POLITICAL HISTORY 



{if) Confirmation of sundry special privileges enjoyed by the people. 



§ 13. All men of the bishopric may have free entry to the shrine of St. Cuthbert 

 except in time of war. 



§ 14. Hunting is to be free under certain restrictions and in districts not especially 

 privileged such as parks and the like. 



§ 17. Persons living in the free chase may, in respect to the use of timber, 

 freedom from pannage and the like, have all privileges that by reason of their tenure 

 belong to them. 



§ 19. All inclosures made in the free chase by Bishop Bek which in any way 

 infringe on commonable rights shall be removed within the year. 

 {e) General. 



§ 12. Only the four chief coroners may be mounted and none of the deputies 

 may go on horseback. 



§ 22. The bishop undertakes to observe and support all of these articles and for 

 the honour of the king, who is concerned in the negotiation, to renounce any rancour 

 or illwill which he may have felt towards his people. They in turn give up any 

 claim for damages or the like that they may have had against the person of the bishop 

 by reason of the abuses mentioned and corrected in this agreement. 



It will be noticed that the question which brought about the revolt — 

 the obligation to serve beyond the Tyne and Tees — is not dealt with in this 

 charter. It appears, however, in the petition by the men of the Palatinate 

 to the king, the eighteenth article of it reading — 



Whereas no freeman is bound to do service beyond the waters of the Tyne and of 

 Teise, there have come the bailiffs of the bishop, and have distrained them to do service 

 elsewhere, at their own proper charge, and those were not able, they took and imprisoned, 

 with those who went to Scotland, and for default of means returned, where no money from the 

 bishop they received. The bishop doth will, that from henceforth they shall not be thereto 

 distrained, to go at their own charge, but only at his own expense, and this in great need 

 in defence of the franchise.*'^ 



It would appear therefore that the bishop's reply was considered satis- 

 factory by his men, who in any case would not have been likely to have got 

 the king to accede to so dangerous a principle.^" 



Ere this agreement had been made the temporalities of the see had been 

 seized in July, 1302.^^* There were probably other motives actuating the 

 king besides irritation at the bishop's reply at the Lincoln Parliament. In 

 the hands of Bek, whose resources had been largely augmented in 1296 by 

 the forfeiture of the Balliol estates, including the great fortress of Barnard 

 Castle, the privileges of the bishopric had been developed to an unprecedented 

 degree, and unless checked might have become a source of danger to the 

 central power. In addition, Edward at this time was preparing for the 

 conquest of Scotland, and the existence of an almost independent state close to 

 the frontier must have proved a serious hindrance when all orders within 

 that area had to be transmitted indirectly through the bishop. 



The temporalities were soon restored (July, 1303),^'' but Bek was again 

 in trouble in December, 1305,"" and for the third time they passed into the 

 king's hands, where they remained till after his death. Edward II in Sep- 

 tember, 1307^" restored the temporalities, but they had been materially 

 diminished by the grant of the Balliol forfeitures to the earl of Warwick 

 and the Bruce estates to Clifford."^ Bek did not long survive his third 



'" Ke//aw's Reg. (Rolls Ser.), iii, 55 5- 



'" Compare the king's ruling in the case of Wardship, § 4 of the charter. 



™ CaL of Pat. 1 301-7, p. 43. "' Ibid. 149. "» Ibid. 409. 



"' Ibid. 1307-13, pp. 2, 17, 50. •'- Script. Tn-s (Surt. Soc), 88. 



155 



