The History of the Church and Manor of Wigan/Thomas Stanley

by George Thomas Orlando Bridgeman

Thomas Stanley, bishop of Sodor and Man (Sodoren Episcopus), was admitted and instituted to the rectory of Wigan, vacant by the death of the last incumbent (Richard Gerrard), on 9th August. 1558, having been presented thereto on 6th August by John ffletewood, Esq., and Peter ffarington, Esq., patrons for this turn by the deed of the true patron (Sir Thomas Langton, knight), dated on 10th May of the same year.^[1] He had been consecrated bishop of Sodor and Man in 1510, but was deprived in 1545 for refusing to comply with the Act of 33 Hen. VII., which disconnected the see from the Province of Canterbury and attached it to that of York.^[2] On 4th March, 1512-13 he was instituted to the parish church of Badsworth (St. Mary's) in the county of York, vacant by the death of Mr. James Harington, on the presentation of Sir Edward Stanley, knight, one of the King's household ; which benefice he resigned at the close of the year 1549.^[3]

In May, 1528, he was collated to the prebend of Thorngate, in the Diocese of Lincoln.^[4] He was restored to his bishoprick by Queen Mary in 1556.^[5]

At the time of his admission to the rectory of Wigan he was bishop of Sodor and Man and rector of Winwick and North Meols, in the county of Lancaster, as also of Barwick All Saints in Elmet, in the county of York, having been admitted to Winwick on l0th April, 1552, and to North Meols on 23rd December, 1557;^[6] for the holding of all which with his bishoprick it is said that he obtained the Pope's Bull.^[7] It has been stated that after the death of Richard Gerrard, the late rector, William Gerrard re-entered and kept possession of a portion of the tithes of Billinge, so that Bishop Stanley was obliged to renew his predecessor's suit against him to obtain possession; and in 1 Elizabeth, 1558-9, we find him, as Thomas Stanley, bishop of Man and parson of Wigan, complaining in the Court of the Duchy of Lancaster that divers letters patent, deeds, evidences and writings concerning the manor of Wigan had casually come into the hands and possession of one William Gerrard, gent, being administrator of the goods and chattels of Richard Gerrard, clerk, late parson of Wigan, and although the said Stanley had sundry times required and demanded the same, the said William Gerrard had refused to give them up. Not knowing the certain number of these writings, nor whether contained in box or bag or in locked chest, he is without remedy by the due order of the common law to demand the said papers. He therefore entreats for a writ of injunction to the said Gerrard commanding him to deliver them up.^[8]

I presume that he recovered his writings and proceeded against the said William Gerrard, who seems to have died about this time; for in Hilary Term of the same regnal year, 1 Eliz., 1559, a final decree was made in the following terms, with respect to the suit commenced by Richard Gerrard, clerk, rector of Wigan, against William Gerrard and John Winstanley: "Whereas in the term of St. Hilary in the second and third years of the reigns of the late King Philip and Queen Mary late Queen of England deceased (1556), in the matter of the tithe corn and grain yearly arising and growing within the town of Billinge in the parish of Wigan, supposed to belong to the parson of Wigan, in the county of Lancaster; it was ordered and decreed in this court that the said plaintiff and his assigns should from henceforth have, perceive, take, occupy, and enjoy, the said tithe corn and grain without let or interruption of the said defendant, as by the said decree more plainly doth and may appear: It was this day moved by the counsell of the plaintiff to have an injunction against Sir Thomas Gerrard, knight, concerning the performance of the tenor of the said decree, whereupon an injunction is this day awarded against the said Sir Thomas Gerrard, that he, as executor, administrator or assign to the said William Gerrard, shall not, upon the sight of the said injunction, have, occupy, and enjoy, the said tithe corn and grain, but shall permit and suffer Sir Thomas Stanley, clerk, and his assigns, to occupy the premises and every parcel thereof without let, molestation, vexation, or trouble, of the said Sir Thomas Gerrard or of any other person or persons by his means."^[9] I presume that John Winstanley had not disputed the previous decree, and therefore he is not mentioned in the order.

In 1 Eliz. Dr. Thomas Stanley, bishop of Man, was present at the funeral of Margaret, Countess of Derby (the Earl's second wife), who was buried at Ormskirk with great solemnity on 24th February, 1558-9. On that occasion the said bishop sang a solemn mass, having on him his ornaments and mitre.^[10]

In the following year, 2 Eliz., the Dean and Chapter of Lichfield complain in the Duchy Court that they have "by all the time whereof the memory of man is not to the contrary" been seized of a yearly rent of £20 issuing out of the rectory or parsonage of Wigan until the last two years in which Thomas "bishop of Sodor and parson of Wigan" has wrongfully detained the said sum, notwithstanding that the said complainants have made continual suit for the same.^[11] I have not found the record of any decree in this matter, but Stanley was doubtless made to pay the pension with the arrears.

Bishop Stanley now began to look up his manorial rights, together with the tithes and rents belonging to the parsonage, all which had been considerably encroached upon, during Kyghley's unfortunate lease, by the Mayor and burgesses of Wigan in the one case and in the other by certain lessees of the tithes and sundry tenants at will. Some of these were irremediably lost, though more than one of Stanley's successors made vigorous efforts to recover them.

During this half century, under the Tudor dynasty, a considerable change in the balance of power had taken place throughout the country. The wealth and power of the commonalty had largely increased, and in borough towns the burghers had attained a stronger and more independent position, which enabled them to repudiate many of the old manorial rights as having become obsolete. This had been notably the case at Wigan, in more than one point, and it was doubtless the more easy of attainment for lack of a powerful hereditary lord who could constantly watch over his interests and enforce his lawful rights. At this time the right of holding the statute markets and fairs and periodical court-leets had been claimed and exercised by the Mayor and burgesses, together with the use of the Moothall. This usurpation of the parson's ancient privileges held under charters from the Crown, which had been frequently confirmed and renewed, was challenged by parson Stanley, who in conjunction with Sir Thomas Langton, knight, the patron, laid a bill of complaint in the Duchy Court and asked for an official enquiry. A commission was accordingly issued in 2 Eliz. (1559-60) to make full enquiries into the matter.^[12]

The bill of Thomas Stanley, Bishop of Man and of the "Owte Isles" and parson of Wigan, and Sir Thomas Langton, knight, baron of Newton and patron of the said church, sheweth: That Thomas Stanley hath of right one "lete or law daye" usually held twice a year, and one Court of Record for all manner of pleas within the town of Wigan, for the preservation of justice, by force of certain letters patent granted unto his predecessors, by reason whereof Thomas Stanley appointed William Fleetwood, gent, steward general of the said church, the duties of the office to be exercised by the said Fleetwood or his lawful deputy. Sir Thomas Langton, being Fleetwood's deputy, the [blank] day of [blank] last past, on going to the court to exercise the said duties was riotously interrupted, troubled, and disquieted by certain evil disposed persons, among whom were Richard Moore, Peter Marshe, Thomas Becke, Robert Penington, Rauffe Turner, John Scotte, John Prescotte, Robert Prescotte, Thomas Barrowe, Richard Casson, Geoffrey Pilkington, John Fraunce, and Thomas Orrell, who have divers times since misused (and wrongfully imprisoned) James Henryson, William Straitbarell, and other servants of the said Stanley and Sir Thomas Langton, both by violence and threatenings, and certain of the said riotous persons refuse to appear at the said court to do their duties and service according to their tenure.

The inquisition was taken at Westminster on the 28th of April, 3 Eliz. 1561, when Richard Moore of Wigan, yeoman, aged 50, John Scott of Wigan, yeoman, aged 55, and Geoffrey Pilkington, three of the defendants, appeared, and were examined upon oath. They deposed that the parson of Wigan had had a "Leete or Lawe daye" and a Court of Record for all manner of pleas or matters in Wigan to their knowledge by the space of 20 years, and that the said deponents had done suit and service there until now of late they and divers others of the inhabitants had said nay to do any such suit or service, thinking that of right the said bishop ought not to have or keep any such court or leet there. That they had no knowledge of Stanley's having appointed William Fleetwood to be his steward general of the same court, or of his having ever exercised the said office. They denied having troubled, vexed or disquieted the said Sir Thomas Langton when sitting in the said court, but they said that Richard Moore, being then Mayor of Wigan, had sat down by Sir Thomas to see that nothing was done to the prejudice of the town of Wigan or the liberties thereof, and John Scott deposed that when Sir Thomas was sitting in court and giving charge to enquire of bloodshed, the said Richard Moore had challenged his authority to do so unless it were drawn or shed within certain limits of time and place. They further deposed that they did not know whether any of the inhabitants of Wigan ought of right to do any suit or service to the said parson's leet or to his three week's court, that most of them had done so, until now of late, to be and pass upon juries there, but that some had departed out of the court and would not be sworn, among whom were the said John Scott and Geoffrey Pilkington and others whose names they did not certainly remember. That James Henryson, servant of the bishop about the [blank] day of February last, did make an assault upon one Christopher Sweeting, and the said Richard Moore, being Mayor of Wigan, went to the place where the assault was committed and sent Henryson to prison; but that on finding sureties for keeping the peace he was liberated; that about the [blank] day of August, being Sunday, when the parishioners were gathered together at divine service, William Straitbarell [mentioned in the bill of complaint as one of the bishop's servants who had been misused and falsely imprisoned] being accompanied by a number of persons and a "mynstrell called a pyper" went through the said church to the Table whereupon the Communion is administered and did cause the said piper to play upon a "paire of graitt and lowde bagg-pypes," whereupon the said Mayor did "gently require the said piper to cease." That some time after the said Straitbarell came to the Mayor in Wigan and asked him "What he hadde to do to cause the said pyper to cease and leave hys playinge," and did then speak these words to the Mayor, "Thou art a very foole and more mete to be a swynnarde than a Mayor," with many other evil and opprobrious words. That the said Straitbarell was thereupon committed to prison, but upon his submission and acknowledgment of his offence was set at liberty. That they did not know that any attachment had been awarded against the said Richard Moore and others on the suit of the said bishop and Sir Thomas Langton, but had heard that such had been awarded and in the Sheriff's hands. That such attachment was not served upon the said Richard Moore or others. That they did not know that the Sheriff stayed the execution thereof from any friendship that he bore towards Moore and the others; nor that any money was given by Moore or others to stay the execution of the said process. That they did not know, but had heard it reported by others, that there was a privy seal served upon one Robert Pennington, at the suit of the same bishop and Sir Thomas Langton, and that the same Robert did break the same and cast the wax at the before mentioned William Straitbarrell.

The deposition of Peter Marshe, Robert Pennington and Thomas Becke agrees with that of the three former defendants. Thomas Stanley and Sir Thomas Langton say in answer that James Harryson [Henryson] is bailiff in Wigan and that he had the said Sweeting in execution of a certain debt, and Sweeting "dyd flee from the sayd Harryson and wolde have escaped owte of execution, and thereupon the sayd Harryson did freshelye hym pursue, and the sayd Sweeting dyd returne agayne and draw hys dagger and dyd stryke at the sayd Harryson; and that the blows struck by Harryson were in self defence. With regard to the other matter they say that a piper came to the church playing on his instrument before a bryde according to the uses of the country, that he did not make any disturbance, and that the said Straitbarell did neither procure him nor come with him."

The defendants, in reply, deny that Harryson had an execution against Sweeting, or did pursue, as stated by the complainants, but assaulted Sweeting unjustly and would doubtless have murdered him if some of the townspeople had not interfered. They declare all the statements made to be untrue.^[13] There is no order or decree to be found with reference to this suit. It would seem, however, that it had the effect of bringing Bishop Stanley and his parishioners at Wigan to some understanding; for in this same year he confirmed to the burgesses of Wigan parson Maunsell's charter of freedom, by a charter of inspeximus dated at Wigan on 10th October, 3 Eliz., 1561;^[14] and from a subsequent lawsuit, held in parson Fleetwood's time, it would seem that Stanley troubled himself no more about the matter, but suffered the Mayor and burgesses to do as they pleased.

In 5 Eliz., 1562-3, there was a lawsuit between Sir Thomas Langton and Sir Thomas Gerrard, knights, concerning the tithes of corn and grain in the township of Pemberton, which Langton claimed as the purchaser of a lease granted by Thomas Stanley, dated 22nd March, 1 Eliz., 1559, to Edmund Burscough and William Straitbarell for a term of years yet enduring, they paying a yearly sum for the same. He asserted that he had entered into the premises by virtue of an assignment of their lease made to him on 22nd April, 1559, and was possessed thereof until he was ejected by Gerrard. Gerrard apparently claimed under Kyghley's lease to Ketchyn and under some arrangement alleged to have been made with parson Gerrard, that he (Thomas Gerrard) should have these tithes in recompence for the tithes of Billinge, of which he had been dispossessed. Langton thereupon pleaded Smyth's re-entry; which Gerrard denied, and said that long before the time of the alleged re-entry into the parsonage, Smyth had entered into a messuage or tenement in Wigan then or late in the tenure of William Hyde, and divers other messuages, parcel of the manor of Wigan, and had wrongfully kept possession of the same during the time that the said rent was accruing, on account of which he is said to have made his re-entry, so that he had forfeited the right to take advantage of the clause under which he re-entered.^[15]

In the same year, 5 Eliz., Thomas "bishop of Sodor and parson of Wigan" lays a complaint in the Duchy Court against William Orrell of Orrell, gentleman. His statement is that the said William Orrell, having gathered unto him about 40 persons, during harvest time and divers other times before and after, had assembled in the township of Orrell, in the parish of Wigan, and with force and arms carried away 20 loads of tithe corn of the value of 40 marks and more, and converted the same to his own use.^[16]

Again in the same year he lays a bill of complaint against Roger Bradshaghe of Haghe, Esquire, stating that he, with sundry other riotous persons to the number of 40, had carried away 80 loads of tithe corn and grain in the township of Haghe, in the parish of Wigan, to the value of £40, and converted the same to his own use, although gently remonstrated with, and hath refused to make amends.^[17]

In 1564 Bishop Stanley, though he was then in possession of several rich benefices, was apparently residing in idleness at Durham. Pilkington, bishop of Durham, in a letter to the archbishop of Canterbury, gives a deplorable account of the clergy of the northern province at that date, and says: "The bishop of Man liveth here at ease and as merry as Pope Joan."^[18]

In 11 Eliz., 1568-9, Thomas Stanley states in his bill of complaint that he is seized of and in two tithes, with the appurtenances, called the tithe of the townships of Ince and Hindley, within the parish of Wigan. Being so seized, in August last past Miles Gerrard of Ince, Esquire, who had lent him one of his barns for storing the grain, died before the whole of the grain was carried, and at his death his son and heir, William Gerrard, agreed to carry and house the said grain and deliver the keys of the barn to the complainant. But when the corn was all carried the said William Gerrard refused so to deliver the keys.^[19]

Bishop Thomas Stanley died in 1568, i.e. 1568-9.^[20] The Earl of Derby calls him "his cousin," but his name does not occur in the family pedigree. He is said to have been an illegitimate son of Sir Edward Stanley, the first Lord Monteagle, of Hornby Castle.^[21] in which case he will have been a brother, or half brother, of Dame Elizabeth the wife of Sir Thomas Langton, knight, the patron of Wigan church.

Bishop Stanley was the writer of the "Rhyming Chronicle," a kind of history in verse of the Stanley family, continued to the year 1562, and his verses have been received by genealogists as the most authentic account of the family.^[22] He is described by Bishop Tanner as "Poeta haud cotemnendus."^[23] He is said to have had in his possession a very ancient painting of the face of our Blessed Lord, which was taken by him to Douglas, in the Isle of Man, where it is still preserved.^[24] Mr. Beamont informs us that he was a bad steward to the rectory of Winwick, one of his preferments, for in 3 Eliz., 1563, he granted to Sir Thomas Stanley, knight, second son of Edward, third Earl of Derby, a lease of the said rectory, parish church and benefice, with the manor, park, and glebe lands, for the term of 99 years, at a yearly rent of £120;^[25] and he seems to have done but little better for the rectory of Wigan.

1. Chester Diocesan Register.
2. Beamont's History of Winwick, p. 30.
3. York Diocesan Registry.
4. Le Neve's Fasti; Wood's Athenæ vol. iii. p. 807.
5. Le Neve's Fasti
6. Baines' Lancashire, vol. iii. p. 622, and vol. iv. p. 277.
7. Raines' MSS., vol. xxii. p. 30; Tanner's Bibliotheca Britannico-Hibernica, p. 689. There is no record, in the York Diocesan Registry, of his institution to Barwick in Elmet, though the institution of his predecessor is recorded in 1519, and that of his successor on the death of the last incumbent on 18 March, 1668-9.
8. Duchy of Lancaster Pleadings, 1 Eliz., vol. iii. S. No. 2.
9. Duchy of Lancaster Decrees and Orders. Hilary, 1 Eliz., fo. 91, vol. xii.
10. Lancashire Funeral Certificates, Chetham Tract, lxxv. p. 9.
11. Duchy of Lancaster Pleadings, 2 Eliz. , vol. vi. L. No. 7.
12. Duchy of Lancaster Pleadings, 2 Eliz., vol. ii. S. No. 2.
13. Duchy of Lancaster Pleadings, 3 Eliz., vol. vii. S. No. 4.
14. Vide ante p. 11
15. Duchy of Lancaster Pleadings, 5 Eliz., vol. xv. L. No. 1.
16. Duchy of Lancaster Pleadings, vol. xvi. S. No. 16.
17. Ibid., S. No. 17.
18. Baines Hist. of Lancashire, vol. iii. p. 100.
19. Duchy of Lancaster Pleadings, 11 Eliz., vol. xi. S. No. 5.
20. Le Neve's Fasti; Anthony â Wood says that he paid the last debt of nature in the latter end of 1570, but in this he is certainly in error. His successor at Barwick in Elmet, Mr. William Power, M.A., was instituted on 18th March, 1568-9, and his successor at Wigan on 22nd June, 1569, so that he probably died in March, 1568-9. In his bishoprick of Sodor and Man he was succeeded by John Salisbury, Dean of Norwich. There is some discrepancy as to the date of Salisbury's appointment. Rev. J. G. Gumming, editor of "A Short Treatise on the Isle of Man" (vol. x. of the Manx Society's publications, p. 77) gives it as 1569. Willis (Survey of Cathedrals, vol. i. p. 367) says that Thomas Stanley died in 1568 (i.e. 1568-9) and gives the date of Salisbury's nomination as 27th March, 1569, but Le Neve gives it as 27th March, 1570, which is probably the correct date. It appears that some question arose as to the right of nomination, and Queen Elizabeth, writing from Gorhambury, on the 29th September, 1570, to the archbishop of York, mentions the fact that the bishoprick had been for some time vacant by the natural death of Thomas Stanley, and destitute of the episcopal consolation; she informs him that the right of nomination notoriously belonged to the Earl of Derby, who had lawfully nominated, and presented to her, John Salisbury, late suffragan of Thelford, who had already been consecrated [as suffragan], and desired her to send her letters mandatory to the archbishop of York, to confirm the appointment, which she does accordingly. (Pat. 12 Eliz. given in Monumenta de insulâ Manniæ, Manx Society's publication, vol. ix. pp. 53-7.)
21. Piccope's MSS. in Ghetham Lib. vol. numbered 7 and corrected to 10, p. 90; being taken from Dodsworth's MSS. in Bodleian Lib.
22. Stanley Papers, part i. (Chetham Tract xxix.) p. 16.
23. Bibliotheca Britannico-Hibernica, p. 689.
24. Journal of the Archæological Institute, vol. xxvii. p. 190.
25. History of Winwick, pp. 32, 114.