A HISTORY OF SURREY 



de Bui, deceased, had had by the late king's 

 request,' and again in 1340 Bartholomew de 

 Langele was sent to receive the maintenance 

 which the convent provided for Nicholas de 

 la Garderobe at the request of Edward I." 

 John Mareys was sent as a pensioner in March 

 1342-3 in the place of John Nichol, deceased.^ 

 In accordance with the practice of imposing a 

 king's clerk on houses of royal patronage on 

 the occasion of the creation of a new prior, 

 the convent received in May 1335 following 

 the election of Thomas de Kent, Richard 

 Murymouth, until such time as he should be 

 provided by them with a suitable benefice.* 

 On similar conditions- Henry de Borewellwas 

 granted a pension in 1340 on the succession 

 of Thomas de Lytlynton as prior.' Besides 

 these charges Stephen de Staplebrigg, a 

 Templar, was sent to do penance in the 

 monastery of St. Mary Merton, and in 1313 

 Henry de Cobham, keeper of the late Temp- 

 lars' lands in Surrey, was ordered to pay to 

 the Bishop of Winchester the arrears for his 

 maintenance, to wit ^d. a day from the time 

 of his appointment as keeper and to continue 

 to pay the same." A few years later the Bishop 

 of London, in accordance with a bull of Pope 

 John XXII., sent to the convent Thomas 

 Totty, a lay brother of the late order, to end 

 his days there.' 



The priory was involved from the days of 

 John in frequent suits which must have 

 harassed them to some extent if it resulted 

 in no pecuniary loss. In Michaelmas term 

 1202 a suit was impending between Simon, 

 son of Richard, and the prior of Merton re- 

 specting half a virgate of land in Fifhide. 

 The prior claimed that the plot in question 

 was parcel of Ewell, a manor which had 

 been granted to the canons by Henry II. to 

 be held in free alms as the king held it in 

 desmesne, and the plea being maintained the 

 assize did not proceed.' In Easter term 

 1206 William, clerk of Tunbridge, was sued 

 by the prior and canons for an annual rent 

 of 2J. claimed by them as the gift of Roger, 

 son of Odo, who confirmed by charter to the 



' Close, s Edw. III. pt. i, m. i6d. The following 

 year the prior of Merton was requested with other 

 ecclesiastics to aid Edward III. with a subsidy in 

 connection with expenses incurred by the marriage 

 of the king's sister Eleanor to the Count of Guel- 

 ders (ibid. 6 Edw. III. m. i6d). 



» Ibid. 14 Edw. III. m. 2-jd. 



» Ibid. 17 Edw. III. pt. I, m. i8d. 



* Ibid. 9 Edw. III. m. 25d. 

 « Ibid. 14 Edw. III. m. zsd. 



• Ibid. 7 Edw. II. m. 20. 



' London Epis. Reg., Gravesend, f. 45. 

 8 Abbrev. Plac. (Rec. Com.), 35. 



church of Merton in free alms his gift of all 

 that land which the widow Alditha held of 

 him. Judgment was deferred till certain 

 inquiries could be made.' In the same term 

 the prior summoned Brian, son of Ralph, and 

 Gunnora his wife for the advowson of the 

 church of Maiden as that which Eudo de 

 Meldon gave with his body in free alms to 

 the convent. The verdict is not given," but 

 as the church was bestowed later, on the 

 scholars of the college founded by Walter de 

 Merton, it would appear that the convent 

 were able to maintain their claim. The 

 prior of Merton brought a suit against Sam- 

 son de Molesey in Trinity term 12 12 for 

 having diverted the course of the water at 

 Molesey to the injury of the free tenant of the 

 priory there." During the reign of Henry III. 

 there appears to have been some violence in 

 connection with the chapel of Ropley. The 

 sheriff of Southampton was ordered to remove 

 the lay force by which the men of the prior 

 of Merton were being obstructed, so that they 

 might have free entry to the chapel, and to 

 take pledges from those causing the obstruc- 

 tion to appear before the king to answer for 

 their violence. The sheriff was further com- 

 manded to attach Master Alberic, the official 

 of the archdeacon of Winchester, to answer 

 for his action in collating and instituting to 

 the chapel contrary to the claim of the king, 

 in whose hands the right of presentation had 

 devolved by reason of the voidance of the see 

 of Winchester, and enjoined to remove all 

 force cleric or lay, and to take all who ob- 

 structed to answer for what they had done.** 

 In the year 1253 * dispute arose between 

 the king's bailiff and the convent, and on the 

 morrow of the Feast of St. Martin, Henry de 

 Tuglur, the prior's bailiff, was attached to 

 answer to the king why they had neglected 

 to convey the king's treasure through the dis- 

 trict of Kingston as required by his bailiff, why 

 they neglected to keep vigil in the aforesaid vill 

 which pertains to the preservation of the 

 king's peace, and why they refused to appear 

 with arms before the king's constables accord- 

 ing to their assignment. The king's bailiff 

 said he had duly admonished them and gone 

 round from house to house, but brother Ste- 

 phen, the prior's bailiff, went to each house 

 and forbad them to fulfil these demands. The 

 prior's bailiff asserted that the prior had a 

 charter of King Richard which acquitted him 

 of such service. The king's bailiff further 

 alleged that they refused to keep watch or 



• Ibid. p. 50. 

 " Ibid. p. 86, 91. 



98 



" Ibid. 



" Ibid. p. 113. 



