Office c. Master John Asshwell

Master John Asshwell – tangentially involved in two other Consistory cases over previous months in 1494, Laurence c Jaco and Unknown c Eve and Hayward – was the curate of Chelmsford parish church; this meant that he had “cure of souls” for his parishioners, that is acted as their parish priest, though he was not the rector, a person or institution who held the benefice or living (the income from the parish’s tithes). Instead, he would have been salaried, and since Chelmsford parish was large, with a magnificent church rebuilt in the fifteenth century (and subsequently made into a cathedral), it was probably a relatively good position. The title “Master” for a priest usually indicates that he held an MA degree; he was probably the Master John Ayschwell who was a chaplain resident at Merton College, Oxford, in 1490.[1] Here and in the other cases, we see something of the parish priest’s interactions with the members of his congregation: in Laurence c Jaco, he came to Laurence’s house to drink malmsey after the couple involved in the lawsuit had contracted marriage; in the testamentary case brought against William Eve and William Hayward, he was the scribe for the will on which the lawsuit centred. Here we see him at a dinner party at the home of John Byglond, attended by several other men, including another chaplain.

While at his (hopefully pleasant) social event, another priest, the vicar of Borham, came to deliver to Asshwell a letter of summons for some ecclesiastical court process, probably for one of the bishop of London’s courts. The letter was not for Asshwell, but for someone else, unspecified: it would have summoned them to appear as a witness or possibly as a defendant in some proceeding. According to Asshwell, the vicar of Borham was simply trying to pass the buck: it was the vicar’s job to deliver it, not Asshwell’s. Someone had to make the trip out to wherever the addressee lived, which would incur transport costs and time, and evidently neither the vicar nor Asshwell were interested in performing this task without compensation. So Asshwell refused: but that then brought him into the Consistory court to face disciplinary proceedings. It is not clear if the summons related to one of the cases in which Asshwell was invoked earlier in 1494; or perhaps this little cluster of Chelmsford cases mentioning him is just a coincidence.

LMA, MS DL/C/A/001/MS09065, fols. 208v, 249r

Response of Master John Asshwell, 10 Jul. 1494

[fol. 208v] Acknowledgement made 10 July before the lord Commissary in the presence of Reed etc., in my, Richard Grome’s, presence

Responses personally made by Master John Asshwell

To the first interrogatory, he admits it. To the second interrogatory, he admits it. To the third interrogatory, he says that at the time of the issue and direction of the letters of summons, this witness stood as the chaplain and curate acting on behalf of the absent rector of the parish church of Chelmsford and stands as such at present. To the fourth interrogatory, he says that on a certain Friday following the last feast,[2] this witness was dining in the home of John Byglond of Chelmsford, London diocese, together with the said Robert Smyth and Ralph Fasakerley, John Reed, and Sir John Illusley chaplain, and others, where and when, at dinner time, the vicar of Borham gave those letters of summons to this witness so that he would deliver them.[3] execute them. And he responded and said to him that because the mandate was general and was not directed especially to this witness but to each and every rector, vicar, and curate etc., and because that particular letter had been given to the vicar, this witness said to him “you must execute it, not I.” In addition, this witness said that even if he did execute the letter, which of them would pay for the travel and the expenses? Then the vicar put a groat[4] on the table in front of this witness, and because this witness said that this would not be enough to pay the travel expenses for this business, the vicar took up the groat from the table and aggressively ripped the letters from this witness’s hands, and thus he left the house with the others. And to the other contents of the interrogatory….[5] To the fifth interrogatory, he says as he said above, and to its other contents he responds negatively. This acknowledgement having been made, the lord licensed him to appear by proctor, and then Master John constituted Masters Henry Aprece, Midd, Imbroke, and Smyth as his proctors, jointly and severally, in all his causes, and […] Master John Coplond and Lewis Johne as his witnesses etc., which proctor Aprece showed and made himself party for him.

[fol. 249r] 10 July [1494][6] the lord chancellor licensed Master John Asshwell, curate of Chelmsford, with the consent of Reed, and then Master John constituted Masters Henry Aprece, Midd, Evilyn, Imbreke, and Smyth as his proctors, jointly and severally in all cases, with Master John Copland and Lewis John, literates, as witnesses etc.

---

[1] A. B. Emden, A Biographical Register of the University of Oxford to A. D. 1500 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1957), 85.

[2] last feast: likely the specific feast in question is mistakenly omitted.

[3] That is, that he would officially hand over the letter of summons to whomever it was addressed. It was evidently someone outside Chelmsford as it involved travel expenses.

[4] A coin worth 4 pence.

[5] sentence not completed.

[6] Though this entry is separated from the examination above in the manuscript, it evidently relates directly to it (and more or less repeats the last sentence in the record of the deposition).