The inscription appears over the high-place at the west end of the great hall, and was probably replaced in the last century during the occupancy of Charles Legh.

Thomas Legh died August 8, 1519, leaving, with other issue, a son, George Legh, then aged 22 years, who succeeded as his heir.

“Better marry over the mixen than over the moor” has ever been a favourite proverb with the men of Cheshire; and the heads of the house of Legh evidently believed in the soundness of the advice it conveyed, for, from the time their Norman progenitor first settled in the county, they had been content to mate within their own shire. The first of the manorial lords of Adlington to depart from this long-established custom was George Legh, who, in 1523, married the daughter of a Huntingdonshire squire—Joan, daughter of Peter Larke, and a sister of that Thomas Larke on whom Cardinal Wolsey had bestowed the rich rectory of Winwick, in Lancashire—and it can hardly be said that the departure added much to the reputation of his house, the supposed antecedents of the lady having given rise to no inconsiderable amount of scandal. It is said that, previous to her marriage with Thomas Legh, Joan Larke had been the mistress (not the illegitimate daughter, as a recent writer has unnecessarily sought to disprove) of Cardinal Wolsey. The statement is evidently made on the authority of one of the “Articles of Impeachment” against Wolsey presented to Parliament by a committee of the House of Lords, December 1, 1529, and quoted in Lord Herbert of Cherbury’s “Life of Henry VIII.” The story is a curious one, and, if true, reflects little credit either upon the Cardinal or his frail companion. The accusation is embodied in the 38th article—

That the sd Cardinal did call before him Sir Jno. Stanley, kt., which had taken a farm by convent seal of the Abbot and Convent of Chester; and afterwards by his power and might, contrary to right, committed the said Sir Jno. Stanley to the prison of Fleet by the space of one year, until such time as he compelled the sd Sir Jno. to release his convent seal to one Leghe, of Adlington, which married one Lark’s daughter, which woman the sd lord cardinal kept and had with her two children; whereupon the sd Sir John Stanley, upon displeasure taken in his heart, made himself monk in Westminster, and there died.

The story, it must be confessed, has much improbability about it; and may, as has been suggested, have been prompted by feelings of malice against the fallen ecclesiastic. Certain it is, the charge was not pressed to a direct issue. Whatever may have been the relations existing between Wolsey and the wife of Thomas Legh, there is no doubt that in the short interval between the expiry of the lease of the Prestbury tithes, in 1523–4, and the granting of a new one by the Abbot of St Werburg, in the following year, a dispute had arisen between George Legh and Sir John Stanley respecting them. It is not improbable that the latter had endeavoured to steal a march upon his neighbour by securing a lease of a portion of them to the disadvantage of the Leghs, who, as we have seen, had been farmers of the impropriate rectory for a lengthened period, and that the Cardinal, who is known to have been a patron of the Larkes, was then appealed to with a view of inducing the monks of Chester to grant George Legh a renewal of the privileges his family had so long enjoyed. If so, the appeal was unsuccessful, for in 1524–5 a new lease for forty years was granted, which was subsequently renewed.

Sir John Stanley was a natural son of James Stanley, warden of Manchester, and afterwards Bishop of Ely, a younger son of that Thomas, Lord Stanley, who placed the crown of the vanquished Richard upon the head of the victorious Richmond on the field of Bosworth. He commanded his father’s retainers at the battle of Flodden Field, in 1513, when his uncle, Sir Edward Stanley, afterwards created Lord Monteagle, led the forces of Lancashire and Cheshire, and Sir Edmund Savage, mayor of Macclesfield, and so many of the burgesses of that town were slain; and on that occasion by his valour in the field won his golden spurs. He married Margaret, the only daughter and heir of William Honford, of Honford, by his wife Margaret, daughter of Sir John Savage, and was consequently closely allied to the Leghs of Adlington. In 1528 he and his wife prayed for a divorce in order that they might severally devote themselves to a religious life, and be quit of the world for ever. The divorce was granted, and he became a monk of Westminster, where he died; his wife also entered a religious house, but must have abandoned her intention of becoming a recluse, for she afterwards married Sir Urian Brereton, by whom she had a family, who through her inherited the Honford estates. Though Sir John assumed the cowl and tonsure of a monk, it is hardly credible, even supposing the story of Wolsey’s arbitrary exercise of power to have been true, that he forsook the society of his wife, retreated from the world, and disappeared in the shadow of the cloister “from displeasure taken in his heart” upon a matter of such comparatively little moment, and occurring four or five years previously.

A recent writer, in an account of Adlington, says that Sir John Stanley “was himself an ecclesiastic and warden of Manchester;” that his claim “was espoused by the Bishop of Ely, his father;” and that “the battle seems in reality to have been fought between the powerful Bishop of Ely on the one hand, and the yet more powerful Cardinal on the other.” These statements are entirely erroneous. Sir John, in early life, had embraced the profession of arms; as a soldier he had earned his knighthood by bravery on the field; and, being married, he would by the canons of the Church be disqualified from holding an ecclesiastical preferment, while, as a fact, his father, the Bishop of Ely, had been in his grave eight or nine years when the dispute respecting the Prestbury tithes arose.

George Legh died on the 12th June, 1529, at the early age of thirty-two. His will was only made on the day preceding his decease, and the broad lands of Adlington were transmitted to his only son, Thomas Legh, then an infant two years of age. His wife survived him, and was remarried to George Paulet, brother of the Marquis of Winchester, and she with her second husband appear to have resided at Adlington during the minority of the heir, for in a return of the clergy serving at the various chapels of ease within the parish of Prestbury there occurs the name of Sir James Hurst, a stipendiary priest, paid by George Pollet (Paulet), and apparently serving in the chapel at Adlington. By an unaccountable error Thomas Legh, of Adlington, has been confounded with another personage of the same name, who, as one of the commissioners under Sir Thomas Cromwell, took an active part in the suppression of the religious houses. The mistake will be apparent when it is remembered that at the time (1536) that worthy was denouncing monachism and despoiling the monks of their lands and houses Thomas Legh, of Adlington, was only in his ninth year, and before he had attained to manhood the great and lesser monasteries had been swept away.

Whilst he was in his minority he had been united in marriage with one of the younger daughters of the great house of Grosvenor—Mary, the daughter of Robert Grosvenor, of Eaton, the direct ancestor of the present Duke of Westminster. It is not known with certainty how the match was brought about, but in those days the lord of the fee was entitled to the wardship of the heir, with the right to put up his or her hand to sale in marriage; and if Richard Grosvenor, as is not unlikely, had the wardship of the Adlington estates, he may have thought the alliance a desirable one for a younger member of his numerous family. It was to avoid the evil arising from this feudal practice that so many early marriages were in former times resorted to, parents being oftentimes prompted to seek an eligible match for their heirs while under age to free them from the exactions and other consequences of wardship—a circumstance that could have been little understood by the President Montesquieu, when he cast the sneer upon our country in saying there was a law in England which permitted girls of seven years of age to choose their own husbands, and which, he added, was shocking in two ways, since it had no regard to the time when nature gives maturity to the understanding, nor to the time when she gives maturity to the body. Mary Grosvenor survived her husband and remarried Sir Richard Egerton, of Ridley, Knight, with whom she appears to have resided at Adlington during the minority of the son by her first husband. She had the manor and tithes of Prestbury settled upon her as dower; and in 1558 her second husband is found attending a meeting in the church at Prestbury, and acting there in the capacity of warden—an office then held in much higher esteem than at the present day. The lady deserves to be held in special remembrance by the men of Cheshire, from the circumstance that she is generally believed to have superintended the education and taken a kindly interest in the well-being of a notable Cheshire worthy, who attained the highest honours of the peerage, Richard Egerton’s base-born son by Alice Starke, of Bickerton—Thomas Egerton, Viscount Brackley, Lord Keeper and Chancellor of England, ancestor of the great Duke of Bridgewater, as well as of the present Earl of Ellesmere—a worthy who, if precluded by the circumstances of his birth from deriving honour from an illustrious ancestry, reflected on them, his descendants, and his county the lustre of a name brighter than any other its annals can boast. It is pleasant to think that some of the earlier years of the great Chancellor were spent within the old house at Adlington, and that the generous-hearted lady to whom he owed so much was not forgotten when he had attained to distinction, and she in her old age had become the victim of religious persecution.[32] She died in 1599, having survived her first husband for the long period of fifty-one years. In her will, dated 18th October, 1597, she appoints the Lord Keeper Egerton, whom she designates her “wellbeloved sonne,” one of her executors, and bequeaths to him “one ringe of Goulde having thereon a Dyamond.” She is buried at Astbury, where her altar-tomb, with a recumbent effigy upon the top, may still be seen.

Thomas Legh, the first husband of Mary Grosvenor, did not long enjoy possession of the ancestral domains, his death occurring at Eaton, May 17, 1548, the year in which he attained his majority. The only issue by his marriage was a son, Thomas, aged one year at the time of his death, so that the broad lands of Adlington were once more held in ward through the infancy of the heir.

On the 21st April, 1548, three weeks before his death, Thomas Legh granted to his wife’s eldest brother, Thomas Grosvenor, of Eaton, all the lands which his family had held in Belgrave from the time of the marriage of Sir Robert Legh with the heiress of Sir Thomas Belgrave, circa 1385; and four days later he settled the remainder of his estates, including “the Hall of Adlington,” in trust for the benefit of himself and his wife and his heirs in tail male.

Sir Urian Brereton, who married the widow of Sir John Stanley, the quondam recluse, seems to have acquired, with the lady, Sir John’s craving for the Prestbury tithes, for in 1538, during the minority of Thomas Legh the elder, he obtained from the Abbot of St. Werburg’s, in the names of himself and John Broughton, the reversion of the lease of the manor and advowson, to commence on the expiry of the one for 40 years renewed to George Legh in 1524; and this reversion was afterwards purchased by Richard and John Grosvenor, the brothers of Mary, the wife of Thomas Legh, in trust, and to prevent their alienation from the other Adlington properties. But a great revolution in religious thought and action was then gradually gaining strength and power, and the day was near at hand when the monks and their system were to be overthrown. On the dissolution of St. Werburg’s Abbey the manor and advowson of the church of Prestbury were granted to the Dean and Chapter of the newly-founded Cathedral of Chester. They did not, however, long enjoy possession; William Clyve, the third dean, and two of the prebendaries, were confined in the Fleet by procurement of Sir Richard Cotton, of Werblington, comptroller of the King’s household, a Hampshire knight, who appears to have shared the acquisitive properties of his elder brother, Sir George Cotton, another courtier and favourite of the King, who had had conferred upon himself the dissolved abbey and the greater part of the demesne of Combermere, in Cheshire, and who, in other ways, had increased his worldly possessions out of the spoils of the religious houses. While in the Fleet, under intimidation, as was alleged, the dean and canons granted to Sir Richard (20th March, 1553), for ever, most of their lands on the payment of a yearly rental; he in turn, on the 28th July, 1555, re-conveyed the manor and advowson of Prestbury to Richard and John Grosvenor, who, in 1559, are found presenting to the vicarage. The validity of the grant to Cotton was subsequently disputed, and on the Cheshire Recognisance Rolls, under date January 13th, 5 and 6 Elizabeth (1563–4), there is the enrolment of a complaint exhibited by Richard and John Grosvenor. Eventually the feoffees surrendered to the Crown; on the 19th December, 1579, the whole of the lands formerly held by the abbey were granted by Elizabeth to Sir George Calveley, Knight, George Cotton, Hugh Cholmondeley, Thomas Legh, Henry Mainwaring, John Nuthall, and Richard Hurleston, Esquires, and their heirs for ever; and, by another indenture, dated 6th August, 1580, the counterpart of which is preserved among the Adlington charters, these fee farmers, after reciting the grant of Elizabeth, for divers good causes and considerations them specially moving, demised and quit-claimed to Thomas Legh and his heirs the rectory, church, and manor of Prestbury, with the appurtenances, excepting the certain messuages, tenements, and hereditaments, with the appurtenances and the tithes, oblations, and obventions, of Chelford and Asthull (Astle). They have since continued in the possession of the Leghs, and have descended with their other estates.

Thomas Legh had a long minority, and it was a fortunate thing for him that in those early years of his life he had a good mother, who, with the aid of her powerful kinsmen, was able to guard his estates and protect him from undue taxation. On the 16th March, 1567–8, he obtained livery of his father’s lands, he being then of full age. He had, five years previously (29th June, 1563), being then in his sixteenth year, married, at Cheadle, Sybil, the youngest daughter of Sir Urian Brereton, of Honford, by his first wife, Margaret, daughter and heir of William Honford, and widow of Sir John Stanley, a marriage that it may be fairly assumed happily terminated the long-standing disputes between the two houses respecting the tithes of Prestbury.

Following the example of his father-in-law, who rebuilt the hall of Handforth, Thomas Legh, in 1581, rebuilt, or at all events, greatly enlarged, the house at Adlington, as the following inscription, in black-letter characters, over the entrance porch leading from the court-yard testifies:—

In 1587 Thomas Legh had the shrievalty of Cheshire conferred upon him. The time was one of considerable excitement and no little anxiety, for scarcely had he entered upon the duties of his office than news came that the “Invincible Armada,” so long threatened and so long deferred, had unfurled its sails, and was then actually advancing towards the English coast. The spirit of patriotism was aroused; Roman Catholic and Protestant united as one man to repel the haughty Spaniard, and the Queen issued a proclamation to her sheriffs and others, urging them by every consideration of social and domestic security to call forth the united energies of their respective counties, in common with the country in general, to resist the meditated attack. Thomas Legh, who was then in the prime of manhood, was not likely to be idle on such an occasion, and doubtless he acted with much the same spirit that Macaulay’s sheriff did when the signal fires announcing the approach of the enemy flashed along the southern coasts,—

In the later years of his life Thomas Legh added considerably to the patrimonial lands. Towards the close of the century, when the Butley estates, which had been held for so many generations by the Pigots, were partitioned among three co-heiresses, he acquired by purchase the manor and a moiety of the lands, which descended with the Adlington property until the present century. On the 20th April, 1596, an enrolment was made, as appears by the Cheshire Records, at the instance of Dame Mary Egerton, his mother, then a widow, of a covenant by which he undertook to convey the mansion house of Adlington, with other properties, to her use for life, and afterwards to himself with successive remainders in fee tail to his sons Urian, Thomas, and Edward, and his daughter, Maria Legh, and his right heirs for ever. In the same year his eldest son, Urian Legh, brought distinction to the family by his gallant bearing at Cadiz, where he earned for himself the honour of knighthood, an event respecting which we shall have more to say anon. Proud as the father must have felt at his son’s conspicuous bravery, the pleasure must have had its alloy when, in the following year, he had the misfortune to lose his younger son, Ralph, who was slain by the insurgents in an attack upon Newry, in Ireland; and, to add to his sorrow, in the next year, 1598, he lost another son, Thomas Legh, who, with his commander, Sir Henry Bagnall, was killed in the disastrous attempt to relieve the fortress of Blackwater,—the most signal defeat ever experienced by an English force in Ireland,—when Hugh O’Neill, Earl of Tyrone, who had been for some time in insurrection against the English rule, was besieging it, and who had, at the same time, burned down the castle of Kilcoleman, where

the “Faery Queen” had been written, and its gifted author, Edmund Spenser, was then residing.

Thomas Legh died at Adlington on the 25th January, 1601–2, in the fifty-fifth year of his age, and was buried at Prestbury, on the following day, as the parish registers show. The same year his widow caused a memorial window, a portion of which still remains, though in a very mutilated condition, to be placed in the church, on which is a shield of arms, with several quarterings, representing the alliances of the two families. Beneath is this inscription:—

Orate pro bono statv Thomæ Leyghe de Adlington armigeri et Sibilla vxoris svæ vni’ filiorvm Vriani Brereton de Handford militis defvncti qvi hanc fenestram fieri fecervnt in anno domini 1601.

She survived her husband eight years, and was buried at Prestbury, February 19th, 1609–10.

Sir Urian Legh, who succeeded as heir on the death of his father, in 1602, was born at Handforth in 1566, and was, consequently, in his thirty-sixth year when he entered upon his inheritance. As we have seen, he had early embraced the profession of arms, and in the service of his country had already won renown. It was the time when Elizabeth’s sea captains, Howard and Essex, and Raleigh and Drake, were adding to the national laurels by their achievements on the main, justifying the witty and well-timed impromptu which one of the courtiers gave when lament was made that England was then under the rule of a queen, instead of that of a king,—

In 1596, when Philip of Spain was preparing for a second invasion of England, Howard, the Lord Admiral, with his characteristic daring and love of adventure, urged that, instead of waiting for the enemy’s attack, a blow should be struck at Spain herself, by destroying the fleet before it could leave her harbours. The more cautious Burleigh counselled the less hazardous policy, but was overruled by the dashing and impetuous Devereux, Earl of Essex, who, with Howard and Raleigh, was eventually entrusted with the command of the expedition. Young Urian Legh could not remain a laggard when such opportunities for distinction offered; leaving the bower and the tilt yard for the Spanish main, and the saddle of the war horse for the deck of the war ship, he joined the expedition, and on the 1st of June, the fleet, then lying at Plymouth, loosed its sails and bore away towards the shores of Spain, arriving before Cadiz on the 12th. Essex, whose impetuosity could brook no restraint, and who had, moreover, a bitter aversion to the tyrant Philip, was so eager for action that he threw his hat into the sea in the exuberance of his delight. The attack was commenced on the following day, and with such fury that the Spanish Admiral’s ship and several others were blown up with all their crews on board, whilst the few vessels which were not either sunk or burned were run on shore, the English admiral refusing to accept a price for their release, declaring that “he came to burn and not to ransom.” This daring and successful enterprise was followed up by an attack on the strongly-fortified town of Cadiz. The impetuous Essex threw his standard over the wall, “giving withal a most hot assault unto the gate, where, to save the honour of their ensign, happy was he that could first leap down from the wall, and with shot and sword make way through the thickest press of the enemy.” The daring of the leader called forth the courage of his followers. The town was captured on the 26th June, and six hundred and twenty thousand ducats were paid as a ransom for the lives of the inhabitants. The heir of Adlington took the leading part in the attack, and displayed such conspicuous bravery that the Earl knighted him upon the spot. The display of British valour on the occasion has been justly described by Macaulay (“Essays,” art. “Lord Bacon,”) as “the most brilliant military exploit that was achieved on the continent by English arms during the long interval which elapsed between the battle of Agincourt and that of Blenheim.”

Sir Urian Legh stands out with marked individuality in any record of the house of Adlington. The Leghs have ever looked with pardonable pride upon the doughty deeds of their warlike ancestor, and the feeling has been nothing lessened by the romantic incident which tradition has linked with his name. He is commonly believed to have been the hero of the old legendary ballad,—“The Spanish Lady’s Love,” written by Thomas Deloney immediately after the return from Spain, and reprinted by the Percy Society from “The Garland of Goodwill”—

The story is that, while with Essex in Spain, a captive maid, “by birth and parentage of high degree,” was so overcome by Sir Urian’s kindness that she conceived an ardent attachment towards him, and when he was about to return, the amorous and high-born beauty, flinging aside the trammels of country and kin, begged that she might be allowed to accompany him and share his lot in life—a request the gallant Cheshire man, after urging many other objections, was compelled to refuse, for the best of all reasons—he had already a wife.

To which the disappointed lady magnanimously replies—

It has been stated by some writers that the ballad has reference not to Sir Urian Legh, but to Sir John Bolle, of Thorpe Hall, in Lincolnshire, the representative of a family remotely connected in a later generation with the Leghs of Adlington; while Dr. Percy, in his introductory remarks, inclines to the opinion that the original was either a member of the Popham family or Sir Richard Leveson, of Trentham, in Staffordshire, an ancestor of the Duke of Sutherland. The legend has doubtless some foundation in fact, though the actores fabulæ may be phantoms; it should, however, be said that, until recent years, when they were removed to Shaw Hill, in Lancashire, the Leghs, in proof of the identity of their kinsman with the hero of Deloney’s ballad, were able to show the veritable “chain of gold” and the casket in which through long generations it had been carefully preserved as an heirloom of the family. A half-length portrait of Sir Urian hangs upon the staircase at Adlington. It has been taken when he was in the fulness of manhood, and represents him as fresh complexioned, with a regular and rather handsome cast of features, suggesting the idea that comeliness of face and figure blended with courage and courtesy,—the characteristics of an old English gentleman. He wears a black felt hat with jewelled front, a black gown with vandyked and richly embroidered points, and round his neck a gold chain of many links that hangs down almost to the waist—whether the one given him by the “Spanish Lady” or not we will not undertake to say. In one corner of the picture is a shield of six quarters, and in the opposite corner this inscription:—

Sir Urian Legh of Adlington in the county of Chester Knight who went with Robert Devereux Earl of Essex to the siege of Cadiz and was by him knighted in the field for his great services in taking that Town in 1575 (should be 1596). He married Margaret daughter of Sir Edmund Trafford in the county of Lancaster Knight by whom he had four sons and three daughters.

On succeeding to his inheritance Sir Urian appears to have settled down to the discharge of his duties as a country gentleman, and to have applied himself to the further improvement of his patrimony, which he managed with so much thrift and care that before the close of the century he was able to make an addition to the family estates by the purchase of the lands and hall of Foxwist, in Butley township, from William Duncalf, whose ancestors had been resident there for more than three centuries, and in 1603 he built the Milne House, which long afterwards continued to be used as the dower house of the family. In 1613, the year following that in which Cecil died and the notorious Carr, a raw Scotch lad, was made Prime Minister, he was entrusted with the shrievalty of the county, and in local affairs he appears to have taken an active part, his bold and clearly defined autograph being of frequent occurrence in the parochial records. He was a man of some culture, had had the advantage of a university education, having matriculated at Oxford, and in his private life he would seem to have had a sweet fancy, turning to literature in the absence of action, for in the inventory of his effects, taken after his death, it is mentioned that there were in his closet at Prestbury “his bookes valued at xvjli.” He affected the society of men of letters: Dee, the “Wizard Warden” of Manchester, in his “Diary,” under date April 22nd, 1597, records that he was visited at his residence in the College by Sir Urian Legh and his brother (Edward Legh, probably, for the other brothers, Thomas and Ralph, were at the time in Ireland engaged in the suppression of O’Neill’s rebellion), a Mr. Brown, and Mr. George Booth, of Dunham, then Sheriff of Cheshire.

On the 6th of September, 1586, ten years before the affair at Cadiz, Sir Urian Legh was united in marriage to Mary, one of the daughters of Sir Edmund Trafford, of Trafford, Knight, that “hunter out and unkeneler of those slie and subtil foxes Iesuites and semenarei Priests.” The guests who graced the ceremony by their presence must have formed a goodly company, for William Massie, the rector of Wilmslow, who preached a sermon on the occasion, speaks of it as being delivered “before the right honourable the most noble Earle of Derby, and the right reuerend father in God the B(ishop) of Chester with diuerse Knightes and Esquires of great worship at the solemne marriage of your (Sir Edmund Trafford’s) daughter, a modest and vertuous Gentlewoman, married to a young gentleman of great worship and good education.”

Sir Urian Legh died at Adlington on the 2nd June, 1627, and two days afterwards, as the registers show, he was buried at Prestbury.

It is somewhat singular that Thomas Newton,[33] the famous Cheshire poet, who sang the glories of Essex and Drake in Latin verse, should have remained silent upon the daring deeds of his quondam friend and neighbour, Sir Urian Legh, leaving the “Water Poet,” John Taylor, to record in rhyme the virtues of the hero of Cadiz. Taylor was a guest at Adlington some time before the close of the century, and in his “Pennilesse Pilgrimage” describes the reception he met in a manner that recalls Ben Jonson’s lines in praise of the daily hospitalities at Penshurst:—

Sir Urian Legh, as we have said, died in 1627; and his eldest son, Thomas, was approaching the meridian of life when he succeeded as heir to the family estates. It was a memorable epoch in English history, for in that year Buckingham, the King’s favourite, by his inglorious expedition to France, had brought dishonour on his country’s arms, and was impeached in Parliament; and in the following year the Commons, before they would grant the supplies necessary to retrieve the disaster, extorted from Charles the Petition of Rights, confirming the liberties that were already the birthright of Englishmen—a measure which, had it been accepted by its authors as final, would have spared the country the calamities of civil war. Thomas Legh had married in his father’s lifetime (1610) a rich heiress, one of the daughters of Sir John Gobert, of Boresworth, in Leicestershire; with whom he acquired considerable property, including the estate of Clumber,[34] forming part of the royal manor and forest of Sherwood, which subsequently passed into the possession of the Pelham-Clintons, Dukes of Newcastle; so that by the time he came into his patrimony he had added considerably to the territorial possessions as well as to the social status of his house. On the death of Sir John Gobert, dame Lucy, his widow, appears to have resided with her daughter and son-in-law at Adlington, and to have remained with them up to the time of her death in 1634. In 1628–9 Thomas Legh was chosen to fill the office of high sheriff of the county, a distinction that was again conferred on him in the year 1642–3. The year of the second appointment was a portentous one, for the seeds of civil strife which had been sown in previous years had ripened, and King and Commoner—sovereign and subject—were then placing themselves in open array against each other. The Royalists of Cheshire, though in a minority, were prompt in obeying the King’s summons. Thomas Legh, in whom the blaze of youth was then sinking into the deep burning fire of middle age, for fifty summers had passed over his head, at once placed himself at the disposal of his sovereign, and had a colonel’s commission in the Royalist army; Thomas, his eldest son, had a lieutenant-colonel’s commission; whilst his four younger sons—John, Charles, Peter, and Henry—and his brother Urian, who had previously been in the wars in the Low Countries, had also commissions.

The attempt to maintain the neutrality of the county by the Treaty of Pacification, as it was called, having failed, the commission of array was issued, requiring the receivers to see that the tenantry and others in their respective districts were mustered and properly armed and accoutred, and each of the hostile parties set to work to procure military stores in anticipation of approaching conflict. The King’s troops were at Chester under the command of Sir Thomas Aston, and the Parliamentarians, led by Thomas Legh’s relative, Sir William Brereton, of Honford, established themselves at Nantwich, which subsequently became the scene of important military operations. In March, 1643, the rival forces met at Middlewich, when an engagement took place in which the Royalists were defeated, Sir Edward Mosley, of Manchester, and several Cheshire men of mark being made prisoners; but Sir Thomas Aston and Colonel Legh, who was present with him and at the time sheriff, being more fortunate, succeeded in making good their escape. Before the close of the year the Royalists suffered a series of reverses. At Nantwich they sustained a defeat at the hands of General Fairfax; on the 4th of February, 1643–4, Crewe Hall was attacked and taken; three days later Doddington Hall shared the same fate; in the same month Adlington was besieged by a force under Colonel Duckinfield, and a few days after its surrender Mr. Tatton’s house at Wythenshawe, was also stormed and taken.

The probability of an attack on their home must have been foreseen by the Leghs, and, consequently, the house was put in a state of defence on the outbreak of hostilities, and stores of provisions and ammunition for the use of the garrison collected in anticipation of any attack that might be made upon it. Colonel Legh appears to have been absent at the time of Duckinfield’s assault, being probably with the King’s forces in some other part of the country, and the defence, therefore, fell to the lot of his eldest son—a brave scion of a brave ancestry, who must have conducted it with considerable energy and judgment, for the garrison held out a whole fortnight, notwithstanding that the siege was carried on with a good deal of vigour. The attacking party appear to have encamped on the south side of the hall, and the assault must have been made from that direction, for the door on the south front is pierced in several places where the bullets and cannon shot passed through. The garrison, by their obstinate bravery, must have won the respect of their assailants, for, unlike the case of Biddulph, which surrendered a week afterwards, when quarter for life only was granted, the defenders of Adlington when they did capitulate (Feb. 14) had full leave to depart. Burghall, the Puritan vicar of Acton, thus records the circumstance in his “Diary”:—

Friday, February 14th.—Adlington House was delivered up, which was besieged about a fortnight, where was a younger son of Mr. Legh’s and 140 souldiers, which had all fair quarter and leave to depart, leaving behind them, as the report was, 700 arms and 15 barrels of powder.

By an order of the Parliament, dated March 18, 1643, Sir William Brereton, of Honford, Thomas Legh’s second cousin, and then major-general of the Cheshire forces, entered upon possession and seized the family estates into his own hands, so that the owner of Adlington could hardly say of Sir William what, according to the old ballad, his kinsman Lord Brereton said when he espied him on the hill overlooking Biddulph—

The house was pillaged, though the fabric itself does not appear to have sustained any very serious injury considering the quantity of powder that was burned and the efforts that were expended upon it. Shortly afterwards it was retaken and held for the King, but it must have been stormed and taken a second time by the Parliamentarian soldiers, for when Colonel Legh’s widow appealed to Sir William Brereton to be allowed to occupy the hall, and to have a portion of her late husband’s estates assigned to her for the maintenance of herself and children, the request was denied, so far as the occupancy of the house was concerned, on the plea that as Adlington Hall had been garrisoned twice against the Parliament it was not judged fitting it should be ventured a third time.

Colonel Legh’s active zeal in the Royalist cause made him so obnoxious to the Parliament party that in the preliminary propositions for the abortive Treaty of Uxbridge he was specially named as one of those to be excluded from the councils of his sovereign, and from holding any office or command from the crown under pain of forfeiture of his estates and the penalties attaching to high treason. The stipulation was unnecessary, for before the commissioners had assembled he had entered into his rest. It is not known with certainty when or where his death occurred; the Prestbury registers for this period are imperfect, and no entry of burial can be discovered; it is not unlikely, however, that he found an unknown grave at some place distant from his home where he may have lost his life in the service of the King.

His widow took up her abode at the Miln House—the picturesque old black and white gabled structure, now occupied as a farmhouse, standing near the railway midway between Adlington and Prestbury, built in the time of Sir Urian Legh—which she held in jointure. She could hardly have been as uncompromising a Royalist as her husband, for in a petition to the committee for compounding with “delinquents,” praying that she might be allowed to compound for her deceased husband’s estates, she sets forth that “she had long before the death of her husband misliked the course of the enemy (i.e., the Royalists) in the parts where she resided, and had departed thence into the Parliament’s quarters, where she had ever since remained and conformed herself to all the orders of Parliament.” The statement was no doubt made in good faith, for some little time after Thomas Legh’s death she married an ardent Republican, who had been as active in furthering the Parliament’s interest in Lancashire as her first husband had been in defending that of the King in Cheshire—Sir Alexander Rigby, of Middleton-in-Goosnargh, a lawyer, statesman, magistrate, and colonel, and eventually one of the barons of the Exchequer. Rigby, who represented Wigan in the Long Parliament, was head and heart and hand and almost everything else of importance in Lancashire; his activity was unwearied; his energy irrepressible, and his influence unbounded. He was engaged in every important action; he commanded at the siege of Lathom, the fight in Furness, the capture of Thurland Castle, and the defence of Bolton-le-Moors; and he was nominated one of the King’s judges, but declined to act, the only occasion in his life, it is said, in which he hesitated to do his worst against royalty. Dr. Halley, in his “Lancashire Puritanism,” describes him as “rash, impetuous, rude, haughty, severe, implacable; admired by many, esteemed by few, and loved by none,” and the same writer adds, “he is said to have contrived a scheme and bargain by which the Royalist masters of three Cambridge colleges—St. John’s, Queen’s, and Jesus’—were to be sold for slaves to the Algerines.”

The “insolent rebell, Rigby,” as Charlotte Tremouille, the heroic Countess of Derby, designated him when he was besieging Lathom House, though possessed of only a small estate, was connected by birth and marriage with many of the best families in Lancashire; he was also closely allied with the Leghs, of Adlington, having married for his first wife Lucy, the daughter of Sir Urian, and sister of Thomas Legh, so that he stood in the relationship of brother-in-law to his second wife.

The marriage of their mother with the “insolent rebell” could hardly have been viewed with much satisfaction by the sons, who were all fighting on the side of the ill-fated Charles, and, therefore, accounted “delinquents,” one of them being specially mentioned as “very active against the Parliament” and continuing “extreamelie malitious,” though, in other respects, it was fortunate, as Rigby’s influence as a member of the House of Commons in the Parliament interest was no doubt used in protecting the estates from the more ruinous exactions to which they would otherwise have been subjected, as well as the illegal challenges which might have wrested them absolutely from their rightful owners.

Sir Alexander Rigby died in 1650, having caught the gaol fever of the prisoners while on circuit at Croydon, and some time after his widow, who appears to have had a penchant for matrimony, again entered the marriage state, her third husband being John Booth, of Woodford, in Over, the uncle of Sir George Booth, of Dunham Massey, the head of the Presbyterian interest in Cheshire. John Booth was also a staunch Puritan; like the knight in “Hudibras,” he had ridden out “a-colonelling” in the interest of the Parliament, and may have been the identical Puritan whom “Drunken Barnaby,” when on his “Four Journeys to the North of England,” saw and thus immortalised:—