ENGLISH CHURCH AND LAY TAXES 221 



It is, therefore, an interesting problem to account for the taxation of the 

 movable property of the clergy upon lands not valued in 1291, during 

 this intervening period. As the church continued to acquire lands 

 during Edward's reign, the interest is not simply in a past difficulty. 



Those records of the reign of Edward III, which have been examined, 

 show clearly, that in spite of the absence of any definite directions to the 

 collectors of the lay subsidies, the practice of the previous reigns con- 

 tinued in force. The evidence of such a condition of affairs is found 

 on all sides, in such rolls of the lay taxes as remain to us, in the manorial 

 accounts and the records of the officials of the ecclesiastical corporations, 

 and more abundantly in the various enrolments of royal and other 

 letters. 



There are extant for the first two lay taxes of the reign of Edward III 

 a large number of rolls giving the names of all those who paid to these 

 subsidies.^ A careful examination of these reveals the names of a number 

 of ecclesiastics paying their share of these purely lay taxes. In many cases 

 the fact that lands owned by the clergy are included on these fists is, 

 doubtless, not to be discovered because of the fact that baihfifs or others 

 were acting as their agents in the farming of these lands. In this case 

 the baififf's name alone might appear. After the year 1332 the rolls of 

 the names of those who paid to the lay subsidies were no longer made 

 up and it is necessary to rely upon other sources of information. The 

 account already noted for the priory of St. Edmund covers the succeed- 

 ing period down to the twenty-fifth year of Edward III, showing in this 

 individual case, at least, a continuity of practice. The remarkable 

 series of baihffs' accounts preserved in the archives of Merton College, 

 Oxford, however, cover the whole of Edward's reign. ^ In the case of 



^ North Riding Record Society, new series, Vol. IV, pp. 153, 155, 160, 161, etc.; Associated Archil. 

 Societies, Reports and Papers, "Earliest Leicestershire Lay Subsidy Roll, 1327," ed. W. G. D. Fletcher, 

 Vol. XX, pp. 16, S3, 8s, 99, 100, loi, 124, 125, 130, 154, etc.; William Salt Archceol. Society, Vol. X, pp. 

 83, 105. 108, 110, etc. An examination of the manuscript rolls gives the same results. For example, the 

 Cambridge roll of 1334, Exchequer Lay Subsidy, 81/10; for Kent, Exchequer Lay Subsidy, 149/9, ™- 76 

 et passim. With the latter compare Pipe Roll, number 180 m. 3 d. 



' They are partially summarized by Thorold Rogers, in his Agriculture and Prices, Vol. II, pp S60-65. 

 Owing to the brevity of his account I have checked up his figvires in some cases. The entries run some- 

 what as follows: In the account of the bailiff of the manor of Cheddington, 6-7 Edward III, under expenses 

 there is the following: "Item in expenses taxatorum XV^, II s. II d. Item in dono eisdem III s. III. d. Item 

 solut' taxatorum XV^ pro manerio de Chetyndon XVIII s. II. d. ob.' " Merton College MSB. 5564 (Manoria 

 Records). 



