RELIGIOUS HOUSES 



sors, GeoflFrey de Muschamp ^'* and William de 

 Cornhill (in 12 16),"' and, finally, in 1228 Pope 

 Gregory IX.^'' Gregory also gave the canons 

 licence to celebrate the divine offices during a 

 general interdict, and to admit those who desired 

 it to burial in their church, saving the rights of 

 their parish churches. No canon was to leave 

 the house without licence except for a stricter 

 rule. Difficulties had arisen with regard to 

 Robert son of Henry's gift of Flixton church. 

 During the episcopate of Geoffrey de Muschamp 

 {i 198-1208) the right of the priory to the 

 advowson was disputed by Roger son of Henry, 

 apparently the founder's brother, and Henry son 

 of Bernard, probably a nephew, who claimed as 

 the heirs of Henry son of Siward, the founder's 

 father. An assize of darrein presentment being 

 held, they obtained a verdict in their favour and 

 presented Henry son of Richard [de Tar bock], 

 which Richard was another brother of the 

 founder.^'' Henry de Tarbock afterwards re- 

 leased his rights in the church to the canons 

 subject to the payment to him of 2 marks a year 

 during the tenure of the benefice by Andrew 

 ' phisicus,' who was perhaps his vicar. He also 

 promised his good offices in obtaining the appro- 

 priation of the church to the priory, which in 

 case of success was to allow him a pension of 

 3 marks for life.^^ No appropriation took place, 

 but either before or after the arrangement with 

 Henry the canons secured a pension from the 

 church.^'^ Towards the end of the thirteenth 

 century the advowson passed into the hands of 

 Bishop Roger Longespde, who appropriated the 

 church, about 1280 it is said, as a prebend in 

 his cathedral.-'^ 



The canons were more successful in obtaining 

 the appropriation of the other two churches 

 whose advowson had been granted to them. 

 Bishop William de Cornhill (1215-23), 'in con- 

 sideration of their religion, honesty, and im- 

 moderate poverty,' gave them Ormskirk church, 

 saving a competent vicarage.-'*^ A few years 

 later Alexander de Stavenby, his successor, 



"* Reg. of Burscough, fol. 69. 



"^ Ibid. Duch7 of Lane. Anct. D., L. 271. 



"° Reg. of Burscough, fol. 63. 



'" Lanes. Pipe R. 353-6. It is not easy to see 

 how the claimants had a better ' hereditary right ' to 

 the patronage exercised by Henry son of Siward than 

 the eldest son and his heirs. 



"* Duchy of Lane. Anct. D., L. 617. The date is 

 after 1232. About the same time Robert de Hulton 

 resigned to the priory all right and claim in the pre- 

 sentation of Flixton church ; Duchy of Lane. Cart. 

 Misc. i, fol. 17 ; Dep. Keeper's Rep. xxxvi, No. 347. 

 The rights of the priory are described by Bishop 

 Alexander de Stavenby as 'Jus quam habent tam a 

 patronis quam predecessoribus nostris in ecclesia de 

 Flixton ' ; Duchy of Lane. Anct. D., L. 272. 



'"Ibid. L. 618. 



"" Le Neve, Fasti Eccl. Angl. i, 602. 

 "' Duchy of Lane. Anct. D., L. 108. 



granted Huyton church to the priory in proprios 

 ususy the gift to take effect after the death of the 

 rector in possession, when he reserved the right 

 to ordain a vicarage."^ It was not, however, 

 until 1277 ^^^^ * vicarage was ordained, with a 

 portion taxed as worth ten marks.'*' 



Eight years later the bishop, in view of the 

 proximity of Ormskirk church to the priory, 

 from which it was distant about three miles, con- 

 sented that on the death or cession of the present 

 vicar the canons should for the future be allowed 

 to present one of their own number, being a 

 priest and suitable.'" On a subsequent vacancy 

 the convent, ' by negligence,' presented a secular 

 priest, and in 1339 thought it necessary to obtain 

 a renewal of the privilege from Bishop North- 

 burgh, ' in relief of the charges with which they 

 are heavily burdened."' Henceforth down to 

 the Reformation the vicar of Ormskirk was 

 always a canon of the house. In the fifteenth 

 century several canons held the vicarage of 

 Huyton. Disputes between the priory and the 

 vicars as to their portions were not thereby obvi- 

 ated. An episcopal inquiry was held in 1340 

 on the petition of Alexander of Wakefield, vicar 

 of Ormskirk ; "^ a dispute with John Layet, 

 vicar of Huyton, was settled by arbitration in 

 1387 ; and in 1461 Ralph Langley, vicar of 

 Huyton, a canon of the house, secured a revision 

 of his portion, which he alleged to be too 

 small."' 



Pope Boniface VIII in 1295 empowered the 

 prior for the time being to nominate six of the 

 canons, even if etate minores, provided they were 

 over twenty years of age, to be promoted by any 

 bishop to sacred orders and minister in them 

 lawfully. On promotion to be priests they were 

 to be allowed a full voice in filling up any 

 vacancy in the office of prior — to which they 

 might themselves be elected."^ The same pope 

 granted a general confirmation of the priory's 

 privileges in 1300."' 



A few years before the prior and convent had 

 bestowed borough rights on their town of Orms- 

 kirk,"" and obtained (in 1286) from Edward I 

 and Edmund of Lancaster a grant of a market 

 and five days' fair there.''' The grant and 



'" Reg. of Burscough, fol. 6<)b. 



'" Ibid. fol. 67-683. Three selions of land and a 

 competent manse ' which the chaplains used to have ' 

 were included. 



'" Ibid. fol. io6b. 



'" Ibid. fol. 107; Duchy of Lane. Anct. D., L. 275. 



■" Ibid. L. 588 ; Reg. of Burscough, fol. 108. 

 The vicarage was declared to consist of a manse, 

 4 acres of land, and ;^I0 a year in money, the priory 

 bearing all charges. 



"' Reg. of Burscough, fol. 104^ ; Duchy of Lane. 

 Cart. Misc. iii, fol. 74. 



'" Reg. of Burscough, fol. 66b. 



'" Ibid. fol. 103. ""Ibid. fol. 15. 



'" Chart. R. Edw. I, No. 23 ; Duchy of Lane. 

 Cart. Misc. i, fol. 45 ; Reg. of Burscough, foh 13. 



149 



