The dissolution of the monasteries : $b As illustrated by the suppression of the religious houses of StaffordshireHibbert, Francis Aidan
History
The dissolution of the monasteries : $b As illustrated by the suppression of the religious houses of Staffordshire
Hibbert, Francis Aidan
Great Britain -- History -- Henry VIII, 1509-1547; Monasteries -- England -- Staffordshire; Monasteries and state
“And as touching the Catell at the pryorie of Calliche the
kinges gracious pleasure is that ye shall suffer the berers
hereof named Fyndern and Curson to have the preferrement in
the byeng of the same uppon suche reasonable prises as they
may convenyently lyve on taking of them som money in hande
and such sufficient bonde and suertie for the residue as
the king may be trewly answered of the same. And so Fare ye
well &c.
“Your mastership.”
An agreement was made between the King and Longford. The Patron
surrendered his claim of presentation, and agreed to the suppression
of the house in 1532. He was to hold the lands in farm from the King,
and the rent was to be fixed by a local jury. Strete recommended the
Abbot of Rocester, Sir William Bassett, Sir John Gifford, and himself,
but the Sheriff refused to “affirm” the panel by reason of its manifest
partiality.[37] Strete’s inclusion was in itself sufficient to condemn
it: in the long letter in which he suggested it he maligned Longford
for “slackness,” and recommended Cromwell to press him for £60 which
was owing on account of Calwich.
Another claimant to the lands, or part of them, was the Earl of
Shrewsbury, and the Sheriff’s panel consisted of the Earl’s tenants.
It was, therefore, as little impartial as Strete’s, but it met with
the approval of Brabazon,[38] one of Cromwell’s emissaries, who was
sent down to Lichfield to help in the business; and evidently no
idea of fairness entered the minds of any of the officials. There
were other claimants, too, apparently Sir Henry Sacheverell and Mr.
Oker (Okeover), but they could be disregarded. Strete and Brabazon
used their powers of persuasion, and the members of the jury, having
served their lord’s ends by deciding in favour of the Earl’s claim to
“a small portion” of the property, were ready to give their decision
as the Crown required. Yet they judged it wiser to save appearances by
a show of hesitation; they insisted on an adjournment, though at the
same time they promised the requisite verdict. This was in the third
week in August, 1532. Of course Strete was able to write to Cromwell in
due course (October 21st, 1532):[39] “The Office of Calwich is passed
for the King.” At that time Longford owed £46 5s. 2d. He had also in
his possession the tithes (£13 3s. 4d.) and the last Michaelmas rents
(£11 16s.). These he undertook to deliver to Cromwell. An escheator was
appointed to receive the dues on the King’s behalf, and on March 11th
of the next year we have a note of Cromwell’s (11th March, 1533) that
£30 had been received from Strete on the Calwich account. By April 26th
the legal formalities were completed, and Strete was able to report
to Cromwell: “The Priory of Calwich, now void, rests in the King’s
pleasure.”[40] This was the year in which the Act was passed giving
to the King the rights of visitation of the religious houses, and, of
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account