CHAPTER IV.

AN AFTERNOON AT GAWSWORTH—THE FIGHTING FITTONS—THE CHESHIRE WILL

CASE AND ITS TRAGIC SEQUEL—HENRY NEWCOME—“LORD FLAME.”

If any reader wishes to obtain a brief respite from the busy life of

the “unclean city,” to get away from the noise of looms and spindles,

the smoke of factories and the smell of dyes, and to find within easy

distance of the great manufacturing metropolis a place of perfect quiet

and repose where he may feel that for all practical purposes he is “at

the world’s end,” let him by all means spend a summer afternoon in that

quaint little out-of-the-way nook, Gawsworth, and he will return to the

crowded mart with little inclination to cry out with the Roman Emperor,

“_Perdidi diem_.” Yet how few there are who have made acquaintance with

this _beau-ideal_ of a quiet rural retreat. The places which it is the

proper thing to visit, or “do,” as the phrase is, are all carefully

mapped out for our convenience; but the literary finger-posts afford

but little guidance to the true rambler, who knows that the fairest

spots are those which are oftenest overlooked. Gawsworth may be easily

reached from Alderley or Chelford; but perhaps the most convenient

starting point is Macclesfield, from which it is distant a short four

miles.

Macclesfield does not present a particularly prepossessing appearance,

though it possesses much that is historically interesting, and

you may here and there see relics of mediæval times; but the long

centuries have wrought many changes in its condition, and those

changes can hardly be said to be from grave to gay. Its forest was

once the hunting-ground of kings. A royal palace occupied a site

very near to the present Park Lane, and in the Fourth Edward’s reign

Humphrey, Duke of Buckingham, had a princely residence there. The

town itself was walled, and though there is not now a single stone

remaining, the recollection of its fortifications is preserved in

the streets—Chestergate, Church Wallgate, and Jordangate—which form

the principal outlets from it. Notwithstanding that it once boasted

a royal owner, it now presents but a dingy and uninviting aspect, so

that we are little loth to leave its steep and tortuous streets, and

what Nathaniel Hawthorne would call its ugliness of brick, and betake

ourselves to the open country.

On getting clear of the town, we enter upon a pleasant rural highway

that rises and falls in gentle undulations. Tall trees border the

wayside, which, as we advance, grow thicker, until we reach a double

line of spreading beeches that meet in an entanglement overhead,

and form a long shady avenue, through which a pleasant vista is

obtained. Now and then we meet a chance wayfarer and occasionally a

sleepy-looking carter with his team, but the road is comparatively

little frequented, and we almost wonder that with the limited traffic

it does not become grass-grown. Though it is quiet now-a-days, it was

lively enough in the old coaching times, when the “Red Rover” and the

“Defiance” were in the zenith of their popularity, and the tootling

of the guard’s bugle daily awoke the echoes to the inspiring notes of

the “British Grenadiers,” for it was then the great highway between

Manchester and the metropolis. But those days are changed, and our

dream of the past is rudely dispelled by the shrill whistle of the

“express” as it shoots along the edge of the Moss, leaving a long white

pennon of steam in its wake.

As we journey on we get agreeable glimpses of the country, and the

varied character of the scenery adds to the charm. Below us on

the left stretches a broad expanse of bog—Danes Moss, as it is

called—commemorating some long-forgotten incursion of the wild

Scandinavian hordes—

When Denmark’s raven soared on high.

On the outskirts of the town is an old farmstead, called Cophurst,

on the site of which, as tradition sayeth, Raphael Hollinshead, the

chronicler, resided three hundred years ago. Close by is Sutton, once

the home of another Cheshire worthy—Sir Richard Sutton—“that ever

famous knight and great patron of learning,” as King, in his “Vale

Royal,” calls him, “one of the founders of Brazenose, in Oxford, where

by his bounty many of Cheshire youth receive most worthy education.”

The foreground is broken into picturesque inequalities, and in the

rear rises a succession of swelling hills, part of the great Kerridge

range—the stony barriers of the Peak country. Where the steep crags cut

sharply against the eastern sky is Teg’s Nose, famed for its gritstone

quarries. Further on, Shutling’s Low rears its cone-shaped peak to a

height of 1,660 feet, and behind we catch sight of the breezy moor, on

the summit of which stands that lonely hostelry, the Cat and Fiddle,

the highest public-house, it is said, to be found in the kingdom. The

great hill-slopes, though now almost bare of wood, once formed part

of the great forest of Macclesfield, in which for generations the

Davenports, as chief foresters, held the power of life and death over

the robber bands who in the old times infested it, as well as the

punishment of those who made free with the Earl’s venison; and they

not only held but exercised their rights, as the long “Robber Roll”

at Capesthorne still testifies. Though it has long been completely

disafforested, the memory of it still lingers. Forest Chapel, away up

in the very heart of this mountain wilderness, perpetuates the name,

and Wildboar Clough—Wilbor Clough, as the Macclesfieldians persist in

calling it—Hoglegh, and Wolfscote remind us of the former denizens

of these moorland wastes. Beyond Teg’s Nose a great gap opens in

the hills, and then Cloud End rears its rugged form—dark, wild, and

forbidding. From the summit, had we time to climb it, a charming

view might be obtained of the picturesquely varied country—

Of farms remote and far apart, with intervening space

Of black’ning rock and barren down, and pasture’s pleasant face;

And white and winding roads that creep through village, vale, and glen,

And o’er the dreary moorlands, far beyond the homes of men.

[Illustration: GAWSWORTH OLD HALL.]

On the right the scenery is of a more pastoral character. Lawns and

meadows stretch away, and the eye ranges over the broad fertile plain

of Cheshire—over quaint sequestered nooks and quiet homesteads, and

old-fashioned villages, with here and there a grey church tower rising

in their midst; over well-tilled fields and daisied pastures, and

league upon league of cultivated greenness, where the thick hedgerows

cross and recross each other in a network of verdant beauty. The

crumbling ruins of Beeston Castle crowning the edge of a bold outlier

of rock, may be dimly discerned, with Peckforton rising close by its

side, and beyond, where a shadowy form reaches like a cloud across the

horizon, we can trace the broken outline of the Welsh hills, with Moel

Fammau towering above them all.

Presently the battlemented towers of Gawsworth Church are seen peering

above the umbrage; then we come to a cross road, and, turning sharply

to the left, continue along a green old bosky lane, and past the

village school, close to which is a weather-worn memorial of bygone

days—the old wayside cross standing beneath a clump of trees, erected,

as old writers tell us, to “guide and guard the way to church,” and

the sight of which, with the surroundings, calls to remembrance Hood’s

lines on the symbol of the Christian’s faith:—

Say, was it to my spirit’s gain or loss,

One bright and balmy morning, as I went

From Liège’s lonely environs to Ghent,

If hard by the way-side I found a cross,

That made me breathe a pray’r upon the spot—

While Nature of herself, as if to trace

The emblem’s use, had trail’d around its base

The blue significant Forget-me-not?

Methought, the claims of Charity to urge

More forcibly, along with Faith and Hope,

The pious choice had pitched upon the verge

Of a delicious slope,

Giving the eye much variegated scope;—

“Look round,” it whisper’d, “on that prospect rare,

Those vales so verdant, and those hills so blue;

Enjoy the sunny world, so fresh and fair,

But (how the simple legend pierced me thro’!)”—

“Priez pour les Malheureux.”

For a short distance the road now descends, and near the bottom a bank

rises abruptly on the right, crowned with a plantation of oak and

larch—the “sylvan shade”—beneath which reposes the “breathless clay”

of the eccentric poet, wit, and player—Samuel Johnson—known by his

generation as “Lord Flame,” of whom we may have something to say anon.

A few yards further on is the new hall, or “New Buildings,” as it is

sometimes called, a plain brick house, the south wing only of which

has been completed, built in Queen Anne’s reign by that Lord Mohun who

brought the noted Cheshire will case to a sanguinary end, when he and

his adversary, the Duke of Hamilton, fell together in a duel in Hyde

Park, Nov. 15, 1712. At this point the view of Gawsworth opens upon

us, presenting one of the fairest pictures of quiet rural beauty that

Cheshire possesses. There is a dreamy old-world character about the

place, a sweet fragrance of the olden time, and a peaceful tranquillity

of the present; and the ancient church, the picturesque half-timbered

rectory, and the stately old hall, with the broad grass-bordered road,

the wide-spreading sycamores, and the old-fashioned fish ponds, in

the weed-grown depths of which every object, with the overarching sky

and the white clouds sailing therein are given back with distinct

vividness, impart an air of venerable and undisturbed respectability.

The place belongs so entirely to the past, and there seems such a

remoteness between the hoar antiquity of a scene so thoroughly old

English and the busy world from which we have just emerged, that we

almost hesitate to advance.

[Illustration: GAWSWORTH CROSS.]

There is no village, so to speak, the church, the parsonage, and the

two halls, with a cottage or two adjoining the church steps, being all

the buildings we can see; there is not even that usual and supposed to

be indispensable adjunct of an old English country village, the village

inn, the nearest hostelry being the Harrington Arms, an old coaching

house on the London road, a quarter of a mile or more away. The church,

a grey and venerable pile, with a remarkably well proportioned tower,

which exhibits some good architectural details of the perpendicular

period, stands in its graveyard, a little to the south of a broad

grass-grown road, upon a gentle eminence encompassed by a grey stone

fence that looks as ancient as the building itself. Tall trees

overshadow it—larch and fir—that rear their lofty spines from near the

water’s edge, and, yielding to the northern blasts, bend in graceful

curves towards the ancient fane. You can mount the steps and pass

through the little wicket into the quiet “God’s-acre,” and surely a

spot more suggestive of calm and serious thought is rarely witnessed.

Move slowly through the tall grass and round the green graves where

The rude forefathers of the hamlet sleep,

Tread lightly upon the weather-stained and moss-grown stones that

loving hands have set up to keep alive the memories of those who sleep

beneath. Near the porch is the chamfered shaft of an ancient cross,

and close by two or three venerable yews cast their funereal shade.

One of them, an aged torso, is garlanded with ivy, and buttressed on

one side by a short flight of steps that have been built against it.

Its gigantic roots grasp the earth with a tenacity that time cannot

relax. It has lived through long centuries, and seen generation after

generation christened, married, and buried, and, though now hollowed

and decayed, the trunk still preserves some of that vitality that was

in its fulness when the valorous Fittons were in the heyday of their

power.

Separating the churchyard from the road is an artificial lake or

fish-pond, one of a series of three or four, through each of which the

water flows in succession, and where, in the chivalrous days of the

knightly owners of Gawsworth, the water jousts and other aquatic games

took place. But those times of pomp and pageantry have passed away,

and the surface is now seldom ruffled save when occasionally a fish

rises, or a stately swan glides gracefully through the warm sunshine.

In its smooth mirror you can see the old grey tower, the projecting

buttresses, the traceried windows, and the embattled parapets of the

church, with their pleasant environment of green all clearly reflected,

presenting the appearance of an inverted picture; while the old

patrician trees that border the wayside bend over the glassy surface,

creating in places a vernal shade that Undine might delight in.

On the opposite side is the Rectory, a picturesque old structure of

black and white timber work, “magpie” as the people call it hereabouts,

with quaint overhanging gables, grotesque carvings, and mullioned

windows, with small diamond panes—one of them, that lighting the hall,

a spacious apartment with an open timber roof, containing fragments of

heraldic glass that would seem to have formerly belonged to the church.

There is a wide entrance porch in the centre of the building, and over

the door, between two shields of arms, this inscription—“Syr Edward

Fytton, Knight, with my lady Mare ffyton, hys wyffe”—from which it has

been commonly assumed that the house was built by Sir Edward Fitton,

who married Mary, the daughter and co-heir of Guicciard Harbottle, of

Northumberland, and so would fix the time of erection in the reign

of Henry VIII. But this inscription originally belonged to another

building of later date than the Rectory, which, as we learn from some

verses preserved in Ashmole’s “Church Notes,” taken _circa_ 1654, was

erected by George Baguley, who was rector of Gawsworth from 1470 to

1497.

The “old” Hall, the ancestral home of the Fittons, now occupied by

Lord Petersham, stands a short distance east of the church. Like

the Rectory, it is half-timbered and of the Elizabethan period, but

the building is now incomplete, a part having been taken down some

seventy years ago, though the original quadrangular form may still be

traced. In the rear, in what has been originally the courtyard, is a

curious octagonal oriel of three stories, each story overhanging the

one immediately below in a sort of telescope fashion. The windows are

filled with leaded panes arranged in a variety of shapes and patterns.

The principal front, which faces the road, has been rebuilt and painted

in imitation of timber-work. Over the principal entrance is a shield

of sixteen quarterings, representing the arms of the Fittons and their

several alliances, surrounded by a garter, on which is inscribed the

motto, “_Fit onus leve_”—a play upon the family name. There is also the

following inscription beneath—

Hec scvlptvra finita fvit apvd

Villam Galviæ in Hibernia per

Richardvm Rany, Edwardo Fyton

Milite primo dn͞o presidente totius

Provinciæ Conatiæ et Thomoniæ.

Anno Domini 1570.

In front of the hall is a grove of walnut trees, very patriarchs

of their kind; and adjoining is a large grassy amphitheatre, which

Ormerod, the Cheshire historian, has described as “a deserted pleasure

ground;” but, after careful examination, and with some show of

probability, pronounced by Mr. Mayer to be an ancient tilting ground,

where in times past the warlike Fittons amused themselves and their

Cheshire neighbours with displays of martial skill and bravery.

Before we enter the church or view the hall, it may be well to glance

briefly at the earlier history of the place. Gawsworth, though now an

independent parish, was formerly included within the limits of the

great parish of Prestbury; and even at the present day the whole of the

townships which surround it—Macclesfield, Sutton, Bosley, North Rode,

Marton, Siddington, and Henbury—all owe ecclesiastical allegiance to

the mother church of that widespread parish. The original name, as we

learn from the Domesday survey, was _Gouersurde_. After the Conquest

it formed part of the possessions of the Norman Earls of Chester; one

of whom, Randle de Meschines, in the twelfth century, gave it to his

trusty follower, Hugh, son of Bigod, with the right of holding his

own courts, without pleading before the prefects at Macclesfield, in

consideration of his rendering to the earl annually a caparisoned

horse; and this Hugh, in accordance with the fashion of the age,

adopted the name of Gawsworth. Subsequently the manor seems to have

passed to Richard Aldford, whose daughter, Lucy, brought it in marriage

to the Orrebies, who held it free from all service save furnishing one

man in time of war to assist in the defence of Aldford Castle. They

retained possession until the reign of Edward I., when Richard, son of

Thomas de Orreby, dying without male issue, his only sister, Isabel,

who succeeded to the inheritance, and who had previously married in

succession Roger de Macclesfeld and Sir John de Grindon, Knight, both

of whom she survived, conveyed it on her marriage in 1316-17 to her

third husband, Thomas Fytton, a younger son of Edmund Fytton, of Bolyn

(Wilmslow); and thus Gawsworth became closely associated with a family

noted for their chivalrous exploits, and famous in the annals of the

county.

Of the early history of this distinguished family—“Knights of a

long-continued Race and of great worth,” as Webb styles them—who for

so many generations held sway and practised a splendid hospitality in

Gawsworth, but few memorials have been preserved beyond the dry details

embodied in their _Inquisitiones post mortem_ in the Public Record

Office, and the inscriptions which still remain upon the sumptuous

monuments erected to their memory in the church which their pious

munificence reared.

Thomas Fitton, who acquired the manor of Gawsworth by his marriage

with the heiress of Orreby, had a son also named Thomas, who married

Margaret, a daughter and co-heir of Peter Legh, of Bechton, and added

to the patrimonial estate half of the manor of Bechton and lands

in Lostock-Gralam, which he obtained in right of his wife. It was

during the lifetime of this Thomas that we find the first attempt

made to erect the chapelry of Gawsworth, which was then dependent

upon Prestbury, into a separate parish. At that time the Abbot of

St. Werburg’s, Chester, held the rectory of Prestbury, and in the

chartulary of his house it is recorded that in April, 1382, he conceded

to John Caxton, rector of Gawsworth, the privilege of burying his

parishioners on paying a moiety of the dues within ten days after each

burial, and with a proviso that any parishioner of Gawsworth might be

interred at Prestbury without any claim on the part of the rector of

Gawsworth.

In explanation of the granting of this privilege it may be mentioned

that in those times, on the formation of a parish, the inhabitants

were required to perform their parochial rites at the mother church,

the “ealdan mynstre” of the parish. But as many parishes were of

considerable territorial extent, those resident in the remote hamlets

found it inconvenient to resort on all occasions to the mother church.

To provide for the spiritual requirements of the people in such

districts, private chapels or oratories, founded by the lords of the

soil, were allowed to be licensed in convenient situations. They were

frequently attached or immediately adjacent to the lord’s mansion, and

were designed more especially for his own accommodation and that of

his dependents; and Gawsworth, which is distant nearly six miles from

Prestbury, was of this class. To prevent such foundations trenching

upon the rights of the mother church, they were merely licensed for

preaching and praying, the ministration of the sacrament of baptism

and the performance of the right of burial being strictly prohibited.

These latter were the true parochial rites, and the grant of them to a

chapel or oratory severed its connection with the parish church, and

converted it into a parochial chapel, or, more strictly speaking, into

an independent church.

But who was John Caxton, the parson of Gawsworth? The name is not

very frequently met with, and the thought suggests itself that he may

have been, and probably was, a kinsman of that William Caxton who, a

century later, set up his press in the precincts of Westminster Abbey,

and revolutionised the world by practising the art which Gutenberg had

invented.

In 1391 Thomas Fitton was appointed one of a number of influential

persons in Cheshire who were constituted a commission to levy a subsidy

of 3,000 marks (£2,000) in the city of Chester, on account of the

King’s confirmation of the old charters belonging to that city. He died

in 1397, and was succeeded by his son, Sir Lawrence Fitton, then aged

22, who married Agnes Hesketh, a daughter of the house of Rufford,

in Lancashire. This Sir Lawrence, who held the lordship for the long

period of 60 years, fills no inconsiderable space in the annals of

the county. He was frequently one of the forest justices in eyre, the

assizes being then held in Macclesfield, and took an active part in the

stirring events of his time. When, in 1399, Richard the Second went

over to Ireland to avenge the death of Roger Mortimer, by chastising

the Irish chieftains who had risen in insurrection, he, in order to

increase the strength of his Cheshire guard by a fresh levy, issued

his orders to Sir Lawrence Fitton and others commanding them to summon

the best archers in the Macclesfield hundred between 16 and 60, and

to select a number to go to Ireland in his train, who were to be at

Chester on the morrow of the Ascension of our Lord for inspection by

the King’s officers. The King did not actually sail till the 4th of

June, when he was joined by Sir Lawrence Fitton, who, as appears by

an entry on the Recognizance Rolls of the palatinate, had protection

granted him on his departure; and at this time, under date June 5,

we find a licence to William Prydyn, parson of Gawsworth, Robert de

Tounley, John Tryket, and Matthew del Mere to act as his attorneys and

to look after his affairs while absent in Ireland on the King’s service.

“When the shepherd is absent with his dog the wolf easily leaps into

the fold.” So says the proverb, and Richard had unpleasant experience

of the truthfulness of it, for scarcely had he loosed his sails before

some of the more discontented of his nobles at home were plotting for

his overthrow.

Within a month of his departure Henry Bolingbroke, Duke of Hereford,

the only son of old John of Gaunt, who had been banished the kingdom,

landed at Ravenspur, near Hull—as Shakspere writes—

The banish’d Bolingbroke repeats himself,

And with uplifted arms is safe arrived

At Ravenspurg,

and before the end of July was at the head of a large army in the wolds

of Worcestershire. It was not until towns and castles had been yielded

to the invader that the King received intelligence of the insurrection,

for the winds had been contrary, and by the time he landed at Milford

the revolution was virtually accomplished. Ill news does not always

travel apace, and in these days, when the trembling wire speeds the

message through air and sea, it seems difficult to realise the thought

of a rebellion stalking through England unchecked for weeks without

the news reaching in the sister isle him whom it most immediately

concerned. On reaching England, Richard started for Chester, where he

had many friends and his power was strongest. At Flint he was delivered

by the perfidious Percy into the hands of Bolingbroke, thence he was

taken to Chester, and afterwards conveyed to London and lodged in

the Tower, when, after having resigned the crown, he was formally

deposed—an act that was followed by his removal to Pontefract, where,

according to common report, he was murdered by Sir Piers Exton and

his assistants, though it is more likely he was allowed to perish of

starvation.

Whether Fitton was one of those who hastened to pay court to the

usurper, and in a bad game elected to adhere to the winning side,

is not clear, but he must have quickly accommodated himself to the

changed state of affairs, and to have gained the confidence of

Bolingbroke—“King Henry of that name the Fourth.”

Scarcely was Richard dead when a great revulsion in public feeling

occurred, old hatreds and jealousies were revived, and those who had

clamoured most for his death now exclaimed—

Oh, earth, yield us that King again,

And take thou this;

and the usurping Henry, who had dreamed only of the throne as a bed of

roses, found himself between the fell spectres conscience and insatiate

treason. In Wales, where Richard had possessed a strong attachment,

Owen Glendower raised the standard of revolt, renounced allegiance

to the King, and claimed to be the rightful Prince of Wales, when he

was joined by young Harry Percy, the Hotspur of the famous ballad

of _Chevy Chase_. To meet this new danger, Prince Henry, Falstaff’s

Prince Hal—“the nimble-footed mad-cap Harry, Prince of Wales,” who was

also Earl of Chester, and lived much in the county, joined his forces

to those of his father, and on the 11th January, 1403-4, we find him

directing a writ to Sir Lawrence Fitton, requiring him to repair “to

his possessions on the marches of Wales, there to make defence against

the coming of Owen Glendower, according to an order in Council enacting

that, on the occasion of the war being moved against the King, all

those holding possessions on the marches should reside on the same for

the defence of the realm,” and the Recognizance Rolls show that a few

days later the Lord of Gawsworth was appointed on a commission “to

inquire touching those who spread false rumours to the disquiet of the

people of the county of Chester, and disturbance of the peace therein,

also to array all the fencible men of the hundred of Macclesfield.”

In 1416, when, after the victory at Agincourt, Henry V. was preparing

for his second expedition to France, with the design of claiming the

crown, Sir Lawrence Fitton, with Sir John Savage, Knight, Robert de

Hyde, Robert de Dokenfield, and John, the son of Peter de Legh, was

appointed collector of the subsidy in the Macclesfield hundred, part

of the 3,000 marks granted to the King by the county of Chester; and

in 1428, with other influential Cheshire knights and gentry, he was

summoned to the King’s Council at Chester, with regard to the granting

of a subsidy to the King (Henry VI.) His death occurred on the 16th

March, 1457, when he must have been over 80 years of age, and his

inquisition was taken 37 Henry VI. (1459), when his grandson Thomas,

then aged 26, was found to be his next heir. As previously stated,

he had to wife Agnes Hesketh. This lady died in 1422, and he would

appear to have re-married, for in the inquisition taken after his death

mention is made of “Clemencia, his wife,” who is said to be then alive.

During his long life a movement was taking place in the Church which

brought about a great change in religious thought and action, and in

which Wycliffe, the rector of Lutterworth, may be said to have been

the chief actor. The rapacity of the monks was securing or had secured

for themselves the larger portion of the livings of the country, the

parishes being handed over to the spiritual care of vicars, with the

small tithes as a miserable stipend. In this manner the rich rectory of

Prestbury had been appropriated to the Abbey of St. Werburg, Chester;

and possibly it was this circumstance, as much as his own personal

convenience, which induced Caxton, acting under the influence of his

patron, the father of Sir Lawrence Fitton, to seek to detach the chapel

of Gawsworth from the mother church of Prestbury. Having accomplished

this, Sir Lawrence Fitton would seem to have set about the erection of

a building more suited to its increased importance as a parish church,

and an examination of the building points to the conclusion that the

greater portion of the fabric was erected during his lifetime, as

evidenced by the architectural details of the building, as well as

by the shields of arms displayed on different parts of the tower,

representing the alliances of the family, the latest impalement being

the coat of Mainwaring, intended to commemorate the marriage of his son

Thomas with Ellen, daughter of Randle Mainwaring, of Over Peover, which

would seem to fix the date between the years 1420 and 1430, and not in

the reign of Edward III., as generally supposed. In the Cheshire Church

Notes, taken in 1592, there is preserved an account of a window to the

memory of Sir Lawrence Fitton and his wife, which formerly existed in

the church at Gawsworth. He is represented as in armour, and kneeling

with his wife before desks in the attitude of devotion; on his surcoat

were displayed the arms of Fitton, and on the lady’s mantle those of

Hesketh; behind the knight were eight sons, and in rear of the lady

four daughters, and underneath the inscription, “_Orate pro bono statu

Laurencii ffitton milit’ et Agnet’ uxor ejus cum pueris suis_.”

By his wife Agnes Sir Lawrence Fitton had a son Thomas, who, as stated,

married Ellen, daughter of Randle Mainwaring, of Over Peover, and

their names were in like manner commemorated by a window, which has

now disappeared, comprising three panes, one representing Sir Randle

Mainwaring and his wife Margery, daughter of Hugh Venables, Baron of

Kinderton, kneeling before desks; the second, Thomas Fitton and seven

sons; and the third, his wife and six daughters, all kneeling, and

the inscription, “_Orate pro a’iabus Thomæ ffitton, filii Laurencii

ffitton, et Elene ux’ ejus, et om’ puerorum suorum, qui istam fenestram

fieri fecerunt_.”

Thomas Fitton pre-deceased his father, leaving a son, also named

Thomas, who succeeded as heir on the death of his grandfather in 1457,

he being then 25 years of age. This Thomas inherited the martial

spirit of his ancestors, and took his share in the fierce struggle of

the White and Red Roses, which destroyed the flower of the English

nobility, and impoverished and well-nigh exhausted the country—“that

purple testament of bleeding war”—

When, like a matron butcher’d of her sons,

And cast aside some common way, a spectacle

Of horror and affright to passers by,

Our bleeding country bled at every vein!

He was present in the sanguinary encounter at Bloreheath, near Drayton,

on that fatal 23rd July, 1459—St. Tecla’s Day—when Lord Audley and the

Lancastrians were defeated, and was knighted on the field; and there is

on the Cheshire Recognizance Rolls, under date April 29th, 38-9 Henry

VI. (1460), the record of a general pardon granted to Thomas Fitton and

Richard Fitton, late of Gawsworth; William, son of Lawrence Fitton,

late of Gawsworth; Edward, brother of Thomas Fitton, late of Gawsworth;

some of their kinsmen of the Pownall stock, and other Cheshire

gentry, with a long list of residents in Gawsworth, the retainers of

the Fittons—names that are still familiar in the neighbourhood—“in

consideration,” as it states, “of the good service of the said Thomas

Fitton, Knight, and his adherents at Blore-heth.” His name also occurs

under date June 10, 1463, with those of John de Davenport, of Bramhall;

Hugh Davenport, of Henbury; and Christopher Davenport, of Woodford, in

the appointment of collectors of a subsidy for the King (Edward IV.) in

the Macclesfield Hundred. He married Ellen, daughter of Sir Peter Legh,

of Lyme, but this lady, who predeceased him, bore him no issue. He died

April 27, 1494, when the estates devolved upon his brother and next

heir, Edward Fitton, then aged 60 years. This Edward, by his marriage

with Emmota, the daughter and sole heiress of Robert Siddington, had at

that time acquired possession of two parts of the manor of Siddington,

which had been held by his wife’s family for many generations on the

tenure of rendering a red rose yearly, and thus he added materially to

the territorial wealth and influence of the Gawsworth house. Though

there is no absolute evidence of the fact, there is yet good reason to

believe that the south porch of Gawsworth Church was added or rebuilt

by this Edward Fitton, one of the carved decorations being a rose, in

the leaves of which may be discerned two heads, evidently intended to

represent Henry VII. and his Queen, who, by their marriage, had united

the rival houses of York and Lancaster, and so terminated the long and

bitter War of the Roses.

Edward Fitton died 15th February, 1510-11, leaving, with other

issue, a son John, who succeeded as heir, and who, as appears by the

inquisition taken after his father’s death, was then 40 years of age.

He had married, in 1498, Ellen, daughter of Sir Andrew Brereton, the

representative of a family that had been seated at Brereton from the

time of William Rufus. By her he had, with other issue, a son Edward,

who succeeded at his death, which occurred on the Sunday after St.

Valentine’s Day, 1525. In the Cheshire Church Notes already referred

to, mention is made of a memorial window formerly existing on the south

side of Gawsworth Church, containing the arms of Fitton quartering

those of Siddington and Bechton, with the inscription underneath:

“_Orate pro a’iabus Edwardi ffitton et Emmotæ uxis suæ, et pro a’iabus

Johannis ffitton, et Elene ux’ sue ... et Roberti Sedyngton et Elene

uxoris sue_;” and there was also formerly in one of the windows of

the south aisle of Wilmslow Church, as we learn from Mr. Earwaker’s

“East Cheshire,” a representation of John Fitton and his wife. The

drawing made by Randle Holmes shows the figure of a knight kneeling on

a cushion and wearing a tabard of arms, the coat being that of Fitton

of Gawsworth; and lower down is a knight kneeling, with his tabard

of arms quarterly—(1) Orreby, (2) Siddington, (3) Bechton, and (4)

Fitton. Behind him kneel eight sons; opposite, also kneeling, is his

wife, wearing an heraldic mantle representing the arms of Brereton,

with a shield containing the same coat above her head; and behind her,

kneeling, six daughters. The inscription had then disappeared, but

it is clear that the first figure was intended for Edward Fitton of

Gawsworth, whilst the other represented his son John, and his wife,

Ellen Brereton, and their children.

On the death of John Fitton, in 1525, the family estates devolved upon

his eldest son Edward, who received the honour of knighthood, and

in the 35th Henry VIII. (1543-4) held the shrievalty of the county.

He married Mary, the younger daughter and co-heir of Sir Guiscard

Harbottle, a Northumberland knight, and by her had five sons and six

daughters. He died on February 17, 1548, and on his inquisition, which

was taken the same year, Edward Fitton, his son, then aged 21 years,

was found to be his heir.

Edward Fitton, who succeeded to the Gawsworth estates on the death of

his father, in 1548, was born 31st March, 1527; and when only 12 years

of age had been united in marriage with Anne, one of the daughters of

Sir Peter Warburton, of Warburton and Arley, the lady being a month

younger than himself. He was one of the foresters of Macclesfield, and

was exempted from serving upon juries and at the assizes, in accordance

with the terms of a writ dated 29th March, 5 and 6 Edw. VI. (1532),

addressed to the sheriff of the county. Eight years after his coming

in possession of the patrimonial lands, as appears by letters patent

bearing date 3 and 4 Philip and Mary (1556-7), he, in conjunction with

William Tatton, of Wythenshawe, who in 1552 had espoused his eldest

sister, Mary, obtained a grant from the Crown of Etchells, part of the

confiscated estates of Sir William Brereton, together with Aldford

and Alderley, the property being subsequently partitioned; Aldford

and Alderley remaining with Sir Edward, whilst Etchells passed to his

son-in-law, William Tatton.

Subsequently his name occurs in the palatine records, with those of

William Davenport, Knt., and William Dokenfield and Jasper Worth,

Esquires, as collectors of a mise in Macclesfield, in 1559-60.

The influential position which the Fittons held in their own county

was due, as we have seen, not less to their martial bearing than to

their successful marriages, and it was this chivalrous spirit which was

ever a characteristic of the stock that led to their being frequently

employed in the public service. In the person of Sir Edward Fitton the

ancient fame of the family was well sustained. In 1569, the year in

which Shane O’Neill, the representative of the royal race of Ulster,

was attainted in Parliament—that daring chief of a valorous line, whose

Kings with standard of green unfurl’d,

Led the Red-branch knights to danger;

Ere the emerald gem of the western world

Was set in the crown of a stranger—

when Ireland was in a state of anarchy and confusion—when the Desmonds

and the Tyrones were trying the chances of insurrection rather

than abdicate their unlicensed but ancient chieftainship, and the

half-civilised people were encouraged in their disobedience to the

law by the mischievous activity of the Catholic clergy, who had been

forcibly dispossessed of their benefices, and therefore wished to

free themselves from the English yoke—Sir Edward Fitton was sent over

to Ireland by Queen Elizabeth to fill the difficult and responsible

post of first Lord President of the Council within the Province of

Munster and Thomond—an office he held for a period of over three

years. His position can hardly be said to have been an enviable one,

for the country at that time had become so wasted by war and military

executions, and famine and pestilence, that two years previously Sir

Henry Sidney, the viceroy, in his letters to Elizabeth, described the

southern and western counties as “an unmeasurable tract, now waste and

uninhabited, which of late years was well tilled and pastured.” He

adds,—

A more pleasant nor a more desolate land I never saw than from

Youghall to Limerick.... So far hath that policy, or rather lack

of policy, in keeping dissension among them prevailed, as now,

albeit all that are alive would become honest and live in quiet,

yet are there not left alive in those two provinces the twentieth

person necessary to inhabit the same.

And the description is confirmed by a contemporary writer—a Cheshire

man, by the way, whose early life was spent in the neighbourhood of

Gawsworth (Hollinshead)—who thus expresses the truth with hyperbolical

energy:—

The land itself, which before those wars was populous, well

inhabited, and rich in all the good blessings of God, being

plenteous of corn, full of cattle, well stored with fruits and

sundry other good commodities, is now become waste and barren,

yielding no fruits, the pastures no cattle, the fields no corn,

the air no birds, the seas, though full of fish, yet to them

yielding nothing. Finally, every way, the curse of God was so

great, and the land so barren, both of man and beast, that

whosoever did travel from one end unto the other he should not

meet any man, woman, or child, saving in towns and cities; nor

yet see any beast but they were wolves, the foxes, and other like

ravenous beasts.

On the dissolution of the Council in September, 1572, Sir Edward Fitton

returned to England; but remained only a few months, when he was

appointed (March, 1573) Treasurer for the War and Vice-Treasurer and

Receiver-General in Ireland. He appears to have taken up his abode in

Dublin, where in January of the following year he lost his wife. She

was buried in St. Patrick’s Cathedral, in that city, January, 1573-4;

and in the MSS. of Bishop Sterne there is preserved the following

curious account of the ceremonial observed on the occasion of her

funeral:—

“The order in the presyding for buriall of the worshypful Lady

Fitton, on Sonday, bein the 17 day of January, Anno 1573.

First, serteyne youmen to goo before the penon with the armes

of Syr Edwarde Fytton, and his wyfe’s dessessed; and next after

them the penon, borne by Mr. Rycharde Fytton, second son to Syr

Edw. Fytton and Lady, his wyfe dessessed; and sarten gentillmen

servants to the sayd Syr Edw. Fytton; then the gentill-hossher

and the chapplens, and then Ulster Kyng of Armes of Ierland,

weyring his mornyng goune and hod, with hys cote of the armes

of Ynglande. And then the corpes of the sayd Lady Fytton, and

next after the corps the lady Brabason, who was the principal

morner, bein lyd and assysted by Sir Rafe Egerton, knyght, and

Mr. Fran. Fytton, Esq., brother to the said Syr Edwarde, and next

after her, Mistress Agarde, wyfe to Mr. Fran. Agarde; then Mrs.

Chalenor, wyfe to Mr. John Chalenor; then Mrs. Dyllon; then Mrs.

Bruerton, being the other III murners. Then Syr Edward Fytton

goying bytwene the Archebysshoppe of Dublin and the Bishop of

Methe; then Sir John Plunkett, Chefe Justice of Ireland; then

Master Dyllon, beying the Chefe Baron; then Mr. Fran. Agard and

Mr. John Chalenor, wyth other men to the number of XIII gentylmen;

then sarten other gentyllwomen and maydens, morners, to the nomber

of VIII; and then the Mayor of Dublyn, wyth his brytherne, the

Schyreffes and Aldermen; and the poure folks VI men on the one

syde of the corse and VI women on the other syde. And so coming

to the cherche of St. Patryke, where was a herse prepared, and

when they cam to the herse, the yomen stode, halfe on the one side

and halfe on the other, the penon berer stood at the fette of the

corps; then the corps was layd upon a payer of trestels within the

herse, and then the III morners were brought to their places by

Ulster Kyng of Armes aforesaid, and the cheffe morner was brought

to her place at the hede of the corps, and so the herse was closd;

and the tow assystants set uppon tow stowles without the rayles,

and then sarvyce was begon by the Bysshope of Methe, and after

sarvyce there was a sermon made, and the sermon endyd, the company

went home to the house of the sayd Sir Edw. Fytton; and the corpse

was buryed by the reverent father, the Bysshop of Methe, and

when the corpse was buryed, the clothe was layd again upon the

trestylls wythin the herse, which was deckyed with scochyens of

armes in pale of hys and her armes, and on the morow the herse was

sett over the grave and the penon sett in the wall over the grave.

And Ulster Kyng of Armes had V yardes of fyne blake clothe for

his lyvery, and 50s. sterling for hys fee, and the herse with the

cloth that was on the corse wyth all the furnyture there of the

herse.”

It may be mentioned that the claim of Ulster King of Arms to the costly

materials of which the hearse was composed was disputed by the Vicars

Choral of St Patrick’s, and the matter was not settled until 1578, when

a decision was given in favour of the former by the Lord Deputy of the

Council. Sir Edward Fitton died July 3, 1579, and his remains were

interred by the side of those of his wife, the memory of both being

perpetuated in an inscription on a sepulchral brass still remaining in

St. Patrick’s Cathedral, Dublin, on which is engraved the figure of

a man with nine children behind him, and, opposite, a woman with six

children behind her, all kneeling. The inscription which is below is as

follows:—

Glorify thy name, hasten thy

Kingdome; Comforte thy flock;

Confound thy adversaries;

Ser Edward ffitton, of Gausworth, in the counte of Chester, in

Englande, knight, was sent into Ireland by Quene Elizabeth, to

serve as the first L President of her highnes Counsell within

the province of Connaght and Thomonde, who landing in Ireland on

the Ascention day, 1569, Ao. R. R. Elizabeth XI. lyued there in

the rome aforesaid till Mighellmas, 1572, Ao. Elizabeth XIIIIº.;

and then, that Counsell being dissolued, and he repayring

into England, was sent over againe in March next following as

Threasaurer at Warres, Vice-treasaurer, and general receyvor

within the realme of Ireland, and hath here buried the wyef of

his youth, Anne, the seconnd daughter of Sir Peter Warburton, of

Areley, in the county of Chester, knight, who were born both in

one yere, viz., he ye last of Marche, 1527, and she the first

of May in the same yeare; and were maried on Sonday next after

Hillaries daye, 1539, being ye 19 daye of Januarie, in the 12 yere

of their age, and lyued together in true and lawfull matrymonie

just 34 yeres; for the same Sonday of ye yere wherein they were

maried, ye same Sondaie 34 yeres following was she buried, though

she faithfully departed this lyef 9 daies before, viz., on the

Saturdaie, ye 9 daie of Januarie, 1573; in which time God gave

them 15 children, viz., 9 sonnes and six daughters; and now her

body slepeth under this Stone, and her soul is retourned to God

yt gave yt, and there remayneth in kepinge of Christe Jesus, her

onely Saviour. And the said Ser Edward departed this lyef the

thirde daie of July, Ao. Dni. 1579, and was buried the xxi daie

of September next folowing; whose fleshe also resteth under the

same stone, in assured hope of full and perfect resurrection to

eternall lyef in ioye, through Christe his onely Saviour; and the

said Ser Edward was revoked home into England, and left this land

the ---- day of ---- Anno Domini being the ---- yere of his age.

At the east end of the north side of Gawsworth Church there is a

replica of this inscription, with the figures of Sir Edward and Lady

Fitton, and their fifteen children.

A younger brother of Sir Edward was Francis Fitton, who in 1588 married

Katherine, the Countess Dowager of Northumberland, one of the four

daughters and co-heirs of John Neville Lord Latimer. His portrait was

formerly to be seen in the “new” hall at Gawsworth, with a long and

curious inscription surrounding it, recording some of the alliances of

the family.

Sir Edward Fitton, as stated, died July 3, 1579. His inquisition was

taken the following year, when his son, Sir Edward Fitton, Knight,

then aged 30, was found to be his heir. He was probably at the time

in Ireland, for it was not until April 24, 25 Elizabeth (1583), that

he had livery of his lands. In 1602, as appears by an indenture dated

June 20 in that year, he sold the manor of Nether Alderley, which had

been acquired by his father, to Thomas Stanley, ancestor of the present

Lord Stanley of Alderley. Sir Edward filled the office of President

of Munster, in Ireland, and died in 1606, leaving, by his wife Alice,

daughter and sole heir of John Holcroft, of Holcroft, in Lancashire,

with other issue, a son, Sir Edward Fitton, born 29th November, 1572,

who was created a Baronet in 1617. He died May 10, 1619, being then

aged 47, and was buried at Gawsworth, where a sumptuous monument was

erected to his memory by his wife, “the Lady Ann Fytton,” daughter and

co-heir of James Barratt, of Tenby, in Pembrokeshire, Esq., with the

following extravagant effusion inscribed on a panel below:—

Least tongves to fvtvre ages shovld be dvmb,

The very stones thvs speak abovt ovr tomb.

Loe, two made one, whence sprang these many more,

Of whom a King once prophecy’d before.

Here’s the blest man, his wife the frvitfvl vine,

The children th’ olive plants, a gracefvll line,

Whose sovle’s and body’s beavties sentence them

_Fitt-ons_ to weare a heavenly Diadem.

Lady Ann Fitton survived her husband many years. Her will bears date

January 31, 1643-4, but the date of probate has not been ascertained.

In it she bequeaths several small legacies to her grandchildren and

others, appoints her daughter, Mrs. Lettice Cole, sole executrix, and

her two grandchildren, William, Lord Brereton, and Charles Gerard,

supervisors. She died 26th March, 1644, and was buried at Gawsworth.

On the death of Sir Edward the family estates passed to his son, also

named Edward, who was baptised at Gawsworth, August 24th, 1603, and

must, therefore, have been under age on his accession to the property.

In October, 1622, he married Jane, daughter of Sir John Trevor, of Plâs

Teg, in Denbighshire, by whom he had a daughter, Margaret, who died

in infancy. Lady Fitton died June, 1638, and was buried at Gawsworth,

when Sir Edward again entered the marriage state, his second wife being

Felicia, daughter of Ralph Sneyd, of Keel, in Staffordshire. Concerning

this second marriage there is the following curious entry in the

Corporation books of the borough of Congleton:—

1638. Paid for an entertainment for Sir Edwd. Fitton, of

Gawsworth, his bride, father, and mother-in-law, on their

first coming through the town, and divers other gentlemen who

accompanied him and his bride, on their going to Gawsworth to

bring his lady. He sent his barber two days before to the mayor

and aldermen, and the rest, to entreat them to bid them welcome

12s. 4d.

The civic authorities of Congleton were noted for their hospitality,

and we may therefore assume that little “entreaty” was required on

the part of the “barber” to secure a cordial welcome for the Baronet

and his bride. We are not told what the entertainment consisted of,

but no doubt the cakes and sack for which the old borough had even

then long been famous entered largely into the festivities, though

the amount charged does not suggest the idea of any very extravagant

convivialities.

Sir Edward was soon called by the stern duties of the times from the

enjoyment of domestic life. Clouds were gathering upon the political

horizon which heralded a tempest; the seeds of civil war had been

sown, and soon King and Commons were arrayed against each other,

neither caring for peace, for if the olive branch was held out it was

stripped of its leaves, and appeared only as a dry and sapless twig.

In the great struggle between Charles and the Parliament the owner

of Gawsworth espoused the cause of his Sovereign, and distinguished

himself in several military engagements. He raised a regiment of

infantry for the King’s service from among his own tenantry and

dependents, of which he had the command; and the good people of

Congleton, not wishing to have the tranquillity of their town disturbed

by the quartering of his troops in it, in the hope of avoiding the

inconvenience proferred him their hospitality, as one of the entries in

the Corporation accounts shows:—

1642. Wine gave to Colonel Fitton, not to quarter 500 soldiers on

the town

3s. 4d.

Colonel Fitton fought in the battle at Edgehill, where the two armies

were first put in array against each other, and was also present with

the King at the taking of Banbury, as well as in the operations at

Brentford and Reading. He afterwards took part with Prince Rupert in

the storming of Bristol, and when that city—exceeded only by London

in population and wealth—was, after a terrible slaughter, surrendered

(July 27, 1643) by Nathaniel Fiennes to the arms of its sovereign, he

was left in charge of the garrison, and died there of consumption in

the following month, at the early age of 40. His body was removed to

Gawsworth for interment, and the occasion of its passing through the

town of Congleton is thus referred to in the accounts:—

Paid for carrying Sir Edwd. Fitton through the town, and for

repairing Rood-lane for the occasion

4s. 0d.

In the south-east angle of Gawsworth Church there is a large monument

to the memory of Sir Edward, his first wife, and their infant daughter,

placed there by his second wife, who survived him, and afterwards

re-married Sir Charles Adderley. It consists of an arch resting upon

pillars, beneath which is an altar-tomb supporting the effigies of

Sir Edward and his wife, and that of their infant daughter. A tablet

containing a long Latin inscription, formerly affixed to the south

wall, beneath the canopy, has in recent years been removed to the east

wall of the chancel.

Sir Edward left no surviving issue, a circumstance which gave rise to

almost endless contentions between the kinsmen of his name and their

cousins—the Gerards. Lawsuit followed lawsuit; long and rancorous were

the proceedings in the “Great Cheshire Will Case,” as it was called;

and the fierce struggle, which began in one century with forgery,

followed by seduction and divorce, was ended in the next, when the

husbands of the two ladies who claimed to be heiresses were slain by

each other in a murderous duel in Hyde Park. Immediately after the

death of Sir Edward Fitton, Penelope, Anne, Jane, and Frances, his

four sisters—married respectively to Sir Charles Gerard, Knight; Sir

John Brereton, Knight; Thomas Minshull, Esquire; and Henry Mainwaring,

Esquire—entered upon possession of the estates; but, after long

litigation, they were ejected by William Fitton, son of Alexander,

second surviving son of Sir Edward Fitton, Treasurer of Ireland, who

claimed under a deed alleged to have been executed by Sir Edward,

settling the estates upon himself, with remainder in succession to his

sons, Edward and Alexander, the latter of whom succeeded him in the

possession, and he obtained three verdicts in his favour. One of the

sisters of Sir Edward Fitton—Penelope—had married Sir Charles Gerard,

of Halsall, in Lancashire, and by him had a son, Sir Charles Gerard,

created Lord Brandon in 1645, and Earl of Macclesfield in 1679. Lord

Brandon was one of the notable gallants at the profligate Court of

Charles II. He held the office of Gentleman of the Bedchamber, and

was also Captain of the Guards—the latter a commission which he

relinquished for a douceur of £12,000 when the King wanted to bestow

the dignity upon his illegitimate son, the Duke of Monmouth. He kept

up a large establishment in London, surrounded by trim gardens, the

remembrance of which is perpetuated in the names of the streets that

now occupy the site—Gerard Street and Macclesfield Street, in Soho. His

wife, a French lady, brought herself into disfavour at Court through

indulging in the feminine propensity of allowing her tongue to wag too

freely in disparagement of the notorious courtesan, Lady Castlemaine,

as we learn from an entry in “Pepys’s Diary”:—

1662-3. Creed told me how, for some words of my Lady Gerard’s

against my Lady Castlemaine to the Queene, the King did the other

day apprehend her in going out to a dance with her at a ball, when

she desired it as the ladies do, and is since forbid attending the

Queen by the King; which is much talked of, my lord her husband

being a great favourite.

On the restoration of the King, nineteen years after the death of Sir

Edward Fitton, and thirty after the entail had been confirmed, as

alleged by a deed-poll, Lord Gerard produced a will which would be

looked for in vain in the Ecclesiastical Court at Chester, purporting

to have been made in his favour by his mother’s brother, Sir Edward

Fitton. Hot, fierce, and anxious was the litigation that followed, and

in 1663 a small volume was printed at the Hague, entitled, “A True

Narrative of the Proceedings in the several Suits-in-law that have

been between the Right Honourable Charles, Lord Brandon, and Alexander

Fitton, Esqr., published for general satisfaction, by a Lover of

Truth.” Fitton pleaded the deed-poll, but Gerard brought forward one

Abraham Grainger, then confined in the Gate House, who made oath that

he had forged the name of Sir Edward to the deed under a threat of

mortal violence, whereupon the Court of Chancery directed a trial to

determine whether the deed-poll was genuine or not. The forgery was

admitted by Grainger, and corroborated by other witnesses, who deposed

that they had heard Fitton confess that Grainger had forged a deed for

him, for which he had paid him £40. The judgment of the Court was given

in favour of Gerard, and the deed declared to be a forgery.

The strangest part of the story remains. Grainger, impelled either

by remorse or the desire to escape a heavy penalty by acknowledging

the smaller offence, made a written confession setting forth that he

had perjured himself when he swore that he had forged the name of

Sir Edward, and had been compelled to do so by the threats of Lord

Gerard. Pepys, who had a strong dislike to Lord Gerard, refers to the

circumstance in his “Diary”:—

My cosen, Roger Pepys, he says, showed me Grainger’s written

confession of his being forced by imprisonment, &c., by my Lord

Gerard, most barbarously to confess his forging of a deed in

behalf of Fitton, in the great case between him and my Lord

Gerard; which business is under examination, and is the foulest

against my Lord Gerard that ever anything in the world was, and

will, all do believe, ruine him; and I shall be glad of it.

The anticipations of the gossiping diarist were not, however, realised.

The confession, being unsupported by evidence, was discredited, and

Fitton, who was adjudged to be the real offender, was fined £500 and

committed to the King’s Bench.

Alexander Fitton, who was thus dispossessed of the property, lingered

in prison until the accession of James II., when, having embraced the

Romish faith, he was released from confinement and taken into favour

by the King, who made him Chancellor of Ireland, and subsequently

conferred upon him the honour of knighthood and created him Lord

Gawsworth. He sat in the Irish Parliament of 1689, where he appears to

have been actively employed in passing Acts of forfeiture of Protestant

property, and attainder of Protestant personages. On the abdication of

James he accompanied him into exile, where he remained, and, dying,

left descendants who, it is to be feared, benefited little from the

tutelar dignities his sovereign had conferred upon him.

The whimsical _finesse_ of the law, which wrested from Alexander Fitton

the lands owned for so many generations by his progenitors and bestowed

them upon the Gerards, though it added wealth, did not convey peace

or contentment to the successful litigants. Their history during the

brief period they owned the Gawsworth estates partakes much of the

character of a romance in real life, but it is one that is by no means

pleasant to contemplate. Charles Gerard, on whom the barony of Brandon

and the earldom of Macclesfield had been successively conferred, died

in January, 1693-4, when the titles and estates devolved upon his

eldest son, who bore the same baptismal name. Charles, the second earl,

was the husband of the lady who, by her adulterous connection with

Richard Savage, Earl Rivers, and as the heroine of the famous law case

that followed upon the birth of the celebrated but unfortunate poet,

Richard Savage, acquired an unenviable notoriety even in that age, when

profligacy formed such a prominent characteristic of society.

The Countess of Macclesfield, under the name of Madame Smith, and

wearing a mask, was delivered of a male child in Fox Court, near Brook

Street, Holborn, by Mrs. Wright, a midwife, on Saturday, the 16th

January, 1697-8. The earl denied the paternity, and satisfactorily

proved the impossibility of his being the father of the son borne by

his countess; who, on her side, narrated a stratagem she had devised,

whereby the disputed paternity could not be denied. The stratagem was

not unknown in the licentious comedies of the time, but no credit was

given to it in this case; and thus the honour of Gerard was saved

from being tainted by the bastard of Savage. A divorce was granted

in 1698; but the law deemed the earl to be accountable, through his

own profligacy, for the malpractices of his wife, and decreed that he

should repay the portion he had received with her in marriage. With

this amount she married Colonel Brett, the friend of Colley Cibber, by

whom she had a daughter, Ann Brett, the impudent mistress of George

I., her illegitimate offspring by Lord Rivers—Richard Savage, whom she

disowned—being educated at the cost of her mother, Lady Mason. It has

been alleged that Savage was an impostor, and this opinion was held by

Boswell, the biographer of Dr. Johnson, who says: “In order to induce a

belief that the Earl Rivers, on account of a criminal connection with

whom Lady Macclesfield is said to have been divorced from her husband

by Act of Parliament, had a peculiar anxiety about the child which she

bore to him, it is alleged that his lordship gave him his own name,

and had it duly recorded in the register of St Andrew’s, Holborn. I

have,” he adds, “carefully inspected that register, and I cannot find

it.” That Boswell should have failed in the discovery is explained by a

reference to “The Earl of Macclesfield’s Case,” presented to the House

of Lords in 1697-8, from which it appears that the child was registered

by the name of Richard, the son of John Smith, and christened on

Monday, January 18th, in Fox Court, and this statement is confirmed by

the following entry in the register of St. Andrew’s, Holborn:—

Jany., 1696-7. Richard, son of John Smith and Mary, in Fox Court,

in Gray’s Inn Lane, baptized the 18th.

Notwithstanding the discredit that has been thrown upon Savage’s story,

there can be little doubt of its truth. It was universally believed at

the time, and no attempt was ever made by the countess to contradict

or to invalidate any of the statements contained in it. Moreover, he

was openly recognised in the house of Lord Tyrconnell, a nephew of

the Countess of Macclesfield, with whom he resided as a guest for two

years, and he was also on terms of acquaintance with the Countess of

Rochford, the illegitimate daughter of Earl Rivers by Mrs. Colydon.[20]

[Note 20: In a tavern brawl, in 1727, Savage had the misfortune to kill

a Mr. James Sinclair, for which he was tried and condemned to death.

His relentless mother, it is said, endeavoured to intercept the royal

mercy; but he was pardoned through the influence of Queen Caroline, and

set at liberty. He afterwards addressed a birthday ode to the Queen, in

acknowledgment of which she sent him £60, and continued the same sum to

him every year.]

The Earl of Macclesfield did not long survive the granting of his

divorce. He was sent as Ambassador to Hanover, and died there, November

5, 1701, when the title devolved upon his younger brother, Fitton

Gerard, who died unmarried in the following year, when the Earldom

of Macclesfield became extinct, the estates then passing under the

will of the second earl to his niece and co-heiress, the daughter of

his sister, Charlotte Mainwaring, married to Charles, Lord Mohun,

son of Warwick, Lord Mohun, by Philippa, daughter of Arthur, Earl of

Anglesey. The preference thus shown offended the Duke of Hamilton, who

had married the daughter of another niece, Elizabeth, daughter and

sole heiress of Digby, Lord Gerard—by his wife, the Lady Elizabeth

Gerard—the heir-general of the Macclesfield family, who felt himself

injured by this disposition of the property. A lawsuit to determine

the validity of Lord Macclesfield’s will was commenced, much jealousy

and heart-burning followed, and eventually the two disputing husbands

brought their feud to a sanguinary end in the memorable duel which

proved fatal to both.

The circumstances of this tragic affair are recorded in Dean Swift’s

“History of the Four Last Years of Queen Anne,” published in 1758,

and are more fully detailed in “Transactions During the Reign of

Queen Anne,” published in Edinburgh in 1790, by Charles Hamilton, a

kinsman of one of the combatants. It appears that upon the return of

Lord Bolingbroke, after the peace of Utrecht, and the suspension of

hostilities between Great Britain and France, the Duke of Hamilton,

long noted for his attachment to the Stuarts, and the acknowledged

head of the Jacobite party, was appointed Ambassador Extraordinary

and Plenipotentiary to the Court of France. Previous to his departure

he wished to bring to a close the Chancery suit which had been

pending between Lord Mohun and himself. With that view he, on the

13th November, 1712, attended at the chambers of Olebar, a Master in

Chancery, where his adversary met him by appointment. In the course of

the interview, Mr. Whitworth, formerly the steward of the Macclesfield

family, gave evidence, and, as his memory was much impaired by age, the

duke somewhat petulantly exclaimed, “There is no truth or justice in

him,” upon which Lord Mohun retorted, “I know Mr. Whitworth. He is an

honest man, and has as much truth as your grace.” This grating remark

was allowed to pass unnoticed at the time, but Lord Mohun afterwards

meeting with General Macartney and Colonel Churchill, both violent

men, and declared partisans of the Duke of Marlborough, who had then

been removed from the command of the army by the party to which the

Duke of Hamilton was attached, it would seem that the offending person

was induced by them to challenge the person offended. Preliminaries

having been arranged, the combatants met in Kensington Gardens, Hyde

Park, on the morning of the 15th November—the duke attended by his

relative, Colonel Hamilton, and Lord Mohun by General Macartney. In a

few moments the affair was ended, and when the park keepers, alarmed by

the clashing of swords, rushed to the spot whence the sound proceeded,

they found the two noblemen weltering in their blood—Lord Mohun was

already dead, and the Duke of Hamilton expired before he could be

removed. Nor had the combat been limited to the principals alone. The

seconds had crossed swords and fought with desperate rancour. Colonel

Hamilton remained upon the field, and was taken prisoner, but Macartney

fled to the Continent. Colonel Hamilton subsequently declared upon

oath, before the Privy Council, that, when they met upon the ground,

the duke, turning to Macartney, said, “Sir, you are the cause of this,

let the event be what it will.” To which Macartney replied, “My lord, I

had a commission for it.” Lord Mohun then said, “These gentlemen shall

have nothing to do here.” Whereupon Macartney exclaimed, “We will have

our share.” To which the duke answered, “There is my friend—he will

take his share in my dance.” Colonel Hamilton further deposed that when

the principals engaged, he and Macartney, as seconds, followed their

example; that Macartney was immediately disarmed; but that he (Colonel

Hamilton), seeing the duke fall upon his antagonist, threw away the

swords, and ran to lift him up; and that, while he was employed in

raising the duke, Macartney, having taken up one of the swords, stabbed

his grace over Hamilton’s shoulder, and retired immediately.

A prodigious ferment was occasioned by this duel, which assumed a high

political character. Neither of the combatants were men who could lay

claim to any great admiration on the score of integrity or principle.

Lord Mohun had, in fact, been long known as a brawler, and had

acquired an infamous reputation for his share in the murder of William

Mountford, the player, before his own door, in Howard Street, Strand.

The Duke of Hamilton, as we have said, was the recognised head of the

Jacobite faction, whilst his antagonist, Lord Mohun, was a zealous

champion of the Whig interest. The Tories exclaimed against this event

as a party duel, brought about by their political opponents for the

purpose of inflicting a vital wound on the Jacobite cause, then in the

ascendant, by removing its great prop before his departure to the Court

of France. They affirmed that the duke had met with foul play, and

treated Macartney as a cowardly assassin. That the allegation was well

founded may be doubted, for all the evidence points to the conclusion

that both sets of antagonists, seconds as well as principals, were

so blinded by the virulence of personal hatred as to neglect all the

laws both of the gladiatorial art and the duelling code, and assailed

each other with the fury of savages. A proclamation was issued by the

Government offering a reward of £500 for the apprehension of Macartney,

and £300 was offered in addition by the Duchess of Hamilton. After

a time Macartney returned, surrendered, and took his trial, when

he was acquitted of murder, and found guilty of manslaughter only.

Subsequently he was restored to his rank in the army, and entrusted

with the command of a regiment. After the accession of George I. he was

in great favour with the Court of Hanover, and was employed in bringing

over Dutch troops on the occasion of the insurrection in England, which

ended in the capitulation at Preston of the Earls of Derwentwater and

Nithsdale, and other English and Scottish lords and gentlemen.

The Gawsworth property, which Lord Mohun had acquired by his first

wife, Charlotte Mainwaring, he bequeathed by will to his second wife,

Elizabeth, daughter of Dr. Thomas Lawrence, first physician to Queen

Anne; and the Lady Mohun, who thus became possessed of the estates,

which she held in trust, directed that at her death they should

be sold, and the proceeds, after the payment of certain specified

bequests, applied to the use of her two daughters by her first husband,

Elizabeth Griffith, wife of Sir Robert Rich, Bart., and Ann Griffith,

wife of the distinguished soldier and statesman, William Stanhope, who,

in recognition of his public services, was elevated to the peerage,

Nov. 20, 1729, by the title of Baron Harrington, and subsequently

raised to the dignities of Viscount Petersham and Earl of Harrington.

Lord Harrington in 1727 purchased the manor from his wife’s trustees,

and thus passed into the family of Stanhope an estate with which they

had no connection by blood or by alliance. From the first Earl of

Harrington the property has descended in regular succession to the

present owner, Charles Augustus Stanhope, the eighth earl.

A curious feature in connection with the Old Hall of Gawsworth, and

one strongly suggestive of the warlike spirit of its former owner,

is the ancient tilting ground in the rear of the mansion. Ormerod,

the historian, was of opinion that this relic of a chivalrous age had

been a pleasure ground; but Mr. Mayer, the honorary curator of the

Historic Society of Lancashire and Cheshire, who made a careful survey

some years ago, shows, with much probability, that it was intended

for jousts and other displays of martial skill and bravery. The

“tilt-yard,” the form of which may still be very clearly traced, is

about two hundred yards in length and sixty-five in width, surrounded

on three of its sides by a steep embankment or mound, sixteen yards in

width. Within this enclosure the lists were arranged and the barriers

erected, and here the knights, with pointless lances or coronels in

rest, assembled to perform the _hastiludia pacifica_ or peaceable

jousts for the amusement of the ladies and other spectators who

occupied the embankment.

At the further end of the long flat is a raised circular mound, with

a base twenty-five yards square, on which was placed the tent of the

Queen of Beauty, who, surrounded by her attendants, could overlook

the whole field, and to her the successful competitors were heralded

to receive at her hand the prize or guerdon to which their chivalrous

skill had entitled them. Near to this mound is a smaller piece of

ground, about fifty-seven yards in length, with three rows of seats

cut out of the bank, on three of its sides, and one row on the fourth,

that nearest the throne of the “Queen of Beauty.” This, Mr. Mayer

surmises, was intended for battles by single combat with the sword and

quarter-staff, for wrestling, and other athletic displays; where, also,

at Christmastide, and at wakes and festivals, the mummers practised

their rude drolleries; where, too, the itinerant bards sang their

rugged and unpolished lays in glorification of the achievements of the

Cheshire warriors of ancient days, and where

Minstrel’s harp poured forth its tone

In praise of Maud and Marguerite fair.

The level ground is divided by a small stream that flows through the

middle, and the flat space beyond, which is hemmed in by a mound

similar to that surrounding the “tilting ground,” is supposed to have

been used for such games as football, leap-frog, prison-bars, and

foot-racing, in which the people generally participated. Here, too,

is a raised circular earthwork, corresponding with the lady’s mound

already referred to, where it is probable the awards were made and the

prizes distributed to the successful competitors. The stream, after

passing by the eastern end of the Old Hall, empties itself into the

uppermost of the series of lakes before referred to, which are divided

from each other only by a narrow strip of land, and where, as has been

said, in days of yore the water jousts took place.

Taken altogether, in the tilting ground, with its raised terraces

for spectators—the court, which formed the arena for quarter-staff,

wrestling, and similar games of strength—and the lakes or ponds, used

for water jousts and other aquatic sports—we have one of the most

remarkable, as well as one of the most complete, memorials to be found

in the North of England illustrative of the manners and customs of our

forefathers—of the military pomp and pageantry, and those displays

of prowess, skill, daring, and strength, which in the reigns of the

Plantagenet and Tudor Kings the English gentry so much encouraged, and

the common people so greatly delighted in—the relic of an age the most

chivalrous and the most picturesque in our country’s history, when

there was no lack of heroism and brave hearts and noble minds, when men

ruled by the stern will and strong arm, and through successive ages

fought the battle of England’s liberties, and laid the foundations of

the freedom we enjoy. The place seems to belong so entirely to a bygone

age that imagination wings her airy flight to those remote days, and

in fancy’s eye we re-people the Old Hall, when

Every room

Blazed with lights, and brayed with minstrelsy;

and call up in each deserted nook and shady grove the figures of those

who have long ago returned to dust. We can picture in imagination the

time when these grass-grown terraces were thronged with a gay company

of gallant youths and fair maidens, of stern warriors and sober

matrons, assembled to witness the princely entertainments provided by

the proud owners of Gawsworth. We see the barriers set up, and hear

the braying of the trumpets, and the proclamations of the heralds; we

see the knights, with their attendant esquires, mounted upon their

well-trained steeds, with their rich panoply of arms and plumed and

crested casques, and note the stately courtesy with which each, as he

enters the arena, salutes the high-bred queen of the tournament; we

hear the prancing of horses, the clang of arms, the shock of combat,

and the loud clarions which proclaim to the assembled throng the names

of the gallant victors. But the days of tilt and tournament have passed

away, the age of feudalism has gone by, and in the long centuries of

change and progress that have intervened, time has mellowed and widened

our social institutions, and raised the lower stratum of society to

a nearer level with the higher. Yet, while we boast ourselves of the

present, let us not be unmindful of what we owe to the past, for those

times were instinct with noble and true ideas, and with Carlyle we may

say that, “in prizing justly the indispensable blessings of the new,

let us not be unjust to the old. The old _was_ true, if it no longer

is.” The glories of Gawsworth are of the past. The old mansion is still

to be seen, and the silent pools, the deserted terraces, the forlorn

garden grounds, and the stately trees still remain as representatives

of the once goodly park and pleasaunce, but those who here maintained

a princely hospitality, and bore their part in those splendid

pageantries, are sleeping their last sleep. We may not lift the veil

which hides their secret history, or reveal much of the story of their

hopes and fears, their perils by flood and field, and their deep feuds

and still deeper vengeances. Their graven effigies and gaudily-painted

tombs are preserved to us, but

The knights’ bones are dust,

And their good swords rust,

Their souls are with the just

We trust.

In this quiet, out-of-the-way nook, amid these old landmarks, an

afternoon will be neither unpleasantly nor unprofitably spent. We

may learn something of English history, and of the historic figures

which played their parts in our “rough island story.” Our thoughts

and fancies will be stirred anew, and our sense of patriotism will be

nothing lessened by the contemplation of the relics of that past on

which our present is securely built

Any notice of Gawsworth would be incomplete that did not make mention

of the remarkable series of fresco paintings that were discovered

during the work of restoring the church in the autumn of 1851. At

that time the fabric underwent a thorough repair, and the remains of

coloured ornamentation in the timber-work of the roof led to the belief

that the same method of decoration had been applied to the surface

of the walls. Accordingly a careful examination was made, and on the

removal of the whitewash and plaster some curious and interesting

examples of mediæval art were discovered; but, unfortunately, no effort

was made at the time to preserve them. Happily, however, before their

destruction careful copies were made by a local artist, Mr. Lynch,

which have since been published as illustrations to a work he has

written. The three principal frescoes represented St. Christopher and

the Infant Saviour; St. George slaying the Dragon; and the Doom, or

Last Judgment. From the details they would appear to have been executed

in the early part of the fifteenth century—probably about the time

the tower was built and some important additions made to the main

structure, which, as previously stated, would be between the years 1420

and 1430.

At the period referred to, St. Christopher had come to be regarded as

a kind of symbol of the Christian Church, and the stalwart figure of

the saint wading the stream with the Infant Jesus upon his shoulder

was a favourite subject for painting and carving in ecclesiastical

buildings. The Gawsworth fresco is especially interesting, from the

circumstance of its being an exact _fac-simile_ (except that it is

reversed) of the earliest known example of wood engraving, supposed to

be of the date 1423—an original and, as is believed, unique impression

of which was acquired by Lord Spencer, and is now preserved in the

Spencer library. The second picture represents St. George on horseback,

armed _cap-à-pie_, brandishing a sword with his right hand, whilst

with the left he is thrusting a spear into the mouth of the dragon. In

the distance is the representation of a castle, from the battlements

of which the royal parents of the destined victim witness the fray,

whilst the disconsolate damsel is depicted in a kneeling attitude.

The knight’s armour and the lady’s costume furnish excellent data in

fixing the time when the work was done. The third subject—the Last

Judgment—occupied the space between the east window and the south

wall. It was in three divisions, representing heaven, hell, and earth,

and from the prominent position it occupied was no doubt intended

to be kept continually before the eyes of the worshippers, that, to

use the words of the Venerable Bede, “having the strictness of the

Last Judgment before their eyes, they should be cautioned to examine

themselves with a more narrow scrutiny.”

Among the rectors of Gawsworth was one who added lustre to the place,

but whose name is, curiously enough, omitted from the list given in

Ormerod’s “Cheshire”—the Rev. Henry Newcome, M.A., who held the living

from 1650 to 1657, when he was appointed to the chaplaincy of the

Collegiate Church at Manchester. Newcome was born in November, 1627,

at Caldecote, in Huntingdonshire, of which place his father, Stephen

Newcome, was rector. In January, 1641-2, both his parents died, and

were buried in one coffin, when Henry removed to Congleton, where his

elder brother Robert had recently been appointed by the Corporation

master of the Free School. The circumstance is thus referred to in his

“Autobiography”:—

I was taught grammar by my father, in the house with him; and when

my eldest brother, after he was Batchelor in Arts, was master

of the Free School at Congleton, in Cheshire, I was in the year

1641, about May 4, brought down thither to him, and there went to

school three quarters of a year, until February 13, at which time

that eloquent and famous preacher, Dr. Thomas Dodd, was parson at

Astbury, the parish church of Congleton, where I several times

(though then but a child) heard him preach.

Newcome entered at St. John’s, Cambridge, May 10, 1644, and began

to reside in the following year. In 1646 he was a candidate for the

mastership of a Lincolnshire grammar school, but failed in obtaining

the appointment—a disappointment he bore with much stoicism. In

September, 1647, he was nominated to the mastership of the Congleton

School, and in the February succeeding he took his degree of B.A.

From his boyhood he seems to have had a fondness for preaching, and

the inclination grew with his years. His first sermon was delivered at

a friend’s church (Little Dalby) in Leicestershire; and on settling

down at Congleton, as he tells us, “he fell to preaching when only

20 years old.” He was appointed “reader” (curate) to Mr. Ley, at

Astbury, and preached sometimes in the parish church and sometimes at

Congleton. At first he “read” his sermons and “put too much history”

into them, whilst “the people came with Bibles, and expected quotations

of Scripture.” Before he had attained the age of 21 he entered the

marriage state, his wife being Elizabeth, daughter of Peter Mainwaring,

of Smallwood, to whom he was married July 6, 1648. He speaks of himself

as rash in taking this step at so early an age, but admits that it

turned to his own good, and he dwells on the excellent qualities of

his wife. It was indeed not only a happy, but in a worldly sense an

advantageous match, as by his alliance with the Mainwarings he became

connected with some of the most influential families in the county, and

to their interest he undoubtedly owed his preferment to Gawsworth. He

was ordained at Sandbach in August, 1648, the month following that of

his marriage, and began his ministerial labours at Alvanley Chapel, in

Frodsham parish, to which place he went for many weeks on the Saturday

to preach on the following day; but before the close of the year he

had settled at Goostrey, where he officiated for a year and a half. It

was whilst residing here that he received the startling intelligence

of the trial and execution of Charles I., for, under date January 30,

1649, he writes: “This news came to us when I lived at Goostrey, and a

general sadness it put upon us all. It dejected me much (I remember),

the horridness of the fact; and much indisposed me for the service

of the Sabbath next after the news came.” Newcome, though a zealous

Presbyterian, was a scarcely less zealous Royalist, and boldly avowed

his abhorrence of the murder of the King.

Shortly after this event his name was mentioned in connection with the

then vacant rectory of Gawsworth, and an effort was made, through the

interest of the Mainwaring family, to secure his induction under the

Broad Seal. Under the Usurpation Independency was in the ascendant, and

“Dame ffelicia ffitton,” the widow of Sir Edward Fitton, in whom the

patronage of Gawsworth had been vested, was then included in the list

of delinquents whose estates were to be sequestered for loyalty to the

sovereign. Eventually the instrument of institution under the Broad

Seal was obtained. It bears date November 28, 1649, and the opening

sentence sets forth that, “Whereas, the rectory of the parish church

of Gawsworth, in the county of Chester, is become void by the death

of the last incumbent, and the Lords Commissioners of the Great Seal

of England have presented Henry Newcome, a godly and orthodox divine,

thereunto. It is therefore ordered,” &c. Considerable demur was made,

however, to the appointment, and the people locked the church doors

against their new minister; but eventually, as we are told, “it pleased

God to move upon the people when I thought not of it, and they came

(some of the chief of them) over to Carincham on February 12th, and

sent for me, and told me they were desirous to have me before another;

and so were unanimously consenting to me, and subscribed the petition,

not knowing that the seal had come.”

The obstacles to this induction having been removed, Newcome and

his family took up their abode in the pleasant old rectory-house at

Gawsworth, April, 1650, and on the 14th of the month he preached his

first sermon to his new flock from Ezekiel iii., 5.

[Illustration: THE REV. HENRY NEWCOME.]

There are several incidents recorded in his “Autobiography” which throw

light on the life and habits of the youthful divine at this period.

Thus he writes:—

Whilst living here (Goostrey) my cousin, Roger Mainwaring, would

needs go to Gawsworth (the park being then in the co-heirs’

possession) to kill a deer, and one he killed with the keeper’s

knowledge; but they had a mind to let the greyhound loose, and to

kill another that the keeper should not know of, partly to hinder

him of his fees and partly that it might not be known that he had

killed more than one. I was ignorant of their design; but had

the hap to be one of the two that was carrying the other little

deer off the ground, when the keeper came and only took it and

dressed it, as he had done the other, and sent it after them to

the alehouse where the horses were. But I remember the man said

this word, that “_priests should not steal_.” I have oft after

thought of it, that when I was parson at Gawsworth, and that

tho’ Edward Morton, the keeper, was sometimes at variance with

me, he never so much as remembered that passage to object against

me; which, though I could have answered for myself in it, yet it

might have served the turn to have been retorted upon me when the

Lord stirred me up to press strictness upon them. But the Lord

concealed this indiscretion of mine, that it was never brought

forth in the least to lessen my authority amongst them.

It is pleasant to reflect that while Newcome was residing in his snug

parsonage at Gawsworth, he was visited by his brother-in-law, Elias

Ashmole, the learned antiquary and founder of the Ashmolean Museum at

Oxford, who spent some time with him at the rectory and rambled thence

into the Peak country. They had married sisters; Ashmole, who was

Newcome’s senior by ten years, having had to his first wife Eleanor,

daughter of Peter Mainwaring. This lady died in 1641, and in 1649

Ashmole married Lady Mainwaring, the widow of Sir Thomas Mainwaring,

of Bradfield, who died in 1668; and the same year he again entered the

marriage state, his third wife being Elizabeth, daughter of Sir William

Dugdale, Norroy, and afterwards Garter King of Arms. Ashmole, in his

“Diary,” thus refers to his visit to Gawsworth and his ramble in the

Peak:—

1652.

Aug. 16.—I went towards Cheshire.

" 28.—I arrived at Gawsworth, where my father-in-law, Mr.

Mainwaring, then lived.

Sept. 23.—I took a Journey into the Peak in search of plants and

other curiosities.

Nov. 24.—My Good Father-in-law, Mr. Peter Mainwaring, died at

Gawsworth.

Oddly enough, Ashmole nowhere makes mention of Newcome’s name in his

“Diary,” but Newcome himself refers to the visit in one of his letters

to his brother-in-law, preserved among Ashmole’s MSS. in the Bodleian

Library, and printed by Mr. Earwaker in his “Local Gleanings,” where,

speaking of the Theatrum Chymicum he had lent to Hollinworth, the

author of “Mancuniensis,” he says, “It was with him when you were with

me at Gawsworth, and I then sent for it home.”

Puritan though he was, Newcome was by no means of a soured or morose

disposition, nor so rigid in his notions as were some of his southern

brethren. He was fond of amusement within reasonable limits, and his

experiences he relates with charming candour and impartiality. Indeed,

sometimes his hilarity was a little too exuberant. “I remember,” he

says, “this year (1650), when the gentlewomen from the hall used to

come to see us, I was very merry with them, and used to charge a

pistol I had, and to shoot it off to affright them.” Notwithstanding

his liveliness of disposition, he set himself determinedly against the

vices to which some of his parishioners were addicted. Drinking and

swearing seem to have been prevalent, and he records how, one Sabbath

evening, at the house of Lady Fitton, a Mr. Constable,—

A known famous epicure ... told the lady there was excellent ale

at Broad [heath—what this place was does not appear], and moved

he might send for a dozen, some gentlemen of his gang being with

him. I made bold to tell him that my lady had ale good enough in

her house for any of them; especially, I hoped, on a Sabbath day

she would not let them send for ale to the alehouse. The lady took

with it, and in her courteous way told him that her ale might

serve him. But notwithstanding, after duties, he did send; but

durst not let it come in whilst I staid.... At last I took leave;

and then he said, “Now he is gone! Fetch in the ale.”

“My lady” was the beautiful and youthful Felicia Sneyd, the second

wife, and then widow of Sir Edward Fitton, who resided at the hall,

her jointure house. In all Newcome’s efforts to improve the spiritual

condition of his parish Lady Fitton warmly joined; the Sacrament, which

hitherto had been discontinued, was with her co-operation revived.

She offered herself to the minister for instruction, and instituted

family prayers twice a day in her house, which Newcome for a while

read; and we gather from several passages that the fascination and

dignified bearing of the youthful widow greatly attracted the divine

of twenty-three. It was not long, however, before he had occasion to

describe another and more painful scene. Lady Fitton, as has been

previously stated, re-married Sir Charles Adderley; and on the 20th

January, 1654, Newcome writes she “was in lingering labour.”

I had been at Congleton, and was just come home; and they came

shrieking to me to pray with Lady Fitton; she did desire it, it

should seem. I went as fast as I could; but just as I came the

fit of palsy took her. We went to prayer in the gallery for her

again and again. Mr. Machin[21] came in, and he helped me to pray.

We prayed there two or three times over. We begged life for mother

and child, very earnestly at first. After we begged either, what

God pleased. After the night we were brought to beg the life of

the soul, for all other hopes were over. The next day I went, and

prayed by her i’ th’ forenoon. I was much afflicted to see her

die, as in a dream, pulling and setting her head clothes as if she

had been dressing herself in the glass; and so to pass out of the

world. A lovely, sweet person she was; but thus blasted before us,

dyed Jany. 21 (1654), just after evening service. She was buried

the next day, at night.... Sir C. Adderley was removed, and all

manner of confusion and trouble came upon the estate, Mr. Fitton

and the co-heirs striving for possession, which begat a strange

alteration in the place.

[Note 21: John Machin was then minister of Astbury, and an intimate

friend as well as neighbour of Newcome’s.]

Lady Fitton, “a very courteous, respectful friend to me while she

lived,” as Newcome observes, lies near the east end of the church of

Gawsworth, close by the communion rails, and near to the stately tomb

of her first husband, on which she is described as “_nulli secundam_.”

In her death Newcome lost a good friend, for the living of Gawsworth

was very poor, and, finding it difficult to equalise the wants of a

growing family and the supplies of a small stipend, he was led to

consider the expediency of removing to some other and more lucrative

charge. His labours had been by no means confined to his own parish. On

the contrary, he devoted a good deal of his time to ministerial work

in other places. The fame of the wonderful young preacher spread to

the larger towns, and those who had heard him once wished to hear him

again. Among other places, he had visited Manchester, and preached in

the Old Church during the sickness of Richard Hollinworth. It was only

on one Sunday, but the generosity of the town brought him considerable

relief at the moment that the necessities of his family were pressing

inconveniently upon him. As Dr. Halley tells us, the relief produced

an effect the contributors did not intend, as it induced him, when

contemplating his removal, to remain in Gawsworth, where Providence had

so unexpectedly relieved him of his anxieties by their liberality. He

painted his rectory-house, parted off a little study from his parlour,

and spent what he could of his friends’ bounty in smartening his home

and making it pleasant and comfortable.

Newcome was not allowed to remain long in undisturbed tranquillity in

his quiet parsonage. On the 3rd November, 1656, Mr. Hollinworth died;

four days later a meeting of the “Classis” was held at Manchester to

nominate to the vacancy. Three persons were mentioned as suitable—Mr.

Meeke, of Salford; Mr. Bradshaw, of Macclesfield; and Mr. Newcome,

of Gawsworth—but the feeling was so unanimous in favour of Newcome

that nothing was said about the other two. Friday, December 5th, was

fixed for the election; but here a difficulty occurred. Newcome had

spent a Sunday at Shrewsbury as well as at Manchester. He had preached

at “Alkmond’s, and the people of Julian’s” (there were no saints in

Puritanical times) “set their affections” upon him while ministering

in the neighbouring church, and by a curious coincidence, on the same

day that he received intelligence of the arrangement at Manchester

he received letters from the people of “Julian’s,” from the Mayor of

Shrewsbury, and from three of its ministers, entreating him to accept

their invitation. On the Sunday preceding the election at Manchester

he preached in the Old Church, and, as he tells us, “the women were so

pleased that they would needs send tokens,” which amounted to seven

pounds. This gave great dissatisfaction to the proud Salopians, who

were evidently afraid the young preacher might not be proof against the

fascinations of the “Lancashire Witches,” and so they “gave him a very

unhandsome lash” for being drawn away from them by “women’s favours.”

Angry contentions arose, Richard Baxter was asked to interfere, and

a conference was suggested, but the good folks of Shrewsbury were

resolved upon securing the services of Newcome, and would not agree

to arbitration, or listen to any other proposition. They were doomed,

however, to disappointment, and, in opposition to the advice of Baxter,

Newcome, on the 24th of December, made choice of Manchester.

His removal from Gawsworth was a sorrowful time both for himself and

his rustic congregation. The sight of the wagons sent to remove his

furniture overwhelmed him with sorrow, and when the time came for

leaving the old rectory, he says, “I was sadly affected, and broken

all to pieces at leaving the house. I never was so broken in duty as

I was in that which I went into just when we were ready to go out of

the house;” and he adds, “I prayed the Lord the sin of the seven years

might be forgiven us, and that we might take a pardon with us.” On his

arrival in Manchester he was welcomed with extraordinary manifestations

of friendship and pleasure, and many of the townspeople went out to

Stockport to meet him.

This “prince of preachers,” as he has been called by his friends,

continued his ministrations in the Church at Manchester until the

passing of the Act of Uniformity, when, unable to conform to the

discipline of the Church, he withdrew from her communion, to the

great grief of his people, by whom he was greatly beloved. On the

passing of the Act of Toleration, at the accession of William of

Orange, the wealthy Presbyterians of Manchester gathered round their

favourite divine and built him a tabernacle on the site of the present

Unitarian Chapel in Cross Street—the first erected for the use of the

Nonconformist body in the town. He was not long permitted, however, to

continue his ministrations, his death occurring on the 17th September,

1695, little more than a year after the opening of the “great and fair

meeting house.”

The church in which Newcome ministered, and where rest the bones of so

many of the “Fighting Fittons,” well deserves a careful examination.

Let us bend our footsteps towards the ancient fane. It is a fair and

goodly structure—small, it is true, but presenting a dignified and

pleasing exterior—

Beauty with age in every feature blending.

The bold, free hand of the old English architect is seen in every

detail—in the deep mouldings, the varied tracery, and the quaintly

grotesque carvings, where burlesque and satire and playful fancy have

almost run riot. The restoring hand of the modern renovator—Sir

Gilbert Scott—is also visible; but what he has done has been well done,

and, if we except the interesting examples of mediæval art to which

reference has already been made, everything that was worth retaining

has been carefully preserved. Though erected at different times, the

general features harmonise and point to the conclusion that nearly the

whole of the existing fabric was erected in the period extending from

the end of the 14th to the middle of the 15th centuries.

The nave, which is three bays in length, is undoubtedly the oldest

part, and the point at which it originally terminated is clearly

shown by the diagonal projection of the angle buttress which still

remains. The chancel appears to have superseded an older foundation

of smaller dimensions. It is of equal width with the nave, and, in

fact, a continuation of it, and both are covered in with a timber

roof of obtuse pitch, with elaborately moulded and ornamented beams

and rafters. The external walls of both the nave and chancel are

surmounted by an embattled parapet, relieved at intervals with

crocketted pinnacles, that are carried above the edge of the parapet

wall as a termination to each buttress. There being no clerestory or

side aisles, the windows are unusually lofty. They are of pointed

character, with traceried heads and mouldings, terminating in

curiously-carved corbels, that have afforded scope for the humorous

fancy of the mediæval masons. On the south side is an open porch with

stone seats, that has at some time or other been added to the original

structure, as evidenced by the fact that the greater portion of the

buttress has been cut away where it is joined up to the main wall.

It has coupled lights on each side, with hood mouldings, the one on

the west terminating in a curiously-carved corbel, representing a

rose with two heads enclosed in the petals, an evidence that this

part of the fabric must have been built shortly after the union of

the rival houses of York and Lancaster, in the persons of Henry VII.

and Elizabeth the eldest daughter of Edward IV. The tower is well

proportioned, and, rising gracefully as it does above the surrounding

foliage, forms a conspicuous object for miles around. It is remarkable

for the armorial shields, 14 in number, carved in relief, in stone, on

each face. These insignia are especially interesting to the antiquary

and the genealogist, as showing the alliances of the earlier lords

of Gawsworth. They include the coats of Fitton, Orreby, Bechton,

Mainwaring, Wever, Egerton, Grosvenor, and Davenport, as well as those

of Fitton of Bollin, and Fitton of Pownall, and there is one also

containing the arms of Randle Blundeville, Earl of Chester, with whom

the Fittons appear to have been connected.

The interior of the church is picturesque and well cared for, and

the garrulous old lady who brought us the keys looks upon it with an

affection that is not diminished by the serving and tending of many

long years. It is an interesting specimen of an old English house of

worship. As you cross the threshold a host of memories are conjured up,

and you feel that you are in the sanctuary where in times past have

communed, and where now rest, the remains of a line famous in chivalry,

the members of which, in their day and generation, did good service

to the State. The seats are low and open, and the appearance has been

greatly improved by the removal of the heavy cumbrous pews with which

until late years it was filled. At the east end, within the chancel

rails, are the effigies and stately tombs of the Fittons already

described. The shadows of centuries seem to fall on the broad nave,

while the slanting rays of the westering sun, as they steal through the

tall windows, brighten the elaborate figures of the knights in armour,

and bring out the colouring of gown and kirtle, where their stately

dames are reposing by their side. During the restorations some of them

were removed from their original positions, and shorn of their original

canopies, as the inscription upon a tablet affixed to the north wall

testifies. Near the centre of the aisle is a plain marble slab with a

brass fillet surrounding it, on which is an inscription commemorating

the marriage and death of Thomas Fitton of Siddington, the second son

of Sir Edward of Gawsworth, by his wife Mary, the daughter of Sir

Guiscard Harbottle.

After our brief survey we passed out through the western door into the

churchyard. The sun was circling westwards over the woods, a warm

haze suffused the landscape, and the shadows were lengthening over the

hillocks and grass-grown mounds in the quiet graveyard. As our cicerone

turned the key in the rusty wards of the lock and turned to depart,

a robin poured out its wealth of song in the neighbouring copse, a

fitting requiem to the expiring day. We stood for a moment looking

through the trees at the picturesque old parsonage. What a lovely

spot!—the spot of all others that a country clergyman might delight to

pass his days in. Well might good Henry Newcome be “sadly affected and

broken all to pieces” at leaving it.

Another celebrity connected with Gawsworth, though of a widely

different character to Henry Newcome, deserves a passing notice—Samuel

Johnson, popularly known by the title of “Lord Flame,” and sometimes by

the less euphonious _sobriquet_ of “Maggotty Johnson.” This eccentric

character was well known in his day as a dancing master, to which

he added the professions of poet, player, jester, and musician. He

appears to have been among the last of the paid English jesters, those

professional Merry Andrews whose presence was considered indispensable

in the homes of our wealthier forefathers—their duty being to promote

laughter in the household, and especially at meals, by their ready

wit and drollery. Johnson was frequently hired out at parties given

by the gentry in the northern counties, where he had licence to bandy

his witticisms, and to utter or enact anything likely to enliven

the company or provoke them to laughter. “Lord Flame” was the name

of a character played by him in his own extravaganza, entitled

“Hurlothrumbo, or the Supernatural,” a piece which had a lengthened

run at the Haymarket in 1729. It is upon this burlesque that his fame

chiefly rests. After much patient labour he succeeded in getting it

on the London boards. Byrom records the circumstance in his “Journal”

under date April 2, 1729:—

As for Mr. Johnson, he is one of the chief topics of talk in

London. Dick’s Coffee-house resounds “Hurlothrumbo” from one

end to the other. He had a full house and much good company on

Saturday night, the first time of acting, and report says all

the boxes are taken for the next Monday.... It is impossible to

describe this play and the oddities, out-of-the-wayness, flights,

madness, comicalities, &c. I hope Johnson will make his fortune

by it at present. We had seven or eight garters in the pit. I saw

Lord Oxford and two or more there, but was so intent on the farce

that I did not observe many quality that were there. We agreed

to laugh and clap beforehand, and kept our word from beginning

to end. The night after Johnson came to Dick’s, and they all got

about him like so many bees. They say the Prince of Wales has been

told of “H,” and will come and see it.... For my own part, who

think all stage plays stuff and nonsense, I consider this a joke

upon ’em all.

On the same day, in a letter to Mrs. Byrom, he writes—

Mrs. Hyde must let her brother teach (dancing), for

“Hurlothrumbo,” as the matter stands, will hardly be quitted while

it brings a house, and consequently more money, into the author’s

pocket, than his teaching would do of a long time.

The play was afterwards published with a dedication to Lady Delves,

and an address to Lord Walpole. The former, while remarkable for its

extravagant panegyrism, is interesting from its reference to many of

the local female celebrities of the time. It is as follows:—

To the Right Honourable the Lady Delves.

Madam,—When I think of your goodness, it gives me encouragement

to put my play under your grand protection; and if you can

find anything in it worthy of your Praise, I am sure the

_super-naturals_ will like it. I do not flatter when I say your

taste is universal, great as an Empress, sweet and refined as Lady

_Malpas_, sublime as Lady _Mary Cowper_, learned and complete

as Lady _Conway_, distinguished and clear as Mrs. _Madan_, gay,

good, and innocent as Lady _Bland_. I have often thought you

were a compound of the world’s favourites—that all meet and

rejoice together in one: the taste of a _Montague_, _Wharton_, or

Meredith, Stanhope, Sneid, or Byrom; the integrity and hospitality

of _Leigh_ of _Lime_, the wit and fire of _Bunbury_, the sense of

an Egerton, fervent to serve as _Beresford_ or _Mildmay_, beloved

like _Gower_. If you was his rival, you’d weaken the strength of

that most powerful subject. I hope your eternal unisons in heaven

will always sing to keep up the harmony in your soul, that is

musical as Mrs. Leigh, and never ceases to delight; raises us in

raptures like _Amante Shosa_, _Lord Essex_, or the sun. If every

pore in every body in Cheshire was a mouth they would all cry out

aloud, _God save the Lady Delves!_ That illuminates the minds of

mortals, inspires with Musick and Poetry especially.

Your most humble servant, LORD FLAME.

The prologue was written by Mr. Amos Meredith, of Henbury, near

Macclesfield, and, at the urgent request of its author, Byrom was

induced to write the epilogue. Johnson’s subsequent career was marked

by many whims and oddities, and even death was not permitted to

terminate his eccentricity, his very grave being made to commemorate it

for the amusement or pity of future generations. As we have previously

stated, he is buried in a small plantation of firs near the road, and a

short distance from the New Hall, in accordance with a request he had

made to the owner in his life-time. His remains are covered by a plain

brick tomb, now much dilapidated, on the uppermost slab of which is the

following inscription:—

[Illustration]

Under this stone

Rest the remains of Mr. SAMUEL JOHNSON,

Afterwards ennobled with the grander Title of

LORD FLAME,

Who, after being in his life distinct from other Men

By the Eccentricities of his Genius,

Chose to retain the same character after his Death,

and was, at his own Desire, buried here, May 5th,

A.D. MDCCLXXIII., Aged 82.

Stay thou whom Chance directs, or Ease persuades,

To seek the Quiet of these Sylvan shades,

Here undisturbed and hid from Vulgar Eyes,

A Wit, Musician, Poet, Player, lies

A Dancing Master too, in Grace he shone,

And all the arts of Opera were his own;

In Comedy well skill’d, he drew Lord Flame,

Acted the Part, and gain’d himself the Name;

Averse to Strife, how oft he’d gravely say

These peaceful Groves should shade his breathless clay;

That when he rose again, laid here alone,

No friend and he should quarrel for a Bone;

Thinking that were some old lame Gossip nigh,

She possibly might take his Leg or Thigh.

On the west side of his tomb a flat stone has been placed in later

years, on which some rhyming moralist has sought to improve on his

character, in a religious point of view, in a lengthy inscription which

says more for the writer’s sense of piety than his regard for prosody:—

If chance hath brought thee here, or curious eyes,

To see the spot where this poor jester lies,

A thoughtless jester even in his death,

Uttering his jibes beyond his latest breath;

O stranger, pause a moment, pause and say:

“To-morrow should’st thou quit thy house of clay,

Where wilt thou be, my soul?—in paradise?

Or where the rich man lifted up his eyes?”

Immortal spirit would’st thou then be blest,

Waiting thy perfect bliss on Abraham’s breast;

Boast not of silly art, or wit, or fame,

Be thou ambitious of a Christian’s name;

Seek not thy body’s rest in peaceful grove,

Pray that thy soul may rest in Jesus’ love.

O speak not lightly of that dreadful day,

When all must rise in joy or in dismay;

When spirits pure in body glorified

With Christ in heavenly mansions shall abide,

While wicked souls shall hear the Judge’s doom—

“Go ye accursed into endless gloom,”

Look on that stone and this, and ponder well:

Then choose ’twixt life and death, ’twixt

Heaven and Hell.

Poor Johnson! His last whim has been gratified: his “breathless clay”

reposes beneath the “sylvan shade” that in life he so much delighted

in. The thrush and the blackbird sing their orisons and vespers

there; the fresh and fragrant breeze sweeps by; and the nodding trees

that rustle overhead cast a verdant gloom around, that is brightened

only where the warm sunlight steals through the intricacy of leaves

and dapples the sward with touches of golden light. May no rude or

irreverent hand disturb his resting-place, or “old lame gossip” share

his sepulchre.

[Illustration: John Dee, the Wizard Warden]

[Illustration]

Nooks and Corners of Lancashire and Cheshire. A Wayfarer's Notes in the Palatine Counties, Historical, Legendary, Genealogical, and Descriptive. · 第 4 / 11 章