Page:VCH Norfolk 2.djvu/435

 RELIGIOUS HOUSES tenements, and rents, in relief of their ' poor pos- sessions,' to the value of ;^40, that they may pray for the good estate of the king and queen and for their souls after death. ^ About 1345, the prior and canons of Wal- singham petitioned Elizabeth, lady of Clare, beseeching her to abandon her intention of per- mitting the Franciscan friars to have a house in either Great or Little Walsingham. They ad- vanced various reasons against the coming of the friars ; but they were all of them of a purely selfish character, and did not touch on the higher grounds of education and of a faithful ministering to the poor, which were no doubt the actuating motives of this noble lady in her new foundation. The petitioners stated that they foresaw that certain tithes would lapse and that their income derived from mortuary masses and offerings at burials, churching of women, confession and other occasions would certainly diminish. The most interesting objection was that wherein they stated that for the security of the valuable jewels that had been presented to their shrine by Lady Elizabeth and her ancestors and others, the gates of the priory were always closed at night ; that the pilgrims who arrived late were accustomed to make their offerings the next morning ; and that this would probably not be the case if they were entertained by the friars.^ It is satisfactory to know that the petition failed. In 1346, John de Watlington, canon of Wal- singham, obtained an indult to choose a confes- sor for plenary remission at the hour of death. ^ Benedict de Bodham, another canon of this house, had the dignity of papal chaplain conferred on him in 1350,* and in the same year Canon Benedict and Thomas de Clare, prior of Walsing- ham, obtained the papal indult for plenary re- mission at the hour of death.* James de Wighten and Richard Brutiham, canons of Walsingham, obtaining the like privilege in 1352.* Pope Urban, in 1364, granted a faculty to Prior Thomas to dispense four of his canons provided they had completed their twenty-second year, to be ordained priests, there being but few, owing to the pestilence.' On I March, 1384, the custody of the priory was given by the king to the sub-prior, acting on behalf of his kinsman Roger, son and heir of the late earl of March, a minor, in consequence of contention between the sub-prior and John Snoryng, prior, the latter being wasteful of its revenues in his desire to secure the position of abbot. This step was taken on the advice of a commis- sion, presided over by Michael de la Pole, the chancellor, appointed to inquire into the dispute.* ' Cal. of Pat. 5 Edw. IV, pt. ii, m. 4. ' Cott. MS. Nero E. vii, fol. 152. The petition is given both in French and Latin. ^ Cal. Papal R:g. iii, 233. * Ibid. 393. ^ Ibid. 402. * Ibid. 473, 505. ' Ibid, iv, 41. One of the charges against Prior Snoryng was that he had interfered with the weekly market at Walsingham, placing divers windows and doors in the priory wall on the site where it was held. The letters patent, however, of I March, giving the custody of the priory to the sub-prior, were speedily cancelled, for on 9 March the prior was allowed to resume his rule, but only upon finding three recognizances of 1,000 marks each, pledg- ing him to keep the priory and all its lands and manors without waste or alienation until the next Parliament, and further pledging him not to go or send to the Roman Court. ^ Further financial irregularities on the part of Prior Snoryng resulted in his suspension and even- tual removal from the office in 1387-8 by the commissaries of the bishop of Norwich, against which sentence he appealed to Rome. The king took the priory and its possessions into his own hands, appointing a commission, at the head of which was the abbot of Holm, for its due ad- ministration. Licence was granted to Snoryng in 1389 to pass beyond the seas, to defend his right before the Holy See. In June 1391, a further licence was granted by the crown to Snoryng to prosecute to a conclusion in the Roman court his long pending suit. Sir Thomas Geney, and three citizens and mercers of London giving bail, each in 1,000 marks, that he would not during his stay attempt aught against the king's regality or the laws and customs of the realm.'** Conditional absolution was granted by Boni- face IX, in May 1398, from excommunication of Prior John Harford and the convent of Wal- singham, together with relaxation of their inter- dict, and the annulment of formal papal letters and proceedings. Thomas Fornesete, canon of this house, having set forth to the pope that for certain reasons he had formerly, without leave of his superior, thrown off his habit, broken iron chains and prison and left his order, the pope ordered the archbishop of Canterbury and the bishops of Norwich and Ely to carry out, with regard to him, Pope Benedict's ordinances as to apostates. The recent petition of the convent of Walsingham, however, set forth that the bishop of Ely, in defiance of the pope, absolved Thomas and ordered restoration to his canonry and pre- bend, as well as payment of his costs in going and returning to Rome. They further stated that on their refusing to receive Thomas, the com- missary of the bishop of Norwich excommuni- cated the convent and put the priory under interdict, from which sentence they appealed to Rome, adding that Thomas had suppressed the truth." ' Cal. of Pat. 1 Ric. II, pt. ii, m. '" P.it. 12 Ric. II, pt. 2, m. 9 ; m. 36 ; 13 Ric. II, pt. 2, m. m. 6. " Ca!. of Papal Reg. v, 157-8. 32 '7- 13 Ric. II, pt. 395
 * Pat. 7 Ric. II, pt. 2, mm. 21, 231/.
 * 14 Ric. pt.