m 



came here to escape the persecution which was then being exerted so energeti* 

 «ally by Archbishop Courtney against the Lollards in Leicestershire and 

 elsewhere. 



" Are not these woods 

 More free from peril than the envious court." 



His companions in Leicestershire had been ^Lister Richard Waystach, 

 chaplain of St. John's— Peter Patershall, called John of Gaunt's chaplain — 

 William Smith, the metal founder, and many others. Here the names of 

 Walter Brut and Stephen Bell are made known to us by the record of the 

 proceedings taken against them, but "others" are several times referred to. 



Walter Brut was a graduate of the Uuiversity of Oxford (Mert-u College), 

 and in the processes against him is always styled " a layman and learned." He 

 is a true Briton as he takes care to show. His zeal against the Pope is said to 

 have been aroused chiefly by the impudent pardons and indulgences of Pope 

 Urban VI. granted to Henry Spencer, Bishop of Norwich, to fight against the 

 rival Pope Clement VII. He had adopted fully the views of the AVycliffites, had 

 attached himself to Swynderby, and come with him or joined him in Hereford- 

 shire. He was very indignant at Swynderby's condemnation, and did not 

 hesitate to express his opinion about it with the utmost freedom in the city of 

 Hereford to the Canons themselves. « 



Two instruments were drawn up against him and carried to the Bishop by 

 Master Walter Pride, the penitentary of the Cathedral church at Hereford. 

 "They were exhibited before us," says the Bishop, "sitting in our judgment 

 seat in the parish church of Whithorn of our diocese." 



The first instrument stated that "at supper time, on Oct. 15, 1.S91, in 

 the dwelling-house of the worshipful man Master John Godemoston, canon of 

 the cathedral church of Hereford, in the presence of Mastr Walter Ramesbury, 

 precenter; Roger Hoare, canon; Walter AValle, chaplain (being a vicar of 

 the choral), and certain other witnesses of credit, and in presence of me, Richard 

 le Whylare, clerk of Worcester, being a public notai-y by the authority apostolic," 

 Walter Brut "stifily maintained" that Swynderby's condemnation was "naughty, 

 Wicked, perverse, and unjust," and that his conclusions were true and cathoUo, 

 and furthermore that the Pope was the very antichrist. (Reg. Trefnant.) 



The second instrument stated that Walter Brut, on January 19th, 1391 

 (1.392 by modern computation) personally appeared before the Lord Bishop at 

 Whithorn and in his presence, and in the presence of Mastr Reginald of Wolston, 

 canon of Hereford ; Mastr Philip Dilesk, parson of Llanuwryn (Montgomeryshu-e) ; 

 Thomas Guldeifeld, parson of English Bykenore ; John Cressit, parson of 

 Wliitborn ; and Thomas Wallewayne, household servant ; especially called and 

 desired as witnesses ; and in the presence of me, Benedict Come, a public 

 notary of the diocese of St. Asaph, he did maintain that christians were not 

 bound to pay tithes, nor might lawfully swear by the creator, nor the creature, 

 that Swynderby's conclusions were just, and that he did eat, drink, and com- 

 municate with Swynderby, the Bishop's sentence against him not-nithstanding. 



(Reg. Trefnant). 



