Page:VCH Norfolk 2.djvu/411

RELIGIOUS HOUSES Pankeford, and Woodbastwick, to find a lamp burning daily in the priory church before the high altar at the time of divine services.^

Boniface IV sanctioned, in 1401, the appropriation by this priory of the church of Runton, as their income was too slender for their sustentation and hospitality. The value of the benefice did not exceed 20 marks, and that of the monastery 30 marks. The church might be served by one of their own canons or by a secular priest, removable at the will of the prior.^

In 1408 the manor of Perers, and in 1412 tenements in Aylmerton, Felbrigg, and Shipton, a moiety of the advowson of Beeston and the advowson of Runton were all granted to the priory.'

In 1466 Isabel Lady Morley died seised of the patronage of the priory, and Eleanor her cousin, wife of William Lovell, Lord Morley, inherited it. This patronage had come to the Morleys as heirs of the Cressys.

John de Walsam, one of the canons of Beeston, got into serious trouble in 1317. The cause of the outrage cannot now be ascertained, but on one occasion he attacked and wounded his diocesan with a sword. Ultimately the case was referred to the pope, and the canon sent to Rome. In December of that year John XXII instructed the bishop to enjoin penance and satisfaction on John de Walsam, for now that he had recovered from his wounds the pope had given the canon absolution.^

The priory was visited by Bishop Goldwell on 25 August, 1494. He was received at the west gate of the monastery by Prior John Poty and the other priests, and proceeded in solemn procession to the high altar of the church, whence he gave his blessing. The visitation was held in the chapter-house. The prior testified that there was only one canon of the house besides himself, namely Thomas Taverner, and he was absent without leave. The bishop enjoined him to have at least two fellow-canons as speedily as possible, and annually to draw up a true return of the priory accounts.'

Thomas Plattyng, by will proved in 1507, left 6d. to Our Lady of Grace and 4d. to Our Lady of Pity in Beeston Priory church.*

Bishop Nicke visited the house on 18 July, 1514. The prior reported that Canon Thomas Taverner was in Norwich without leave. Canon Nicholas Wodforth said that the prior did not produce his accounts, and charged him with a scandal. Canon Robins testified that all was well. Canon Daume said that they had no school; that mattins were said at five o'clock and not in the night; that the common seal was in the prior's private keeping, but that everything else was right. Canon Rump knew of nothing to depose./

Bishop Nicke again visited Beeston in August, 1532, when Richard Hudson, who had become prior that year, exhibited his accounts and inventory; Canon Woodford reported that all was well, with which report Canon Yorke agreed. The bishop finding nothing worthy of reformation dissolved his visitation.*

On 11 August, 1539, Prior Hudson and his four canons, Nicholas Wodforth, William Wusbarow, James Fysser, and Robert Swyer put their signatures to the acknowledgement of the king's supremacy.' It is said that the income of the house was never sufficient to sustain more than four canons in addition to the prior; but this is highly improbable in its earlier days, considering the size of the house as shown by the ruins.

On 25 March, 1537, Harry Lord Morley wrote to Cromwell making bold to sue him for the priory of Beeston 'whereof sometime I was founder' (patron), understanding that it would be shortly suppressed. He desired to know whether he should sue the king for it.^"

In some curious way, however, Beeston, though one of quite the smaller monasteries, managed to slip through the meshes of the first suppression. In March, 1538, Sir Richard Rich wrote to Cromwell saying that he intended to suppress Beeston ' which pretended themselves to be friars,' but were canons and so apparelled and known. He stated that they were consuming the goods and chattels.'^

The confusion as to the proper nomenclature of this house and as to the order to which the inmates belonged is not a little singular. It is usually described after the same fashion as the other small houses of Austin Canons that were so prevalent in East Anglia; but Dr. Jessopp says that he has twice found it described in the Norwich episcopal registers as 'Hospitale sive Ecclesia canonicorum B. Marie in Prato de Beeston.' Nevertheless it was at one time considered by some to be tenanted by friars, for the patent rolls of 1400 have an entry 'pro Priore de Monte Carmali de Beeston.' '^

In the report of the 'mixed commission,' consisting of Sir William Paston and three others, the account of this house is headed, 'The Priory of Chanones in Beeston of th' order of Peterstone, they been callyd Chanones hospitlers and they have a convent scale.' This commission

Pat. 44 Edw. Ill, pt. i, m. 36. ' Cal. Papal Reg. v, 416. ' Pat. 10 Hen. IV, pt. i, m. 24 ; I Hen. V, pt. i, m. 21. * Cal. Papal Reg. ii, 136. '" Jessopp, 'Norzv. Visit. (Camd. Soc), 55. ' Reg. Spiltymbre (Norwich), 4. ' Jessopp, 'Norw. Visit. (Camd. Soc), i 24. Mbid. 316. ' Dep. Keeper's Rep. vii, App. 2, 280 ; Norf. Antiq. Misc. iii, 460. '» L. and P. Hen. VIII, xii (i), 321. " Ibid, xiii (l), 232. " Pat. 2 Hen. IV, pt. i, m. 30. 373