Biography of Walter Clopton -1400
Walter Clopton pronounced the death sentences.
On 31 Jan 1388 Walter Clopton was appointed Chief Justice of the King's Bench which position he held for life.
Around 08 Sep 1397 Thomas of Woodstock 1st Duke of Gloucester (age 42) was murdered in Calais [Map] for his role as leader of the Lords Appellant. Duke Albemarle aka Aumale, Duke Gloucester, Earl Essex forfeit. His son Humphrey Plantagenet 2nd Earl Buckingham (age 16) succeeded 2nd Earl Buckingham.
Walter Clopton was part of the inquiry into his death the outcome of which is not known. A John Hall was executed for the murder.
On 21 Oct 1400 Walter Clopton died.
Calendars. 5. The following are assigned to be triers of petitions from England, Ireland, Wales, and Scotland:
The duke of Guyenne and duke of Lancaster.
Sir Walter Clopton.
William Thirning.
William Rickhill.
John Wadham.
- to act all together, or at least six of the aforesaid prelates and lords; consulting with the chancellor, treasurer, steward, and chamberlain, and also the king's serjeants when necessary. And they shall hold their session in the chamberlain's room near the Painted Chamber [Map].
Calendars. 26. William Montague, Earl of Salisbury, submitted a petition in parliament, the tenor of which follows:
To our lord the king his liege William Montague, Earl of Salisbury, prays: whereas the most noble King Edward [III], your grandfather, by his letters patent gave and granted to William Montague, Earl of Salisbury and father of the said supplicant, whose heir he is, and to the heirs issuing from his body, with the clause of warranty of the said very noble King Edward [III] and his heirs, the castle, town and honour of Denbigh, and the cantreds of Rhos, Rhufiniog, and Cymeirch and the commote of Dinmael with their appurtenances in Wales, as plainly appears from the said letters patent: which castle, town, and honour, cantreds and commote, with their appurtenances, Roger Mortimer, late Earl of March, by the name of the land of Denbigh, in Trinity term, in the twenty-eighth year of the reign of the said most noble King Edward [III] [18 June 1354-9 July 1354], before William Shareshull and his fellow justices assigned to hold the pleas before the said very noble King Edward [III], against the aforesaid supplicant, by erroneous judgment, recovered by a writ of scire facias, founded on a judgment given in the parliament held at Westminster on the Monday after the feast of St Mark the Evangelist in the twenty-eighth year of the reign of the said very noble King Edward [III], for the aforesaid Roger, on a petition showed by him to the said very noble King Edward [III] then, in the name of Roger Mortimer of Wigmore, son and heir of Edmund Mortimer, son and heir of Roger Mortimer; in which record and judgment on the said writ of scire facias there are patent errors.
May it please you of your gracious lordship to cause the full record to be brought before you, with all attachments to the same concerning the said writ of scire facias, in the present parliament, that they may be inspected and examined for error, and to forewarn Roger Mortimer, Earl of March, cousin and heir of the aforesaid Roger son of Edmund, and others who are to be forewarned in the matter, to be before you at the next parliament to hear the said errors; and if they know of anything to say wherefor the aforesaid judgment on the said writ of scire facias should not be reversed, and the aforesaid supplicant restored to his said possession with the issues and profits in the meantime since the said loss, and also to do right and justice to the parties in the aforesaid manner. Whereupon, the said petition having been read before the king and lords of parliament, the king ordered Sir Walter Clopton, his chief justice, to bring before the king and lords in parliament the record of which the said petition made mention above. Which record, on the king's command, was later brought to parliament before the king and lords, and there it was read in part, and certain errors therein were pointed out and alleged by the said Earl of Salisbury. Whereupon the king, by the assent and advice of the lords of parliament, the justices of the king there present, granted and ordered that the said earl have a writ of scire facias on the matter of the said petition, returnable at the next parliament, as the same petition mentions.
Calendars. 27. Be it remembered that the venerable father Thomas, archbishop of Canterbury, primate of all England, earnestly prayed to the lord king in the present parliament that whereas his church of Canterbury, by the gift and grant of his noble and holy progenitors, which the same king graciously confirmed, had such prerogative over the other churches of England that whatsoever archbishop of Canterbury for the time being had custody of all lordships, manors, tenements, and rents with appurtenances which were held of the same church in chief during the minority of the heirs of their tenants, even though the same tenants elsewhere held in chief of the lord king; and now concerning the castle and manor of Tonbridge, Kent [Map], which by virtue of this prerogative were in the custody of William de Courtenay, late archbishop of Canterbury now deceased, predecessor of the present archbishop, on the day on which he died, by reason of the minority of the heir of the earl of Stafford deceased, who held the aforesaid castle and manor from the aforesaid former archbishop in chief, dispute and controversy between the present archbishop and the executors of the will of the aforesaid late archbishop are pending at present. And whereas a certain composition was drawn up a short while ago between the archbishop of Canterbury and the prior and chapter of the church of Canterbury on the matter, it pleased the lord king, having inspected and examined that composition, to order a view and settlement of the matter for the peace and right of his said church of Canterbury, as should seem best to his royal majesty, to whose ordinance and decree on the foregoing the same archbishop proclaimed himself to be firmly obedient in all things, whereupon the same lord king immediately appointed the venerable fathers Robert archbishop of York, Robert Bishop of London and John Bishop of Ely, and John duke of Aquitaine and Lancaster, and John Earl of Huntingdon, and Thomas the earl marshal, to inspect and examine that composition, and further to discuss and settle the matter at their discretion, and fully to inform the lord king of what their deed and action should be. And later on Monday, the last day of the aforesaid parliament [10 February 1397], the archbishop of York, and the bishops, and the aforesaid duke and earls thus appointed by order of the lord king in the same parliament returned their decree and ordinance on the aforesaid matter by Walter Clopton, the lord king's justice, in this form - namely, that the third part of all manors, lands, and tenements of the inheritance of the aforesaid heir, and the issues, profits, and revenues of the same from the time of the death of the aforesaid late archbishop, should, according to the form of the aforesaid composition, remain and be in the hands of the aforesaid prior and chapter, to be used for their own purposes; and that two parts of the aforesaid lands and tenements, with the issues, profits, and revenues of the same two parts, should remain likewise in the hands of that prior and chapter, safely and securely to keep until the lord king shall have ordained to whom those said two parts of the issues, profits, and revenues shall be delivered and has declared his will thereon. And the castle of Tonbridge [Map] will be delivered to the aforesaid present archbishop of Canterbury without delay, to remain in his hands and keeping until the the coming of age of the aforesaid heir. The which ordinance and decree thus rendered by the archbishop of York, bishops, duke and earls, the aforesaid lord king, approving thereof, ordered to be placed on record on the roll of parliament at the request of the aforesaid present archbishop of Canterbury.
