10. ST. MARY OF BETHLEHEM
In 1247 Simon Fitz Mary, one of the sheriffs
of London, made over his land west of Bishopsgate Street, near the church of St. Botolph without Bishopsgate, to Godfrey, bishop of Bethlehem,
to found there a priory of canons, brothers and
sisters, of the order of St. Mary of Bethlehem, (fn. 1)
whose duties were to be prayers for the souls of
the founder, of Guy de Marlowe, John Durant,
Ralph Ashwye, and others, and the reception
of the bishop of Bethlehem, and the canons
and messengers of that church when they
came to London. The house was to be subject to the bishop of Bethlehem, who was to
receive from it an annual pension of a mark,
to be increased as its wealth grew, and who
had the right of visitation and correction.
Fitz Mary also provided that the members
of the house should wear on their copes and
mantles the distinguishing sign of the order,
a star, according to Matthew Paris, (fn. 2) red with
five rays inclosing a circle of blue.
The institution was perhaps never very large.
It was certainly of much less importance than the
other house outside Bishopsgate. The respective
spheres of St. Mary Spital and the rector of
St. Botolph's had had to be determined within a
few years of the foundation of the priory, (fn. 3) but it
was not until 1362 that the building of a chapel (fn. 4)
in honour of the Virgin and the Nativity of
Jesus by the house of St. Mary of Bethlehem
made an agreement between the rector and this
hospital necessary. By the arrangement then
made the master and brethren were permitted to
complete the chapel, have bells rung there, celebrate divine service, and receive offerings; they
might also bury any who wished to be buried in
the chapel or precincts, and have the oblations
or obventions, except in the case of parishioners
of St. Botolph's, when half the offering was to
go to the rector. Considering that at this time
their fixed income was only 33s. (fn. 5) per annum,
and that the proceeds of the collection, which
by royal licence (fn. 6) they made throughout the
kingdom, had probably fallen off after the plague
of 1350, (fn. 7) this settlement was important, and
in order to swell the flow of offerings they
obtained from the pope in 1363 a special indulgence, extending over a period of ten years,
to those who at Christmas, the Epiphany, and
the five feasts of the Virgin Mary, with their
vigils, visited and rendered material aid to the
hospital. (fn. 8) In 1389 it benefited, presumably to
the extent of £100, (fn. 9) by the will of Ralph Basset
of Drayton (fn. 10) who erected two chantries there.
It must also have reaped some advantage from
a gild called the Fraternity of St. Mary of
Bethlehem established in the church in 1370. (fn. 11)
The connexion of the house with the bishopric of Bethlehem doubtless came to an end in the
latter part of the thirteenth century, when the
Holy Land was lost to Christendom, but how or
when the king obtained the patronage it is impossible to say. The corporation of London in
1346 took the hospital under its protection, (fn. 12) and
had certainly some kind of right over the place
in 1350, for on the death of the master, John de
Nortone, the serjeant was ordered to take possession of the house in the name of the City, (fn. 13)
though the order was afterwards rescinded because
the hospital had been let to a certain Robert
Aaunsard, fishmonger, for a term of years. In
1381, when the king appointed William Welles
as master, the City disputed his right, asserting
that the hospital was in their gift. (fn. 14) At first
they were successful, (fn. 14a) but in the end the crown
gained the day, and appointed (fn. 15) as in the case of
a royal free chapel, which the hospital resembled
also in another point, viz. its exemption from the
jurisdiction of the ordinary.
Some very interesting facts about the house
were disclosed during a visitation by two of the
king's clerks in March, 1403. (fn. 16) It had already
become an asylum principally, though not exclusively, for the insane, and at that time there
were six lunatics and three sick persons there.
These people, or their relatives, contributed
something to their support, but the amount
varied, the highest rate mentioned being 12d. a
week paid by a merchant of Exeter, who was
there for six weeks. The hospital had a little
property, (fn. 17) but was chiefly maintained by voluntary contributions, and it was calculated that the
collections throughout England brought in about
40 marks a year, the obventions in the great and
small chapels 52s., those on the great feasts
another 52s., the box at the door of the house
and the two boxes carried about London and the
suburbs similar amounts, and the offerings for
the poor on the day of the Parascene 20s. A
collection throughout the diocese of London for
the sick poor amounted roughly to 4 marks
annually, and gifts of meat, ale, fish, salt, and
candles were also made.
The management of the hospital appears at
this time to have belonged to the office of porter,
and Peter Taverner, who had received the post
for life, had abused his trust in every way. He
had rendered no accounts of the money accruing
from the various collections, in some cases for
four years, in others for fourteen, nor of bequests
and payments made for the inmates. He had
not distributed the alms, but with the money
had bought fuel and made the poor pay for it,
while his wife had taken the best of the contributions in kind. Not content with this, he had
disposed of the beds and other goods, causing a
loss to the hospital of about £40, and through
him robbers had caused even worse damage. In
spite of the remonstrances of the master he persisted in playing at dice and draughts, and in
selling ale at his house within the close. It is
incredible that Taverner's conduct would have
been so long unchecked if the master had been
constantly resident or really interested in the place,
and it may be noted that the statement of one
of the inmates that divine service was sometimes
withdrawn by the default of the master or his
curate was found to be true, and that the chapel
was but poorly provided with books and plate, (fn. 18)
while it was also said to be his fault that there
were no brothers and sisters in the hospital. (fn. 19)
The distinctive dress of the order had been
abandoned, (fn. 20) and with it seems to have vanished
most of the character of the original foundation.
Some kind of reconstitution must have been
effected, since in 1424 brethren and sisters were
associated with the master in sending a proctor
or quaestor to seek alms in the archdeaconry of
Oxford. (fn. 21) But it is evident that in one important
respect the hospital developed in the direction it
had already taken in the fourteenth century, the
office of master tending more and more to become a sinecure. Proof of this may probably be
found in the hospital being let to farm by its
head in 1454, (fn. 21a) but there can be no doubt
of the significance of the appointment of George
Boleyn, a layman, in 1529, and on his forfeiture
of a gentleman of the privy chamber.
In 1523 Stephen Gennings, a merchant-tailor,
gave £40 to the City Corporation towards the
purchase of the patronage of the house, (fn. 22) which,
however, was not effected until 1546. (fn. 23) As
there is no Valor there are no means of ascertaining what property the hospital had at this
date, but the income derived from it seems to
have been less than £40, (fn. 24) and was so inadequate
to the demands upon it that recourse was had in
1551 to the old practice of soliciting alms of the
charitable, in this instance within the counties
of Lincoln and Cambridge, the isle of Ely, and
the city of London. (fn. 25)
In 1632 commissioners were appointed to inquire into the state of the hospital, (fn. 26) which was
found to be very unsatisfactory. (fn. 27) A sum of 2s.
a week was allowed for each patient, but as the
master, Dr. Crooke, spent most of it on himself,
and the steward appropriated the gifts in kind,
the unfortunate inmates, unless they bought of
the steward at extortionate rates, were almost
starved. It need hardly be added that no
measures were taken to cure them of their malady.
The income of the house was £277 3s. 4d.,
but this did not include the weekly donations
of food from the Lord Mayor, sheriffs, and other
persons.
There appears to have been some idea of enlarging the hospital in 1644, (fn. 28) a project made
impossible by the Civil War, which diminished its
revenues and caused it to be converted to other
uses (fn. 29) for the time being. In 1675, however,
the increased number for whom admission was
requested (fn. 30) made larger quarters a necessity, and
as the situation of the house was not a good one
for the purpose, (fn. 31) a new hospital was built in
1675, at a cost of nearly £17,000, on ground
in Moorfields granted by the City. (fn. 32)
At that time it formed one corporation with
Bridewell, and the superior officials were common to the two institutions, but each had a
committee of its own, and a subdivision of this
went to the hospital once a week to check the
accounts and inspect the food. (fn. 33) The building
was much enlarged in 1734, when accommodation was provided for 100 incurable cases as
well as for more patients not supposed to be
hopeless. (fn. 34) The inspecting committee evidently
worked well, and the management of the place
was excellent. Care was taken to make the
charges on friends of the patients as small as
possible, (fn. 35) and the welfare of the lunatics was
the chief consideration. (fn. 36)
In 1814 the hospital was removed to St.
George's Fields, on the other side of the
Thames.
Masters of St. Mary of Bethlehem
Thomas, occurs 1293 (fn. 37)
John de Norton, occurs 1346, (fn. 38) died 1350 (fn. 39)
William Titte, occurs 1370–1 (fn. 40) and 1380 (fn. 41)
William Welles, occurs 1381–2 (fn. 42)
John Gardyner, appointed 1381, occurs
1389 (fn. 42a)
Robert Lincoln, appointed 1388, (fn. 43) occurs
1399 (fn. 44) and 1403 (fn. 45)
Robert Dale, appointed 1423 (fn. 46)
Edward Atherton, appointed 1437, (fn. 47) occurs
1454 (fn. 48)
Thomas Arundel, appointed 1457 (fn. 49)
Thomas Hervy, appointed 1459 (fn. 50)
Thomas Browne, appointed 1459 (fn. 51)
John Smeathe or Sneethe, appointed 1470 (fn. 52)
John Davyson, removed 1479 (fn. 53)
Walter Bate and William Hobbs, appointed
1479 (fn. 54)
Thomas Maudesley, occurs 1485 (fn. 55)
John Cavalary, appointed 1512 (fn. 56)
George Boleyn, appointed 1529 (fn. 57)
Peter Mewtys, appointed 1536 (fn. 58)
Dr. Crooke, occurs 1629 (fn. 59) and 1633 (fn. 60)
The seal of the priory is said to have represented the Assumption of the Virgin. (fn. 61)
FRIARIES