A HISTORY OF DURHAM 



earl of Warwick, the bishopric was Lancastrian, and we find the prior and 

 convent of Durham advancing money to Queen Margaret and other members 

 of that party.^" 



There is no trace of any engagement taking place between the Tyne 

 and Tees, though in June, 1461, John Lord Neville and others made a raid 

 from Ryton to Brancepeth ' with standardes and gytons unrolled.' ^°* In 

 the consequent act of attainder the rights of the bishop of Durham to 

 forfeitures were set out and allowed. During this period King Edward IV 

 was several times in Durham directing the operations of his troops in 

 Northumberland.^*' In 1462 (7 December) he seized the temporalities of 

 the see, and the accounts of this period show that the king had a garrison in 

 the castle of Durham."" On 17 April, 1464, Booth was restored, and from 

 this date he appears to have gone over to the Yorkist side."^ So much so 

 that he reopened with success the question of the Balliol and Bruce for- 

 feitures, and in 1470 obtained a full acknowledgement of his rights.'^'' 



In the case of^ the Neville rising in 1469 Durham again seems to have 

 been fortunate in being outside the area of operations, which appear to have 

 been south of the Tees. 



Of Booth's two successors, Dudley (1476-83) and Sherwood (1484-94), 

 but little can be said. The latter, a partisan of Richard III, does not appear 

 to have been regarded with favour by Henry VII, and the circumstances 

 under which he retired to Rome are obscure. In 1477 Richard duke of 

 Gloucester became possessed of Barnard Castle, and in 1480 was appointed 

 commander-in-chief of the northern forces against the Scots. Personally 

 popular, he appears to have been largely instrumental in winning over 

 Lancastrian Durham to the Yorkist side,'^* and it was probably due to their 

 loyalty to the memory of Richard III that in 1488 the people of the 

 bishopric rose in rebellion."'* This rising was caused by a tax of 

 a tenth on movables, which the people of the Palatinate refused to pay. 

 When Henry VII declined to remit it ' the rude and beastlie people 

 with great violence set upon the Earle ' (of Northumberland), who was en- 

 trusted with the levying of the tax, and ' furiouslie and cruellie murthered 

 both him and diverse of his household servants.' "* 



With the accession of the house of Tudor the existence of the Palatinate 

 of Durham as a virtually separate state was doomed, though in 1492 

 Henry VII promised to respect the privileges of the franchise,"' and it 

 was not till 1536 that the Act of Resumption was passed. For some time 



'" Scri/'t. Tres (Suit. Soc), App. No. cclviii. "^ Rot. Pari, quoted by Hutchinson, op. cit. i, 423. 



'*' At the end of 14.62 Edward IV, when marching north to support Warwick who was besieging the 

 Northumbrian strongholds, fell ill with measles at Durham ; Ramsay, Tork and Lane, ii, 293. 



'™ King's Receiver's Accts. printed in Raine, Auckland Castle, 5 i. 



'" Thomas Lumley also became a supporter of the new regime. Governor of Scarborough Castle for 

 Henry VI, he assisted Edward IV in his operations against the Northumberland garrisons. In the first year of 

 his reign the king restored his peerage on reversal of the attainder of his grandfather, who, being involved in 

 the rising of 1 400, had been lynched by the mob at Cirencester and attainted ; Surtees, Hist. Dur. ii, 156 ; 

 Ramsey, op. cit. i, 21. 



'" As we have seen above (p. 155), Edward I, notwithstanding the bishop's admitted right to the for- 

 feitures of war, had granted Barnard Castle to the Beauchamp family and Hart to Robert Clifford. Kellaw, 

 Beaumont and Langley had each obtained a bare recognition of their right to those two forfeitures, but failed 

 to obtain possession ; Lapsley, op. cit. 43. 



'"Surtees, Hist. Dur. iv (i), 66 ; (2), 114. '"* Lapsley, op. cit. 299. 



"* Holinshed, Chron. iii, 769. '" Materials Illustrative of the Reign of Henry Vll (Rolls Ser.), i, 99. 



162 



