Chapter Six

THE LAST ABBOTS OF DIEULACRES,

At the beginning of the sixteenth century, John Newton was Abbot of Dieulacres, and under his guidance the policy of leasing out parts of the abbey’s estate was still continuing. By this time, only a few granges were being held in demesne. These included Birchall, which was used for the cultivation of foodstuffs for the community, Fowlchurch, Westwood, Woodcroft, and other lands in the immediate vicinity of the abbey site.

Among the Cheshire possessions of the abbey, the manor of Poulton was leased for the first time in 1504, when it was granted to Nicholas Manley and his wife for a term of 89 years, at an annual rent of £50. The lease included all the appurtenances of the manor, and the chapel of Poulton with its tithes and oblations. The abbot did not completely sever the connections between Dieulacres and its original site, for he inserted some interesting conditions in the lease. The Manleys were required to entertain him, together with twelve mounted companions, for two weeks in every year. They were also required to entertain the cellarer and other servants of the abbey whenever they came to Poulton.

For their part, the Manleys were promised that they would not be expected to provide wine, fresh salmon and oysters on these occasions. When Nicholas Manley died in 1520, the manor was re-leased to his son, Henry, under the same conditions. [1] John Newton’s successor as Abbot of Dieulacres was William Alben, or Alen; a man who believed in looking after the interests of his relations. The Alben family originated from the Staffordshire village of Buekenhall, and when William became Abbot of Dieulacres he leased Rossall Grange to his kinsman, George, in whose family the property remained until 1553. [2] George’s grandson later rose to fame as Cardinal Allen, the founder of Douai College. Name and vocation were all that the Cardinal had in common with his distant Cistercian relative, for the first William Alben conducted himself so badly that he was finally deposed from office.

In 1516, there was a riot in Leek, during which a man called Paunsfote was murdered by some servants of Sir John Savage, the Steward of the town. Abbot William, together with John Brereton and other servants of the abbey, were indicted as accessories. William Egerton of Wall Grange was appointed King’s Comissioner to investigate the incident and to arrest those responsible; but, at the instigation of John Brereton, about 200 of the abbot’s servants and tenants assembled together in a riotous manner and tried to prevent Egerton from discharging his duties. They chased the Commissioner from house to house until he was eventually cornered at one of the local taverns. Brereton and his men surrounded the tavern, where they were later joined by the abbot and eight of his monks. They waited for about an hour, hoping that they might force Egerton to come out; and at one point Brereton shot an arrow through the window of the room in which the Commissioner was sitting. Witnesses later declared that they also saw the abbot “take his bow from his monk, Whitney, and take an arrow from under his girdle and nick it into his bow”.

Artist's impression of the Cistercian monks' dormitory

Eventually the men grew tired of waiting and went away, knowing that Egerton would not get very far if he tried to escape. Egerton did in fact emerge from the tavern, and moved on to a friend’s house in another part of the town. About an hour later, Brereton came back with three of the abbot’s brothers and went to the house of John Fairfield, where other adherents of his were waiting. Thinking that the coast was now clear, Egerton and his friends tried to make off in the direction of Wall Grange; but they were spotted, and Brereton and the Alben brothers gave chase. Seeing that there was no escape, the Commissioner and his companions took sanctuary in St. Edward’s church, and there they stayed for the next few days. The abbot’s servants, meanwhile, blocked up the main road with trees, poles and ladders, so that no ­one could enter the town. Several attempts were made to convey food and provisions to the refugees in the church, but Brereton’s men were ready at hand to capture and carry off anyone who was rash enough to go near the churchyard.

The whole affair was subsequently brought before the Court of Star Chamber. [3] and as a result, the abbot was sentenced to imprisonment in the Fleet Gaol. The incident shows quite clearly that the abbot and his men exercised a very powerful hold over the town of Leek. In spite of the mischief which he and many of his predecessors had caused, he still had a considerable following; and his servants and tenants were prepared to go to great lengths on his behalf to preserve his autonomy and to resist interference from authorities outside the town.

Abbot William remained in prison until about 1519, and when he returned to Dieulacres, he found the abbey in a sorry state. Some of the monks had been misbehaving themselves; and it seems that John Brereton was virtually in control of the monastery, and doing more or less what he liked. A spell in prison had given the abbot ample opportunity for reflection and reform. Hearing that his brethren at Dieulacres were doing untold mischief and earning the monastery a thorougly bad name, he decided, on his release, to set about the task of putting the house in order. Neither John Brereton nor the unruly monks particularly relished the idea of being disciplined, especially by a man who, only a few years before, had been no more virtuous than they. It was decided that, at all costs, William Alben must go. Brereton and the rebellious monks sent letters to Combermere, the mother­house of Dieulacres, in which they made sinister allegations about their abbot. As a result, the Abbot of Combermere made a visitation to Dieulacres in order to examine their accusations more closely. The precise nature of the charges against William Alben are not known, but they were sufficiently grave to bring about his downfall. He was deposed from the office of abbot, and was compelled “for fear of his life” to leave Dieulacres and to take a pension at the assignment of his monks.

The pension, as might be expected, was not paid, and the ex­abbot soon found himself in financial difficulties. He appealed to the King in Chancery, complaining that what had been done was to the decrees and statutes of the Cistercian Order, and that the Abbot of Combermere had not conducted his visitation in a proper manner. As Patron of Dieulacres, Henry VIII took the matter in hand, and directed the Abbots of Combermere and Vale Royal to make a fresh visitation to Dieulacres to find out the precise reasons why William Alben had been deposed, and whether there was any truth in the allegations that had been made against him. The Abbot of Vale Royal was specifically instructed to enquire into the allegedly irreligious behaviour of the abbot of Combermere during the first visitation. If it turned out that Alben had been deposed through the malice and ill­ will of his brethren, the Abbot of Vale Royal was to appoint the Abbot of Combe as his associate, and then to proceed with the matter according to the ordinances and statutes of Cîteaux. [4] The outcome of this second visitation is not recorded, but it is almost certain that William Alben remained deposed. An interesting point about the whole case is that Alben appealed to the King rather than to the General Chanter of Cîteaux, which was the normal channel through which such matters should have been settled. It serves to underline the fact that relations between the English houses and Cîteaux were virtually non-existent by this time.

St Bernard of Clairvaux, one of the most influential early Cistercians

The monk who succeeded William Alben in the abbacy of Dieulacres was John Woodland, and his character and career were wholly consistent with one who had been chosen as abbot by a group of unruly monks in order to resist reform. His principal contribution to the history of Dieulacres was a not unsuccessful attempt to reduce the abbey to a state of financial ruin. In a Bill of Complaint which was brought into Chancery by his successor, it was stated that without any regard to the wealth and prosperity of Dieulacres, Abbot Woodland not only “wasted and spent a large amount of the goods of the abbey”, but also “of evil mind and intent” drew up a number of blank deeds, and sealed them with the conventual seal. He distributed these amongst his friends, who were left to write on them what they pleased. [5]

It was probably on account of his gross mismanagement of the abbey’s affairs that John Woodland was deposed from office in about 1523. His place was filled by Thomas Whitney, the last Abbot of Dieulacres. Whitney was a close friend of the archvillain, John Brereton. and he had played an active part in the Brereton-Egerton affair of 1516. His activities from the time he was elected until the time he surrendered the monastery to the Royal Commissioners shew that he inherited some of the more unpleasant characteristics of his immediate predecessors.

As soon as he became abbot, Whitney was faced with the task of clearing up the financial mess inherited from Iohn Woodland, and it must be said, to his credit, that by the time of the Dissolution, Dieulacres was not heavily in debt. Whitney made several attempts to recover the blank deeds which his predecessor had given away, but he met with only partial success. One of the ex-abbot’s friends, Edmund Washington, repeatedly refused to give up the deeds that were in his possession. Whitney had no idea whatever as to what had been entered on the blanks, and the Bill of Complaint which he brought into Chancery in about 1535 reveals a genuine fear that Washington was intending to cause further hardship to the abbey. [6]

The Brereton-Egerton affair of 1516 had taught Thomas Whitney how to organise a first­class riot, and in 1530 John Brereton was still around to give him any extra tuition he might need. In that year they were both involved in a violent quarrel which took place between Hugh Willoughby and Hugh Bagnall on the one part, and William Chetwyn and Henry Brooke on the other. The dispute concerned the ownership of some land at Cheddleton, and the abbot took the side of Willoughby and Bagnall. A small armed band was gathered together, and an attempt was made to evict Chetwyn, Brooke, and their tenants from the land in question. A savage attack was made on the house of one of Chetwyn’s farmers, John Massey. There were some ugly scenes in which Massey’s children were thrown out of the windows. His cattle and other livestock were rounded up and driven off so that he could not find them again. When accused of being a party to this crime. the abbot denied the charges, and said that they had been slanderously contrived to put him and his associates to unjust cost. None of them, he said, were guilty of riot. [7]

In the same year, Abbot Whitney tried to evict one of his own tenants in Leek. The tenant, John Leigh, was assaulted by the abbot and Henry Brereton (a brother of John Brereton) who then proceeded to tear down his hedges and destroy his pasture land. In 1531, Whitney leased to this same Henry Brereton a piece of land at Heaton, near Rushton Spencer: this lease provoked yet another violent dispute. Peter Wyllott of Heaton claimed that the land in question a meadow called “Fairboroughs” -- had been held by his family for many years. He said that in spite of fact that he had paid his rent promptly each year, Abbot Whitney, “of his covetous mind intending the utter impoverishment Peter Wyllot, his wife and children”, had recently made out a new lease to Henry Brereton. Wyllot refused to give up his tenancy to Brereton, who then decided to take the lands by force. He and several others went to Wyllott’s house at Heaton, assaulted he man’s wife, and took away his livestock. The matter was brought before the Court of Star Chamber, and in the proceedings vhich followed, Abbot Whitney was forced to admit that he had granted the lease to Wyllott’s father, and that he had later conirmed the lease in favour of Wyllott himself. [8]

This may have been the end of the affair as far as the abbot was concerned, but Henry Brereton did not give up his claim. He said that the meadow had been leased to him in 1531 for a term 31 years, and for some time he carried on a personal quarrel with Wyllott. In 1535 he was complaining that Wyllott, his wife, sons, and several of his friends, had lain in wait to assault him with bows, arrows, clubs and staves, and that on the 4th January 1535 he had been attacked so violently that he would ertainly have been killed “if great and good help had not come”. [9]

The most violent dispute over property which occurred during his period took place in 1535-6, and it concerned the tenancy of Easing Farm, just outside Leek. Abbot Whitney had leased his farm to a man called Mounford shortly after he had become Abbot. Mounford had died in about 1526, leaving his thirteen-year old grandson, Richard, in possession of the farm. Several of the boy’s relatives and friends had asked the abbot to transfer the tenancy to Richard and his widowed grandmother. Whitney had agreed, and had granted the lease to the boy for a period of twelve years, the term to begin after the death or re­marriage of his grandmother. Richard’s grandmother took a second husband in 1527, and so his tenancy should have commenced from that date; but his uncle, William Arment, took over the farm and ppropriated all the revenues which the boy should have received. Abbot Whitney, moreover, aided and abetted him in this act of injustice, in spite of the agreement which he had made with Richard only a short time before. This state of affairs continued until fter Richard’s twenty­first birthday in 1535, when, on the advice of his friends, he decided to stand up for his rights, and took possession of Easing Farm. His action provoked the abbot into directing William Arment and his men to throw him out. This they did with such great violence and tyranny “as hath not lately been seen practised nor used amongst Christian men”. They emptied the premises of all Richard’s belongings, ill­treated his cattle, and assaulted the young man himself in a most cruel and malicious way. Not content with this, they pulled down one of the two houses which comprised Easing Farm, destroying such goods as still remained inside, thus leaving Richard homeless.

Abbot Whitney carried the affair a stage further. He indicted Mounford before the Justices of the Quarter Sessions on a charge of forcible entry. The young man was so impoverished by this time that he was unable to take any action to redress his grievances. Fortunately he had one or two good friends who brought the matter to the attention of the Court of Star Chamber and asked for the abbot and his abettors to be brought before the Court to answer for their outrages. [10] The outcome of the case is not recorded.

The very fact that the history of Dieulacres comes suddenly to light at the beginning of the sixteenth century after some fifty years of obscurity is due almost entirely to the misdemeanors of the abbots; and the incidents just examined emphasize dramatically the statements made in an earlier chapter concerning the loosening of discipline which followed the breakdown in the administrative machinery of the Cistercian Order. While the energetic Jean de Cirey was Abbot of Cîteaux (1476-1503) there was a distinct possibility of a renewal of the ties between the English Cistercians and their Mother-House, and of drastic reforms being implemented. Even as late as 1531 the General Chapter appointed the Abbot of Chaloché to undertake the visitation and reform of the English monasteries. By this time national events were beginning to move far too quickly to allow any reforming measures to be implemented from within. It was left to the King and his advisers to apply their own brand of medicine to the ills of the Religious Orders in England.

---