RELIGIOUS HOUSES 



Bishop Nicke visited West Acre in 15 14. 

 Richard Clarke, prior, was much embarrassed 

 by lack of money. He was in debt ^^20, and 

 was not able to pay the small stipends of the 

 canons ; the stock of sheep had considerably 

 diminished, then numbering 3,000 ; the prior 

 had sold nine score sheep at the last shearing ; 

 they had no grain except that which they 

 bought ; there had been no distribution made 

 of the effects of the late prior, whose will 

 ordered the distribution among the brethren. 

 There were also complaints against William 

 Smythe, the sub-prior. Some of the younger 

 canons were pursuing their studies at Cambridge, 

 but there were complaints that they had not 

 received the full amount of the exhibition that 

 had been granted. The visitation shows that 

 there was a good deal of bickering in the con- 

 vent, but apparently no grave evils. Some of 

 the complaints testify to the strictness with 

 which the services were kept up. For Robert 

 Pepyr, the only canon who could play the organ, 

 could never get the prior to grant him leave of 

 absence. The principal injunction that followed 

 this visitation was the bishop's order to elect a 

 new sub-prior, for the four senior canons pre- 

 sented Spillman and Pallmer to the prior for him 

 to choose one, and his choice fell on Canon 

 Spillman.^ 



During the next six years the debts and 

 difficulties of the house had increased. William 

 Lowthe was prior at the visitation of 4 July, 

 1520, having been appointed earlier in that year. 

 There was no schoolmaster to teach the boys. 

 The number of canons had diminished, but three 

 were at their studies at the University. The 

 prior was spoken of by three of the canons as 

 a sensual person, but their meaning is difficult to 

 understand. There was not a breath against 

 him of any kind of scandal. Sixteen canons 

 were examined at this visitation, but two of 

 them belonged to the cell of Great Massingham. 

 This visitation led to the deposing of the sub- 

 prior and the appointing of Thomas Pallmer in 

 in his place.^ 



The priory was visited on I August, 1526, 

 when William Wingfield was prior. Seven of 

 the fourteen canons who were present agreed 

 with the prior that all was going on well. But 

 the debts were increasing and the number of 

 canons decreasing ; and a grievous scandal had 

 to be reported of one of the canons.' 



The last visitation was held in July, 1532. 

 Several of the canons, as well as Prior Wingfield 

 and Sub-Prior Stirtewhaite, were satisfied that 

 there was nothing calling for reformation. All 

 debts were paid, and the balance-sheet produced 

 by the prior showed that the cellarer had ^t^'^ in 

 hand. Among the complaints were the pay- 

 ment of an annuity of £if to Anthony Calibut, 



' Jessopp, Nora). Visit. (Camd. Soc), 10 1-6. 

 ' Ibid. 164-6. ^Ibid. 249-51. 



for which he returned no service ; a diminution 

 in the distribution of bread to the poor ; and 

 neglect to keep the lamp burning before the 

 Sacrament according to custom.* 



Prior William and sixteen of his canons sub- 

 scribed in their chapter-house, on 31 August, 

 1534, to the king's supremacy.* 



On 18 September, 1535, at the suggestion of 

 Dr. Legh and John ap Rice, a notary public, 

 two of the most subservient of Cromwell's tools, 

 the monastic visiting jurisdiction of the bishops 

 was suspended by the king. The two men who 

 suggested this were at once made monastic visitors 

 and speedily entered upon their work in Norfolk. 

 On 1 1 November they wrote to Cromwell as 

 to the progress they were making with their 

 comperta.^ 



When these two men presented their report 

 they actually asserted that the prior and sub- 

 prior and eleven other of the canons of West- 

 acre had confessed that they were guilty of foul 

 sins.' It is impossible for any fair-minded person 

 to give credit to so monstrous and wholesale a 

 supposition, especially in view of the recent 

 searching and obviously truthful visitations of 

 this priory by its diocesans. 



At any rate no credence whatever could have 

 been given to this particular charge made by 

 these notorious ' visitors ' ; for although, accord- ^ 

 ing to them. West Acre was by far the foulest 

 lived of all the Norfolk religious houses, in 

 October of the very year when their report of 

 the prior of Westacre's personal and conventual 

 enormities had been rendered, William Wingfield 

 was one of the fourteen Norfolk gentlemen 

 specially appointed by the king to abide in their 

 counties and act as justices to keep good order 

 during the absence of the rest of the gentlemen 

 and noblemen during the northern rebellion, 

 the priors of West Acre and Castle Acre being 

 the only two ecclesiastics of the county selected 

 for this honour.' 



On 15 January, 1538, West Acre Priory, with 

 the dependent priory or cell of Great Massing- 

 ham and all its possessions, was surrendered to 

 Robert Southwell, attorney of the Augmentation 

 Office, to be held by him for a year with 

 remainder to the king. The surrender was 

 signed by the prior and seven of the canons. 

 This was the first of the monastic 'surrenders,' 

 and its farcical character is clear ; for a month 

 earlier (16 December, 1537) Sir Roger Townsend 

 wrote to Cromwell saying that all the goods of 

 West Acre Priory had been sequestrated according 

 to order and inventories taken. On 9 Decem- 

 ber there had been some endeavour otherwise to 

 dispose of the monastic property. Commissioner 



* Ibid. ' Dep. Keeper's Rep. vii, App. 2, p. 304. 



^ L. and P. Hen. Fill, ix, 808. The Norfolk 

 comperta are in Ap Rice's handwriting, 

 'i. and P. Hen. VIII, x, 143. 

 "Ibid, xi, 235 (4). 



403 



