STROTHER, William

The Strothers were an ancient Northumbrian family, which by the early fifteenth century had established connexions to some of the leading families of the region (such as the Swinburnes, Musgraves and the Blenkinsops) as well as to the borough of Newcastle-upon-Tyne (where Strothers had served as mayors and MPs since the mid-fourteenth century). Indeed, our MP’s brother, John, who had unexpectedly inherited the family estates on the childless death of his nephew, William, in 1415 or 1416, represented that borough in three Parliaments between 1417 and May 1421. Strother’s own prospects were to be enhanced in similar circumstances, for John himself died childless in March 1424.4 J. Hodgson, Hist. Northumb. ii (1), 255; CFR, xiv. 107; The Commons 1386-1421, iv. 518-19; CIPM, xxii. 390. By then William had established himself in local affairs with appointment to the Northumberland bench in February 1422.5 He was not of the quorum, although he was later to be: C66/404, m. 18d. Seemingly he had had a legal training, but no evidence survives of it and once he had inherited the family estates he had other resources on which to rely. Yet those resources were not as extensive as they might have been. His inheritance was burdened by the interests of two dowagers, Isabel, the widow of his nephew, William, who was the wife of the Newcastle merchant, William Medocroft*, and Agnes, his elder brother’s widow, who married a wealthy merchant of Kingston-upon-Hull, John Bedford†. Both survived him, and the latter had a jointure interest in what was probably the most valuable manor of the inheritance, that of Wallington. Further, the value of what did come to him, principally the manor of Kirkeharle near Wallington, was significantly diminished by the effects of Scottish raids.6 CIPM, xxii. 390; Reg. Langley, i. (Surtees Soc. clxiv), 220; The Commons 1386-1421, ii. 169.

None the less, whatever the burdens upon Strother’s inheritance, it was enough to give him a place in local affairs, particularly because Agnes appears to have alienated to him her interest in Wallington, which, according to the subsidy returns of 1428, was then in his possession, and also part of her dower property. Indeed, in the subsidy returns of 1436 he was assessed on a respectable income of £20 p.a. , a worthwhile sum in the impoverished far north.7 Feudal Aids, iv. 85; Archaeologia Aeliana, ser. 3, v. 48; E179/158/38. In the late 1420s he was intensely active in the administration and representation of Northumberland. On 24 Jan. 1426 he was appointed escheator of the county, a role he was to exercise for more than four years as, for reasons that are unclear, those appointed to succeed him failed to act.8 He is recorded as holding inquisitions post mortem in the county between Apr. 1426 and July 1430: CIPM, xxii. 645; xxiii. 365. This continuation in office is striking and unusual. New escheators were appointed in Dec. 1426, Nov. 1428 and Feb. 1430, but are not known to have acted: CFR, xv. 158, 244, 305. Six days after this appointment he was elected to represent Northumberland in Parliament, and he was re-elected, again while still serving as escheator, at the next election held on 21 Aug. 1427. 9 C219/13/1, 4, 5. Others were better qualified to serve, and his successive returns are probably to be explained by the reluctance of some of the leading members of Northumberland society to travel to Westminster. In respect of his second Parliament he was ill-rewarded for his willingness. In Easter term 1429 he and his fellow MP, Sir William Elmden*, brought an action in the Exchequer of pleas, complaining that the sheriff, Henry Fenwick*, had failed to pay them their wages, totalling £29 8s. each, for their service in Parliament. The case was respited until the octave of Trinity, and the outcome is not known.10 Parliamentarians at Law ed. Kleineke, 369. Strother was not to be elected again, perhaps deterred by his failure to secure payment.

As escheator, Strother played a part in the causa de Heron, the famous dispute between two Northumberland families, the Herons of Ford and the Manners of Etal. This resulted in the murder of William Heron in January 1428 at the hands of John Manners†. In the following June an inquisition held before Strother falsely found that Heron had died seised of his lands in Northumberland, thus bringing his lands into royal wardship to the detriment of the interests of Heron’s widow, Isabel. She complained that this finding was procured by Manners, and it may be that Strother was here guilty of partisanship. In any event, in April 1429 he was nominated by Manners to act as an arbiter in the matter on his behalf.11 CIPM, xxiii. 17; J.W. Armstrong, ‘Violence and Peacemaking in the English Marches towards Scotland’, in The Fifteenth Cent. VI ed. Clark, 59, 65.

In November 1430 Strother’s long stint as escheator finally came to an end with the nomination of another lawyer, John Cartington*.12 CFR, xvi. 17. New responsibilities now came his way. In the following August he was appointed as one of the arbiters in a dispute between Elmden and John Wessington, prior of Durham, and this involvement in the affairs of the palatinate was the prelude to appointment to office. His wider family had long had interests there, and his kinsman, Robert Strother, was later to be appointed as one of the executors of Thomas Langley, bishop of Durham. It was Langley who, in September 1431, appointed William Strother as one of the justices in his liberty of Norhamshire and Islandshire.13 Durham Univ. Lib. cathedral muns., priory reg. iii, ff. 140v-41v; CPR, 1429-36, p. 171; DURH3/36, m. 5. Two years later he was reappointed by the Crown to the quorum of the Northumberland bench, and between 1429 and 1435 he served alongside other leading men of the county on the jury that delivered the county gaol.14 CPR, 1429-36, p. 622; JUST3/54/7, 13, 14, 16. In short, he had established himself as a prominent local lawyer, but, although his career had been comparatively short, he was far from a young man in the 1430s, having inherited the family lands so belatedly. He died shortly before 14 May 1438 when a writ of diem clausit extremum was issued. No inquisition post mortem is extant.15 CFR, xvii. 2. He was succeeded by his son William, who, in the course of another brief career, was active as a juror at gaol delivery and inquisitions post mortem. He died without issue before 1456, by which time the family lands had passed to his three sisters.16 CIPM, xxv. 516; xxvi. 108; JUST3/54/20, 22, 25, 28, 29; R. Welford, Newcastle-upon-Tyne and Gateshead, i. 330; Hodgson, ii (1), 241-2n.