History of England from the Fall of Wolsey to the Death of Elizabeth. Vol. IIIFroude, James Anthony
History
History of England from the Fall of Wolsey to the Death of Elizabeth. Vol. III
Froude, James Anthony
Great Britain -- History -- Tudors, 1485-1603
The second portion of the subsidy (an income-tax of two and a half per
cent. on all incomes above twenty pounds a year), which had been voted
in the autumn of 1534, had fallen due. The money had been required for
the Irish war, and the disaffected party in England had wished well to
the insurgents, so that the collectors found the greatest difficulty
either in enforcing the tax, or obtaining correct accounts of the
properties on which it was to be paid.
[Sidenote: A commission to carry out the Act of Suppression,]
[Sidenote: And a commission for the examination of the character and
qualifications of the clergy.]
Simultaneously Legh and Layton, the two most active and most unpopular
of the monastic visitors, were sent to Yorkshire to carry out the Act of
Suppression. Others went into Lincolnshire, others to Cheshire and
Lancashire, while a third set carried round the injunctions of Cromwell
to the clergy, with directions further to summon before them every
individual parish priest, to examine into his character, his habits and
qualifications, and eject summarily all inefficient persons from their
offices and emoluments.
[Sidenote: Complaints against the monastic commissioners.]
[Sidenote: The complaints were perhaps exaggerated,]
[Sidenote: But were not wholly without justice.]
The dissolution of the religious houses commenced in the midst of an
ominous and sullen silence. The act extended only to houses whose
incomes were under two hundred pounds a year, and among these the
commissioners were to use their discretion. They were to visit every
abbey and priory, to examine the books, examine the monks; when the
income fell short, or when the character of the house was vicious, to
eject the occupants, and place the lands and farm-buildings in the hands
of lay tenants for the crown. The discharge of an unpopular office,
however conducted, would have exposed those who undertook it to great
odium. It is likely that those who did undertake it were men who felt
bitterly on the monastic vices, and did their work with little scruple
or sympathy. Legh and Layton were accused subsequently of having borne
themselves with overbearing insolence; they were said also to have taken
bribes, and where bribes were not offered, to have extorted them from
the houses which they spared. That they went through their business
roughly is exceedingly probable; whether needlessly so, must not be
concluded from the report of persons to whom their entire occupation was
sacrilege. That they received money is evident from their own reports to
the government; but it is evident also that they did not attempt to
conceal that they received it. When the revenues of the crown were
irregular and small, the salaries even of ministers of state were
derived in great measure from fees and presents; the visitors of the
monasteries, travelling with large retinues, were expected to make their
duties self-supporting, to inflict themselves as guests on the houses to
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account