We may note at the outset that the necessity for taking into consideration the material interests involved was fully recognised. According to the instructions issued to the suppression officials who dealt with the lesser monasteries, the Superior of each house was to be provided for, but no one else. Accordingly at Trentham we find no record of pensions to any others except the Prior. The rest were to be given the option of receiving “capacities” or of being transferred to other houses. This was following the precedent of earlier dissolutions, and it will be remembered that Dr. David Pole, of Calwich, was ordered to be “translated to some good house of his religion near.”[204] While the work of destruction was yet on a small scale, and its ultimate extension unsuspected, it may have appeared less necessary to conciliate public opinion, by removing occasion for complaints of material and pecuniary loss, than appeared later. As it became evident that the destruction of the monasteries was to become wholesale, and that great numbers of people, not only religious but lay folk, must be affected, it may well have seemed politic and wise to take pains to assure everyone that vested interests would be respected. Accordingly a different policy was pursued in the later dissolutions. All the religious received payments and most received pensions. At the suppression of Brewood,[205] Prioress Isabel Launder received a reward of £2 and a pension of £3 6s. 8d.; each of the nuns a reward of £1 and a pension of £1 13s. 4d. At Stafford[206] the payments were as follows: £ s. d. £ s. d. Richard Whytell, “late Prior” 6 0 0 reward, 26 13 4 pension Richard Harvey, Sub-Prior 2 0 0 „ 6 0 0 „ Sir Christopher Simson 2 0 0 „ 6 0 0 „ Sir Thomas Bageley 2 0 0 „ 5 6 8 „ Sir William Pykstok 2 0 0 „ 5 6 8 „ Sir William Stapulton 2 0 0 „ 5 0 0 „ Sir William Boudon 1 0 0 „ No explanation is given as to why William Boudon received a smaller “reward” than the rest, and was awarded no pension; but, as we have already noticed, he had not signed the Deed of Surrender on the previous day and perhaps he had to be punished for his recalcitrancy. At Dieulacres[207] the arrangements were of a similar nature: