xhd PREFACE. and S. "Wiilstan's charter was read, which threatened an anathema against any who removed monks from West- bury. The king was present in person/ and after the chancellor had apparently temporized about the matter, said himself, that though he personally should prefer the churches to be made prebendal, he was yet unwilling to do anything to the prejudice of the chm'ch of Worcester ; and the council taking warning by what was the case at Lincoln, where so many of the prebends were in the hands of Italians, which was also the case with the archdeacomy of Worce3ter,as what were the king's at the time of the vacancy of the see might come into the hands of the Pope, would not agree to allow that churches, which by any means might come into the king's appointment, should be made prebendaL Gilbert de Clare also spoke on the same side : " The chm*ches belong to the barony ; " therefore the condition of the churches cannot be '"' changed any more than that of the barony" (pp. 501, 502). In spite of this, however, in July of the same year (1290), the bishop installed three persons, no doubt incumbents of his chui'ches, as prebendaries at Westbury. He visited the priory soon afterwards, and departed in anger, because they refused to afiix their seal to the annex- ation of the prebends to the churches (p. 504). We hear no more of the question till 1294, when, while the bishop was ill at Hartlebury (p. 518), the citation of the court of Canterbury was again brought forward. The next year witnesses were examined in the church of St. Mary at Bow as to the facts of the bishop's proceedings (p, 523), and after this the Annals do not mention the affair again, possibly from being unwilling to record the defeat of the priory. It appears from the Bishop's Register that the cause came on in the Arches Court in 1297, and was decided in the bishop's favour.^ ^ The bishop had previously had letters from the king and queen and nobles in favour of the annexation. See p. 500. - See Thomas's Wo7-cester, p. 146.
