Walter Skirlaw, Bishop of Durham. Skirlaw Walter King and lords of parliament. Bishop...

Petitioners

Walter Skirlaw, Bishop of Durham.

Name(s)

Skirlaw, Walter

Addressees

King and lords of parliament.

Occupation

Bishop of Durham

Nature of request

Walter, Bishop of Durham states that he and his predecessors have always enjoyed all manner of lordships, liberties and rights within their franchises and regality of Durham, and have always had the forfeitures of lands, tenements, goods and chattels within the franchise as their escheats, but that recently, certain manors, lands, tenements, goods and chattels within the franchises and regality, which belonged to Michael de la Pole and Roger de Fulthorp, knights, and were forfeited by virtue of a judgement brought against them in the parliament held at Westminster in the eleventh year of the king's reign, should belong to the bishop as the right of his church of St Cuthbert of Durham, but were seized into the king's hand, to his great injury, and in disinheritance of his church. He requests to be allowed to have and enjoy the aforesaid manors, lands, tenements, goods and chattels, and the issues thereof, as the right of his church.

Nature of endorsement

. . . forfeiture . . . tenements of which this petition makes mention . . . being in the king's hands . . . to the king's hands . . . have been sold . . . in the meantime, and that proclamation should be made that all those who wish to or can inform the king . . . of the said bishop in this matter, or who claim title or interest in the same forfeitures . . . in a similar case are to be at the said next parliament, to show there, both for the king and for themselves, their information . . . and interest in this matter, on pain of the appropriate penalty.And then, at the parliament held at Westminster . . . Martin, in the year of the reign of our . . . it was agreed and assented that the said . . .should continue in the estate in which it now is . . . parliament.And then at the parliament held at Westminster on the . . . of All Souls, in the year of the reign of our lord the king . . . it was agreed and assented that the said . . . continue in the state in which it now is . . . parliament.

Places mentioned

Liberty of Durham, [County Durham]

River Tyne

River Tees

Westminster.

People mentioned

Michael de la Pole, [Earl of Suffolk], knight

Roger de Fulthorp, knight.

A petition on the same subject by the bishop's predecessor is SC 8/20/980

For letters patent of Henry III quoted in support of this petition, see SC 8/20/981A

• Calendar of Close Rolls, Ric II, vol. IV, 1389-1392, (Public Record Office, 1923), p.221 (writ to the sheriff of Cumberland resulting from the petition, presented in the parliament of January-March 1390, ordering information on the matter before the next parliament)
• Rotuli Parliamentorum; ut et Petitiones, et Placita in Parliamento, vol. III, Ric II and Hen IV, (Record Commission, 1783), p.177a (no.9) (full edition of related petition from the bishop's predecessor)