Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T19:06:24.578Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Inheritance events and spending patterns in the English country house: the Leigh family of Stoneleigh Abbey, 1738–1806

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2012

MARK ROTHERY  and
JON STOBART
MARK ROTHERY
Affiliation:
The University of Northampton.
JON STOBART
Affiliation:
The University of Northampton.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article analyses the everyday spending patterns of the Leigh family of Stoneleigh Abbey, Warwickshire, in relation to inheritance, demography and trusteeship. The analysis makes use of a large dataset of receipted bills along with various other types of accounts and legal documents. We show that several factors contributed to the survival and flourishing of the Leigh estates. These included: first, moderate levels of spending by successive owners of the family estates, punctuated by periodic surges in spending following inheritance events; second, demographic factors; and, third, the responsible management of the estate by trustees during periods of minority. This analysis illustrates that careful economic management, rather than conspicuous consumption, was the defining feature of wealthy landed families such as the Leighs.

Passation d'héritage et budget dépensé dans le manoir anglais: la famille leigh à stoneleigh abbey, 1738–1806

Dans cet article sont étudiés les types de budget de dépenses quotidiennes au sein de la famille Leigh à Stoneleigh Abbey, Warwickshire, en fonction de la succession familiale, de la démographie et des périodes de tutelle. L'analyse repose sur un riche dossier de factures acquittées ainsi que sur divers types d'autres comptabilités et de documents juridiques. Nous montrons que plusieurs facteurs ont contribué à la survie et à la prospérité des propriétés des Leighs. Premièrement, parmi ces facteurs positifs, on note le niveau modeste des dépenses engagées par les héritiers successifs des biens familiaux, ponctué par des poussées de dépenses périodiques qui suivaient toujours de près le moment où la succession était intervenue; deuxièmement, les facteurs démographiques jouèrent favorablement et troisièmement, les administrateurs et chargés de tutelle qui se sont succédés pendant les périodes de minorité des enfants héritiers ont adopté une gestion responsable de la propriété familiale. Cette analyse met en évidence qu'une gestion économique prudente était la norme et non un modèle de consommation ostentatoire, au sein de ces riches familles anglaises comme l'étaient les Leighs.

Erbschaftsfälle und ausgabenmuster im englischen landhaus: die familie leigh in stoneleigh abbey, 1738–1806

Dieser Beitrag untersucht die alltäglichen Ausgabemuster der Familie Leigh in Stoneleigh Abbey, Warwickshire, im Zusammenhang mit Erbschaft, Demographie und Treuhänderschaft und greift zu diesem Zweck auf einen großen Datenbestand von erhaltenen Rechnungen und verschiedenen anderen Konten und Rechtspapieren zurück. So lässt sich zeigen, dass mehrere Faktoren zum Bestand und zur Blüte der Besitzungen der Leighs beitrugen. Dazu zählen (1) maßvolles Ausgabeverhalten mehrerer aufeinander folgender Besitzer der Familiengüter, das nur durch wiederholt auftauchende kurzfristige Ausgabespitzen im Anschluss an Erbschaftsfälle unterbrochen wurden; (2) demographische Faktoren; (3) verantwortungsvolle Gutsverwaltung durch Treuhänder in Phasen der Unmündigkeit des jeweiligen Besitzers. Diese Befunde zeigen, dass sich reiche Grundbesitzerfamilien wie die Leighs weniger durch demonstrativen Konsum als durch vorsichtige Wirtschaftsführung auszeichneten.

Type
Research Article
Information
Continuity and Change , Volume 27 , Issue 3 , December 2012 , pp. 379 - 407
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

ENDNOTES

1 See the two articles by Habakkuk, H. J.; ‘English landownership 1640–1740’, Economic History Review 10, 1 (1940), 2–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and ‘Marriage settlements in the eighteenth century’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 32 (1950), 15–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 For examples, see Spring, Eileen, ‘The strict settlement: its role in history’, Economic History Review 41, 3 (1988), 454–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bonfield, Lloyd, Marriage settlements, 1601–1740: the adoption of the strict settlement (Cambridge, 1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Clay, Christopher, ‘Property settlements, financial provisions for the family and the sale of land by the great landowners 1660–1790’, Journal of British Studies 21 (1981), 18–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar; English, Barbara and Saville, John, ‘Family settlement and “the rise of the great estates”’, Economic History Review 33, 4 (1980), 556–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The standard definition for Strict Settlement is ‘settlement of land to the father for life and after his death to his first and other sons or children in tail, with trustees to preserve the contingent remainders’. Strict Settlement is often also referred to as Marriage Settlement, the settlement being made upon the marriage of the eldest son, whereupon his maintenance until inheritance was fixed. The process was repeated in each generation upon marriage of the inheriting child. There were also European versions of entail and strict settlement: the Castillian ‘Mayorazgo’; the French ‘Majorat’; the Italian ‘fidecommisum’. See the Glossary in Goody, Jack, Thirsk, Joan and Thompson, E. P., Family and inheritance: rural society in Western Europe, 1200–1800 (Cambridge, 1976), 399–405Google Scholar.

3 For examples see the case studies in Gordon E. Mingay, English landed society, 61–6 (Lord Ashburnham); John Beckett, The rise and fall of the Grenvilles, Dukes of Buckingham and Chandos, 1710–1921 (Manchester, 1994); Williams, J. D., ‘The noble household as a unit of consumption: the Audley End experience, 1765–1797’, Essex Archaeology and History 23 (1992), 67–78Google Scholar (Sir John Griffin Griffin).

4 Franklin, Jill, The gentleman's country house and its plan, 1835–1914 (London, 1981)Google Scholar; Girouard, Mark, Life in the English country house: a social and architectural history (New Haven, 1978)Google Scholar; Lawrence Stone and Jeanne C. Fawtier Stone, An open elite: England 1540–1880 (Oxford, 1984), 253–73; Mingay, English landed society, 209–24 and 160; Richard Wilson and Alan Mackley, Creating paradise: the building of the English country house 1660–1800 (London, 2000).

5 Thomas Veblen, The theory of a leisure class: an economic study of institutions (London, 1899); L. Stone, The crisis of the aristocracy, 1558–1640 (London, 1967), 249–69. For a description of the lavish celebrations to mark the majority of the Duke of Rutland in 1799, also see F. M. L. Thompson, English landed society in the nineteenth century (London, 1973), 77–8. It should be noted that he does present more modest examples of spending, although in less detail and less ‘conspicuously’.

6 The Gentleman's Magazine 37 (1767), 287.

7 Roebuck, Peter, Yorkshire baronets 1640–1760: families, estates and fortunes (Oxford, 1980), 93–102 and 250–9Google Scholar. Also see French, Henry and Rothery, Mark, Man's estate: landed gentry masculinities 1660–1914 (Oxford, 2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar for the gendered dimensions of thrift and prudent spending.

8 The major exception to this is Roebuck's analysis of minority ownership amongst the three examples of the Hotham, Beaumont and Constable families in his Yorkshire baronets, 93–102, 133–41 and 194–8, respectively. Also see Roebuck, Peter, ‘Absentee landownership in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries’, Agricultural History Review 21 (1973), 1–17Google Scholar. Gordon Mingay briefly describes the role of trustees in The gentry: the rise and fall of a ruling class (New York, 1976), 67–70.

9 Hollingsworth, T. H., ‘The demography of the British peerage’, Supplement to Population Studies 18, 2 (1964), 29–52Google Scholar. Hollingsworth did find that mortality rates improved into the late eighteenth century; however, the earlier problems were of the most relevance in the case of the Leigh family.

10 Clay, Christopher, ‘Marriage, inheritance and the rise of large estates in England, 1660–1815’, Economic History Review 21, 3 (1968), 503–18Google Scholar.

11 Goody, Thirsk and Thompson, Family and inheritance, 403.

12 See Bonfield, Lloyd, ‘Affective families, open elites and strict family settlements in early modern England’, Economic History Review 39, 4 (1986), 341–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Roebuck, Yorkshire baronets.

13 Shakespeare Central Library and Archive (hereafter SCLA; formerly known as the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust Record Office), DR 18/31/903, Account of the Estate and Effects of the Honourable Charles Leigh, 1749, Inventories of Leighton Buzzard House, Bedfordshire, Hoddesdon House, Hertfordshire and Brook Street, Hanover Square, London.

14 Massie's was one of the social typologies produced in the long eighteenth century, along with those by Gregory King (1688), Daniel Defoe (1709) and Patrick Colquhoun (1803). He identified a seven-tier hierarchy of British society with nobles at the apex and labourers at the bottom. The Leighs were well within the top bracket of society identified by Massie according to their landed income. For more details see Peter Mathias, ‘The social structure in the eighteenth century: a calculation by Joseph Massie’, in Mathias, The transformation of England: essays in the economic and social history of England in the eighteenth century (London, 1979), 171–89.

15 SCLA, DR 18/31/16–37, Rentals of real and devised estates 1762–1806.

16 Beckett, John, ‘English landownership in the later seventeenth and eighteenth centuries: the debate and the problem’, Economic History Review 30, 4 (1977), 567–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Beckett, John, ‘The pattern of landownership in England and Wales, 1660–1800’, Economic History Review 37, 1 (1984), 1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The issue of Strict Settlement has been an important feature of this debate. See English and Saville, ‘Family settlement’.

17 Roebuck, Yorkshire baronets, 93–102; R. A. C. Parker, Coke of Norfolk: a financial and agricultural study, 1707–1842 (Oxford, 1975).

18 SCLA, DR 18/13/7/11, Probate of the will of Thomas Lord Leigh, Baron of Stoneleigh.

19 SCLA, DR 18/13/1/15, Settlement between Thomas, Lord Leigh and Catherine, his wife, of lands in Cubbington, Warwickshire, 16 January 1747. A ‘Jointure’ is defined as property settled on a husband and wife for their lives in survivorship of their marriage. See Goody, Thirsk and Thompson, Family and inheritance, 401.

20 A ‘portion’ was a sum of money granted either to a younger son or daughter. A ‘marriage portion’ was a sum to be paid by the wife's family on marriage. See Goody, Thirsk and Thompson, Family and inheritance, 402.

21 Habakkuk, H. J., Marriage, debt and the estate system: English landownership 1650–1950 (Oxford, 1994), 117CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

22 Spring, ‘The strict settlement’.

23 SCLA, DR 18/13/7/11.

24 Mairi Macdonald, ‘Not unmarked by some eccentricities: the Leigh family of Stoneleigh Abbey’, in Robert Bearman ed., Stoneleigh Abbey: the house, its owners, its lands (Stoneleigh, 2004), 150.

25 SCLA, DR 18/31/461, Auditors Account November 1763–May 1774, 3 March 1768; DR 18/17/27/200, Letter from Dr Monro to Joseph Hill (Family Lawyer) recommending James Hill as attendant to Lord Leigh, 2 November 1769.

26 SCLA, DR 18/5/5029, 5034, 5096, 5107, 5115, 5126 Receipted bills and vouchers 1772–4; DR 18/31/461, Auditors Account November 1763–May 1774, 2 May 1771–18 January 1774.

27 SCLA, DR 18/13/7/11.

28 The title was eventually revived by Chandos Leigh (1791–1850), the son of James Henry Leigh (1765–1823), in 1839.

29 See Spring, ‘The strict settlement’; and Bonfield, ‘Affective families’.

30 SCLA, DR 18/13/1/15.

31 On the distinction between ‘marriage settlements’ and ‘family settlements’ see Amy Erickson, Louise, ‘Common law versus common practice: the use of marriage settlements in early-modern England’, Economic History Review 43, 1 (1990), 21–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

32 ‘Dowager’ refers to the surviving wife of an estate owner. It derives from the term ‘Dower’ and ‘Dowry’ which, in common law usage, refers to the income received by the widowed wife after the death of her husband, payments to the equivalent of her marriage portion with supplements. See Goody, Thirsk and Thompson, Family and inheritance, 400.

33 SCLA, DR 18/17/4/8, Account of the business done by Christopher Wright since the death of Lord Leigh, 1749–1753.

34 Habakkuk, ‘Marriage settlements’.

35 Hollingsworth, ‘Demography of the British peerage’, 54–6.

36 SCLA, DR 18/5/2099, 2448, 2516, 2643, 2935, Receipted bills for dancing lessons, lecturers fees, tutors fees and French lessons, 1738–1747.

37 Mingay, English landed society, 135.

38 Ibid., 141.

39 On the cost of marriage portions and jointures for children see Clay, ‘Marriage’; Bonfield, ‘Affective families’.

40 Macdonald, ‘Not unmarked by some eccentricities’, 144.

41 Burke's peerage, baronetage and knightage (London, 1852), 601; SCLA, DR 18/5/2885–2945, Receipted bills for a Grand Tour of Europe 1747–1748.

42 Mingay, English landed society, 138; Roebuck, Yorkshire baronets, 101.

43 SCLA, DR 18/31/461, Auditors Account November 1763–May 1774, entry 18 June 1867.

44 Northamptonshire Record Office, D(CA)/347, John Turner Dryden's Tour of France, 1774. On the problem of the numbers embarking on the Grand Tour, see Jeremy Black, The Grand Tour in the eighteenth century (London, 1999), 7–14. On the popularity of the ‘slimmed-down’ version of the Tour, see French, H. and Rothery, M., ‘“Upon your entry into the world”: masculine values and the threshold of adulthood among landed elites in England, 1660–1800’, Social History 33, 4 (2008), 402–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

45 Andor Gomme, ‘Abbey into palace: a lesser Wilton?’, in Bearman, Stoneleigh Abbey, 83.

46 Wilson, Richard and Mackley, Alan, ‘How much did the English country house cost to build, 1660–1800?’, Economic History Review 52, 3 (1999), 436–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

47 Macdonald, ‘Not unmarked by some eccentricities’, 144.

48 John Britton, quoted in J. N. Brewer, et al., The beauties of England and Wales: Warwickshire (London, 1814), 44.

49 SCLA, DR 18/5/2430, Receipted bill to Lord Thomas Leigh for his account at Warwick Races for £50, 22 August 1750; DR 18/5/4501, Receipted bill to Lord Edward Leigh for Theatre and Concert Expenses and Ranelagh Gardens for £5, 16 June 1766.

50 Obituary of Edward, fifth Lord Leigh, Gazetteer and New Daily Advertiser, Tuesday 30 May, 1786; SCLA, DR 18/31/461, Auditor's Accounts of the Stoneleigh Estate, November 1763–May 1774.

51 Roebuck, Yorkshire baronets, 259.

52 Ibid., 260.

53 Ibid., 86–94.

54 Wilson and Mackley, Creating paradise, 313.

55 SCLA, DR 18/5, Receipts and vouchers of the Leighs of Stoneleigh.

56 SCLA, DR 18/31/18, Stoneleigh Abbey Household Account Book, half the year to Midsummer 1774.

57 This reflects the importance of day-to-day running expenses noted for Audley End by Williams, ‘Noble household’.

58 SCLA, DR 18/31/22, Stoneleigh Abbey Household Account Book, 7 January 1778 to 7 January 1779; DR 18/31/456 Auditors Account, November 1763–May 1774.

59 There is likely to have been another £4,000 paid for stocks that was not labelled as such in the account books but which was assigned to a stock dealer. Stocks, shares and bonds were increasingly important in the investments made by wealthy landowners. See Roebuck, Yorkshire baronets, 4.

60 See the online data generated by the Economic History Association (USA) at www.measuringworth.com

61 Thompson, English landed society, 105.

62 Dickson, P. G. M. and Beckett, John, ‘The finances of the Dukes of Chandos: aristocratic inheritance, marriage and debt in eighteenth century England’, Huntingdon Library Quarterly 64 (2001), 309–55CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed. For other examples, see Mingay, English landed society, 61–6, 126–9; R. Gemmett, ‘“The tinsel of fashion and the gewgaws of luxury”: the Fonthill sale of 1801’, The Burlington Magazine, CL (2008), 381–8; Kelch, R. A., Newcastle, A Duke without money: Thomas Pelham-Holmes, 1693–1768 (London, 1974)Google Scholar.

63 SCLA, DR 18/5/2227, Receipts and vouchers.

64 Macdonald, ‘Not unmarked by some eccentricities’, 148.

65 Vickery, Amanda, Behind closed doors. At home in Georgian England (New Haven and London, 2009), 131–6Google Scholar.

66 See French and Rothery, Man's estate, especially 96–106.

67 Parker, Coke of Norfolk; Roebuck, Yorkshire baronets, 93–101.

68 SCLA, DR 18/5/2047, Receipted bill from John Taylor to Right Honourable Lord Leigh for walnut chairs, 26 January 1738; DR 18/5/2658, Receipted bill from Humphrey Hands to Right Honourable Lord Leigh for mahogany tables and gilt frames, 30 September 1743; DR 18/5/2218, Receipted bill from John Pardoe, London, for a chimney glass, 3 November 1738.

69 Williams, ‘Noble household’, 87.

70 Macdonald, ‘Not unmarked by some eccentricities’, 150.

71 SCLA, DR 18/17/27/97, S[amuel] Butler to [William] Craven: various matters re furnishing for house and entertainment for Staffordshire tenants. Mr. Lightoler has been to look at site for kitchen garden and offices.

72 SCLA, DR 18/3/47/52/15, Letter from Thomas Burnett to Lord Edward Leigh including a bill for ‘furniture put in his Lordship's House at Stoneleigh Abbey’ itemised room by room, 1764–1765; DR 18/4/69, Inventory of the household goods of Stoneleigh Abbey, July–August 1786.

73 SCLA, DR 18/5 Receipted bills 1763–1766.

74 SCLA, DR 18/5/4251, Receipted bill for silverware and jewellery from Thomas Gilpin, London to Lord Edward Leigh, 15 January 1765.

75 See Williams, J., Audley End: the Restoration of 1762–97 (Colchester, 1966)Google Scholar.

76 See Wilson and Mackley, Creating paradise, 67–70.

77 Warwickshire County Record Office (hereafter WCRO), CR36/v/156, Sir Roger Newdigate's Accounts, 1747–1762; Rosie MacArthur, ‘Material culture and consumption on an English estate: Kelmarsh Hall, 1687–1845’ (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Northampton, 2011), 225–35.

78 SCLA, DR 18/13/7/13-14, Probates of the will of Edward Lord Leigh, Baron of Stoneleigh. Dated: 11 May 1767, with affidavit concerning an undated codicil. Proved (P.C.C), by his sister, the Honourable Mary Leigh, spinster.

79 SCLA, DR 671/101, Account of the personal estate of Mary Leigh, died 12 July 1806, exhibited by James Henry Leigh, 10 July 1823.

80 Macdonald, ‘Not unmarked by some eccentricities’, 154.

81 SCLA, DR 18/31/656, Household accounts of Grove House, Kensington, 1789–98; DR 18/31/655, Account of goods moved from Stoneleigh Abbey to Grove House, Kensington, 1793–1798.

82 Vickery, Behind closed doors, especially 207–30.

83 Williams, ‘Noble household’; Wilson and Mackley, Creating paradise, 308–13; WCRO, CR36/v/156.

84 Macdonald, ‘Not unmarked by some eccentricities’, 148.

85 SCLA, DR 18/9/1/2, Marriage settlement of Theophilus Leigh and Elizabeth Craven, 1 December 1679.

86 SCLA, DR 18/17/25/24, Letter from Lord Edward Leigh to his sister, Elizabeth Verney, 15 December 1727. Elizabeth Verney appears several times in the receipted bills for the Stoneleigh estate. See DR 18/5/3175 and 3617, Receipted bills from Elizabeth Verney for the board and Lodging of the Hon Miss Mary Leigh, to the value of £50, 17 June 1752 and 5 January 1756, respectively.

87 SCLA, DR 18/15/11, Indenture quadripartite between Arden Bagot of Pipe Hall, esq., and the Hon. Mary Bagot, his wife, 27 May 1678.

88 SCLA, DR 18/17/27/52, Letter from Joseph Hill (Family Lawyer) to William Craven, 19 December 1761. On the importance of trustees to family fortunes, see Roebuck, Yorkshire Baronets, 93–102; Mingay, The gentry, 67–70.

89 SCLA, DR 18/17/4; DR 18/17/4/5; DR 18/17/4/1; Accounts of Christopher Wright and Thomas Clarke with the Late Lord Leigh, 1747–1753.

90 SCLA, DR 18/17/4/4, Account of Christopher Wright with the Late Lord Leigh delivered to the Trustees September 1750. A note at the end of this account expresses the dissatisfaction of the late Lord Leigh and the Trustees with the accounting of Christopher Wright.

91 SCLA, DR 18/17/4/28, Memorandums relating to Lord Leigh's Affairs, no date, 1749; DR 18/4/27, Inventory of Stoneleigh Abbey 30 November 1749.

92 SCLA, DR 18/4/26, Inventory of Stoneleigh Abbey 27 September to 4 October 1750. Some plate and jewels were also sold to the London silversmith, Thomas Gilpin: DR 18/5/3121, Receipt for the sale of Plate and Jewellery from Thomas Gilpin, Silversmith, 5 February 1751.

93 SCLA, DR 18/17/4/28.

94 SCLA, DR 18/17/4/3, Statement of accounts of the personal estate and debts of the late Lord Leigh, 10 March 1749/50.

95 Roebuck, Yorkshire baronets, 7.

96 Macdonald, ‘Not unmarked by some eccentricities’, 144.

97 Roebuck, Yorkshire baronets, 36–40.

98 SCLA, DR 18/17/4/3.

99 Mingay, English landed society, 126.

100 Ibid., 129.

101 SCLA, DR 18/17/4/19, Schedule of bills paid by William Craven, esq.

102 This is probably Sir William Joliffe, a London banker and merchant.

103 SCLA, DR 18/17/4/19.

104 SCLA, DR 18/17/4/22, Arrears of rent received and unreceived.

105 For example SCLA, DR 18/17/4/8a, The account of business done by Christopher Wright (Auditor) since the death of Lord Leigh, 1749–1753; DR 18/17/4/7, Robert Hughes' account to Lord Craven, 1749–1752; DR 18/17; DR 18/17/4/23, [Dowager] Lady Leigh's accounts to the Executors of Lord Leigh, 1754.

106 SCLA, DR 18/17/4/10, An account of South Sea Annuities purchased by Mr. Hill on Lord Leigh's account in the names of Mr. Craven, Sir Charles Mordaunt and Sir Walter Bagot, 1761–1762.

107 SCLA, DR 18/17/4/5, Orders made by the trustees of Edward, Lord Leigh, 18 September 1750.

108 Roebuck, Yorkshire baronets, 32.

109 Williams, ‘Noble household’, 63–75.

110 SCLA, DR 18/17/4/5.

111 SCLA, DR 18/17/4/9, Orders made by the trustees of Edward, Lord Leigh, 11 October 1754.

112 SCLA, DR 18/17/4/5; DR 18/5/3543, Receipt for payment of £225, one half years allowance for Lord Edward Leigh, from William Butler to William Craven, 30 May 1755; DR 18/17/27/52, Letter from Joseph Hill to William Craven, 19 December 1761. This allowance would have placed him amongst the wealthier students at Oxford around this time – see Mingay, English landed society, 135.

113 SCLA, DR 18/17/4/5.

114 SCLA, DR 18/17/27/97.

115 SCLA, DR 18/31/461.

116 The auditor's accounts record payments for Dr Willis's care of Edward from 1772 onwards. See SCLA, DR 18/31/461.

117 This is a minimum estimate for the act of enclosing since there are a number of other bills for goods associated with enclosure, but which were not assigned as for the purpose of enclosure.

118 SCLA, DR 18/5/2537, 2540 and 2565, Receipted bills for enclosure and for posts and rails; DR 18/3/17/1/7, Letter from Joseph Hill to Lord Edward Leigh on the proposed enclosure of Stoneleigh estates, 3 February 1767; DR 18/6/17/26 Letter from Frederick Willis, Leighton Buzzard to Thomas Hill Mortimer re: Committee in the House of Lords to discuss the enclosure of the Leighton Buzzard estates, 20 June 1743.

119 SCLA, DR 18/7/7/10, Memorandum of an agreement between Joseph Hill (Receiver of the Estates of Lord Leigh) and John Sparrow, Newcastle under Lyme, Staffordshire, gent, for the Trent and Mersey Canal Company, 1776. Also see DR 18/7/7/6, Agreement specifying the conditions of the purchase of the Leigh Lands for the Trent and Mersey Canal, 1775.

120 SCLA, DR 18/31/18; DR 18/31/22.

121 Roebuck, Yorkshire baronets, 93–6.

122 Ibid., 97–8.

123 Bonfield, ‘Affective families’; Roebuck, Yorkshire baronets, 11.

124 John Beckett, The aristocracy in England, 1660–1914 (Oxford, 1986), 295–321; Wilson and Mackley, Creating paradise, 297–351.

125 Roebuck, ‘Absentee landownership’; Roebuck, Yorkshire baronets, 93–102; Parker, Coke of Norfolk.

126 For two discussions of the concept of ‘family strategies’, see P. Bordieu, ‘Marriage strategies as strategies of social reproduction’, in R. Foster and O. Ranum eds., Family and society: selections from the annales economies, societies, civilisations (London, 1976), 117–45; Pier Paulo Viazzo and Lynch, Katherine A., ‘Anthropology, family history, and the concept of strategy’, International Review of Social History 47, 3 (2002), 423–52Google Scholar.

127 Hollingsworth, ‘Demography of the British peerage’, 46.

128 Cooper, J. P., ‘The counting of manors’, Economic History Review 8, 3 (1956), 377–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

129 These included a payment of £20,000 to James Leigh Perrott and annuities of £2,000 each for him and his wife: Macdonald, ‘Not unmarked by some eccentricities’, 155–6.