“This Robert was the son of Thomas Brooke de Claverley, in this
county, and was made Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas in the
first year of Queen Mary, when he received the honour of Knighthood.
He died in the communion of the church of Rome, A.D. 1558, and left
his zeal for his religion to posterity, and his excellent performance
of the Abridgment of the Common Law to the Students of that
Profession. 36th Hen. VIII. William Astun did homage for a shop
here. 38th Hen. VIII, the said Robert Brooke likewise did homage pro
shopa in Madalie. Recorda Paschæ, 2d Edw. VI rot. 11, de Roberto
Brooke, Armigero, et Dorothea uxore ejus occasionalis ad ostendendum
qualiter ingressi sunt et tenent unam shopam et dimid. acræ terræ in
Madeley. 3d. Edw. VI, the king grants to Edward Molyneux and Robert
Brooke, of London, Esqrs. all that annual rent of £4 13s. 9½d.
reserved to the crown out of this manor, together with the demenses
of the same, and other lands therein specified, in fee simple. John
Brooke, Esq. 27th Eliz. made a settlement of Madeley on Richard
Prince, Esq. Sir Basil Brooke, Knight, 3d James I, sold lands here
to David Stilgo, Robert and Edward Stilgo. Matthew Fowler, Gent. son
and heir of Roger Fowler, had general livery 17th James for his lands
in Madeley.”
Mr. Brooke had the reputation of being a great lawyer, and whilst a
barrister we find him engaged by the Corporation of Shrewsbury to examine
a petition from the town “for the discharge of the subsidies.” According
to the entry in the Corporation books (1542) he and Serjeant Molyneux
were paid 15s. for their services. He is described as Recorder of London
whilst visiting the town, with Roger Townesende, Chief Justice of Wales,
and Richard Hasshall, Esqr., “one of the Commissioners of our Lord the
King,” and as being presented with “wayffers and torts,” at the expense
of the corporation.
With regard to Basil Brooke, we find by an indenture of release, dated
the 29th of May, 1706, that he, Basil Brooke, Esq., of Madeley, deceased,
by his will bequeathed to the poor of the parish of Madeley the sum of
£40, which the churchwardens and parishioners of the parish desired might
be laid out in the purchase of lands and tenements for the use of the
poor. And it was witnessed that Comerford Brooke, in consideration of
the said £40, and also a further sum of £30 paid to him by Audley Bowdler
and eight other parties to the said indenture, granted to the said Audley
Bowdler and others, their heirs and assigns, three several cottages or
tenements, with gardens and yards thereto belonging, situated in Madeley
Wood, in the said parish, and in the said indenture, more particularly
described, on trust to employ the rents and profits thereof for the use
of the poor of the said parish in such manner as the grantees, with the
consent of the vicar and parish officers, should think fit.
Near one of the fields adjoining the Court House, called the “Slang,” a
man, while clearing a piece of rough ground, which appeared not
previously to have been cultivated, a few years ago, came upon a large
number of gold coins, chiefly of Queen Elizabeth’s reign, and of the
modern value altogether of between three and four hundred pounds.
Looking at what the place now is, and calling to mind what it must have
been when the spacious rooms rang with the joyous laugh, and echoed the
minstrel songs of bygone days, one is reminded of Southey’s Eclogues, in
one of which he seeks to connect the past and present by an old man’s
memory, only that in this case more than one generation has gone to rest
since the old Court House was complete with park, and moat, and
fish-ponds. The old stonebreaker bemoans the change in some old
mansion-house thus—
“If my old lady could rise up—
God rest her soul!—’twould grieve her to behold
What wicked work is here.
* * * *
Aye, master, fine old trees.
Lord bless us! I have heard my father say
His grandfather could just remember back
When they were planted there. It was my task
To keep them trimmed, and ’twas a pleasure to me;
My poor old lady many a time would come
And tell me where to clip, for she had played
In childhood under them, and ’twas her pride
To keep them in their beauty.
* * * * *
I could as soon
Have ploughed my father’s grave as cut them down.
Then those old dark windows—
They’re demolished too;
The very redbreasts that so regular
Came to my lady for her morning crumbs
Won’t know those windows now.
There was a sweet briar, too, that grew beside;
My lady loved at evening to sit there
And knit, and her old dog lay at her feet,
And slept in the sun; ’twas an old favourite dog.
She did not love him less that he was old
And feeble, and he always had a place
By the fireside; and when he died at last,
She made me dig a grave in the garden for him,
For she was good to all: a woeful day
’Twas for the poor when to the grave she went.
—At Christmas, sir!
It would have warmed your heart if you had seen
Her Christmas kitchen—how the blazing fire
Made her fine pewter shine, and holly boughs
So cheerful red; and as for mistletoe,
The finest bush that grew in the country round
Was marked for madam. Then her old ale went
So bountiful about! A Christmas cask,
And ’twas a noble one. God help me, sir,
But I shall never see such days.”
Still greater changes than those described in the lines quoted above are
witnessed at the old Court House and in its immediate vicinity,—changes
so great that were it possible for one of its former feudal owners to
revisit the scene he would fail to recognise the place. Ugly pit-mounds
are seen surrounding the building; the place is illumined by the blaze of
the blast-furnace, the screech of machinery is heard around it, and the
snort of the iron horse sounds across the park, where the hounds were
wont to
“Rend the air, and with a lusty cry
Awake the echo, and confound
Their perfect language in a mingled voice.”
The fashions and manners here represented have passed away, and these
relics of antiquity look like fossils of old formations, or like
dismantled wrecks cast up by the ever-moving current of time. They
contrast strangely enough—these trophies of times gone by—with the
visible emblems of man’s altered genius around. Modes of life have
changed; every age has turned some new page as it passed. Instead of
monasteries and moated manor-houses, with country waste and wood,
thistled and isolated, whose wild possessors neglected even to till the
surface, we have men of active mould, who do daily battle with the
stubborn elements of the earth, while flashing fires flicker round their
stolid effigies, telling of wealth-producing agencies that make millions
happy. Ideas begotten of time, not then dreamt of, have leaped over moat
and rampart, re-constituted society, converted parks into pit-mounds, and
around the habitations of knighted warriors reared forges and constructed
railways.
We are tempted to dwell a little longer here in connection with the Old
Court, because considerable interest attaches to features, memorials, and
traditions of such places. Viewed from the position we now occupy, a
position the culminating result of past efforts and past struggles, they
remind us of less favourable phases of society, and picture to the mind
ideas, manners, and institutions—the cradle of our present privileges.
Manor houses, many of which were destroyed during the Civil War, were
held by the Church, and by distinguished personages, lay or clerical, who
granted or leased land they did not themselves require. Hence the rise
of copyholds—estates held by copy of the roll of the Court of the Manor.
Courts were held within these manors and jurisdiction was had of
misdemeanours and disputes. On forest borders, on grassy plains, amid
fat meadow lands, by rivers, on rocky spurs and projections, these
mansions or castelled structures stood, whilst their occupiers, with
little industrial or political activity to escape the _ennui_ of their
position, were often driven upon the high road of adventure. One can
scarcely conceive the privileged owners of such mansions to do otherwise
than despise the dependent population—boors, serfs, and villeins, who
cultivated their domains. Salient and strongly marked were the two
classes—knowledge and power paramount with the one, ignorance and
incapacity characterising the other: a proud supremacy and
subserviency—claimed and admitted. Priors, bishops, and lay proprietors
moved from manor to manor, taking their seats in these feudal courts,
receiving homage and inflicting penalties. Woe to the bondsmen of the
estate—doomed from the cradle to the grave to slavery—found guilty of an
attempt to “steal himself,” as the old Roman law had it, from his lawful
owner. Even tenants under these proud holders were subject to great
exactions,—the cattle of the manor, boar or bull, by the condition of the
tenure being free to roam at night through standing corn or grass: a
provision as just as that with which in this the nineteenth century the
lord of the manor has power, after purchase, to mine under and throw down
the house one has built, in this same manor of Madeley, without one
farthing compensation. Sturdy radicals, troublesome fellows, then as now
held up at times the glass by means of political squibs to perpetrators
of such injustice. One quaint old Shropshire satirist in the 14th
century lashes severely the vices of the times. Another in a political
song colours his picture deeply. The church at times interfered to
mitigate the condition of the people, but the spiritual overseers of the
poor, as a rule, thought more of the sports of the field than of their
flocks except, indeed, at shearing time. Chaucer in estimating their
qualifications was of opinion that “in hunting and riding they were more
skilled than in divinity.”
We need not wonder, then, to find in the thirteenth century the Rector of
Madeley a sportsman. Henry III, being in Shrewsbury, in Sept. 1267, at
which time he concluded a treaty with Llewellyn, and settled sundry
little differences with the monks and burgesses respecting a monopoly
claimed by the former, of grinding all corn used in the town, and
possessing all mills within its limits, granted through Peter de Neville
to Richard de Castillon the rector, licence to hunt in the royal forest
of Madeley. In such sport the clergy were borne out by their prelates.
Of one Walter, bishop of Rochester, it is recorded that he was so fond of
the sport that at the age of four score he made hunting his sole
employment, to the total neglect of other duties. There were jolly
churchmen in those days, for
“The Archdeacon of Richmond, we are told, in his initiation to the
Priory of Bridlington, came attended by ninety-seven horses,
twenty-one dogs, and three hawks. Walter de Suffield, Bishop of
Norwich, bequeathed by will his pack of hounds to the king; whilst
the Abbot of Tavistock, who had also a pack, was commanded by his
bishop, about the same time, to break it up. A famous hunter,
contemporary with Chaucer, was the Abbot of Leicester, whose skill in
the sport of hare hunting was so great, that the king himself, his
son Edward, and certain noblemen, paid him an annual pension that
they might hunt with him.”
The faithful portraits Chaucer drew of the Sumptner and Pardoner, agents
of ecclesiastical courts—one to hunt out delinquents who were wealthy,
the other to make them pay well for their sins—are familiar to most. The
prior of the Madeley manor carried this so far that he drew down upon him
one bright day in April, 1243, before he was aware of it, a king’s writ
for exacting “toll,” “on beer, seizing the third of widows’ goods who
died within the _vill_ of any deceased tenant, before his debts were
paid, and otherwise oppressing those within the limits of the priory.”
As the author of the “Antiquities of Shropshire” has said,
“The prior ground down the vicar, the vicar in turn impoverished his
subordinates, and they (the chaplains) either starved their flocks or
were themselves paupers. The bishops moreover, doubtless for certain
considerations, connived at, nay, prominently aided the whole system
of extortion.”
This had been carried so far as to require the presence of Bishop
Swinfield, who held the See, in 1285, to rectify misappropriations of
tithe in sheep and corn, and to arrange disputes respecting them within
the boundaries of the Priory. In April, 1290, the bishop paid another
visit, being by invitation the guest of the Prior; we do not get the
expenses of the feast, but he is known to have been a joval soul, well to
do, with two palaces in the country, and three in London, constantly
moving about, taking care to carry about with him his brass pots, earthen
jugs, and other domestic utensils for his retainers, who were littered
down in the great halls of the manors, at each stage of the journey. He
had numerous manor houses of his own, a farm at each, stables for many
horses, kennels for his hounds, and mews for his hawks. His kitchens
reeked with every kind of food; his cellars were filled with wine, and
his spiceries with foreign luxuries. Take a glance at the bishop’s feast
after a fast at his residence on the Teme. On Sunday, October the
second, at the bishop’s generous board, the consumption was, three
quarters of beef, three sheep, half a pig, eight geese, ten fowls, twelve
pigeons, nine partridges, and larks too numerous to mention, the whole
accompanied with a due proportion of wine.
Madeley not being a “fat living,” there was great shuffling on the part
of the incumbents, none of them caring to hold it very long. One, master
Odo de Horbosio, who was instituted March 14, 1299, on presentation of
the Convent and Prior of Much Wenlock; and again, June 4th, 1300, has
license to study, and to attend to business of himself and friends.
August 2nd, 1300; William de Fonehope, who was presented by the Bishop of
Hereford, (by lapse,) on March 18th, 1318, we find exchanging in 1322,
with Sir William Hoynet, rector of Westbury; the said William the fifth
of August, the same year, exchanged with James de Tifford, who exchanged
with another, John Aron, who resigned it in November, 1319.
The oftener these changes occurred the better for the priors, who held
the right of presentation to the bishop, and exacted fealty and fees. In
Madeley, being lords of the manor, they nominated and presented the
vicars: and in Badger, Beckbury, and elsewhere, where there were lay
lords who nominated, they held the right of presenting such as were
nominated to the bishop, and of exacting fees for their mediate offices
between the nominators and the bishop.
As the land came to be cultivated, and the population engaged in
agricultural and other pursuits increased in number, the living, we
imagine, improved in value, and the advowson in importance. We have
shown from the commissioners’ description in Domesday what was the state
of Madeley just subsequent to the Norman conquest, and Madeley being
still within the limits of the forest of the Wrekin, which surrounded it
on three sides, little progress was made in the way of cultivation. From
the “Survey of Shropshire Forests” in 1235, it appears that the following
woods, besides those of Madeley, were subject to its
jurisdiction:—Leegomery, Wrockwardine Wood, Eyton-on-the-Weald Moors,
Lilleshall, Sheriffhales, the Lizard, Stirchley, and Great Dawley.
Forest laws were rigorously enforced, and encroachments, either by
cultivation or building without royal license to do so, were severely
punished.
Prior Imbert was fined for three such trespasses, in 1250, in the heavy
sum of £126 13s. 4d., chiefly in connection with Madeley. In 1390 the
park and meadows the prior had been permitted to enclose with those at
Madeley, Oxenbold, and other manors, were estimated as barely capable of
maintaining the livestock of the priory.
A perambulation of forests in the reign of Edward I. shows the village of
Madeley, with its bosc and two plains, to be disforested, as well as
Coalbrookdale, one half of Sutton Maddock, and some other places. Coming
down, however, to a much later period,—to the thirty-sixth year of the
reign of Henry VIII., when he sold the Madeley manor,—cultivation had
made considerable progress, and the property of the priory had very much
increased in value. The last of the Wenlock priors, Sir John Bailey,
_alias_ Cressage, gave up possession on the morrow of the Conversion of
St. Paul, 1539, _with his own free will and consent_, according to the
deed, together with that of the sub-prior, and eleven monks. Take
“The fourth part of the Close Rolls of the 31st King Hen. VIII. 26th
January, 31st Hen. VIII. Deed of Surrender to the Crown of the
Monastery of Wenlock.
“To all faithful christians to whom the present writing shall come,
we, John Cressegge, Prior of the monastery of St. Milburgh the
Virgin, of Wenlock, in the county of Salop, and the Convent of the
same place, greeting in the Lord everlasting, know ye that we the
aforesaid Prior and Convent, with our unanimous assent and consent,
and with our deliberate purpose, certain knowledge and mere motion
for certain just and reasonable causes, as our mind and consciences
specially moving, have freely and spontaneously given and granted,
and by these presents do give, grant, and yield up, and deliver and
confirm to our most illustrious and invincible prince and lord Henry
the Eighth, by the grace of God of England and France king, defender
of the faith, lord of Ireland and on earth of the church of England
supreme head, all that our said monastery, and also all the scite,
ground, circuit, and precinct, and church of the same monastery, with
all our movable debts, chattels, and goods to us or our said
monastery belonging or appertaining, as well those which we at
present possess, as those which by bond or any other cause whatsoever
to us and our said monastery are due in any manner; and also all and
singular our manors, lordships, messuages, gardens, curtilages,
tofts, lands, and tenements, meadows, feedings, pastures, woods, and
underwoods, rents, reversions, and services, mills, passages,
knights’ fees, wards, marriages, bondmen, villains, with their
sequels, commons, liberties, franchises, privileges, jurisdictions,
offices, courts leet, hundred courts, views of frankpledge, fairs,
markets, parks, warrens, vivaries, waters, fisheries, ways, paths,
wharfs, void grounds, advowsons, nominations, presentations, and
donations of churches, vicarages, chapels, chanteries, hospitals, and
other ecclesiastical benefices whatsoever, rectories, vicarages,
chanteries, pensions, portions, annuities, tithes, oblations, and all
and singular other our emoluments, profits, possessions,
hereditaments, and rights whatsoever, as well within the said county
of Salop, and in the liberties’ of London, Sussex, Chester, and
Stafford, as elsewhere in the kingdom of England and Wales, and the
marches of the same, to our same monastery aforesaid, in any manner
belonging, appertaining, appended, or incumbent, and all and all
manner of our charters, evidences, obligations, writings, and
muniments whatsoever to us or our said monastery, lands, or
tenements, or other the premises with their appurtenances, or to any
part thereof in any manner belonging or appertaining, to have, hold,
and enjoy our said monastery and the aforesaid scite, ground,
circuit, and precinct, and our church aforesaid, with all our debts,
goods, and chattels, and also all and singular manors, lordships,
messuages, lands, and tenements, rectories, pensions, and other
premises whatsoever, with all and singular their appurtenances, to
our aforesaid most invincible prince and king aforesaid, his heirs,
successors, and assigns for ever; and in this behalf, to all effects
of law, which shall or can result therefrom, we subject and submit
ourselves and our said monastery, with all and singular the premises,
and all rights to us in any wise howsoever acquired (as is fitting),
giving and granting, and by these presents we do give and grant,
yield up, deliver, and confirm to the same king’s majesty, his heirs,
successors, and assigns, all and all manner of full and free faculty,
authority and power to dispose of us and our said monastery, together
with all and singular manors, lands, and tenements, rents,
reversions, and services, and every of the premises, with all their
rights and appurtenances whatsoever, and according to his free and
royal will and pleasure to be alienated, given, exchanged, or
transferred to any uses whatsoever agreeable to his majesty, and we
ratify such dispositions, alienations, donations, conversions, and
appropriations by his aforesaid majesty henceforth in any wise
however to be made, promising, moreover by these presents that we
will hold firm and valid all and singular the premises for ever; and
that moreover all and singular the premises may have due effect we
publicly, openly, and expressly, and of our certain knowledge and
spontaneously will, renounce and withdraw all elections from us and
our successors, and also all plaints, challenges appeals, actions,
suits, and other processes whatsoever, rights, remedies, and
benefits, to us and our successors in that behalf by pretext of the
disposition, alienation, donation, conversion, and translation
aforesaid, and other the premises in any wise howsoever competent and
to be competent, and laying aside and altogether putting away all
objections, exceptions, and allegations of deceit, error, fear,
ignorance, or of any other matter or disposition, whatsoever as by
these presents we have renounced and withdrawn and from the same do
recede by these presents: and we the aforesaid prior and convent, our
successors, our said monastery, and also all the scite, ground,
circuit, precinct, mansion, and our church aforesaid, and all and
singular our manors, lordships, messuages, gardens, curtilages,
tofts, lands, and tenements, meadows, feedings, pastures, woods, and
underwoods, rents, reversions, and services, and all and singular
other the premises, with all their rights and appurtenances, to our
aforesaid lord the king, his heirs, successors and assigns, to the
use aforesaid, against all men will warrant and for ever defend by
these presents. In testimony aforesaid, we the aforesaid prior and
convent to this our present writing have subscribed our names and put
our common seal. Given at our chapter house the twenty-sixth day of
the month of January, in the thirty-first year of the reign of our
aforesaid most invincible prince and lord Henry the Eighth.”
At any rate the prior, sub-prior, and eleven monks retired upon a pension
of £100, which was divided between them thus:—
£ s. d.
Extranni Baylie (alias Cressage) nuper 30 0 0
priori ibidem
Willielmus Corfeld nuper sub prior ibidem 6 13 4
Richard Fishewyke presbitero 6 0 0
Thomas Acton presbitero 6 0 0
Johanni Caslett presbitero 6 0 0
Richardo Fenymo presbitero 6 0 0
Richardo Benge presbitero 6 0 0
Richardo Norgrave presbitero 6 0 0
Thomas Ball presbitero 6 0 0
Willielmo Morthowe presbitero 5 6 8
Johanni Lee presbitero 5 6 8
Willielmo Chamberlain presbitero 5 6 8
Johanni Hopkins presbitero 5 6 8
Summa 100 0 0
Sir John, the last of the long list of Wenlock priors,—many of them noble
and distinguished men,—retired upon his life-pension of £30 to the old
Court House, Madeley, where he resided till his death, which took place
in 1552. Mr. Eyton says he died on Christmas-day, at the Madeley
manor-house, and was buried next day in Madeley church. The Wenlock
register, at Wynnstay, contains the following entry by Sir Thomas Butler,
the then vicar:—
“1549. 25 Decr departed and dyed in the manor place of Madeley about
IX of the clock in the nyght Sir John Baily Clercke the last Prior of
Moncks that was in the Monastre of Moch Wenlock prior ther at the
tyme of the Surrender thereof, whose bodie was buryed on the morrow,
vz fest of St. Stephan in the parish churche of Madeley aforesaid.”
The same authority, Sir Thomas Butler, who seems to have been a most
painstaking recorder of events, under date of February 20, 1539, has the
following entry a little higher up:
“Edwd Browne Servant to my Lord Prior was married in Madeley and the
Certf. entered in the book of the parish Church of Madeley.”
Unfortunately that register has been lost, if it existed. It may be that
it did not, as many existing churches were then chapels, that is
affiliations without a baptistery or a cemetery.
Madeley was subject to the mother-church of Wenlock, and we know how
zealously the vicars of that church guarded their privileges. Broseley
was in the same position, and in our “Tourists’ Guide to Wenlock” we
quoted a memorandum made in the Wenlock register, in which the vicar
says:—
“1542. Feb. 3rd Mem. at the same time in this Chancel of the Holy
Trinity that I went to bury the Corpse of the sd John, Sir Edmund
Mychell Parson of Browardesley aforsaid, in the presence of Rowland
Wilcocks of the same Browardesley, willed me to give my consent that
they of Browardesley might have their chapel there dedicate for the
Burial there so to be had unto whom I answered (if the law would so
bear me) I would not consent to the dedicating of that their Chapel
of Browardesley nor of none other annexed and depending unto this the
mother Church of the Holy Trinity of Moch Wenlock.”
These privileges were not strictly regarded, we believe, but as a rule
the dead had to be carried to Wenlock to be buried, excepting in the case
of persons of distinction, like lords of the manor or wealthy tenants of
the prior, who were buried in the church.
The king having got possession of the property of the Wenlock priory,
proceeded to dispose of it; and Madeley was sold to Robert Broke for what
must have seemed a good round sum in those days. The following
translation, which a friend has been kind enough to make for us, from a
Latin copy of the original deed preserved in the archives of Madeley
church, may be of interest.
Patent Roll, 36 Henry VIII., Part V. Grant to Robert Broke, Esquire, of
the title and advowson of Madeley, co. Salop.
“The king to all whom it may concern, etc. salutation.
“Be it known to you all that we, in consideration of the sum of £946
3s. 8d., of our own legal English money, delivered over for our use
into the hands of our legal treasurer, for the increase of the common
revenue of our crown, by our beloved subject, Robert Broke, Knight,
the sureties having been paid on the said sum of £946 3s. 8d., we
declare that we shall be satisfied, contented, and fully indemnified,
and that thenceforward Robert Broke, his heirs and executors, are to
be exonerated and free from molestation, by force of these present
letters, which we have given and conceded from our own special
goodwill, certain knowledge, and of our own accord; and by these same
present letters we give and concede to the aforesaid Robert Broke the
whole of that manor named Madeley, with all and each of its rights,
connections, and patronages, in our county of Salop, enjoyed lately
over the priory of Wenlock, lately suppressed, in the abovementioned
county, and all the belongings formerly attached to the lately
existing monastery. Likewise all the other revenues of ours
whatsoever, with their patronages in the above-named Madeley, and
elsewhere in the above-named county, which have been part members or
subject to the above-named manor, either by acknowledgment,
acceptation, enjoyment, reputation, localization, or even by forcible
separation.
“Likewise the advowson, the free enjoyment and the right of patronage
of our vicariate parish-church of the above-named Madeley, in the
above-mentioned county, as well as the rights attached to the whole
of the place and buildings that go under the one name of the Smithy
Place, and Newhouse called Calbrooke Smithy, with its patronages in
the aforesaid Madeley.
“Likewise all our tithes of all fruits and grain annually growing,
being renewed or produced in Madeley the afore mentioned, and now or
lately in the possession of Richard Charleton; also the whole of that
yearly and perpetual endowment of ours, viz., of three shillings
annually, coming to us from the vicarage or church of the aforesaid
Madeley; and the whole of that annual and perpetual pension of ours
of 3s. 4d. annually, due from the rectory or church of Badger, in the
above-named county.
“Likewise the messuages, tofts, houses, dwellings, stables, dovecots,
stagnant ponds, and vivaries, springs, gardens and orchards, lands,
tenements, incomes, revenues, dues, meadows, pasturages, woods,
shrubberies, and trees.
“Likewise all the permanent feudal rights and customs, the permanent
dues, endowments, tithes, offerings, belongings, annuities, products,
revenues, and the annual result of engagements entered into by
whomsoever such engagements and provisions were made . . . common
fisheries, ways, paths, void grounds, as well, moreover, as the
liberties, franchises, and jurisdictions, profits, emoluments,
rights, possessions, and the rest of our heraditaments, both
spiritual and temporal, with all their rights, situated, lying,
within, and existing in the manor of the above-named Madeley, over
the late priory, whether belonging to the possessions or revenues of
the late existing. . . .
“This manor, in truth, with its tenements, and the other things
premised, reaching the clear annual value of £46 17s. 7d., not
considering the tithe. The aforesaid manor, its advowson, rents,
revenues, services, and all and each of the other of its rights, are
to be possessed and held by the aforesaid Robert Broke, his heirs and
assigns, for the personal use of the said Robert Broke, his heirs and
assigns in perpetuity.
“In consideration of the military service due in taxation to us, our
heirs and successors, viz., the twentieth part of the value of one
feudal knight, £4 13s. 9¼d. of our legal English money are to be paid
to our legal treasurer, for the increase of the common revenues of
our crown, on the feast of St. Michael the Archangel, each year, for
all the rents, services, and demands whatsoever . . .
“We also wish, and by these presents we concede, to the aforesaid
Robert Broke that the said Robert Broke shall have and retain these
letters patent of ours, drawn up in the usual manner, under our great
seal of England, and signed without fine or tax, heavy or light, to
be paid into our revenue office, or in any other way to be demanded
or paid to the use of us, our heirs, or successors.
“Therefore express mention of this our will has been made, etc. In
testimony of which, etc., T. R. Signed at Westminster, 23 July
[1544]. On behalf of the king himself, in virtue of the royal
commission.”
The MS. breaks off abruptly in places, probably from the copyist not
being able to decipher the original. Of the Richard Charleton here
mentioned we have no account in connection with Madeley, but a Richard
Charlton is mentioned some ten years earlier, in the accounts of the
first-fruits office, as the king’s bailiff or collector at the Marshe,
near Barrow, where the Wenlock priors had one of their principal granges,
and held a manorial court.
This was in the twenty-sixth year of the reign of Henry VIII., and
shortly after the very subservient parliament of 1534–35 had requested
the king “to be pleased, as their most gracious sovereign lord, upon whom
and in whom depended all their joy and wealth, to receive the
first-fruits of all spiritual dignities and promotions.” An earlier
member of this family is also mentioned as Bishop of Hereford, examining
the titles of the prior to certain privileges in Madeley, during one of
his Visitations. We have also heard it said, but are not aware on what
authority, that one of this very ancient and distinguished family at one
time lived at the Hay, in the parish of Madeley.
The deed is further interesting from its mention of the ironworks at
Coalbrookdale, described as Smithy Place and New House. It is earlier by
a century than any notice previously met with, and we shall further
allude to it when we come to speak of these works. The patronages spoken
of, probably, were the rights exercised over the minerals by the Wenlock
priors, one of whom, in the exercise of such rights, had, in 1322, for
the sum of six shillings, granted a license to Walter de Caldebroke to
dig for coals in the Brockholes, for the term of one year.
Some light is thrown upon the advowson and tithe of Madeley by
interesting old documents carefully preserved in the vestry of Madeley
church. The following copy of the “Terrier,” kindly lent by Joseph Yate,
Esq., made March 14th, 1710, shows the kind of tithe then collected:
“True copy of the Terrier of the parish of Madeley, in the county of
Salop. For the vicar and clerks’ fees, tythes, offerings, and
minister’s fees, &c.
“Imprimis. The court demesnes pays Easter offerings for master and
servants, but no other tythes, except eight shillings at Easter, in
lieu of tythes. The general way of tything within the parish is: hay
and clover is due throughout the whole of the parish, except the
demesnes, and is to be gathered at every eleventh cock; grass at the
tenth cock; every pig and goose pay at the tenth, but for want of
that number pay at the seventh; wool and lambs pay at the tenth, but
in case they are set, is twopence a fleece and threepence a lamb, and
for what lambs are fallen in wintering the owner pays twopence;
calves are gathered in like kind, at the tenth, but for want of ten,
at sixpence per calf. One penny a cow, in lieu of milk. Tythes of
orchards or fruit-trees are gathered in kind throughout the parish,
except the demesnes. The parishioners pay twopence for every stall
of bees they put down, in lieu of tythe-money. Twopence for every
colt, and two eggs for every hen or duck. Three eggs for every cock
or drake at Easter. Surplice fees are paid after this manner: every
marriage solemnized by banns, three shillings and sixpence; if by
license, five shillings (let the parishioner be man or woman). For
churching every woman, sixpence. Easter dues are: every man pays
threepence, every woman pays twopence; one penny smoke, and one penny
garden, clerks fees. Every hen at Easter, one egg; every marriage by
banns, sixpence; if by license, one shilling. Churching every woman,
twopence. Every burial without a coffin and ringing the bell,
twopence; if with a coffin, one shilling and sixpence. Fourpence for
every plough land; twopence every householder; double fees for all
strangers (and likewise the minister). Ten shillings per year for
looking after the clock. Tythes of corn-mills are due in all
parishes except demesnes.
“Taken 14 March, 1710. Jeremy Taylor, vicar. John Stringer and
William Wood, churchwardens.”
It would appear from this that the dead were sometimes buried without a
coffin, in which case a coarse cloth was, we believe substituted. The
“smoke penny” was a penny collected for every chimney emitting smoke, or
rather a tithe paid to the vicar upon the wood burnt. A dispute having
arisen in the earlier part of the last century between the vicar and
impropriator, respecting the right of the former to tithe on woods, a
parish meeting was called and a case got up by the vicar and
churchwardens for the opinion of counsel, in which the payment of the
smoke-penny was quoted to establish the vicar’s claim. We give the
queries put and counsel’s replies in the Appendix.
Tithe and Easter offerings were occasionally paid in kind, as appears
from the churchwardens’ accounts. In one case two heifers are mentioned,
which it is added, produced forty shillings.
In the churchwarden’s accounts of Easter offerings to the vicar of
Madeley, in 1693, we get an insight of the household of the Court. The
sums given are not stated, but the entry is as follows:—
“Basil Brooke and wife gave —, John Brooke gave —, John Bowdler gave
—, John the butler gave —, Dennis — gave —, Joseph Littlehales gave
—, Thomas gave — Francis, — gave —, Anthony — gave —, Edward — gave
—, Mrs. Lawson gave —, Margaret — gave —.”
We have already referred to this distinguished family in connection with
Madeley and Claverley, where one branch continued to reside for many
generations, whilst another was seated at Blacklands, in the neighbouring
parish of Bobbington. Dukes says:—
“The family of Brooke, formerly of Lapley, in Staffordshire, and
afterwards of Bobbington, and subsequently of Haughton, in
Shropshire, had possessions in this parish, in whose family it
continued until 1800, when the capital mansion and estates belonging
thereto were sold by George Brooke, Esq. to different purchasers.”
In Claverley the name of John de la Broke occurs in 1242, and that of
Thomas de la Bruche, in 1260, both of whom are supposed to have resided
there. In 1268 a Geoffrey de la Broke is mentioned as having been on an
inquest at Kinver. From 1299 to 1338 Richard de Broke, of Claverley, is
sometimes called Richard atte {35} Broke, in connection with juries on
which he sat, and in attesting deeds at Claverley, Bridgnorth, and
elsewhere. In 1316 he was a grantee of land at Beobridge, whilst his son
Richard is mentioned as a clerk in 1318, and the same son is again
mentioned with his father in 1324. In 1342 and 1343 this succession, Mr.
Eyton thinks, continues in Thomas atte Broke, of Claverley; but Randolf
atte Broke, who was at Enville, in 1347, he takes to have been an
ancestor of Brooke of Blacklands, one of whom (deceased in 1385) seems to
have married a co-heiress of the Gravenors.
We have already noticed the very magnificent alabaster tomb, in the N.E.
corner of the Gatacre chancel, on which are the recumbent figures of Lord
Chief Justice Brooke, in his official robes, and his two wives, one on
each side; and a subsequent visit enables us to add some additional
particulars. The female-figures have ornamental head-gear, flowing
mantles, single ruffs round their necks, three rows of chain necklaces
hanging loose, and ruffles with braid at the hands. On the three sides
of the tomb are figures of their eighteen children, in the dresses of the
time. This tomb must have been a gorgeous one, for a close inspection
shows traces of gold and colour, which once adorned the principal
figures. It is to be regretted that the arms of this distinguished
family, like those of the Gatacre, the Beauchamp, the Talbot, the
Ferrers, and some others, which, about the end of the seventeenth century
adorned this church, have disappeared. Among others Mr. Eyton, in his
“Antiquities of Shropshire,” gives the following:—
“Quarterly—first and fourth, Chequy * *, and * *, a crescent for
difference; second and third, * * a Cross Flory * *. (‘Thomas Broke’
written over this Coat.)
“Quarterly—first and fourth, Chequy * * and * *, on a Chief * *, a
Brock * *; second and third, Arg, a Cross Flory Sa.
“Brooke (quarterly) empaling—Paly of six, Or and Az, a Canton Erm.
“Quarterly—first and four, Chequy Arg and Sa; second and third, Arg a
Cross Flory Sa.”
Over each of the doors, forming an entrance to, or egress from, the
gardens, at the old Court House, Madeley, are massive stones, with the
arms of the Brooke family, but without the crest. These correspond, too,
with the arms of the Rev. John Brooke, of Haughton, near Shifnal, who
represents another branch of the family of the Brookes, of Claverley.
They are as follows:—
Parted per pale first Chequy * * and * *, second, Paly of six * * and *
*, a Canton Ermine.
Parted per pale first Chequy * * and * *, second * * a Chevron, * *
between three Helmets.
ARMS ON CEILING OF CHAPEL.—Quarterly—first and fourth, Chequy * * and *
*, second and third, * * a cross Flory * *.
SHIELD OF ARMS IN WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY THE LARGE DINING HALL
BELOW.—Quarterly—first Chequy, * * and * *, second * *, a cross Flory *
*, third * *, a fess Chequy * * and * *, between ten Billets * *,
fourth * *, a fess * *, thereon three Bugle Horns * *, stringed * *,
garnished * *, between three Bucks’ Heads cabossed * *.
Crest: Ostrich.
There are also coats of arms over the gatehouse of the Brooke family,
{37} those over the window and doorway being—
Party per pale. First Chequy * * * and * * *. Second paly of Six, and
a Canton Ermine.