Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 37.djvu/277

  rights. Prior Eastry strongly advised the archbishop to rather abate his strict legal rights than to get involved in an interminable and costly lawsuit at the papal curia (Literæ Cantuar. i. 333–4); but the archbishop was deaf to such judicious counsels. On the failure of the abbot and monks to appear before the archbishop's court, Meopham pronounced them contumacious. The abbey thereupon appealed to the pope, who sent a nuncio, Icherius de Concoreto, canon of Salisbury, to act as judge of the suit. Meopham denounced the judge as prejudiced, and refused to take any part in the case. Early in 1330 the proctor of the abbey, Thomas of Natendon, went with a public notary and a large following to the manor of Slindon in Sussex, where Meopham was then residing, to serve on him a summons to attend the court of the papal commissioner. The archbishop was ill in bed, but his servants beat and insulted the followers of the proctor, breaking the arm of the notary, and carrying on rude horseplay against one of the retinue, whom they beat severely, tied tightly with cords, and drenched with cold water. The proctor himself fled to Petworth, but was brought back and kept prisoner three days before he was allowed to escape.

Meopham protested that he had no knowledge of this outrage, and eight of his suffragans, feeling that they had a common cause with him in his attack on the great monastery, sent strong letters to the pope testifying to his high and honourable character. But the pope was much incensed, and, through the Archbishop of Aquino, pronounced the archbishop guilty. Meanwhile Icherius had, in November 1332, condemned Meopham in England, pronouncing him contumacious for refusing to appear, and awarding the enormous costs of 700l. to the monks of St. Augustine's, in whose favour he pronounced judgment (ib. i. 511–17). In January 1333 Icherius informed the archbishop that if he did not pay the costs within thirty days he became suspended, and if he did not pay within sixty days, incurred the sentence of excommunication (ib. i. 517–19). The archbishop made no sign of submission, and in due course incurred the threatened penalties. Meopham spent the summer, in failing health and great sadness, at his manor of Mayfield, where he was visited by the faithful Bishop of Rochester, whom he told that he was not troubled by his excommunication. He died on 12 Oct. He was buried on 26 Oct. at Canterbury, in the chapel of St. Peter, at the east end of the south aisle of the choir and near the tomb of St. Anselm; but the monks of St. Augustine's boasted that it was in their power to prevent his burial until his body had been formally released from the sentence which the living archbishop had incurred (, c. 2066). By his will, the executor of which was Master Lawrence Falstof, he left 50l. to the monks of his cathedral to buy land, the rent of which was to be appropriated for the expenses of celebrating his anniversary (Anglia Sacra, i. 59).

 MERBECKE, JOHN (fl. 1583), musician and theologian. [See .]

MERBURY or MARBURY, CHARLES (fl. 1581), author, is described by Strype as the son of a dependent ‘on the Duchess of Suffolk and the Duke of Suffolk.’ The patrons of the father, who are said to have continued a revenue and pension to the son, were probably Richard Bertie [q. v.] and his wife Catharine, whose first husband was Charles Brandon, duke of Suffolk (d. 1545). There were no other persons who could claim any connection with the title of Duke or Duchess of Suffolk in Elizabeth's reign. Merbury graduated B.A. at Oxford on 18 March 1569–70, and speaks of studying under ‘Master Humfrey,’ apparently a reference to Laurence Humphrey [q. v.], president of Magdalen College. In 1571 he entered Gray's Inn, but soon afterwards left England for a long sojourn in Italy, and acquired perfect familiarity with the language. He was a friend of Henry Unton, and on returning home obtained a post in the household of the lord chamberlain, the Earl of Sussex. He was thus often about the court. In 1581 he published a defence of absolute government, which was licensed, after it had been carefully read and approved in manuscript by Thomas Norton (1532–1584) [q. v.] It was entitled: ‘A briefe Discourse of Royall Monarchie, as of the best Common Weale: wherein the subiect may beholde the Sacred Majestie of the Princes most Royall Estate: written by Charles Merbury, Gentleman, in duetifull Reuerence of Her Majesties Most Princely Highnesse: Whereunto is added by the same Pen a Collection of Italian Prouerbes in Benefite of such as are studious of that Language,’ London, 1581, 4to (by 