Charities -- Great Britain; Hospitals -- Great Britain; Hospitals, Medieval; Leprosy -- England
“_As to other hospitals, which he of another foundation and patronage
than of the King, the Ordinaries shall enquire of the manner of the
foundation, estate and governance of the same . . . and make thereof
correction and reformation according to the laws of Holy Church, as
to them belongeth._”
(Parliament of Leicester.)
Attention having been already called to the internal constitution of
hospitals, we must now consider their relation to those in authority.
The position of such a house was necessarily complicated; there arose
a difficulty in reconciling its subordinate, yet partly independent
character. We must see, first, how its welfare depended to a certain
extent on king and bishop; secondly, its position with regard to the
parochial system; and thirdly, how far it was affected by monasticism.
(i) RELATIONS WITH THE KING AND THE BISHOP
The hospitals of England have never been exclusively in the hands
of Church or State. The relations which they bore to each may be
subdivided under the headings of Constitution, Jurisdiction and Finance.
(a) _Constitution._—As we have seen, the Church, usually represented by
the diocesan bishop, was responsible for the rule and statutes by which
a hospital was guided.
(b) _Jurisdiction._—In the province of administration, visitation and
reform, king and bishop played their [p195] respective parts. Speaking
generally, the bishop was administrator, and the king protector;
to the former, matters of religious observance and conduct were
referred, to the latter, questions of temporal privilege, immunity from
taxation, etc. Both had rights as “visitors.” Faithfully conducted,
ecclesiastical visitation might be of great use, but owing to the huge
extent of dioceses, it was infrequent and inadequate, and where the
king was patron, the diocesan bishop’s visitation was prohibited. Under
Henry III, the royal almoner undertook the keeping of Crown hospitals,
but afterwards this duty fell to the Chancellor, who alone had the
right of visitation; the diocesan bishop had no jurisdiction in such
houses except by special arrangement, as in the Statute directing that
ordinaries “by virtue of the king’s commission to them directed” shall
take inquisitions and return them into chancery. Royal interposition
was not customary unless the king were patron; thus an order to inquire
into waste at certain hospitals was cancelled because the king had
erred in believing that they were founded by his progenitors. When
investigations were commanded, they were committed to a local jury, who
were to find by inquisition on oath of the good men of the county how
far rules had been observed, and they possessed full power “to deal
with the hospital as well in the head as in the members.” Detailed
accounts of such special visitations may be found among _Chancery
Miscellanea_ in the Record Office.
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