A HISTORY OF HAMPSHIRE 



ing the foundation of the hospital ; one was 

 granted by Innocent II. in 1137, and the other 

 by Lucius II. in 1144. The charter of the 

 founder delivered to Raymond, prior of the 

 Knights Hospitallers, the hospital founded for 

 the weal of his soul and those of his predeces- 

 sors and the kings of England, and provided for 

 the reception, clothing and entertaining of 

 ' thirteen poor impotent men, so reduced in 

 strength as rarely or never to be able to raise 

 themselves without the assistance of another.' 

 In addition to this a hundred other poor men 

 of good conduct were to be entertained daily 

 at dinner, and permitted, on departure, to take 

 away with them the remnants of both meat 

 and drink. 1 The first master mentioned, in a 

 grant of Bishop Blois, was Robert de Limosia. 



Serious disputes arose with respect to this 

 hospital during the next episcopacy (Richard 

 of Ilchester, 1174-88), between the bishop 

 and the Hospitallers. At length, on 10 April, 

 1185, the Order formally gave up the man- 

 agement to the diocesan, 2 by which agreement 

 the bishop undertook to provide daily for 20O 

 men instead of the original i oo. The chartu- 

 lary shows however that the Order of Hos- 

 pitallers did their best to recover the manage- 

 ment, and actually obtained two papal awards 

 in their favour of the years 1187 and 1189. 

 In 1197, Pope Celestine III. commissioned 

 the Bishops of London and Lincoln and the 

 abbot of Reading to settle the dispute, and they 

 gave their award in favour of the bishop. 

 Nevertheless, only two years later King John 

 again confirmed the hospital to the Hospital- 

 lers. 3 



The decision however of the papal com- 

 missioners was upheld, and in 1204 the Bishop 

 of Winchester appointed a master, which right 

 has since been maintained by the bishops down 

 to the present day. The Hospitallers never- 

 theless clung to the muniments and records 

 until 1379, when the energetic Bishop Wyke- 

 ham obtained them from Prior Robert Hales. 

 The prolonged dispute as to the valuable pat- 

 ronage of this hospital had seriously impeded 

 the intentions of the founder, and delayed its 

 completion. The great church was not 

 finished until the year 1255, when special 

 appeals were made for assistance. 4 



The gross mismanagement of this grandly 



1 This charter is in Bishop Stratford's register 

 (f. 1 86b), as well as in the chartulary. It has been 

 rendered into English in the 3/th Report of the 

 Charity Commissioners, and reproduced in Notes 

 and Queries, 1st ser. xi. 42. 



3 Harl. MS. 1616, f. 27. 



3 Charter Roll, John (Rec. Com.), 16. 



Harl. MS. 1616, ff. 10,29. 



conceived foundation, and the alienation of so 

 large a share of its funds from the poor to 

 wealthy pluralists, which made the mastership 

 of St. Cross a scandal and a byword for full six 

 centuries, began at an early date. 



On 16 June, 1321, the Bishop of Winches- 

 ter received orders from the king to induct the 

 king's clerk, Geoffrey de Welleford, to the 

 house of St. Cross, which he had deferred doing, 

 although he had verbally admitted Geoffrey 

 at the king's presentation ; pretending that the 

 house was filled by Robert de Maidstone, the 

 king having ordered him to admit a suitable 

 person notwithstanding the claim of the late 

 Bishop of Winchester, because the king had 

 recovered in his court the presentation by 

 reason of the late voidance of that bishopric. 5 

 The obedient prelate duly inducted Geoffrey, 

 for the second time, by proxy, on 26 June. 6 

 This was followed on 28 June by a more im- 

 perative order to the bishop, telling him to 

 certify by the bearer if any further resistance 

 should be offered ; as the king was informed that 

 when the bishop ordered his commissary to in- 

 duct Geoffrey's proctor, the commissary found 

 many persons at the house who actively resisted 

 him so that he could not execute the order. 7 

 The resistance continued, and on 3 July the 

 bishop made a third induction of Geoffrey, with 

 a solemn warning to all who should resist. On 

 1 2 July the sheriff of Hampshire was ordered 

 to take with him sufficient power of the county, 

 and to go in person to the house of Holy Cross, 

 and to the churches annexed thereto, and to re- 

 move all lay or armed force from the house 

 and churches, and to put Geoffrey de Welle- 

 ford in possession. He was further instructed 

 to imprison any one resisting the execution of 

 the order. In this mandate it was also recited 

 that the sheriffs bailiff had reported that he 

 visited the house on Friday after the Transla- 

 tion of St. Thomas to remove all lay or armed 

 force, and that he found no force nor resist- 

 ance, and therefore did nothing in the matter, 

 'at which answer the king marvels, especi- 

 ally as it is testified before him by trust- 

 worthy men that a lay and armed force was 

 then and is still in the house of St. Cross, and 

 that the bailiff's answer was made frivolously 

 and derisively.' 8 The king's next step, in this 

 determined assertion of his authority and rights, 

 was to prohibit the archbishop from attempt- 

 ing anything prejudicial thereto. A further 

 writ on the same subject was addressed to the 



B Close, 14 Edw. II. m. 2d. 



6 Winton. Epis. Reg., Asserio, f. 15. 





7 Close, 14 Edw. II. m. id. 



8 Ibid. 15 Edw. II. m. 1 3d. 



194 



