Page:VCH Norfolk 2.djvu/451

 RELIGIOUS HOUSES Richard Marleburgh was the first prior, and John de Pevesey the first sacrist. The sacrist had charge of the parish part of the manor and of the parishioners, and lived in the two-storied parvise over the south porch. His office was a benefice, and there are two instances of sacrists being instituted in the diocesan registers, namely, in 1387 and 1426. On 2 July, 1360, the bishop licensed the appropriation of the church of Ingham to the priory ; at that date there were only a prior and two brethren or chaplains.^ In 1362 the priory was beginning to flourish, for in that year they obtained letters patent for the enlargement of their house, and three years later leave to divert a road for the same object." In July, 1379, Roger de Boys, John de Boys, and Reginald de Eccles granted to the priory property in Worstead and Scottow.' In 1384 the priory received from John de Saxham the advowson of the church of All Saints, Cley, and lands and tenements in ' Treston ' and Little Soxham ; in 1389 the manor of Thorney ; and in 1392 the manor of Cockley Cley, and eight messuages, 211 acres of land, 22 of meadow, 4 of moor, and lis. lid. rents in Ingham, Hick- ling, Worstead, and divers other townships, to- gether with the advowson of the church of Walcott.* In 1 40 1 Boniface IX sanctioned the appro- priation to this priory of the churches of Walcott and Cockley Cley, value not exceeding 90 marks; each church might be served by one of their canons, or by a secular priest removable at the prior's wish.* The Valor of 1535 gave the clear annual value of the priory at £6 1 <)s. "j^d. ; their most valuable possessions were the appropriations of the churches of Ingham and Walcott, which brought in an income of j^20 ijs. Thomas Catfield alias Godrede occurs as prior in 1492. In that year, on 23 October, Arch- deacon Goldwell, acting as commissary of the bishop, visited the house. The prior and his brethren were severally and privately examined, with the result that nothing was found that required reformation. There were four professed brethren, John Ludham, sacrist ; William Nor- wich, Robert Fryston, and John Ingham ; and two who were not professed. Prior Catfield was still in office when the house was again visited by commission on 1 8 July, 1520. The prior and four brethren testified o>nnia bene, but Brother John Saye complained that the prior did not present an annual state- ment of accounts. As a result of the visitation ' Blomefield, Hist. ofNorf. ix, 326-7 ; Pat. 3 3 Edw. Ill, pt. i, m. 30 ; 34 Edw. Ill, pt. ii, ni. 26. ' Pat. 36 Edw. Ill, pt. i, m. 30 ; 39 Edw. Ill, pt. ii. m. 29. » Cal. of Pat. 3 Ric. II, pt. i. m. 37. m. 16. * Ca/. Papal Reg. v, 416. the prior was required to exhibit, at the next Michaelmas synod, an inventory of all valuables and movables, and to render an annual account before the senior brethren. The same prior also received a visitation, by commission, on 18 June, 1526. Prior Catfield gave a good report, save that the house was in debt 26;. ^d. John Saye, licensed by the bishop to the cure of the parish church of Walcott, Richard Fox, serving in a similar way the church of Ingham, three other brethren, and two novices, all agreed that omnia bene. John Saye was prior on 12 June, 1532, when Bishop Nicke visited Ingham in person. The prior and four brethren united in testifying that there was nothing worthy of reformation, and the bishop took a like view.° On 5 August, 1534, Prior Saye, with six of his brethren, signed their acknowledgement of the king's supremacy.' The visitors of 1535 alleged in their secret comperta that the prior and one of the brethren were guilty of incontinence. On 7 November, 1535, Cromwell received information from Richard Wharton that the prior and convent of Ingham had sold their house and lands to one William Woodhouse without the knowledge of their founder (patron) Sir Francis Calthrope, and contrary to their pro- mise to Edward Calthrope, nephew and heir to Sir Francis, who had married a near kinswoman of the writer, to give him the first offer of it. The letter curtly offered Cromwell ;^ioo for his favour. But on 19 November Dr. Legh wrote to Cromwell from Norwich, saying that the prior of Ingham had made no sale to Wood- house as reported, but only conditionally in the event of his procuring the king's licence. How- ever, another correspondent, on 15 December, reaffirmed what Wharton had stated.* The four county commissioners for the Nor- folk suppression wrote to Cromwell on 10 August, 1536, saying that during their survey they sent to the house of Ingham to put their books and necessaries in due order before their coming ; but on their arrival they found no religious person there, because of their bargain, dated 24 December, 1534, with William Wood- house. Woodhouse had appeared before the commissioners at Coxford, and alleged that Ing- ham was outside the statute, for it was a house of Crossed Friars and not of monks or canons. The commissioners had perused the statute and thought that it was so.' ^ Jessopp, A^ara'. ^/V;V. (Camd. Soc), 27, 173, 210, 276. ' Dep. Keeper's Rep. vii, App. 2, 6j. » L. and P. Hen. Fill, ix, 264, 284, 328. ' Ibid, xi, 1 10. Woodhouse had evidently fallen into a not uncommon mistake of confusing the Trini- tarians (who followed the Austin rule, with certain special statutes) and the Crossed or Crutched Friars, who were a distinct order founded in 1 1 69; their first English house was at Colchester. 411
 * Tanner, Notitia, xxxvi ; Pat. 16 Ric. II, pt. i,