Gerbald was succeeded by his grandson and heir, Gerard de Rhodes. This is shewn by a Carlisle document. [17c] A dispute arose between Hugh, son of Ralph (surname not given) and Gerard de Rhodes, concerning the manor and soke of Horncastle, the advowson of the church, &c., which were claimed by the said Hugh; but a compromise was effected, 400 marks being paid to Hugh, and Gerard de Rhodes left in undisputed possession.
It has been thought probable that this Ralph, father of Hugh, was Ranulph, Earl of Chester, who was lord of the manors of Revesby and Hareby, and had other possessions in the neighbourhood. He, it is supposed, held the manor of Horncastle, as trustee, during the minority of Gerard. Gerard was, in due course, succeeded by his son and heir, Ralph de Rhodes, in the reign of Henry III. This again is proved by a Feet of Fines, [17d] which records an “agreement made in the court of the Lord King at Westminster (3 Feb., A.D. 1224–5), between Henry del Ortiay and Sabina his wife on the one part, and the said Ralph de Rhodes on the other part,” whereby the former acknowledge certain lands and appurtenances in Horncastle and its soke to be the property of the said Ralph, and he grants to them, as his tenants, certain lands; they, in acknowledgement, “rendering him therefor, by the year, one pair of gilt spurs at Easter for all service and exactions.”
We have now reached another stage in the tenure of this manor and find ourselves once more at the point where the present chapter opened. Hitherto the manor had been held “in capite” (or “in chief”) of the king by lay lords, or, in the two cases of Queen Editha and Adelias de Condi, by a lady;
but in this reign Walter Mauclerk, the third Bishop of Carlisle, purchased the manor from Ralph de Rhodes. He was himself a powerful Norman and held the office of Treasurer of the Exchequer (a common combination of civil and ecclesiastical duties in those days), but now he and his successors were bound “to do suit and service to Ralph and his heirs.” This purchase is proved by a Lincoln document called a “Plea Quo Warranto,” which records a case argued before the Justices Itinerant, in the reign of Edward I., when it was stated that Ralph de Rhodes “enfeoffed Walter Mauclerk to hold the church, manor and appurtenances in Horncastre, to him and his heirs, of the gift of the said Ralph.” [18a] That the Bishop, although an ecclesiastic, was bound to do service to the heirs of Ralph is shown by another document, [18b] in which John, son of Gerard de Rhodes, a descendant of Ralph, makes a grant to certain parties of “the homage and whole service of the Bishop of Carlisle, and his successors, for the manor (&c.) of Horncastre, which Gerard, son of Gerard my brother, granted to me.” This is dated the 13th year of Edward I., 1285, whereas the actual sale of the manor took place in the reign of Henry III., A.D. 1230, and was confirmed by the king in the same year. [18c]
We have called this another stage in the tenure of this manor and for this reason, an ecclesiastic of high rank, with the authority of the Pope of Rome at his back, was a more powerful subject than any lay baron, and this influence soon shewed itself, for while the lay lords of the manor had been content with doing their service to the king, and exacting service from those holding under them, the Bishop of Carlisle, in the first year of his tenure, obtained from the king three charters, conferring on the town of Horncastle immunities and privileges, which had the effect of raising the town from the status of little more than a village to that of the general mart of the surrounding country. The first of these charters gave the bishop, as lord of the manor, the right of free warren throughout the soke [18d]; the second gave him licence to hold an annual fair two days before the feast of St. Barnabas (June 11), to continue eight days; the third empowered him to hang felons. An additional charter was granted in the following year empowering the bishop to hold a weekly market on Wednesday (die Mercurii), which was afterwards changed to Saturday, on which day it is still held; also to hold another fair on the eve of the Feast of St. Laurence (Aug. 10th), to continue seven days. [18e]
We here quote a few words of the original Carlisle charter, as shewing the style of such documents in those days: “Henry to all Bishops, Bailiffs, Provosts, servants, &c., health. Know that we, by the guidance of God, and
for the health of our soul, and of the souls of our ancestors and descendants, have granted, and confirmed by this present charter, to God, and the church of the blessed Mary of Carlisle, and to the Venerable Father, Walter, Bishop of Carlisle,” &c. It then goes on to specify, among other privileges, that the bishop shall have “all chattells of felons and fugitives, all amerciaments and fines from all men and tenants of the manor and soke; that the bishop and his successors shall be quit for ever to the king of all mercies, fines (&c.), that no constable of the king shall have power of entry, but that the whole shall pertain to the said bishop, except attachments touching pleas of the crown, and that all chattells, &c., either in the king’s court, or any other, shall be the bishop’s.” Then follow cases in which chattells of Robert Mawe, a fugitive, were demanded by the bishop, and £24 exacted from the township of Horncastle in lieu thereof; also 40s. from William, son of Drogo de Horncastre, for trespass, and other fines from Ralph Ascer, bailiff. Robert de Kirkby, &c., &c. The same document states that the bishop has a gallows (furcæ) at Horncastle for hanging offenders within the soke; and, in connection with this we may observe that in the south of the town is still a point called “Hangman’s Corner.”
These extensive powers, however, would hardly seem (to use the words of the charter) to have been “for the good of the souls” of the bishop or his successors, since they rather had the effect of leading him to the abuse of his rights. Accordingly, in the reign of Edward III., a plea was entered at Westminster, before the King’s Justices, [19a] by which John, Bishop of Carlisle, was charged with resisting the authority of the king in the matter of the patronage of the benefice of Horncastle. That benefice was usually in the gift of the bishop, but the rector, Simon de Islip, had been appointed by the king Archbishop of Canterbury and, in such circumstances, the crown by custom presents to the vacancy. The bishop resisted and proceeded to appoint his own nominee, but the judgment of the court was against him.
A somewhat similar case occurred a few years later. [19b] Thomas de Appleby, the Bishop of Carlisle, and John de Rouseby, clerk, were “summoned to answer to the Lord the King, that they permit him to appoint to the church of Horncastre, vacant, and belonging to the king’s gift, by reason of the bishopric of Carlisle being recently vacant.” It was argued that John de Kirkby, Bishop of Carlisle, had presented Simon de Islip to that benefice, afterwards created Archbishop of Canterbury, and that the temporalities (patronage, &c.) of the Bishopric of Carlisle therefore (for that turn) came to the king by the death of John de Kirkby, bishop. The said bishop, Thomas de Appleby, and John de Rouseby brought the case before the court, but they admitted the justice of the king’s plea and judgment was given for the king.
We have said that although Walter Mauclerk, as Bishop of Carlisle, bought this manor from Ralph de Rhodes, he and his successors were still bound to “do suit and service” to Ralph and his heirs, and in the brief summary with which this chapter opened we named Roger le Scrope and Margaret his wife, with Robert Tibetot and Eva his wife, among those descendants of Ralph de Rhodes. We have fuller mention of them in documents which we here quote. In a Roll of the reign of Edward I., [19c] John, son