therwise, and for very many years, known as "The Inkleys,"
the generally-accepted derivation of the name being taken from the fact
that one Hinks at one time was a tenant or occupier, under the Smalbroke
family, of the fields or "leys" in that locality, the two first narrow
roads across the said farm being respectively named the Upper and the
Nether Inkleys, afterwards changed to the Old and New Inkleys. Possibly,
however, the source may be found in the family name of Hinckley, as seen
in the register of Harborne. A third writer suggests that the character
of its denizens being about as black as could be painted, the place was
naturally called Ink Leys. Be that as it may, from the earliest days of
their existence, these places seem to have been the abode and habitation
of the queerest of the queer people, the most aristocratic resident in
our local records having been "Beau Green," the dandy--[see
"_Eccentrics_"]--who, for some years, occupied the chief building in the
Inkleys, nicknamed "Rag Castle," otherwise Hinkley Hall. The beautiful
and salubrious neighbourhood, known as "Green's Village," an offshoot of
the Inkleys, was called so in honour of the "Beau."

~Hiring a Husband.~--In 1815, a Birmingham carpenter, after ill-treating
his wife, leased himself to another woman by a document which an
unscrupulous attorney had the hardihood to draw up, and for which he
charged thirty-five shillings. This precious document bound the man and
the woman to live together permanently, and to support and succour each
other to the utmost of their power. The poor wife was, of course, no
consenting party to this. She appealed to the law; the appeal brought
the "lease" before the eyes of the judiciary; the man was brought to his
senses (though probably remaining a bad husband), and the attorney
received a severe rebuke.

~Historical.~--A local Historical Society was inaugurated with an
address from Dr. Freeman, Nov. 18, 1880, and, doubtless, in a few years
the reports and proceedings will be of very great value and interest.
The fact that down to 1752 the historical year in England commenced on
January 1, while the civil, ecclesiastical, and legal year began on the
25th of March, led to much confusion in dates, as the legislature, the
church, and civilians referred every event which took place between
January 1 and March 25 to a different year from the historians.
Remarkable examples of such confusion are afforded by two well-known
e