the Manor of Layton,
and the towns of Great Marton, Little Marton, Black Pool, and Bispham,
have an exclusive Right to turn and depasture their Beasts, Sheep, and
other Commovable Cattle, in and upon the said Waste or Common, called
Layton Hawes, at all Times of the Year; and the Parties interested are
willing and desirous that the said Waste or Common should be inclosed,
allotted and divided, and therefore pray that the said Waste or Common
called Layton Hawes, lying within the Manor of Layton, may be divided,
set out, and allotted by Commissioners, to be appointed for that purpose
and their Successors, in such manner, and subject to such rules, orders,
regulations, and directions, as may be thought necessary.” Leave to carry
out the object contained in the prayer was granted to the petitioners,
and within a comparatively short time the work of dividing and
apportioning the soil accomplished.
The greater part of the township of Layton-with-Warbreck being now
absorbed in the borough of Blackpool, to which the ensuing chapter will
be devoted, there is little further to notice beyond the ancient seats of
the families of Rigby and Veale. Layton Hall was probably the residence
of the Butlers, of Layton, previous to the opening of the seventeenth
century, when it was sold to Edward Rigby, of Burgh; at least that
gentleman was the first of the Rigbys whose _Inq. post mortem_ disclosed
that he held possessions in Layton. The Hall remained in the ownership
and tenancy of the Rigbys until the lifetime of Sir Alexander Rigby, who
married Alice, the daughter of Thomas Clifton, of Lytham, and died about
1700.[126] The original edifice, which was taken down and a farm-house
erected on the site about one century ago, was a massive gabled building.
At the bottom of the main staircase was a gate, or grating, of iron, the
whole of the interior of the Hall being fitted with oak panels, etc., in
a very antique style.
Whinney Heys was held by the Veales from the time of Francis Veale,
living in 1570, until the death of John Veale, about two hundred years
later, when it passed to Edward Fleetwood, of Rossall Hall, who had
married the sister and heiress of John Veale.[127] The Hall of Whinney
Heys was embosomed in trees and presented nothing of special moment to
the eye, being simply a large rough-cast country building of an early
type. It was partially taken down many years since and converted to
farming uses.
“The village affords,” says Mr. Thornber,[128] “an example of
covetousness seldom equalled. John Bailey, better known by the name of
the Layton miser, resided in a cottage near the market-house. His habits
were most frugal, enduring hunger and privation to hoard up his beloved
pelf. Once, during every summer, his store was exposed to the beams of
the sun, to undergo purification, and he might be seen, on that occasion,
with a loaded gun, seated in the midst of his treasure, guarding it with
the eyes of Argus, from the passing intruder. Notwithstanding all this
vigilance, upwards of £700 was stolen from his hoard; and this ignorant
old man journeyed to some distance to consult the wise man in order to
regain it; his manœuvre to avoid the income-tax also failed, for although
he converted his landed property into guineas, concealing them in his
house, and then pleaded that he possessed no _income_, but a _capital_
only, the law compelled him to pay his due proportion. In the midst of
his savings, death smote this wretched being, and even then his ruling
passion was strong in the very agony of departing nature. His gold watch,
the only portion of his property which remained unbequeathed, hung within
his reach; his greedy eye was riveted upon it; no he could not part with
that dear treasure—and, with an expiring effort, he snatched it from
the head of his bed, and it remained clenched in his hand and convulsed
fingers long after warmth had forsaken his frame. Alas! His hidden store,
all in gold, weighing 65lb, was discovered at the close of a tedious
search, in a walled up window, to which the miser had had access from
without, and was carried home in a malt sack, a purse not often used for
such a purpose.”
[Illustration]
[Illustration]