Prohibition/Premunire 1344-1345

From Rpalmer

Jump to: navigation, search

1344

  • H1344 A: London. Rex v. Master Robert de Thresk. John, archbishop of Canterbury, had made an unlicensed sale of the advowson of Northfleet, so that the advowson, held in chief of the king, was seized into the king's hands. Thresk entered the church and supported his entry with papal bulls. [1], [2], [3] rcp
  • H1344 B: Buckinghamshire. William Parent vicar of Bradwell (qui tam) v. John Mangeowe chaplain, John vicar of Newport Pagnell, and William vicar of Segenhoe. The king had appointed Parent to the vicary of Bradwell, and Parent was installed. The king issued prohibitions protecting him. Defendants did not desist from using ecclesiastical processes to disturb his possession. [4], [5] rcp
  • E1344 A: Berkshire. Thomas de Abyndon cleric (qui tam) v. Henry de Stoke Abbots. Inquiry as to what bulls etc., Henry had for claiming provision to Farnborough. He claimed he entered Farnborough before the ordinance. [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12] rcp
  • T1344 A: Lincolnshire. Rex v. Master Hugh de Walmesford, William parson of Westkele, Master Richard de Cibford, and Robert de Sulthorpe. John de Neuton parson of Fulbeck had impleaded Master Hugh for wrongs done before oyer and terminer justices and had recovered 46 marks. THe other defendants iimpleaded Neuton for vexing Master Hugh and continued the plea even after a royal prohibition. [13], [14] rcp
  • T1344 B: London. Rex v. Robert, abbot of Caen and Robert Hervi procurator of the abbot. They compelled William, prior of Panfield outside the realm by papal bulls and processes despite the general orders concerning alien priories and particular prohibitions. [15] rcp
  • M1344 A: Nottinghamshire. Rex v. Simon le Graunt de Hokesworth and Robert le Graunt de Hokesworth, together with William, parson of St Peter of Nottingham, Master William de Wrolleton parson of Swafield, John de Kilnyngton, and William his son, Geoffrey Mattelok, and John son of Geoffrey de Wodeburgh. John de Bekyngham in common pleas had recovered against the prior of Shelford the presentation to the church of Burton Joyce and had presented John Glide, who was canonically possessed. John le Graunt received a papal provision, and defendants expelled Glide and maintained him with armed force and with various papal processes, including excommunication, despite the general prohibition made in parliament (retailed). [16] rcp

1345

  • E1345 A: London. Rex v. Peter Duraunt parson of St Dunstans by the Tower of London, Hugh de Berry parson of St Dennis (interlineation that he was found not guilty), John Taverner of Lichfield parson of St Leonard, Henry atte Castel parson of St Michael de Crokedeland (not guilty), Thomas Boywyk parson of Blessed Mary de Bothhawe (not guilty), and Richard parson of All Saints of Graschirche London, together with Richard de Warmynton commissary general of the dean of the court of arches. The king had commissioned inquiries into wrongdoings (aiding and abetting enemies, avoiding customs etc.). Thomas ate Wyche, Henry de Braghyng, Thomas Broun, Nicholas atte Boure, Robert de Pykenham, John de Shrovesbury, Nicholas de Bokhurst, John de Braghyng, William atte Ferye, John Vau, John de Brigham, and Simon de Brigham presented under oath that William de Brikelesworth, Henry Wymond, John Anketyn, William Box, Richard de Preston, Adam Hurel, Roger atte Ponde, Adam Baudre, Robert de Hakeneye, and John atte Welhous had not paid customs and had exported to the king's enemies and brought false money into the kingdom. The accused went to church court and claimed to have been defamed and purged themselves before Richard de Warmynton. Warmynton thus excommunicated the presenters, and the whole process proceeded against royal prohibition. [17], [18], [19], [20] rcp
  • T1345 A: Yorkshire. Commission to William Scot, William Basset, Nicholas de Wortelay, William de Estfeld, John de Went, and John de Wynteworth dated November 29, 1344 to inquire concerning those who are undermining in Yorkshire the jurisdiction and judgments in king's court by resorting to ecclesiastical processes and obtaining papal bulls etc. The inquest found that John late prior of St Oswald of Nostell recovered in common pleas in 1333 an annual rent of 33 marks against William de Wardhowe than parson of Lythe and was thereafter seized for a long time. In 1343 he brought a scire facias then against John de Bolton then parson of Lythe, but Bolton drew him into a plea before the pope. The prior was thus summoned to be at Avignon, and the summons was delivered February 6, 1345. On 8 March was delivered an inhibition to the prior that he not seek further execution of the annual rent judgment under penalty of major excommunication; a similar inhibition was delivered to the archbishop of Canterbury against enforcing the judgment. John de Stokesley official of Cleveland was Bolton's procurator for the suit. The sheriff at first returned that Bolton was dead, but on testimony that Bolton was still alive the sheriff returned that Bolton and the others were not found. [21], [22]. Against Bolton, Ralph de Wrayte parson of Skelton by York, William Hert, and Master de Stokesley official of Cleveland. [23], [24] rcp
  • T1345 B: Norfolk. Adam de Balsham and James his son (not qui tam) v. Master Thomas de Walpol. Attachment against the prohibition for suing trespasses against the king's peace in church court: that he complained before Master Roger de Wortham official of the bishop of Norwich that Adam and James assaulted Master Thomas at King's Lynn and that a prohibition was delivered on 12 March 1345 in the presence of Thomas Shillyng, Nicholas Spriggi, Stephen Furbour, and Gilbert de Salle. Issue joined on whether the plea was prosecuted further thereafter. [25] rcp
  • T1345 C: Devon. Prohibition. The temporalities of the priory of Colwick were in the king's hands by reason of the war with France. Edward III recovered the presentation to the vicary of St Thomas by Exeter against the Prior of Colwick. Simon Russell allegedly now entered and occupied that church by virtue of a papal presentation. Jury continuation. [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32], [33], [34], [35], [36] rcp
  • T1345 D: London (Cornwall). Rex v. Ralph de Ristalek. The king had recovered the presentation to the vicary of St Hillary by St Michael's Mount by reason of the priory being in the king's hands. The king presented William Alesby and issued a prohibition, but Ristalek procured church court processes. [37], [38], [39] rcp
  • T1345 E: Quare non admisit. Northumberland. Rex v. Custodian of the spiritualities of the Durham sede vacante. The king had recovered against Richard late bishop of Durham and Giles de Bolounville his presentation to the prebend of Westmerington in the church of St Andrew of Auckland by reason of the vacancy of the bishopric in the reign of Edward II. Bishop Richard died, so that the order went to the custodian, who refused to admit. [40] rcp
  • T1345 F: London. Rex v. Master John de Kelleseye. Hugh le Despenser and Elizabeth his wife had recovered against Kelleseye the presentation to the church of Barrow and presented Edmund de Grymesby. Kelleseye drew him into a plea in court Christian outside the realm for receiving the presentation. [41], [42], [43] rcp
  • M1345 A: Before Council: Rex and Robert de Burton cleric and royal presentee to be the custodian of the spiritualities of the bishopric of Winchester sede vacante v. Bernard Viventis and Ayquelinus Guilli/Guillelmi de Sparra, whom Viventis inducted into the position by his procurator John de Beccles by pretext of a papal provision given to Ayquelinus. Order to appear at council was dated 21 August 1345. [44] rcp
  • M1345 B: Northamptonshire. From chancery: a quare impedit for the presentation to the church of Brinton based on the IPM of John de Ferariis in the reign of Edward I. [45] rcp
  • M1345 C: Wiltshire. Rex v. Abbess of Wilton. Edward I had recovered the presentation to the prebend of Chalk, and the judgment was not executed. The pope provided now Robert de Trumflet, but John de Wodeford, who claimed by virtue of certain papal letters, intruded into the prebend. Trumflet secured papal processes against Wodeford and succeeded, but died before judgment could be executed. The pope substituted John Lambok of Nottingham, who continued the process against John de Wodeford and obtained sentences against him. Succeeding processes. [46], [47], [48], [49] rcp
  • M1345 D: Norfolk. Rex v. William, bishop of Norwich. Prosecution for seeking to undermine the privileges of the monastery of Bury St Edmunds granted by the king's predecessors in papal court. The bishop forfeits 30 talents of gold after consideration by the king's council and the justices. [50] rcp
  • M1345 E: Norfolk. King's council consideration of processes by the king against the bishop of Norwich, the Prior of Kersey, Hamo de Belers, Master John de O, and Simon de Sudbury the bishop's commissaries. [51], [52], [53], [54](3 cases), [55], [56] rcp
  • M1345 F: Devon. Rex v. Henry Gurdon and Robert Boner. The king had recovered against the prior of Otterington the presentation to the vicary of Harpford because the temporalities of the priory were in the king's hand because of the war. He presented John de Sibthorpe. Defendants entered the vicary and obtained church processes. [57], [58]; M1346: Rex v. Henry Gurdon, Walter de Seton, John de Holand, Laurence de Stanford, and John de Vyse. [59] rcp
  • M1345 G: Leicestershire. Rex v. John Knyghe de Wykeneston chaplain, William Osgot de Foston chaplain, Roger de Cranewe chaplain, and Master Simon de Dyngeleye notary public. Like his predecessors, king has the temporalities of foreign houses during wars and thus the presentations that accrue. The king thus had the temporalities of the priory of Lenton and presented John de Lalleford to the church of Foston, and Lalleford was canonically admitted and in possession. Defendants together with William son of Simon de Cranesleye expelled him and with armed force inducted Cranesleye by virtue of a papal provision and church processes. [60] rcp
  • M1345 H: London. Rex v. Master James de Multon. The king had recovered the presentation to the prebend of Howden against Multon, John, prior of Durham and Master Edmund de Hawukesgarth. The king ordered William, archbishop of York to admit William de Emeldon cleric and prohibited Multon under penalty of forfeiture of all he had from impeding. Multon instead drew him into foreign court. [61], [62], [63] rcp
  • M1345 I: Cornwall. Rex v. Prior of Tywardreath. The temporalities of the priory were in the hands of the king by reason of the war, so that the king could present to the vicary of St Andrew, Tywardreath. [64] rcp
  • M1345 J: London. Rex v. Master Nicholas Hethe. The king had presented Paul de Monte Florum to the prebend of of la More in the churchof St Pauls, London by reason of the vacancy of the bishorpic of London. He had prohibited Hethe from impeding, but Hethe procured ecclesiastical processes. [65] rcp
  • M1345 K: Rex v. Simon Benet de Keten chaplain. Whereas the king in common pleas recovered the presentment to St Peters Stamford against the prior of St. Fromond, Simon, scheming to enervate that judgment drew into a plea in foreign court Richard Martyn cleric whom the king had presented and who had been canonically installed. [66], [67], [68], [69], [70]. Simon was apparently aided by Stephen and John his brothers and by Walter in the Pyt, chaplain. [71], [72], [73], [74], [75], [76]
  • M1345 L: Huntingdonshire. Rex v. Robert Abbot de Wodeweston chaplain. The king had recovered the presentation to Fen Drayton against the Abbot of Sawtry. Defendant drew John e Hilton, the king's presentee, into foreign court. [77] rcp
  • M1345 M: Devon. Rex v. John, bishop of Exeter. William Wyke, Robert de Kirkham, Elias Wilde, and John Dobyn, as royal messengers, had delivered to the bishop a prohibition that he not make to bring Thomasia who was the wife of Robert de Kirkham before him on matters that pertain to the king or do matters that would be in derogation of the king's crown. The bishop thus excommunicated the messengers. The king prohibited the bishop from proceeding against the messengers, but he proceeded nonetheless. [78], [79], [80] rcp
  • M1345 N: Somerset. Rex v. Master Alan de Conesburgh. The king had recovered the presentation to provosture of Wells in the church of Blessed Andrew, Wells against Ralph, bishop of Bath and Wells. The king prohibited Alan from doing anything to the contrary, but Alan seditiously took the case outside the realm. [81] rcp
Personal tools