Bednall Collection Part 2 (BC2) No.s 1061 to 1067   

The Bednall Archive 

Last updated 29/07/2007


BC2/ 1061 Places:

Places: Doveridge; Leek, Uttoxeter, Staffordshire;

 

Description: Miscellaneous documents relating to the  Abbotsholme Estate Derbyshire.

[1]Letter, dated 28 October 1896, from Dr C. Reddie, The New School, Abbotsholme, Derbyshire to Mr T. Shaw of Leek, Staffordshire concerning his case.  With reference to "the latest project of Wilkins", Reddie states "I have not the slightest intention of accepting his ridiculous terms" and goes on to say that he was " disposed to refuse altogether to negotiate with Wilkins, but to offer -without prejudice- to meet Lord Ormonde himself with a view to a mutual amicable arrangement".

[2] Draft solicitor's note, dated 29 October 1896" concerning Dr. Reddie's right of way case.

[3] Draft agreement between the Earl of Ormonde and Dr Reddie and Mr Brandon,, prepared by Dr Reddie and sent to Mr Brandon. A note states "Received today 5-12-96 from Lord Ormonde without alterations or comments.

[4] Letter, dated 8 December 1896, from Dr C. Reddie, The New School, Abbotsholme, Derbyshire to Mr T. Shaw of Leek, Staffordshire returning the draft agreement and stating that "I can see nothing to add or alter -Brandon's agreement must follow subsequently -when this is signed"

[5] Letter, dated 10 December 1896, from T. S. Wilkins, solicitor, Uttoxeter, Staffordshire to Messrs Challinor & Co., solicitors, Leek, Staffordshire re the case of Ormonde v Reddie. Wilkins points out that a Mr Wandesford "will not consent to what, you will excuse my saying, is the ridiculous suggestion made as to the payment of the £75….that was to be paid on the signing of the agreement".

[6] Letter, dated 23 December 1896, from T. S. Wilkins, solicitor, Uttoxeter, Staffordshire to Messrs Challinor & Co., solicitors, Leek, Staffordshire re the case of Ormonde v Reddie. Concerns a delay in the proceedings due to Dr Reddie being "on the Continent". "Mr Wandesford", Wilkins continues, stated particularly he should like to have it settled by 13th January, at the farthest". Wandesforde  would not consent to any restriction of the right of Mr Wood's personal friends to use the road".

[7] Letter, dated 11 January 1897,  from Ms Lydia A. Webb, Clownholme, Derbyshire to Mr Shaw, solicitor, Leek, Staffordshire., enclosing [originally] an item that she had just received. She states that she hopes Dr Reddie will return on Tuesday.

[8] Letter, dated 15 January 1897, from Dr C. Reddie, The New School, Abbotsholme, Derbyshire to Mr T. Shaw of Leek, Staffordshire concerning the right of way case. He had been to see Miss Webb and thought that the case "which has made me seedy is killing her" and had decided " to accept the last draft of the clause and to make the most of it". He thought the detailed clauses concerning who could use the road would be useful in preventing trespass by others. An additional note in red ink asks Shaw to "kindly pay the £75".

[9] Letter, dated 13 February 1897, from T. H. Wilkins, solicitor, Uttoxeter to Messr Challionr & Shaw, Leek, Staffordshire, re the case of Lord Ormonde v Reddie, enclosing [originally] the agreement "duly executed by his client".

[10] Letter, dated 15 May 1897, from Dr C. Reddie, The New School, Abbotsholme, Derbyshire to Mr T. Shaw of Leek, Staffordshire concerning a letter received from Brandon.

[11] Letter, dated 11 October 1897, from Dr C. Reddie, The New School, Abbotsholme, Derbyshire to Mr T. Shaw of Leek, Staffordshire paying off his account with Challinor & Co for work in connection with the right of way case.  He had, he said, "been away recruiting" and that he had "had a splendid time in Germany".

[12] Letter, dated 11 June 1889, from William Cassels of Abbots Clownholme, near Rocester, to Oakden, Surveyor, Tutbury which [originally] accompanied a list of repairs . He asks Oakden for 3 copies of the plans and  description of the house and mentions that Moss "says there is a right of way  to Doveridge through the field  the front of the house. I fear this will be a serious drawback. We are afraid of loose characters hanging about. We have been warned that there are such in the village". Cassels also wants to know whether the spring cart in the coach house was for sale and also expressed interest in various implements, such as lawn mowers.

[13] Letter, dated 17 April 1894 from Slater Heelis & Co, solicitors, Princess Street, Manchester to T. H. Oakden, Tutbury, Burton on Trent, Staffordshire, concerning the Abbots Clownholme Estate, Derbyshire. It asks whether there is a right of way to plot number 33 in the plan of the contract for sale from  Rocester High Street over Mr Atkin's land. Other rights of way are mentioned. Information is also requested concerning rights of fishing  "down the Dove over the whole Eaton Estate".

[14] Letter, dated 23 April 1894 from Slater Heelis & Co, solicitors, Princess Street, Manchester to T. H. Oakden, Tutbury, Burton on Trent, Staffordshire, concerning the Abbots Clownholme Estate, Derbyshire. Further request for lithographed plans.

[15] Letter, dated 1 May 1894 from Slater Heelis & Co, solicitors, Princess Street, Manchester to T. H. Oakden, Tutbury, Burton on Trent, Staffordshire, concerning the Abbots Clownholme Estate, Derbyshire. Concerns rights of way and contribution by Mr Silcock to the upkeep of carriage drive over which he had a right of way.

[16] Letter, dated 12 June 1894 from Slater Heelis & Co, solicitors, Princess Street, Manchester to T. H. Oakden, Tutbury, Burton on Trent, Staffordshire, concerning the Abbots Clownholme Estate, Derbyshire.

[17] Letter, dated 22 June 1894 from Slater Heelis & Co, solicitors, Princess Street, Manchester to T. H. Oakden, Tutbury, Burton on Trent, Staffordshire, concerning the Abbots Clownholme Estate, Derbyshire.

 

Names: Atkins; Brandon; Carrington; Cassels; Challinor; Moss; Mynors; Oakden; Ormonde; Pearson; Reddie; Shaw; Silcock; Smith Taylor; Wandesforde; Webb; Wilkins; Wood;  

 

 

BC2/ 1062

Places: Derby, Derbyshire; Leek, Staffordshire;

 

Description: Miscellaneous items connected with the Challinor family of Leek, Staffordshire.

[1] Printed card from the Committee of the Lichfield & Southwell Diocesan Training College, Derby to Joseph Challinor of Leek, Staffordshire, inviting him to attend the "Dedication of the Chapel by the Lord Bishop of Southwell. The Sermon will be preached by His Grace the Archbishop of York". The dedication was to take place on 10 November  [undated]

 

Names: Challinor;  

 

 

BC2/ 1063

Places: Doveridge, Derbyshire; Hanley, Leek, Staffordshire

 

Description: Letters and other items relating to new buildings, alterations and extensions to the new school at Abbotsholme, Derbyshire -1898-1902.

[1] Bill of quantities of new buildings in alterations and extensions of the new school, Abbotsholme, Derbyshire prepared by Wm. Sugden & Son FRIBA, Leek  and Hanley, Staffordshire for Dr Cecil Reddie and dated April 1898. A note states "Sent 2-4-2 to Messrs Challinor & Shaw". Attached to this is a letter, dated 15 January 1901 from Thomas Godwin, Builder & Contractor, Hanley, Staffordshire to Dr C. Reddie, Abbotsholme, Rocester, insisting on payment of the "architect's certificate" in full and commenting on a dispute between them about the repair of roads. [7 sheets].

[2] Draft letter, dated 7 November 1901, sent for Thomas Goodwin to Dr Cecil Reddie with a "copy certificate" on account of "works at Abbotsholme School Buildings as per final account sent in 6/11/01 -certified now £1000 previously £7750-  £8750 [Total].

[3] Letter, dated 7 February 1902, from Dr C. Reddie, The New School, Abbotsholme, Derbyshire to Messrs Challinor & Shaw, Leek, Staffordshire requesting their bill so that he could proceed with an audit of the school's accounts. Much of the letter concerns Reddie's dispute with the architects William and Larner Sugden and his concerns with regard to a proposal by Sugden's partner (W. D. Black) to consult Challinor & Shaw about the account between the Sugdens and Reddie. Reddie emphasised the  impossibility "that one firm can satisfactorily and honourably act as legal advisors to 2 antagonists in a dispute". [2 sheets]

[4] Draft letter, dated 8 February 1902,  from Messrs Challinor & Shaw, Leek, Staffordshire to Dr Reddie, Abbotsholme, Derbyshire in reply to Dr Reddie's letter of 7 February 1902.  [3 sheets].

[5] Letter, dated 12 March 1902, from Dr C. Reddie, The New School, Abbotsholme, Derbyshire to Messrs Challinor & Shaw, Leek, Staffordshire. Reddie states that he had posted "an account of the conclusion reached in the interview between Mr Gwynne  and myself and the Architect and the Quantity Surveyor".  As a result Godwin had been notified to execute repairs but had declined to do so and had asked his solicitor to issue a writ. Reddie thought there was little to be gained by a "legal war" but was, he said, "perfectly determined …not to pay him the balance of his account".

[6] Letter, dated 13 March 1902, from William Sugden & Son, architects & surveyors, Derby Street, Leek, Staffordshire to Messrs Challinor & Shaw, solicitors, Leek, concerning Godwin's action. They state that they will await developments and the notice given him under his contract expires, consider what action to take.

[7] Letter, dated 15 March 1902, from James E. Moxon, solicitor, Hanley, Staffordshire to Messrs Challinor & Shaw, Leek, Staffordshire re Godwin v Reddie. The letter accompanied Godwin's writ.

[8] Note dated 15 March 1902, concerning a phone call from Moxon asking whether they accepted service of the writ in Godwin V Reddie.  Note asks Mr Gwynne to telephone Moxon about the matter and a footnote by Gwynne that this had been done.

[9] Letter, dated 19 March 1902, from Rowcliffes, London to Messrs Challinor & Shaw, Leek, Staffordshire confirming they had received Challinor's letter and "the copy writ".

[10] Letter, dated 20 March 1902, from Dr C. Reddie, The New School, Abbotsholme, Derbyshire to Messrs Challinor & Shaw, Leek, Staffordshire, simply stating he would reply to their letter of 19-3-02 later.

[11] Letter, dated 24 March 1902, from Rowcliffes, London to Messrs Challinor & Shaw, Leek, Staffordshire confirming they had appeared for the defendant.

[12] Letter, dated 25 March 1902, from James E. Moxon, solicitor, Hanley, Staffordshire to Messrs Challinor & Shaw, solicitors, Leek, Staffordshire. In answer to a previous query by Challinors, Moxon states that Godwin's charges were for work done at the piggeries at Abbotsholme under the superintendence of Dr Reddie's clerk.

[13] Letter, dated 26 March 1902, from Dr C. Reddie, The New School, Abbotsholme, Derbyshire to Messrs Challinor & Shaw, Leek, Staffordshire concerning Godwin's writ.  Reddie also mentions that he was pressing the architects to "have the boiler  put in the scullery as my guests arrive for 5 days, 40 people, and I don't know how I shall manage unless it is reinstated". He also mentions the "Kite's are threatening to issue a writ". Gives details of his future intentions re the school holidays.

[14] Letter, dated 29 March 1902,  from Rowcliffe's, London to Challinor & Shaw, Leek, Staffordshire enclosing [originally] a copy summons for judgment and an affidavit in support in the case of Godwin v Reddie. Requests Challinors to send "the best affidavit you can in opposition to the summons".

[15] Letter, dated 1 April 1902, fro William Sugden & Son, architects and surveyors, Leek, Staffordshire to Messrs Challinor & Shaw, Leek,  asserting that their letter of 17 October 1901 was written "after full consideration of our surveyor's report and in conjunction with him, of Godwin's Day Bills and other claims and as we considered in the best interests of the late Mr Sugden's client Dr Reddie".  They stated that they held to this opinion and that the figures were something like £700 or £800 less than Godwin claimed "and we only obtained his acceptance of this amount on the understanding that final certificate should be issued at once."

[16] Letter, dated 2  April 1902,  from Rowcliffe's, London to Challinor & Shaw, Leek, Staffordshire, indicating they had received a letter from Challinors.

[17] Letter, dated 2 April 1902, from Dr C. Reddie, The New School, Abbotsholme, Derbyshire to Messrs Challinor & Shaw, Leek, Staffordshire simply stating that he will sign the affidavit and return it to them.

[18] Minutes, dated 19 May 1902, re the roads on Dr Reddie's Abbotsholme Estate. Includes extracts from contracts and two letters to contractors dated 15 and 22 June 1898 respectively. [4 sheets]

[19] Typed copy of particulars of the actual cost of repairs to private roads on Dr Reddie's Abbotsholme Estate damaged by Mr Godwin the contractor for the new building, carting away excavated soil and river gravel and drawing materials on to the site.  The particulars were provided by B Young, land agent and surveyor, of Alton, Stoke-on-Trent and sent to Mr Gwynne on 20 May 1902.

[20] Challinor & Shaw's notes concerning an interview with Mr Black on 29 May 1902 concerning  various aspects of the work carried out at the New School, Abbotsholme, Derbyshire by the Wm Sugden & Son of Leek, architects. Problems experienced with the boiler supplied by Hartley & Sugden of Halifax, with the roads and with galvanised iron piping.

[21] Letter, dated 31 May 1902, from William Sugden & Son, architects & surveyors, Derby Street, Leek, Staffordshire to Mr Gwynne, Leek, concerning work carried out  on the New School at Abbotsholme, Derbyshire. Attached to this is an itemised statement of work left defective by the contractor.

[22] Letter from Dr Cecil Reddie, The New school, Abbotsholme, Derbyshire to Messrs Challinors & Shaw, solicitors, Leek, Staffordshire enclosing his cheque in payment of their account dated 31 January 1902

 

Names: Anderson; Black; Challinor; Godwin; Hayward; Kite; Moxon; Reddie; Rowcliffe; Sugden; Shaw; Young;  

 

 

BC2/ 1064

Places: Leek, Staffordshire; Westminster, London;

 

Description: Final agreement in the Court at Westminster "in eight days of the Purification of the Blessed Mary" in the 24 year of the reign of George 3rd and afterwards "in fifteen days  of St. Martin" in the 25 year of the reign of the said King George. The agreement was between John Birtles, plaintiff, and  James Lucas and Alice his wife, deforciants of two messuages, 2 gardens, three acres of land, common of pasture for all manner of cattle & common of turbary with the appurtenances in Leek & the parish of Leek and of all manner of tithes whatsoever yearly arising growing or renewing (the tithes of hay excepted) from and out of the premises. A plea of covenant was summoned between them in the same court  with James & Alice acknowledging the property to be the right of John Birtles which he had of their gift  and they quitclaimed them from themselves to John and his heirs forever. For the agreement, etc., John gave James and Alice £100.

 

Names: Birtles; Gould; Heath; Lucas; Nores;  

 

 

BC2/ 1065

Places: Leek, Staffordshire;

 

Description: Note book containing the account of Mrs Challinor of Compton Hall, Leek, Staffordshire with "William Fallon & Co, Fish Game and Poultry Salesmen, Fruiters and Florists, Central Fruit Stores, 14 Derby Street, Leek, 1914-15.

 

Names: Challinor; Fallon;  

 

 

BC2/ 1066

Places: Leek, Staffordshire;

 

Description: Common Warrant to the Constable of Leek and to all other Peace Officers in the County of Stafford, commanding them to apprehend Joseph Cope, an inmate in the Union workhouse, Leek, Staffordshire, who on Sunday evening the 6th October 1844, absconded from the workhouse and "feloniously took and carried away two suits of Barrigane clothes, one suit of cloth cloathing, three pair of shoes, one handkerchief, one shirt and one pair of stockings the property of the Guardians of the Leek Union. The information and complaint were laid before Matthew Gant, JP, by William Rawlins, Governor of the Union Workhouse, Leek. The document was signed by Matthew Gaunt on 9 October 1844.

A handwritten note on the reverse states " The within names Joseph Cope was apprehended by Edward Johns P.C. (police constable) near Leek on the morning of 11 October instant. J. Russell, Leek 11 October 1844.

 

Names: Cope; Gaunt; Rawlins; Hilliard; Russell;  

 

 

BC2/ 1067

Places: Leek, Stafford, Staffordshire;

 

Description: To the inhabitants  of the Town of Leek. 2nd Edition.  It has been stated in opposition to a notice issued under the sanction and approval of those Gentlemen who formed a minority at a Public Meeting on 7 December last "that Private Meetings have since been convened of such Persons only as were in a minority without the least attention being paid to the Ley Payers in general" This Is Altogether False, it having been the principal object of the Gentlemen composing the said Minority, to take all the pains they possibly could in obtaining the general opinion of the Inhabitants of the Town on the subject, and on such general opinion they have acted, and they will act.

A few Questions appear in this Opposition Notice, which although not worth answering, may probably be worth laughing at.

Query 1st.- Does it not become inoperative upon all parties whose Property will be amenable to the payment of the Rate, to require a general Investigation of the matter, and if they are not deemed worthy of being consulted, strenuously to oppose it?
Answer.- Certainly it does,- and the sooner the investigation and opposition is entered into, the better.

Query 2nd.- "Is it fair that a Party should take to themselves the power of carrying into effect what they wish and draw out a Petition to the legislature without consulting their fellow Townsmen"?

Answer:- What do we call our fellow Townsmen? Those only deserve that Name who support the Morality of the Town, and the Town itself.    If these long-sighted Gentlemen who so strenuously oppose the point in question were to erase from the List of their Townsmen, those Names which compose the Minority, where would the Town be?

Query 3rd:- "If it is, and that Party should succeed, what will be the Consequence?

Answer:- The Majority at the Meeting of the 7th of December last, will be most deucedly over the left shoulder,

Query 4th:-  "Who will they appoint Commissioners? And what powers will they be invested with?

Answer:- The Commissioners will be Persons of Property, and whose Property lies within the limits of the Act, and they will still only be invested with such power as will tend to the convenience and benefit of the Inhabitants at large.

 The next assertion contained in this bright production is-- "The Magnitude of the Town is not such as to support great expences without considerable inconvenience."

Answer:- No Town can support great expense without inconvenience.  The Question is, What is the expense compared with the advantage?

The following assertion is, "The Expense of lighting has not been satisfactorily ascertained, nor yet that of watching, but shall we submit to what must be the Case if the Act passes, that our Structures shall be thrown down, and many of our Edifices  which we set a value upon (shall) be levelled with the Ground  at the Caprice and whim of the Commissioners, and that too at the general Expense of the Occupiers of Property in the Town?

Answer:- Surely the Editor of this Opposition Notice (with all due reference to him and respect for his abilities) must have been dreaming of the Wonderful Structures at Cornhill Cross -- or the beautiful Edifices in Back oth' Street, if not, he surely must have been thinking of ancient Rome.

Finale:- "Does not the Notice affixed on the Door of the Town Hall at Stafford on Thursday last, state that application is intended to be made for "Paving, Lighting, Cleansing, Watching and Improving the Town of Leek"?

Answer:-  yes- and it is a great pity that the Names of those who oppose such beneficial Measures are not posted there also.

Leek, 19th January, 1825  

N. B. It is rather extraordinary that one or two of those who Subscribed their Names to the Opposition Notice so suddenly altered their minds and signed the petition for the Measures in question.

Hilliard and Son, Printers, Leek.

Names: Hilliard.  

 

©AWBednall Macclesfield 2000-2007