A HISTORY OF HERTFORDSHIRE 



revenge for the discourtesy shown him by the 

 convent of Binham during a visitation made 

 the prior collector of the next tenth." The 

 abbot in vain tried to pacify the bishop by letter 

 and personal interview, and by the intercession 

 of the Dukes of Gloucester and Bedford.'* He 

 then contested the matter in the Court of 

 Exchequer and Convocation," and after a long 

 struggle seems to have been successful.*" 



These cases are characteristic of Wheat- 

 hampstead, who Hke De la Mare has been called 

 Utigious " and with as good or as bad foundation. 

 He was undoubtedly tenacious of the rights of 

 his house, but seems to have been diplomatic 

 rather than aggressive. In the means used to 

 attain his ends, however, he was not always 

 quite scrupulous. It has been noticed,*^ for 

 instance, that while Offa's charter contained 

 nothing about exemption from episcopal juris- 

 diction, there was much that bore directly 

 on the point in the copy produced by the abbot 

 before the Exchequer judges on the above 

 occasion. The way judgement was ensured 

 against the rector of Harpole can hardly be 

 approved. After a consultation with Bekyng- 

 ton, Dean of Arches, over a pension withdrawn 

 from St. Albans for thirty years,*^ the abbot 

 secured the Bishop of Lincoln's consent to the 

 trial of the case in the Arches Court, where the 

 decision in favour of the abbey in 1430 " was 

 a foregone conclusion. 



Wheathampstead showed his discretion in 

 coming to terms the same year with Thomas 

 KnoUys over right of chase in Tyttenhanger 

 Heath, that had been in dispute in Heyworth's 

 time *^ ; he was also prudent and fortunate 

 enough to persuade William Flete to submit the 

 questions between them to the arbitration of 

 Sir WilUam Babington, and thus settle amicably 

 an affair that might have proved as harassing 



'' Amundesham, Annalts, i, 300—1. 



" li id. 305-10. 



" Ibid. 31 1—65. The point seems to have been 

 whether Wheathampstead had protested for the abbey 

 and cells when the convocation granting the tenth 

 had declared that no collector should be excused by 

 obtaining royal immunity or privilege. 



*" The result is not given in the Annates, but in 

 the account of the abbot in Cott. MS. Nero, D vii, 

 printed in Reg. of St. Albans, i, App. D. 



*' Riley's Introduction to Amundesham, Annates, ii, 

 p. xiii. Wheathampstead was apparently considered 

 litigious for defending the abbey's rights and Hey- 

 worth indolent and unsatisfactory (ibid, i, p. xxvii) 

 for not doing so. 



*^ Ibid, ii, p. xlvii. 



*^ Apparently after a verdict against the abbey in 

 the Court of King's Bench on a technical issue 

 (Amundesham, Annates, i, 233). 



" Ibid. 232-54; Arundel MS. 34, fol. 25-31 d. 

 For the examination of witnesses for the abbey see 

 Lansd. MS. 375, fol. 6— I7d. 



^' Amundesham, Annates, i, 254-61. 



as Chilterne's.*' A dispute with the rector of 

 Girton about a pension was referred in 1434 

 to Bekyngton as arbiter " ; and in 1435 the 

 abbot recovered two quit-rents from tenements 

 in London, one by agreement, after it had been 

 unpaid for forty years.** 



The mistakes in the Whitman case, 1433-5, 

 were not Wheathampstead's. The archdeacon, 

 after declaring Richard Whitman, an inhabitant 

 of Rickmansworth, contumacious for not appear- 

 ing to answer a charge of slander,** excom- 

 municated him in face of his appeal to Rome 

 and letters of protection from the Court of 

 Arches. 



The Archbishop of Canterbury naturally 

 began proceedings against the archdeacon, who 

 thereupon resigned his office. Wheathampstead, 

 now left to cope with a difficult situation, 

 invoked the goodwill of the official of the 

 Arches, appealed in his turn to Rome and forced 

 \\'hitman into submission."" Whatever sym- 

 pathy may be felt for Whitman," it should be 

 remembered that the abbot could not afford to 

 be defied by a subject. 



In the affair with the Abbot of Westminster 

 Wheathampstead's good and bad points were 

 alike displayed. The matters at issue were the 

 gallows on Nomansland, which by Wheathamp- 

 stead's orders had been cut down in 1427,°^ and 

 toll demanded in the St. Albans market and re- 

 fused by the Abbot of Westminster and his men."^ 

 After the dispute had dragged on for years it 

 was brought in 1437 before certain judges, in an 

 unofficial capacity. When both sides had been 

 heard Wheathampstead invited the judges to 

 dinner and undoubtedly tried to influence them. 

 But, although he was willing to abide by their 



'" Amundesham, Annates, \, 263-73. Flete and 

 Babington were both admitted to the fraternity. 

 Unpleasant conclusions have been drawn from the 

 presents to Babington and Bekyngton entered in the 

 abbot's expenses (Riley, Introd. to Amundesham, 

 Annates [Rolls Ser.], ii, pp. xl-xli), but compensation 

 to a man for his time and trouble is not necessarily 

 a bribe, and when and in what circumstances the 

 gifts were offered and accepted is not known. 



*^ Amundesham, Annates, ii, 89-103. 



** Ibid. 1 13-15. 



*^ Whitman's account was that William Creke had 

 entered his tenement and taken his goods, and to 

 cover this act had charged him with defamation. He 

 said the archdeacon intended to make him submit to 

 Creke and this meant the loss of his tenement, and 

 he accused the abbot of showing partiality throughout 

 to Creke, who was his relation by marriage (Early 

 Chan. Proc. bdle. 44, no. 235). 



*" Amundesham, Annates, i, 369-90 ; ii, 7-87. 



'^ He gave in only after imprisonment for more 

 than a year. 



^ Amundesham, Annates, i, 14-15. 



" Their goods had therefore been seized and their 

 horses impounded by the bailiff of the Abbot of 

 St. Albans (Amundesham, Annates, ii, 128-31). 



400 



