BHO

Close Rolls, Edward III: January 1360

Pages 665-670

Calendar of Close Rolls, Edward III: Volume 10, 1354-1360. Originally published by His Majesty's Stationery Office, London, 1908.

This free content was digitised by double rekeying. All rights reserved.

Citation:
Please subscribe to access the page scans

This volume has gold page scans.
Access these scans with a gold subscription.Key icon

January 1360

Jan. 22.
Reading.
John de Horwode, the younger, citizen of London, acknowledges that he owes to John Tyntagel and Henry Baret, citizens of London, 34l.; to be levied, in default of payment, of his lands and chattels in that city.
Jan. 23.
Reading.
Robert Gosson of Keleby acknowledges that he owes to David de Wollore and Michael de Ravendale, clerks, 120l.; to be levied etc. in the county of Lincoln.
Cancelled on payment, acknowledged by David.
Membrane 3d.
Enrolment of sale by William Baldewyne and Richard Brok, executors of the will of Thomas Frithebek, citizen and saddler of London (by virtue of his will proved and enrolled in the full husting of London of pleas of land held on Monday after St. Hilary, 33 Edward III), to Robert de Herlouwe, citizen and saddler of that city, of all that tenement now newly built by Thomas Frithebek in the lane called Goderounelane in the parish of St. Vedast, London, which tenement Thomas bequeathed to be sold, and it is situate in breadth between the tenement of the dean and chapter of St. Martin le Grand, London, on the north, and the tenement of the brotherhood of the goldsmiths, London, on the south, and extends in length from the highway of Goderounelane on the west to the tenement of John Coraunt towards the east, for a great sum of money which Robert de Herlouwe has paid down; Simon Dolsali being then mayor of London, John Chichestre and Simon de Benyngton sheriffs, John de Chichestre aforesaid alderman of that ward. Witnesses: John Hiltoft, Nicholas de Farndon, John de Blythe, John Crepulgate, Hugh de Waltham. Dated London as aforesaid.
Enrolment of deed testifying that whereas Thomas Frithebek, citizen and saddler of London, in his will bequeathed to Alice his wife for her life all his lands in the city of London, to wit, all those tenements which he acquired of John Romburgh, lynga armourer, at le Brokenewharf in the parish of St. Mary Somersete, London, those which he acquired of Robert de Bristouwe in Goderounlane in the parish of St. Vedast, London, those which he acquired of the executors of the will of William de Causton in the said lane and parish, those which he acquired of John de Blithe at the corner of the said lane in the said parish, and the tenement which he acquired of John Brauncestre, goldsmith, in the lane and parish aforesaid, to be sold after Alice's death by William Baldewyne and Richard Brok, executors of his will, and the money arising therefrom to be spent in masses and other works of charity and for his soul and the souls of all the faithful departed, the said executors have sold the said tenements to John Baldewyne, citizen and saddler of London, to hold after Alice's death for a sum of money paid down; Simon Dolsali being then mayor of London, John Chichestre and Simon de Benyngton sheriffs, John Chicestre alderman of the ward of Farendon within, and John Little alderman of the ward of Queenhithe (Ripe Regine), London. Witnesses: John Hiltoft, Nicholas de Farndon, John de Blithe, John Crepulgate, Hugh de Waltham. Dated London as aforesaid.
Memorandum that William and Richard came into the chancery at Westminster on 22 January and acknowledged the preceding deed.
Jan. 20.
Reading.
To the treasurer and barons of the exchequer. Order to supersede until the quinzaine of Easter next the demand made upon Robert de Burton, clerk, for any sums of money whatsoever as prests by reason of foreign accounts for the time when he was receiver of the issues reserved to the king's chamber, that the king may be informed meantime as to the particulars of allowances claimed by Robert. By the guardian and C.
Jan. 12.
Reading.
To the mayor and bailiffs of Lincoln. Order, under pain of forfeiture, upon sight of these presents, to cause proclamation to be made that no native or alien, merchant or other, upon pain of forfeiture, shall bring to the king's enemies staying in England or to their adherents any letters or credences prejudicial to the realm, and no one shall receive such letters, and that no one of the king's enmity shall come to England without his licence and safe conduct, to make diligent search of all aliens coming to that city, of whom there is any suspicion, even if they have such letters of safe conduct, and send all letters found prejudicial to the realm or suspect, with the persons bearing them, to the council at Westminster from time to time, to be dealt with as shall be there ordained, and to arrest all enemies coming without licence and safe conduct, and keep them safely until further order, warning all alien merchants, both Lombards and others, in that city to be before them on a day and at a place to be by them set, upon pain of forfeiture, to take the oath ordained by the king and his council and contained in a schedule enclosed, and certifying the king in chancery before Sunday in mid Lent next of the names of those who take such oath and of all their action in the matter, as the king has learned that great number of letters and credences prejudicial to him and the realm are brought into England by merchants and aliens. By the guardian and C.
The like to the following, to wit:—
The mayor and bailiffs of Sandwich.
The mayor and bailiffs of Wynchelse.
The mayor and bailiffs of Dover.
The mayor and bailiffs of Canterbury.
The mayor and bailiffs of Chichester.
The mayor and bailiffs of Rochester.
The mayor and bailiffs of Southampton.
The mayor and bailiffs of Winchester.
The mayor and bailiffs of Hereford.
The mayor and bailiffs of Weymuth and Melcombe.
The mayor and bailiffs of Worcester.
The mayor and bailiffs of Salisbury.
The mayor and bailiffs of Bristol.
The mayor and bailiffs of Exeter.
The bailiffs of Gloucester.
The mayor and bailiffs of Maldon.
The mayor and bailiffs of Coventre.
The mayor and bailiffs of Colchester.
The bailiffs of Ipswich.
The bailiffs of Great Yarmouth.
The bailiffs of Norwich.
The mayor and bailiffs of Lenne.
The bailiffs of Boston.
The mayor and bailiffs of Kyngeston upon Hull.
The mayor and bailiffs of York.
The mayor and bailiffs of Newcastle upon Tyne.
Roger de Mortuo Mari, constable of Dover castle and warden of the Cinque Ports.
To the sheriff of Lincoln. The like order, 'mutatis mutandis,' as to alien merchants without the city of Lincoln and the town of Boston.
The like to the following, to wit:—
The sheriff of Kent, without the cities of Canterbury and Rochester and the liberty of the Cinque Ports.
The sheriff of Surrey and Sussex, without the city of Chichester.
The sheriff of Wilts, without the city of Salisbury.
The sheriff of Devon, without the city of Exeter.
The sheriff of Southampton, without the city of Winchester and the town of Southampton.
The sheriff of Somerset and Dorset, without the towns of Weymuth and Melcombe.
The sheriff of Gloucester, without the towns of Gloucester and Bristol.
The sheriff of Essex and Hertford, without the towns of Colchester and Maldon.
The sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk, without the city of Norwich and the towns of Ipswich, Great Yarmouth and Bishop's Lenne.
The sheriff of York, without the city of York and the town of Kyngeston upon Hull.
The sheriff of Northumberland, without the town of Newcastle upon Tyne.
The sheriff of Cornwall.
The sheriff of Cambridge and Huntingdon.
Membrane 2d.
[Membrane 1d.]
Whereas, at the suit of Hugh de Wesenham, showing that Agnes his wife, sister of Bernard son of John de Bruys of Conyngton, tenant in chief, was Bernard's sole heir and of full age, on proof of her age the king took Hugh's fealty for all the lands which Bernard held in chief at his death and ordered them to be delivered to Hugh and Agnes, and afterwards because it was found by inquisitions taken after John's death that Agnes, John whom Nicholas Grene married, Elizabeth and Ellen were John's daughters and next heirs apparent, being then under age, Margaret, John's wife, then being pregnant of the said Bernard, no mention being made of Bernard nor that Agnes was his sister and sole heir, except in the writ for proof of Agnes's age, by which it appeared that the king was deceived in taking Hugh's fealty and delivering the lands, the king caused those lands to be taken again into his hands; and by another inquisition, taken by William Fililode the escheator, it was found that Bernard was son and heir of John de Bruys and died within a year from his birth, that Agnes and Joan were his sisters and next heirs and of full age, and that Elizabeth and Ellen, sisters of Agnes and Joan, took the habit of religion in the priory of Bolyngton, wherefore Nicholas and Joan petitioned the king to cause the said lands to be divided into two parts and the purparty falling to Joan to be delivered to her; and the king ordered the sheriff of Rutland, by writ dated 18 December in the 32nd year of the reign, to notify Hugh de Wesenham and Agnes his wife, sister of Bernard, to be in chancery on the octaves of Hilary following, to show cause why the lands which belonged to Bernard should not be divided into two parts and one moiety delivered to Nicholas Grene and Joan his wife, daughter and heir of the said John, as Joan's purparty, and further to do and receive what the king's court should determine; and the sheriff returned that he notified Hugh and Agnes as aforesaid by John Davy and John Taillour, on which day Hugh and Agnes appeared by John de Shipdham, their attorney, and Nicholas and Joan by Thomas de Tholewall, attorney of Nicholas and guardian of Joan, and Nicholas and Joan craved that a moiety of the said lands should be delivered to them; and Hugh and Agnes said that the king by letters patent granted to John de Grey of Riffyn the wardship of all the lands which belonged to John de Bruys, tenant in chief, in the king's hand by reason of the minority of the heir, to hold until the heir should come of age, together with his marriage, which lands so granted were the same as those whereof Nicholas and Joan craved a moiety, and afterwards the king by other letters patent, reciting his said grant, granted that although the heir died a minor, whereby the inheritance descended to his sisters, then under age, John de Grey should have the wardship thereof until the said sisters came of age together with their marriage, and if any of them should die before she came of age and should be by him married, her heir being a minor, he should have the wardship and marriage of that heir until of age, and they showed the letters patent of the king dated at Westminster on 20 October in the 21st year of the reign [text follows], and said that John de Grey of Ruffyn by his deed granted the said wardship and the marriage of the heirs to John de Verdon 'le fitz,' to hold until the heirs should come of age, and he granted all his estate in the said wardship and marriage to Master Simon de Islep, who granted the same to John de Wesenham, and they presented the deeds thereupon, and said that the king demised all manner of profit which might come to him from the wardship and marriage, and that, Bernard being dead, and Joan, Elizabeth and Ellen, sisters and coheirs with Agnes, having professed in the habit of religion, and Agnes having proved her age before Guy de Seintcler, then escheator in the county of Huntingdon in the presence of the said John de Wesenham her guardian, Hugh had done fealty for all the said lands as for all the inheritance of Bernard descending to Agnes as his sister and sole heir, and so the whole inheritance was delivered to Hugh and Agnes by due process in chancery, and remained in possession until, at the suggestion of Nicholas, those lands were seized into the king's hand without due process, Hugh and Agnes not being warned or called upon to answer touching their freehold, wherefore they craved that those lands should be restored to them and they would answer for them to Nicholas and Joan at the common law; and they further said that on the octaves of Trinity last Nicholas and Joan brought a like writ against them in chancery, and the process thereupon was continued until the quinzaine of Midsummer following, on which day Hugh and Agnes came and Nicholas and Joan did not appear when solemnly vouched and so the writ was not pursued, whereby restitution of the said lands ought to have been made to Hugh and Agnes, and this was not done, wherefore they do not understand that before restitution made they ought to answer for their freehold; and Nicholas and Joan said that by the records and offices in chancery and by the writ whereby Hugh and Agnes were warned, it is probably shown that the king was deceived in taking Hugh's fealty and in the delivery of the lands to him and to Agnes as Bernard's sole heir, and therefore the king caused those lands to be seized into his hand, and they craved that Hugh and Agnes might answer, wherefore Hugh and Agnes were told to answer further, saving to them the claims and exceptions proposed above; whereupon Hugh and Agnes protesting that they would not recede from their exceptions in regard to the jurisdiction of the court and restitution, said that Nicholas and Joan ought not to answer, because at the age of eleven Joan assumed the habit of religion as a nun in the priory of Nunneton which is a cell of the house of Fontevrault in Normandy, the house and priory being immediately subject to the apostolic see and exempt from all ordinary jurisdiction, so that there is no ordinary between the pope and the abbess, the rule of which order both in the chief house and in the said priory is such that, if a woman wears the habit in the house for a year after completing the age of twelve years, she is professed in that order, and they said that Joan took the habit in the said priory in the eleventh year of her age, and stayed in the house during her twelfth, thirteenth, fourteenth, fifteenth and sixteenth years and longer, and therefore she is professed in that order by its rule; and Nicholas and Joan, not acknowledging that the house of Fontevrault is so exempt, or that the priory of Nuneton is a cell of that house, or that Joan took the habit or remained there as alleged, said that they at another time before the king brought a writ against one Robert Baldewyn because by force and arms he took goods and chattels of Joan found at Haldenby to the value of 40l., upon which writ process was continued until the quinzaine of Hilary in the 32nd year of the reign, on which day Robert appeared before the king and objected that Nicholas and Joan ought not to be answered because Joan had taken the habit of religion in the priory of Nuneton, and was professed at the time when she and Nicholas said the trespass had been committed against her, and pretended to verify this, to which they replied that Joan never was so professed, wherefore the bishop of Coventry and Lichfield was ordered to make inquisition upon the matter and to inform the king thereupon on the quinzaine of Easter following, on which day Nicholas and Joan came before the king, and the bishop certified that he had found by inquisition that Joan was not professed in the said priory on Monday before Midsummer in the 31st year of the reign or ever before, wherefore it was decided she and Nicholas should recover damages against Robert, and upon this they proffered the tenor of that record sent into chancery (Coram Rege, Hilary term, 32 Edward III, roll 89 [sexagesimo vicesimo nono]: text follows), containing the plaint of Nicholas and Joan by Simon de Staverne, attorney for Nicholas and guardian of Joan, that on the said Monday Robert had taken by force and arms a casket, gold rings, gold clasps and other jewels of Joan to the value of 20l. found at Haldenby, and the certificate of the bishop of Coventry and Lichfield that Joan was not professed in the priory of Nenneton on the said Monday or on any other day, wherefore it was decided that she and Nicholas should recover against Robert their damages, taxed at 20l. and that Robert should be taken, wherefore Nicholas and Joan did not understand that Hugh and Agnes ought to allege the inability of Joan by reason of such profession, contrary to the bishop's certificate; and Hugh and Agnes said that by the record shown by Nicholas and Joan it appears that after the bishop was ordered to certify a day was given to the parties, in which case the cause should have been put without a day, that on the day the certificate was returned Robert Baldewyn did not come, and notwithstanding this judgment was rendered against him in his absence without reattachment or other process sued against him, wherefore that judgment is void, that the certificate was made in the negative and between persons foreign to Hugh and Agnes, who were not called to prove profession before the bishop, whereby they could be made parties to object to that proof, that the words of the certificate, that Joan was not professed, are not only words of assertion, but are from the relation of others, that the certificate was made by one who had no jurisdiction over the priory as the nuns of the order are exempt from the jurisdiction of the bishop, as he has certified in chancery, wherefore Hugh and Agnes do not understand why they should be excluded from their proof of Joan's profession by pretext of an erroneous judgment to which they were not parties, especially as the profession is alleged in the person of Joan for the present time which is in nowise repugnant to the certificate supposing that she was not professed before that date, wherefore since they propose to prove the profession of Joan, and she and Nicholas refuse proof, they do not understand that they ought to answer them in the premises; and Nicholas and Joan, protesting as before that they did not acknowledge that the house of Fontevrault and the priory are exempt as aforesaid, or that Joan had taken the habit of religion or stayed in the priory in that order for the time alleged, said that because the bishop formerly certified that Joan was never professed, they do not understand that Hugh and Agnes ought to be admitted to prove that profession unless they could show that it took place subsequently; and Hugh and Agnes said as before that the certificate was not contrary to their proof, and they were strangers to the record proceeding from an erroneous judgment, wherefore they were not lawfully bound to show that the profession in Joan's person was for the present, but they were ready to prove it, which proof Nicholas and Joan refused, and they did not understand that they should answer further; and after deliberation by the justices and other of the king's council, because Hugh and Agnes said nothing to avoid the said record or to exclude Nicholas and Joan from their action in the matter, it was decided that Nicholas and Joan should have execution for the division of the lands between the parties and the livery to each of the purparty falling to them.