Parish Management 1310-1319

From Rpalmer
Jump to: navigation, search

This page will be segmented when it gets too long. Add information by clicking on "edit" above. Items should begin with term (if available) and year together with a letter to allow for distinguishing subsequent documents in the same year and term. The designation should be in bold. Thus an entry will appear as H1285 A:. Text thereafter should indicate what the document concerns. The link to the document should be a copied and pasted full web address (http:// . . .) surrounded by single brackets ( [ ] ). Leave a line between entries. The 25-year segments begin with a vertical bar and end with a vertical bar minus. Avoid other more complex codes. If you want to append a translation, provide a completely unique address surrounded by double brackets: Par Man H1275 A Tr. Such an address indicates sector and year, the A indicates it is the first document entered for that year and term, the Tr indicates it is a translation. That will constitute a unique address. DO NOT attempt to re-order documents within a term to achieve a perfect chronology, since it will invalidate other references to re-named documents. A document written in Notepad will copy into the site without any complicating code. Avoid more complicated coding. Check your entry before saving by clicking on "show preview below (return here by using the back arrow); before leaving the document, remember to save the page.

E1310 A: Tithes in named crops at Clopton, Northamptonshire. Trespass taking of goods. John de Brynton of Clopton v. Robert, prior of Huntingdon, Simon Noble, Robert son of Robert Est de Lullyngton, Simon his son, John theprioureschaumberleyn, William de Coln, Stephen le Mareschal de Wynewyk, Walter Avoun, Edmund le Webstere, Richard de Styvecle, Richard son of John le Carpenter de Wynewyk. Verdict returned that Noble et al by order of the prior took Brynton's crops. [1]

E1310 B: Tithes in named crops in Drayton Beauchamp. Thomas son of Richard le Swan v. Simon de Burncestre parson of Drayton Beauchamp and Jordan le Chapeleyn. They justify that they took tithes pertaining to the church worth 12d. [2]

E1310 C: Tithes in named crops in Clopton, Northamptonshire. Walter Scot de Clopton v. Robert, prior of Huntingdon, Henry de Colston, Roger Peverel, Thomas son of Walter le Keu de Gyddingge, William de Kymes de Wynewyke, Walter Avoun, & Richard son of John le Carpenter de Wynewyke. [3]

E1310 D: Tithes in named crops in Clopton, Northamptonshire. Richard de Blayesworth v. Thomas son of Walter le Keu de Gyddynge, Robert son of Phillip, Roger Peverell, Henry atte Style de Gyddynge, William Clleston, Henry le Taillur de Wynewyke, Nicholas de Kymis, & Geoffrey le Keu de Wynewyke. [4]

E1310 E: Tithes in named crops in Clopton, Northamptonshire. Richard de Clopton clerk v. Robert, prior of Huntingdon, Simon Noble, William de Colne, Richard de Styvecle de Wynewyke, Henry son of John Warde, Robert son Robert Est of Lullyngton, & Reginald atte Style de Gyddynge. [5]. See for case by Hugh Aleyn of Clopton: [6]

E1310 F: Tithes in named crops from leasehold in Casthorpe, Lincolnshire. Abbot of Swineshead v. William de Wylghby parson of Barrowby, John de Wylghby cleric, Roger de Northumberland, Peter de Harston, William son of William le Carter, & William Hogge de Barrowby. Parson justifies that the abbot has a grange that he demised to Master Robert de Candelby for a term of five years with the condition that if Robert died within the term the crops would remain to the abbot. Robert harvested and gathered and separated the tithes; the parson and others thus took the tithes. [7]

E1310 F: Autumn tithes in names crops in Milton, Kent. Thomas de Rede parson of Wydeford v. Roland parson of Moleton et al. [8]

T1310 A: Tithes in named crops in Caldecote. Trespass taking of goods. Thomas de Suthewerk parson of Caldecote v. Robert, prior of Huntingdon, Brother John de St Ive canon, Richard Gosse, William de Brikhull, Walter le Noble, Simon le Noble, Ralpf de Luditon, William de Colne, Henry atte Hull, John Thepriouresclaumberleyn, William atte Style, Robert Parys, Henry Stalham, Robert Palmer de Lullyngton, & Robert Dobun de Geddinge. Justified as the taking of tithes tithed from the nine. No verdict. [9]

M1310 A: Tithes in named crops in Sock Dennis, Somerset. Richard de Birland parson of Sock v. Master Robert de la More. De la More justified as the taking of his tithes from a certain place called Chestremore. [10]; [11]

M1310 B: Mortuary taken in Hambleden, Buckinghamshire. Alexander le Hurt v. Adam le Chapeleyn de Hamelden & Richard le Brevecour. Taking of brazen pot justified as delivery of mortuary after death of Alexander's father. [12]

E1311 A: Lease of parish of Skidbrook, Lincolnshire. Abbot of Barlings v. Gilbert vicar of Skidbrook, John Leker, John atte Kirke, John Wymerk, Robert son of Ralph le Carpenter, Hugh his brother, John son of Ralph, Roger le Vicaresprocuratour de Skidbrook, William son of William Wyles de Thedelthorpe, Richard Obille, William de Bradele, Richard Cok, Robert son of Ralph le Rede, Walter son of le Vicariesseriaunt, & Thomas del Duke de Skidbrook. Vicar justifies that the Abbot of Barlings is the rector of Skidbrook and leased him the church and an acre of land, and he was only having the acre harvested. [13]

T1311 A: Tithes of lambs and wool in Langar, Nottinghamshire. Prior of Lenton v. William de Shaldeford chaplain, Hugh son of William le Provost de Wynerton, Richard Passavaunt, John Fillesone, William Husbonde, ROger de Herdeby, William Hamond, William Bonservaunt, Simon Peire, Robert Peire, Henry Peire, Hugh Grys, Robert de Herdeby, Nicholas son of Geoffrey, Robert son of Alice de Derby, John Boket, John son of William Dobbesone, John in the Wro, & John Alicon. Trespass taking of lambs and wool. Shaldeford justified as the parochial chaplain of Langar and servant to the parson of the same church, and he took as tithes tithed from the nine. No verdict. [14]. See also [15]

T1311 B: Tithes in Snitterfield pertaining to the dean of Blessed Mary of Warwick. Walter de Cantilupe v. Robert Tankard dean of Blessed Mary of Warwick, Simon de Haseleye, Thomas de Folebrok, and Richard le Garfere. Justified by the dean as that two-thirds of the tithes of Snitterfield that pertained to the deanery. [16]. Then Master Robert Tankard chaplain v. Walter de Cantilupe, Gilbert le Taverner chaplain, Thomas le Taverner chaplain, Henry Page, John le Machon, William le Chapeleyn v. Walter de Cantilupe. Cantilupe justified as the taking of tithes pertaining to his church of Snitterfield. Verdict that Cantilupe et al took the dean's tithes, that is, two-thirds of the tithes of Snitterfield that pertain to the deanery. Damage of 12 p.s. [17]

H1313 A: Grant for a term of 10 years by Ralph, prior of Ware to Henry de Insula of two messuages and all the arable land of the priory in Ware "cum omnibus redditionibus, decimis, pratis, pascuis, et pasturis et omnibus aliis ad ecclesiam de Ware pertinentibus" except woodlands, an annual rent of 40s from mills, and the advowson of the vicary, for 60 p.s. Repair, at the expense of the lessee, would appear to have been a major reason for the lease. [18]

E1313 A: Repair of the church of Shipbourne, Kent. Prior of the Hospital of St John of Jerusalem in England v. Richard Hendeman of Shipbourne, Matthew Attehale, John Attehale, Richard de Cleygate, William le Coupere, John Symound, Henry le Clerk, John Astan, John Budde, & John Kym de Tywedele. Trespass cutting of trees. Defendants justified that customarily they were entitled to cut trees outside the cemetary to repair the church and had done so. No verdict. [19]

H1314 A: Lease of Laxfield parish. William Maheu de Felstede and William le Smythessone de Frysingfeld acknowledged a debt of 12 p.s. to John de Hoo. John de Hoo was sheriff of Essex and Hertfordshire and mainperned for Maheu and Smythessone, who were the lessees of Gilbert de Roubury for his church of Laxfield, that they would pay the arrears of rent and the damages to buildings for which Roubury had sued them. [20]

E1314 A: John de Guyton parson of Ewhurst v. Elias Laweles, Gerard Elislawelesesman, Roger le Clerk, William Penhed, Walter de Bussewell, William atte Sonde, Bartholomew le Suur, John atte Sonde, John le Fullere, Walter le Fullere de Shyre, William de Cothulle, Walter le Wyse jr, Peter atte Hathche, William atte Parke sr, Robert his son, William atte Parke jr, Henry Shirloke, Phillip le Chesman de Shire, William Baynard de Dorkyng, Walter de Pynkhurste, David de Plumton, Gervase le Heyward de Wodeton, John Bovery, Robert Bovery, and Hugh le Palfrey. Elias Laweles justified as parson of Shere that he took the crops as tithes tithed from the town of Gomshall. Jury returned verdict of guilty. [21]

H1315 A: Tithes of Broadbridge. John de Covert v. Richard vicar of Horsham, Henry de Ebesham chaplain, John Moys chaplain, & William Chike. Trespass taking of hay. Justified as the taking of the tithes of Broadbridge that pertain customarily to the vicar of Horsham. [22]

E1316 A: Tithes of sheep and fleeces. Reginald parson of West Tofts v. John vicar of Stanford, WIlliam Brixi, Andrew son of Geoffrey, William le Ray, Geoffrey son of Alexander, John Watte. Trespass taking of goods worth 40 marks at Stanford. Vicar justified that one Andrew de Nethergate his parishioner tithed his tithes and John took by reason of his vicarage seven lambs and 10 fleeces by delivery from Andrew. No verdict. [23]

T1316 A: Tithes and glebe in Gedney. William de Swynesheved vicar of Gedney v. Thomas de Reppes & John his brother. Trespass taking of crops worth 10 p.s. Defendants justified as procurators and servants of Robert de Bardelby parson of Gedney. Concerning the hemp and flax, they were tithes looking to the church of Gedney and tithed by the parishioners. They took the tithes to the parsonage. They challenged whether the division of tithes between rector and vicar should be handled in the king's court. As to the wheat, it was grown on land looking the church and they took the wheat in the name of the parson. [24]

M1316 A: Tithes in named crops in Sharnbrook, Bedfordshire. Abbot of Leicester v. Roger de Pateshull parson of Bletsoe. Trespass taking of goods. Justified as the taking of tithes tithed pertaining to the church of Bletsoe. No verdict. [25]; [26]

H1317 A: Tithes in kind at Southwark. Alard parson of St George of Southwark v. John parson of Neuton. Trespass taking of named crops worth 10 p.s. Justified that as parson of Neuton he found the crops in the fields of Neuton tithed and took them as tithes. No verdict. [27]

T1317 A: Tithes in kind in Stamford. Roger parson of St Peter Stamford v. Geoffrey, prior of Durham, Brother Adam de Pontefract, Brother Henry de Slikebourn, Geoffrey de Kelingworth, William Staumpes de Stamford, William de Glatton, Stephen Tubbel, Robert de Newerke, & Henry de Lutryngton. Challenge to jurisdiction. [28]

M1317 A: Repeated sales of fruits in kind of Ewell, Kent. William de Bristou archdeacon of Gloucester had all the fruits of the church of Shoreham and the chapel of Otford by sale of Gerald parson of Ewell procurator of Vitalis de Testa parson of Shoreham; William sold the fruits then to Groshurst, who then took the said fruits. Nicholas de Aynnesle chaplain v. Richard de Groshurst, Richard Stytholf, Nicholas le Bedel, John de Pelham, & Richard Whytegos. [29]

T1318 A: Abbot of Lyra v. John le Northerne cleric together with Richard de Bourne parson of Shalfleet, Walter de Maunton, John le Palfreyman, Lawrence de Sawyere de Newport, Simon le Muleward de Chestel, and William Pechoun. Taking of named crops worth 20 p.s. over three weeks at Shalfleet and Chestel. John defends as servant of Bourne and says he found the crops as the tithes of Bourne and so took them. Verdict for plaintiff with damages of 25 marks. [30]

M1318 A: Division of tithes in Hodnet, Shropshire. Phillip de Say parson of Hodnet v. Geoffrey de Wolsele parson of Cheddleton, Thomas de Heywode de Gravenongre and Geoffrey his brother, William de Ware chaplain, Thomas Wimot de Weston, Thomas de Keel, and Adam le Keu de Heywode. Trespass taking of named crops worth 100 p.s. Jury verdict: Phillip de Say was parson of Hodnet, and Geoffrey is parson of the chapel of Marchamley, which is a free chapel within the parish of Hodnet. The chapel receives all the tithes from the lord's demesne lands. All tithes coming from other lands and from old and new assarts go to the church of Hodnet, and the tithes of assarts have gone to Hodnet from the time of the assart until 6 Edward II when there was a dispute between Phillip and Geoffrey concerning the tithes from new assarts. Friends intervened and it was agreed that the tithes would be collected and put in a neutral place until the dispute was settled. While the dispute pended, Thomas and the others took the tithes. The tithes taken were all from the new assart that should go to the Hodnet church. Damages amounted to 20 p.s. [31]

M1318 B: Washingley, Huntingdonshire. Richard de Bolyton v. Edmund de London parson of Washingley and John Osborn. Trespass taking of crops. Defendant pleaded that he took the crops from the land of his church. [32]

E1319 A: Hollington, Derbyshire. Thomas parson of Brailsford v. John de Cressi, Henry de Lindeby, William de Eginton, Richard le Feure with Roger Williamesman, Ralf son of Matilda, Oliver le Foun, John de Hopton, Walter le Harpere, and Roger son of Amice. John de Cressi as parson of Longford; Hollington is within the boundaries of Longford and they there took the oats as tithes. No verdict. [[33]

T1319 A: Abbot of Thame v. Master Adam Maynel and Thomas his brother. Rescue: John de Bek and Roger Lucas, the abbot's servants tried to arrest three horses and a cart doing damage, but the defendants rescued them. Adam was the rector of Stoke Talmage and was only collecting his tithes without doing damage to the abbot's land. [34]

M1319 A: Thomas, parson of Brailsford v. John de Cressi parson of Longford, Henry de Lyndebi, William de Cressi, William le Sumeter, Roger Page, Roger Sturt, Roger le Keu, Richard the Parsonesman, Richard le Reve de Longeford, Robert de Grendon, Oliver his brother Trespass: taking of oats worth 100sover a period of fifteen days at Hollington. John defended that Hollington is within the bounds of the parish of Hollington, and thus he took the oats as his tithes separated from the nine. No verdict. [35]