A HISTORY OF HERTFORDSHIRE 



i,ooo marks,** of which his official-general and 

 Thomas W alUngford, his senior chaplain, had 

 charge. When he was dead the two brothers 

 produced 250 marks and denied all knowledge 

 of the rest. The election resulted in the return 

 to power of Wheathampstead, who was informed 

 of the episode, but said nothing for a time. 

 When, however, W'allingford presented his first 

 accounts at Michaelmas 1453, it was discovered 

 that although during Stoke's time seasons had 

 been good, much wood sold, many serfs manu- 

 mitted and extreme parsimony exercised at the 

 monastery, and under the new rule expenses 

 had been kept down, yet the granaries were 

 empty and debts amounted to 600 marks and 

 more. The abbot showed his surprise and dis- 

 satisfaction, expressed his opinion to the 

 convent that there was dishonesty somewhere, 

 and told Wallingford that unless he could 

 manage better he must be remo\ed. \\'alling- 

 ford then manipulated his accounts so that there 

 appeared to be fewer debts and ^160 in hand ; 

 but when required soon afterwards to make 

 certain payments he said recourse must be had 

 to borrowing, telling the abbot that the sup- 

 posed ready money had really been expended 

 in repairs, and informing others that he had 

 given most of it to the abbot. Wheathampstead 

 thereupon accused him of peculation and 

 ordered him to surrender his unlawful gains, 

 which he heard amounted to ^1,000, or he would 

 proceed against him. Wallingford, however, 

 promised through an intermediary to pay every- 

 thing necessary, clear off the debts, and within 

 two years have ^^200-^(^300 in the treasury, and 

 was allowed to retain his post. 



In what is apparently another version of the 

 tale, it is related that the abbot, finding that the 

 official-general and the senior chaplain said 

 nothing about the 750 marks, began to suspect 

 them, and at last questioned them on the sub- 

 ject ; both declared they had not had the money, 

 and Wheathampstead, though convinced that 

 they were lying and telling them so, let the 

 matter drop.^ 



The story can hardly be dismissed as entirely 

 fiction.'* There must have been at least un- 

 pleasant rumours about \^ allingford, possibly 

 he was actually charged with dishonesty. His 

 innocence is also not proved by his retention 

 in office. That may have been a matter of 

 expediency. He had a party in the convent '^ 



'-The account in the Registers (i, 115-17) is 

 cert.iinly unfair to Stoke in implying that he had a 

 secret ho.ird. He had apparently saved out of his 

 revenues as other abbots had done, to leave money 

 for pious objects. 



'^ Reg. of St. Allans, i, 119-22. 



^ Abbot Gasquet, however, considers it an absolute 

 invention (Abbot WalUngford). 



" Reg. of St. Alhans, i, 104. Some had wished to 

 make him abbot (ibid. 5). 



and influential friends outside " ; moreover, 

 he could best put right the financial difficulty 

 he had created. The affair is discreditable to 

 St. Albans in any case, for if Wallingford was 

 blameless, one or more of the monks must 

 have been guilty of gross slander. 



In 1454 the monastery was threatened with 

 the loss of Pembroke Priory through Parha- 

 ment's confirmation of the earldom of Pembroke 

 to Jasper Tudor," and of Burston through 

 Charlton's action while Speaker of the Com- 

 mons,** but Wheathampstead managed to avert 

 both dangers.*' 



St. Albans on 22 May 1455 *" was the scene 

 of one of the most important battles of the 

 Civil War. The town was pillaged by the 

 northern followers of the victorious Duke of 

 York; the abbey, however, was spared." Its 

 escape, ascribed by the chronicler to the fact 

 that the king had not by lodging there com- 

 promised its neutrality,^^ was probably due to 

 the monastery's connexion with the late Duke of 

 Gloucester and its supposed inclination in conse- 

 quence to the side of the Duke of York, Hum- 

 phrey's political heir. If Wheathampstead could 

 not rely at all on the duke's favour, he merits 

 greater praise for doing what no one else dared, 

 asking the duke to allow his former enemies to 

 be buried."^ Permission was immediately given, 

 and the bodies of three Lancastrian nobles were 

 brought in by the monks and interred in the 

 Lady chapel." 



The Act of Resumption of 1456 caused the 

 abbot some anxiety : the prior sent to the 

 ParUament to guard the abbey's interests as 

 to the clerical tenth, had a proviso inserted in 

 the Act, but discovered afterwards that it was 

 invalid ; the end was only achieved by a fresh 

 grant in November 1457.** 



The reconciUation between the two parties 

 on 24 March 1458 was of direct benefit to the 

 monastery in so much as the Yorkists were to 

 pay £45 a year to the convent for masses for 

 the Lancastrians buried at St. Albans.*' The 

 king seems to have come immediately after- 

 wards to the abbey to spend Easter and stayed 

 three weeks." On 20 June he came again for 



'•^ Reg. of St. Albans, i, 112. He asked the Earl 

 of Pembroke and Lord Sudeley to intercede for him. 



" Ibid. 92-4. 



'* Ibid. 136-7. 



" The first through one of the late Duke of 

 Gloucester's servants. 



** Paston Letters (ei. 1 896), i, 327-31. 



" Reg. of St. Albans, i, 17 1-2. 



'^ Ibid. 173. 



«3 Ibid. 175-6. 



«^ Ibid. 177-8. 



" Ibid. 250-68. 



'''' Ibid. 295-302 ; An Engl. Chron. oj Reigns of 

 Ric. ll-Hen. VI (Camd. Soc), 77. 



" Cott. MS. Nero, D vii, fol. 73. 



404 



