stwood_) having been possessed by
Townley, and by explaining, 1st, The identity of the tenement once owned
by Spencers; 2ndly, The seeming cause of Whitaker's silence; and, 3rdly,
The certainty of possession by the Spencers.

I. The former estate of the Spencers in Hurstwood is a tenement which
was purchased by the late Rev. John Hargreaves from the representatives
of William Ormerod, of Foxstones, in Cliviger, in 1803, and which had
been conveyed in 1690, by John Spencer, then of Marsden, to Oliver
Ormerod of Hurstwood, and his son Laurence; the former of these being
youngest son, by a second marriage, of Peter Ormerod of Ormerod, and
co-executor of his will in 1650. So much for the locality.

II. As for Dr. Whitaker's silence, I know, from correspondence with him
(1808-1816), that, from an irregularity in the Prerogative Office, he
was not aware of this will, and uninformed as to this second marriage,
or the connexion of this purchaser's family with the parent house; and I
think it as probable that he was as unaware of the ancient possession of
the purchased tenement by Spencers, as it is certain that this theory as
to the connexion of the poet with it was _then_ unknown. If otherwise,
he would doubtless have extended his scale, and included it.

III. As to the certainty of possession by Spencers, I have brief
extracts from deeds as to this tenement as follows:--

1677. Indenture of covenants for a fine, between _John Spencer the
elder_, and Oliver Ormerod of Cliviger, and note of fine.

1687. Will of same _John Spencer_, late of Hurstwood, mentioning
possession of this tenement as the inheritance of his
_great-grandfather_, _Edmund Spencer_.

1689. Family arrangements of _John Spencer_ (the son) as to same
tenement, then in occupation of "Oliver Ormeroyde" before mentioned.

{411}
1690. Conveyance from _John Spencer_ to O. and L. O., as before
mentioned.

In _Gentleman's Magazine_, August, 1842 (pp. 141, 142.), will be found
numerous notices of these Spen_c_ers or Spen_s_ers, with identified
localities from registers.

I think that this explanation will solve the difficulty suggested by
CLIVIGER. On the main question I have not grounds sufficient for an
opinion, but add a reference to _Gentleman's Magazine_, March, 1848, p.
286., for a _general objection_ by MR. CROSSLEY, President of the
Chetham Society, who is well acquainted with the locality.

LANCASTRIENSIS.

I was about to address some photographi