Richard and Parliament

Hi all,

This is the case I promised to post yesterday. It's from the first session of the 1472-5 parliament (ie autumn 1472), and the source, again, is the Medieval Rolls of Parliament accessed on British History Online. I hope I'm not posting too much for copyright. Anyway, here is the statute in question (my apologies to anyone of sensitive disposition):-

"To the most wise and discreet commons assembled in this present parliament Katherine, widow of Richard Williamson, lamentably complains and shows to your great wisdoms, that where the said Richard was in God's and our sovereign lord the king's peace on 1 October last [1472], riding and coming from a town called Riccall in the county of York towards his own dwelling-place in Howden in the same county; and when he was at Hemingborough in the same county waiting to cross on a ferry there called Barnaby Ferry, which was on the main road on the way to his said dwelling-place, there came Robert Farnell late of Newsholme near Howden in the same county, yeoman, otherwise called Robert Forster, Richard Farnell late of Newsholme near Howden in the same county, yeoman, otherwise called Richard Forster, and John Farnell late of Newsholme near Howden in the same county, yeoman, otherwise called John Forster, sons of Thomas Farnell late of Newsholme near Howden in the same county, yeoman, otherwise called Thomas Forster, defensibly equipped, that is to say with jacks and sallets, and with force and arms, that is to say with bows, arrows, swords and spears, with malice aforethought lay in wait at Hemingborough aforesaid to kill and murder the said Richard Williamson, and then and there they made a great assault and affray on him, and horribly struck him with a spear there so that he fell to the ground beside his horse; and then the said wrongdoers, having no mercy or pity on him, cut off both the hands of the same Richard Williamson with their swords and one of his arms above the elbow, and hamstrung him and fatally wounded him and left him there for dead, of which blows and deadly wounds the said Richard Williamson died a short time afterwards. And so the said Robert, Richard Farnell and John then and there feloniously murdered and slew the same Richard Williamson, and then and there feloniously robbed and despoiled him of his goods, that is to say of a bow, 12 arrows, a sword, a buckler worth 10s. and other goods. And then the said Robert, Richard Farnell and John left and rode to the said Thomas their father in the said town of Hemingborough; and the said Thomas, knowing that all his said sons had committed the aforesaid felonies, murders and robberies in the aforesaid form, feloniously sheltered and harboured all of them and each of them at the aforesaid town of Newsholme on the same day and on several later occasions; and the said Thomas, immediately after the said felony, murder and robbery had thus been committed, made approaches to the most high and mighty prince and most honourable lord Richard, duke of Gloucester, to take and accept him and all his said wicked sons into his service, so that by the strenuous efforts of the said Thomas he and his said sons might have been supported in their horrible felony, murder and robbery; the said duke having afterwards been reliably informed and notified of the said felony, murder and robbery, when the said Thomas was calling himself a servant of the said duke and wearing his clothing which he had obtained and received by crafty and devious means, commanded that the said Thomas should be brought to the gaol at York to remain there until he was lawfully acquitted or attainted of the aforesaid felony, murder and robbery."

And here is Rosemary Horrox' editorial comment:-
" The murderous attack on Richard Williamson detailed in the petition of his widow (item 39) had taken place at Hemingborough in the East Riding less than a week before parliament assembled, and the petition went on to detail subsequent developments, including efforts by the murderers' father to get his sons into the service of the duke of Gloucester. It would have been difficult, although not quite impossible, for Katherine Williamson to meet the 15 October deadline for the submission of petitions and her petition may have been a late addition to the business under consideration, taken up by the commons because it spoke to their current preoccupation with law and order. The importance of maintenance to the criminals in this case, and Gloucester's refusal of his support when he discovered what they had done, provided a case study not only of what the commons saw as the major threat to the preservation of the law but also of their preferred solution."

Now, was Richard maybe involved in getting Katherine Williamson's case put before parliament?

Marie