A HISTORY OF SURREY 



acknowledged that the debt of the house 

 originally amounted to 700 marks and was 

 now 2,300 marks. The visitors severely 

 reprimanded him for the increase, particu- 

 larly as the number of monks had been 

 reduced during the past four years. It also 

 appeared that since the time that Prior Henry 

 had temporary charge of the convent for a 

 year and a half, he (Prior John) had sold a 

 property called Ompton, for which he had 

 received 500 marks. Also he had received 

 from Adam de Stratton 700 marks to be dis- 

 tributed over a term of seven years for a 

 wood called Chavor ; they reported that there 

 was something underhand about this trans- 

 action. He had also sold other wood to the 

 value of 600 marks and had alienated other 

 estates. The brethren were living correctly, 

 observing their rule and performing be- 

 comingly their sacred and devotional offices. 

 The necessaries for the subsistence of the 

 fraternity in grain and stock were sufficient 

 until the time of the next harvest. The 

 visitors summed up the prior's financial 

 delinquencies by reporting that on succeeding, 

 he had found the house indebted to the amount 

 of 300 to 400 marks, that during the time 

 when Prior Henry was in charge things went 

 from bad to worse, that Prior John had aug- 

 mented the convent's pecuniary obligations to 

 2,300 marks on his own showing and admis- 

 sion, that he had entirely made over to Adam 

 de Stratton four manors, in return for which 

 Adam was only under obligation to reduce 

 the convent debt by 1,500 marks.* The 

 monastery was taken under the king's protec- 

 tion in 1284 at the request of the prior of 

 Coulangcs, proctor general of the prior of 

 La Charite, who at the same time received 

 letters of safe conduct to visit and correct 

 excesses of houses of the order." 



An inundation of the Thames on 18 

 October 1294, which submerged the lands 

 of the brethren and broke the embankment 

 at Rotherhithe,^ must have considerably 

 added to their embarrassments, and in the 

 following year the king placed the monastery 

 in the custody of David le Graund on 

 account of its debts, with instructions for re- 

 pairing the breach at Rotherhithe.* William 

 de Carleton, who succeeded to the custody in 



I Duckett, Fuit. of Engl. Cluniac Foundations, 

 pp. 20 -2. Again there appears an irreconcileable 

 discrepancy betvireen the statements in this Visita- 

 tion as to the prior and his predecessors and the 

 account given in the Annals. 



» Pat. 12 Edw. I. m. 4. 



> Jnn. Mon. (Rolls Ser.), iii. 468. 



« Pat. 23 Edw. I. m. 6. 



1296, received a licence to demise the lands 

 of the priory in Birling and Charlton, Kent.' 

 Edward II. granted the prior and convent 

 exemption during pleasure from contribution 

 to the king's use at the prayer of Queen Isabel 

 on the occasion of a similar disaster in 1309.' 

 Nearly two years previously the prior had 

 received a royal request for the loan of two 

 good carts and horses to be at Westminster 

 early on St. Stephen's day to help to carry 

 the equipment or the king's household to 

 Dover. The king engaged to pay the costs 

 of the men leading the carts and of the 

 horses in going and returning.'' Edward II. 

 made some attempts at managing the affairs 

 of this distressed house ; his efforts though 

 well-intentioned were not always judicious, 

 and did not succeed in advancing its fortunes. 

 In April 1310 he wrote to the abbot of 

 Cluny with a request that at his next chapter 

 general he would provide Brother Peter de 

 Sancto Laurentio, monk and almoner of the 

 priory of Bermondsey, with a fitting priory 

 of his order in England.* This request being 

 apparently productive of no result, he wrote 

 again two years later on the death of Prior 

 Henry to urge the appointment of Brother 

 Peter to Bermondsey," to whom the tem- 

 poralities of the priory were restored on 28 

 October 131 2}° During his rule licence was 

 obtained from the king to appropriate the 

 church of Chelsham with the chapel of 

 Warlingham, for which privilege the convent 

 paid a fine of 40 marks." 



Prior Peter de Sancto Laurentio died in 

 1 31 9 and so did Geoffrey de Delviz who 

 followed him,*" to whom succeeded another 

 Peter who proved a very difficult subject to 

 both king and superior." The prior of La 

 Charit6 evidently distrusted him from the 

 outset, but the king, whose favour Peter had 

 secured, requested him to abate the suspicion 

 and malevolence that he had of his subor- 

 dinate prior of Bermondsey and gave instruc- 



s Ibid. 25 Edw. I. pt. i. m. 23. 

 « Ibid. 2 Edw. II. pt. i. m. 7. 

 ' Close, I Edw. II. m. I2d. 

 8 Ibid. 3 Edw. II. m. 6. 

 » Ibid. 6 Edw. II. m. 27d. 

 »» Pat. 6 Edw. II. pt. i. m. 13. 

 " Ibid. 8 Edw. II.pt. ii.m. 19. 

 i» Ann. Mon. (Rolls Ser.), iii. 470. 

 " In apparent contradiction to the statement of 

 the Annalist as to the death of Peter de Sancto 

 Laurentio in 1 3 19, an entry occurs among the 

 patents (i Edw. III. pt. ii, m. 23), for protec- 

 tion for Peter de Sancto Laurentio, late prior of 

 Bermondsey. See also Close, 15 Edw. II. m. 25, 

 where it would appear that the two Peters are one' 

 and the same— Peter de Sancto Laurentio. 



70 



