RELIGIOUS HOUSES 



the canons' men, and that they were providing 

 for the homicides with the goods of the house. 

 The archbishop at once ordered them not to 

 receive or defend or provide for the homicides 

 cut of the goods of their house, which were for 

 their use and that of the poor. 



In 1 380-1 ^^ the Prior of Warter was taxed at 

 29J. 8^., and there were ten canons each taxed 

 at 3i. 4^. 



On I July 1388''^ John Claworth, sub-prior, 

 and John Hemyngburgh, Robert Takell, and 

 Richard de Beverley, canons of the house, 

 were appointed administrators in the place of 

 William Tyveryngton, who was suspended from 

 office owing to his notorious waste of the 

 property of the house, and for other reasons. 

 Shortly after this. Archbishop Arundel took 

 up the rule of the diocese, and on 21 

 November 1388 the suspended prior resigned. 

 The election of his successor took place on 

 1 1 December following,^' when, after mass 

 of the Holy Ghost, the canons, twelve in 

 number, proceeded to the election by way of 

 scrutiny, the three scrutators being John 

 Claworth, the sub-prior, John de Hemyngburgh, 

 and William de Tyveryngton, the late prior. 

 All voted for John de Hemyngburgh, except 

 himself, and he was declared duly elected, and 

 was thereafter confirmed and installed. It was 

 his second term of office, and he resigned again 

 in 1392,^ when Robert Takell succeeded him. 



William York, vicar of the parish church of 

 Warter, was elected prior on i March 1453,^' 

 in succession to Robert Hedon, who had 

 resigned. Five years later (16 August 1458)^^ 

 Archbishop William Booth suspended William 

 York from the priorship owing to his waste of 

 the goods of the house, and appointed John 

 Stranton the sub-prior and John the cellarer 

 temporary custodians of the goods of the priory. 



Archbishop Kemp in 1440 had forbidden all 

 abbots, priors, or others to sell, without the 

 special licence of their diocesans, within the 

 province of York, any wood, fallen or not. 

 Public report, however, had it that William York 

 had sold trees that had not fallen, as well as 

 those that had, at ' Setonwoddes, Seynt Loy 

 Woddes, and Brokhirst,' belonging to the priory, 

 in no small quantity, so that the woods them- 

 selves were nearly destroyed. Besides this, he 

 had sold various trees recently growing within 

 the precinct of the priory. Houses, moreover, 

 and buildings belonging to the priory, through 

 his neglect and carelessness had fallen to the 

 ground. His general dilapidation of the property 



"^ Subs. R. (P.R.O.), bdle. 63, no. 12. 



" York Archiepis. Reg. Arundel (sed. vac), fol. 2 

 [the registers sed. vac. before Arundel's rule are 

 contained in his register, not in the ' Sede Vacante ' 

 volume]. 



" Ibid. Arundel, fol. iz. . " Ibid. fol. 35. 



» Ibid. W. Booth, fol. 68. " Ibid. fol. 198*. 



had been to the grave injury of the house, and 

 the archbishop peremptorily cited him to show 

 cause why he should not be deposed from office. 

 The result was that York ' renounced ' the 

 priorship, and on 13 October^' the archbishop 

 sent a monition to him that he was to remove 

 himself within three days from the priory, and 

 was not to molest the prior or his brethren. A 

 concurrent order was sent '^ to William Spenser, 

 the new prior, that he was to remove William 

 York within three days from the priory, 

 retaining the monastic belongings which he had, 

 but allowing him to keep his own. He was to 

 be kept from consorting with the brethren, lest 

 by his malice and evil ambition he should make 

 the sheep who were whole dissatisfied, overthrow 

 the monastery, and bring to naught the obser- 

 vance of religion. He was, however, granted on 

 25 November^' a pension of 8 marks a year for 

 his maintenance, and on 8 December the arch- 

 bishop granted him letters testimonial, and a 

 licence to study at any university. In this way, 

 it seems, Warter got rid of him. 



In 1526 ^'' the clear annual value was returned 

 at ;^ 1 1 8, and according to the Fa/or Ecclesias- 

 ticus,^'- £14.4. Js. Sd, 



In 1534 Archbishop Lee included it among 

 the houses which he visited. The injunctions 

 which he then issued have been printed, ^^ and 

 only a brief summary is needed here. The 

 first portion of the injunctions were of a general 

 character. These include, however, a direction 

 that immediately after compline the cloister 

 doors were to be locked and the keys kept by 

 the prior or some discreet brother deputed by 

 him, and were not to be unlocked until 6 o'clock 

 in the morning in summer, and 7 in winter. 

 A more important injunction forbade the prior, 

 or any canon, to talk to women except in the 

 presence of two other canons who could witness 

 what was said and done. Any who infringed 

 this restriction would be held guilty of incon- 

 tinence. May this be charitably taken to explain 

 some of the cases of incontinence (which are 

 common) as being technical in character, 

 rather than actual breaches of the moral law ? 



The special injunctions to Warter directed 

 that the canons were to sleep in the dormitory, 

 each in his own appointed bed. They were to 

 eat together in the refectory, on common food, 

 and were not to use belts adorned with gold or 

 silver, or wear gold or silver rings, and were not 

 to go out without the prior's leave, and the prior 

 was only to grant leave for good reason. The 

 prior was to hold an inquiry twice a year to 

 prevent private proprietorship, and once a year 



" Ibid. fol. 203^. '» Ibid. 



'' Ibid. fol. 114. 



'» State Papers (P. RO.), 1526 (return by Brian 

 Higdon). 



" ra/or Ecci. v, 126. 



" Torks. Arch. Journ. xvi, 445. 



237 



