RELIGIOUS HOUSES 
pleaded that Guy de St. Walery and Aubreye 
his wife had given the church to St. Paul’s, 
Bedford, their gift being confirmed by Simon 
de Beauchamp and Bishop Hugh (1186- 
1200). It was proved that Roger had only 
held Aspley as baillee until he was assigned 
land to the value of £10 elsewhere (which 
he afterwards received in Stotfold), and that 
Guy de St. Walery had recovered Aspley 
against him by fine. Therefore his gift was 
invalid, and Newnham was assigned the 
church under St. Walery’s gift." 
But new troubles soon arose through the 
tyrannical behaviour of William de Beau- 
champ, son of the founder; who, en- 
couraged by his wife Ida, proved himself 
quite as much an enemy to the religious 
of the neighbourhood as Fawkes de Bréauté 
had been. The first difficulty was connected 
with the church of Wootton, and other 
property of the priory ;? but it was at the 
election of a prior that William’s conduct at 
last brought him under episcopal censure. 
The charter of Simon had provided that the 
convent should have the right of free election, 
only asking his consent as patron: William 
wished to do the part of both bishop and 
patron. There was some unpleasantness over 
an election in 1247 ;° but in 1254 William 
came in person to the priory with his wife, 
and compelled the new prior, Stephen, to 
come outside the gate to him to receive the 
temporalities ; then, taking him by the hand, 
he led him into the church, and installed him 
in his place in choir. This, however, was 
too much for the bishop: he at once visited 
the priory and made William apologise for his 
invasion of the liberties of the church.® It 
is possible that the great charter of Newnham, 
in which William confirmed all the gifts of 
his father and others, including the licence for 
t Bracton’s Note Book, iii. 474-6. There had 
been several disputes about the church before 
this. Nicholas the archdeacon (1145-81) con- 
firmed the gift of it by Roger de Salford to 
Dunstable, and explained that it had once formed 
a part of his prebend, but now he resigned all his 
rights in it to the priory (Harl. MS. 188s, f. 24); 
while on the other hand Simon de Beauchamp 
wrote to the Bishop of Norwich to say that if the 
prior of Dunstable or any one else should bring 
forward a charter to prove his right to the church, 
it would not be with his warrant: and that the 
charter of Roger de Salford, who, as his tenant, 
had no power to give the church to any one with- 
out his consent, was invalid (Harl. MS. 3656, f. 
20). 
2 Harl, MS. 3656, ff. 19, 21b, 22. 
3 Ann. Mon. (Rolls Series), iii. 172. 
4 Ibid. rgr. 
5 Harl. MS. 3656, f. 54. 
free election, belongs to this time.6 The 
next of the Beauchamps, another William, 
made some reparation for the misdeeds of his 
father.” 
When the barony of Bedford passed to the 
Mowbrays the advowson of the priory went 
with it. An attempt was made in 1347,° at 
the death of John of Astwick, to prove that 
it was held of the king in capite; but the 
jury then called proved conclusively that it 
was held always of the barony of Bedford, 
and that Sir John Mowbray was at that time 
the patron. In 1352 Thomas Mowbray, 
Earl Marshal, confirmed the charter of 
William de Beauchamp.® The foundation 
charter, charter of transference to Newnham 
and others were confirmed by Henry IL, 
Edward J., Edward II., Edward III. and 
Richard II. ; the last royal charter was that 
of Henry IV. dated 15 February 1408-9.1° 
Of the internal history of the priory we 
know very little. It seems to have had a 
good reputation at all times. Hervey, the 
prior in 1228 (previously prior of Osney),. 
was commissioned in that year, with Richard 
de Morins of Dunstable, to visit all the houses 
of their order throughout the dioceses of 
Lincoln and Coventry ; two priors resigned 
in consequence. In Grossetéte’s unsparing 
visitations of 1235 and 1249 no charge was 
laid against this house ;*? and no other visita- 
tion is recorded until that of Bishop Burghersh 
some time before 1322. The prior at that 
time, John of Astwick, was very unpopular, 
and anxious in consequence to resign; but 
the bishop thought it sufficient to urge the 
brethren to be more exact in their obedience.'® 
Bishop Buckingham sent an order in 1387 
that ‘peace should be established between 
the priories of Newnham and Caldwell; ’*4 
8 Ibid. ff. 8-12. 
7 Harl. MS. 3656, ff 2tb, 22. The elder 
William died in 1260, the younger in 1262 (Ann. 
Mon. [Rolls Series], iii. 215, 219). 
8 The question of the advowson had been before 
the bishop in 1314 (Linc. Epis. Reg., Memo. 
Dalderby, 280d). The king’s escheator, Roger 
PEstrange, held it in 1271 and 1272 (ibid. Rolls of 
Gravesend) in the interval between John de Beau- 
champ and Sir John Mowbray, and this naturally 
led to the assumption that it was held of the king. 
9 Harl. MS. 3656, f. 32. 
10 [bid. ff. 25-36. 
11 Ann, Mon. (Rolls Series), iii. 112. 
12 Tbid. 146, 179. It seems, however, that 
Grossetéte purposed a special visitation to Newn- 
ham, and was not satisfied with its condition, though 
the Dunstable chronicler does not allude to this 
(Introd. to Letters of Grossetéte [Rolls Series}). 
13 Linc. Epis. Reg., Memo. Burghersh, 38. 
14 Ibid. Memo. Buckingham, 342d. 
379 
