33 
sonages, had promised to the same William free access ;, that is to wit on that 
‘*day for the free exhibiting of these answers, and also free departing, without 
“prefixing of any term, or without citation, or else any other offence or harm in 
“body or in goods.” 
The Bishop, however, lost but little time in preparing a formal citation for 
him. Five days after, one was issued “‘ from our house at Whitborn,” dated July 
5th, 13891. ‘‘ And because,” says the Bishop, ‘‘ the said Wm. Swynderby conceals 
‘himself, and cannot be served personally with it, we have caused him to be 
‘*publickly cited in the places where the said William has been accustomed to 
“officiate.” It is therefore addressed ‘‘To his dear son our Dean of Leamster, to 
“the parsons of Croft, Almaley, and Whitney, and also to the vicars of Kington, 
“*Eardersly, Wiggemore, Monmouth, Clifford, and St. John’s Altar, in our 
‘Cathedral Church of Hereford” charging them ‘‘to cite or cause to be cited 
‘*peremptorily, under pain of excommunication, William Swynderby, pretending 
“‘himself to be a priest,” &c., &c., “to appear at North Ledebury, on the 20th of 
“this present month of July.” (Reg. Trefnant.) Swynderby heard of it quickly, 
and sent a servant with ‘‘a certain schedule of paper made like an indenture to 
“excuse him.” He was then ordered to appear on the 29th of July, at Ponsley, 
or Pontesbury. He did not appear there, and was pronounced ‘‘ Obstinate,” and 
the 8th of August was appointed for him to appear at Cleobury Mortemere. He 
was publickly called for in vain here, and was then ordered to appear August 16th, 
in the parish church of Whitborn. He did not appear, and then was read out the 
process against Swynderby sent from Lincoln, and witnesses were examined as to 
his proceedings in the diocese of Hereford, and on the 2nd of September, 1391, he 
was formally excommunicated, and the faithful forbidden ‘‘ to believe, receive, 
“defend, or favour the said William, under pain of the law.” 
Against this decision Swynderby made a long appeal to the King and his 
Council, ‘‘for the King’s Court in such matter,” he says with some policy, “is 
“above the Bishop’s Court.” He contrasts ‘‘Christ’s law ” with the ‘‘ Pope’s law,” 
and adds that ‘‘if the Bishop or any man couthe showe me by God’s law that my 
‘conclusions and mine answers were error, or heresie, I would amendet and 
‘‘openlie revowe yem before all ye peepple.” He also addresses a long letter 
to the nobles and burgesses, and both the appeal and address are copied at full 
length in the Ecclesiastical Register. 
Swynderby did not live as a recluse in the Forest of Deerfold. He brought 
with him or was quickly joined by several companions, some of them able and 
learned men. The names of Walter Brut and Stephen Bell are made known to us 
by the record in the Ecclesiastical Register of the proceedings taken against them, 
but ‘‘ others” are several times referred to. 
Walter Brut was a graduate of the University of Oxford (Merton College), 
and in the processes against him is always styled “‘a layman and learned.” He 
came from Birtsmorton Court, in Worcestershire, as shown in that very interest- 
ing book Malvern Chase, by the Rev. W. S. Symonds, and was personally well 
known to the Bishop of Hereford and the Canons of the Cathedral. He probably 
became acquainted with Swynderby at Oxford, and he was certainly very intimate 
3 
