Page:VCH Bedfordshire 1.djvu/445

 RELIGIOUS HOUSES pleaded that Guy de St. Walery and Aubreye his wife had given the church to St. Paul's, Bedford, their gift being confirmed by Simon de Beauchamp and Bishop Hugh (i 1 86— 1200). It was proved that Roger had only held Aspley as baillee until he was assigned land to the value of £10 elsewhere (which he afterwards received in Stotfold), and that Guy de St. Walery had recovered Aspley free election, belongs to this time. 6 The next of the Beauchamps, another William, made some reparation for the misdeeds of his father. 7 When the barony of Bedford passed to the Mowbrays the advowson of the priory went with it. An attempt was made in 1347, 8 at the death of John of Astwick, to prove that it was held of the king in capite ; but the against him by fine. Therefore his gift was jury then called proved conclusively that it was held always of the barony of Bedford, and that Sir John Mowbray was at that time the patron. In 1352 Thomas Mowbray, Earl Marshal, confirmed the charter of William de Beauchamp. 9 The foundation charter, charter of transference to Newnham and others were confirmed by Henry II., Edward I., Edward II., Edward III. and Richard II. ; the last royal charter was that of Henry IV. dated 15 February 1408-9. 10 Of the internal history of the priory we know very little. It seems to have had a good reputation at all times. Hervey, the prior in 1228 (previously prior of Osney), was commissioned in that year, with Richard de Morins of Dunstable, to visit all the houses of their order throughout the dioceses of Lincoln and Coventry ; two priors resigned in consequence. 11 In Grossetete's unsparing visitations of 1235 and 1249 n0 charge was laid against this house ; ia and no other visita- tion is recorded until that of Bishop Burghersh some time before 1322. The prior at that time, John of Astwick, was very unpopular, and anxious in consequence to resign ; but the bishop thought it sufficient to urge the brethren to be more exact in their obedience. 13 Bishop Buckingham sent an order in 1387 that ' peace should be established between the priories of Newnham and Caldwell ; ' u invalid, and Newnham was assigned the church under St. Walery's gift. 1 But new troubles soon arose through the tyrannical behaviour of William de Beau- champ, son of the founder ; who, en- couraged by his wife Ida, proved himself quite as much an enemy to the religious of the neighbourhood as Fawkes de Breaute had been. The first difficulty was connected with the church of Wootton, and other property of the priory ; 3 but it was at the election of a prior that William's conduct at last brought him under episcopal censure. The charter of Simon had provided that the convent should have the right of free election, only asking his consent as patron : William wished to do the part of both bishop and patron. There was some unpleasantness over an election in 1247 ; 3 but in 1254 William came in person to the priory with his wife, and compelled the new prior, Stephen, to come outside the gate to him to receive the temporalities ; then, taking him by the hand, he led him into the church, and installed him in his place in choir. 4 This, however, was too much for the bishop : he at once visited the priory and made William apologise for his invasion of the liberties of the church. 5 It is possible that the great charter of Newnham, in which William confirmed all the gifts of his father and others, including the licence for 1 Bracton's Note Book, iii. 474-6. There had been several disputes about the church before this. Nicholas the archdeacon (1 145-81) con- firmed the gift of it by Roger de Salford to Dunstable, and explained that it had once formed a part of his prebend, but now he resigned all his rights in it to the priory (Harl. MS. 1885, f. 24); while on the other hand Simon de Beauchamp wrote to the Bishop of Norwich to say that if the prior of Dunstable or any one else should bring forward a charter to prove his right to the church, it would not be with his warrant : and that the charter of Roger de Salford, who, as his tenant, had no power to give the church to any one with- out his consent, was invalid (Harl. MS. 3656, f. 20). 2 Harl. MS. 3656, ff. 19, 21b, 22. 3 Ann. Mon. (Rolls Series), iii. 172. 4 Ibid. 191. » Harl. MS. 3656, f. 54. « Ibid. ff. 8-12. » Harl. MS. 3656, ff. 21b, 22. The elder William died in 1260, the younger in 1262 (Ann. Mon. [Rolls Series], iii. 215, 219). 8 The question of the advowson had been before the bishop in 1 3 14 (Line. Epis. Reg., Memo. Dalderby, 28od). The king's escheator, Roger l'Estrange, held it in 1 271 and 1272 (ibid. Rolls of Gravesend) in the interval between John de Beau- champ and Sir John Mowbray, and this naturally led to the assumption that it was held of the king. » Harl. MS. 3656, f. 32. 10 Ibid. ff. 25-36. 11 Ann. Mon. (Rolls Series), iii. 112. 12 Ibid. 146, 179. It seems, however, that Grossetete purposed a special visitation to Newn- ham, and was not satisfied with its condition, though the Dunstable chronicler does not allude to this (Introd. to Letters of Grossetete [Rolls Series]). " Line. Epis. Reg., Memo. Burghersh, 38. " Ibid. Memo. Buckingham, 342d. 379