Ainsworth as a lovely girl of eighteen summers, and her wooer, Humphrey, had just entered on his twenty-fifth year, when the curtain rises. But truth is stranger than fiction, and by some curious coincidence, about a quarter of a century later, we find Humphrey playing a not unimportant part in the family fortunes and welfare of the Radcliffes, and the real and tangible Sir Alexander comes to court the assistance of Viviana's would-be lover of the novel. The star of the once powerful and proud house of Radcliffe was, and for a long time had been, declining. As Ainsworth has it, "They were devout Catholics and men of large possessions, though reduced by the heavy fines imposed upon them as recusants.” Chetham, meanwhile, by power of commercial genius, had risen to commanding eminence, and was known as one of the most opulent men of the town where he transacted business, both as a Manchester trader and local banker. We have it on record that amongst his clients were to be found some of the first families of the neighbourhood—such as Lady Anne Mosley of Hough Hall, who owed him three thousand four hundred pounds, Robert Tatton, who was his debtor for three thousand pounds, and many others-and at his death there was still due to Chetham, from various quarters, some fifteen thousand pounds in outstanding moneys. Sir Alexander obtained from him a loan of two thousand pounds, which appears from a short memorandum still extant in the Chetham papers, addressed by Chetham to "good Sir Cecil Trafford," dated from Clayton, his then residence; it runs: "Wheras Sir Alex: Radcliffe lately passed unto mee some part of the Demayne of Ordsall for and in consideration of the some of 2000 Pounds: if therefore he shall think it more for his easement that hee will & doe pay unto mee part of the said some this yeare, for or

towards the redemsion of the saide Lande, over & beside the Rent due unto mee by one Demayne or Lease granted to yourselfe & Mr. Prestwiche, I will accept thereof & I will likewise mitigate or abate of my Rent as much as shall be proporsionable or equall to the Some you pay and the Tyme you pay it. Provided always and uppon Condicione that this my Promise shall not frustrate, make voyde, nor be any Prejudice unto my Bargen or Contract formerly made in or uppon the said premises with Sir Alexander, yourself, or any other. In witness whereof I have hereunto putt my hand & seal this 8. June 1634." Attached to Humphrey Chetham's moiety of the Ordsall demesne were certain taxes, severally due to the king and one Christopher Anderton, esquire, of Lostock, the latter variously described as a Papist, a Papist delinquent, for chief rent and corn tythe, for some parcel of land in Ordsall, lying within Eccles parish, sequestered and seized from him, namely, Shoulsworth' and Shoulsworth meadow. The Chethams paid these taxes for thirty consecutive years, from 1634 to 1663, and there are still twenty-seven receipts in evidence, all worth studying in detail. They graphically bring before us the drift of events, illustrative of the tempestuous times of Charles I.'s personal rule, the Civil War, the army and Parliament, the Commonwealth, Cromwell's iron administration, and the Restoration. Thus, in 1644 these taxes were collected and remitted to the committee in Manchester; 1645, for king and Parliament and for the Northern Association; 1647, by "the bayliffe of the Hundred of Salforde, Ralph Worthington, Esq., & due to his Majesty;" 1649, for the use of the State; 1650-1, by "Wm ffarmer, Receiver General for the Honorable Trustees; 1654, for the Commonwealth," etc. This mortgage debt of two thousand pounds became subsequently

the subject of much protracted and complicated litigation. There are certain notes in the Chetham papers which concern Sir John Radcliffe (son) and Sir Alexander (father) which seem to bear upon the Ordsall estate, and those of Attilborough, etc., the latter settled by Sir Robert Radcliffe on Jane, his illegitimate daughter, whom Sir Alexander had married when quite a young girl; for, on 31st March, 1653, John Radcliffe acknowledged a statute before the Lord Chief Justice St. John to Sir Alexander, his father, for £8,000. On 7th July, 1653, ditto, before Lord Chief Justice Rolle to Wm Ellis, James Winstanley, esquire, for £12,000 (vacated); 12th July, 1653, ditto, before the same, to Sir Alexander, his father, for £12,000 (vacated); 21st December, 1655, ditto, John Radcliffe, of Attleborough in Norfolk, before Lord Chief Justice Glynn to ffrancis Vickley, of Hackney, for £8,000. Humphrey Chetham must have become cognisant of the existence of some irregular private arrangement on the part of Sir Alexander with reference to the Ordsall estate which was likely to threaten or imperil his mortgage charge, and he appears to have taken legal opinion, through his attorney, Jos. Lightbown, to make sure of the points of his case and his locus standi. The matter, however, dragged on, for Humphrey died on the 12th October, 1653, aged seventythree, closely followed by Sir Alexander, who deceased in April, 1654, having, as we see from a passing remark in Baines's History of Lancashire, "previously sold the Ordsall estate to Sam. Birch, Esq., of Ardwick, father of Col. John Birch, commander on the side of the Parliament in the civil war." Edward Chetham, his nephew and one of his heirs and executors, on the demise of his uncle, at once took active steps for defending and pushing his Ordsall claim, for we find his attorney,

Lightbown, charging him, August 6th, 1654, for "drawing the draught between John Ratcliffe and you,” 20s.; 8th November, 1654, "for drawing and engrossing twice the Long Release in ffee with Covenant for the Earl of Derby about Ordsall for your plea at common law, 10/-;" August, 1656, charges for ffine about Ordsall for Mr. Radcliffe, £9. 2s., for a copy of the great deed of Settlement at Ordsall, IIS., and there is another little. item "ffor postage of 2 letters for Cozen Booth about Sir Alexander Radcliffe, o/6." Meanwhile Edward Chetham continued his hold on the moiety of the Ordsall estate, and we have his accounts for wintering, pasturage, and farm expenses for 1653 to 29th September, 1656, which contain an interesting detailed account of all the feeding beasts, cattle, hay crops, stock, farm labour, repairs, and names of tenants or other admitted charges of pasturages, etc., etc. There is unfortunately no record in the papers with reference to the decision of the court, or any compromise between plaintiff and defendants. But there seems to have been some approved reconciliation between Edward Chetham and the surviving members of Sir Alexander's family. We have the bonds of the 17th February, 1657, for £70, in which John Radcliffe, of Ordsall, Esq., and Humphrey, his brother, acknowledge their obligation; again, 9th June, 1658, a loan to John Radcliffe, of Attilborough, Humphrey Radcliffe, of Ordsall, and Rich. Bassano, of Stone, for £60; 15th July, 1658, for £5 from Ffrancis Radcliffe, with promise to repay same in London; 31st July, 1658, John Radcliffe, for £5; 16th July, 1659, Dame Jane Radcliffe, of Ordsall (Sir Alexander's widow), and Humphrey Radcliffe, of Ordsall, for £26, sad and telling memorials of the decay the ancient house of Radcliffe had at last reached. With John Radcliffe, who died in 1669, at Attilborough,

in Norfolk, the succession died out, and the venerable homestead was swept away from this ancient family.

Friday, December 4th, 1896.

The monthly meeting of the Society was held in the Chetham Library, Mr. J. Holme Nicholson presided.

Miss F. A. Roylance exhibited six of her black-andwhite drawings of old Manchester buildings.

Mr. George C. Yates made a short communication on "The Recent Discoveries at Pule Hill, Marsden." Mr. W. O. Roper, of Lancaster, contributed a paper on "The Lancaster Royal Grammar School." page 27.)

(See

In the discussion which followed the reading of the paper, Mr. T. Cann Hughes, town clerk of Lancaster, and the Chairman took part, the latter, though not an alumnus of the school, speaking from his personal recollections of the school, its masters, and many of its distinguished scholars between the years 1835 and 1845.

Mr. Samuel Andrew read a paper on Roos Ditch, near Whaley Bridge. He described it as a gulley near the top of a hill, supposed by some to have been a military station, and by others to have been a Roman racecourse. He doubted if either of these was the original use of the place. At the southern end of the ditch a series of knolls and hollows might be observed, and from a suitable position it would be seen that these had the appearance of what at one time might have been banks or terraces rising one above another, some four or five in number. Proceeding northward these banks or terraces merge into one deep gorge, which continues down the side of the hill in the direction of the river. The question arose how to account