SKELTON, Sir John

The pedigree of the Skeltons raises difficult problems, but the earlier biography is in error in describing Sir John as lord of the manors of Braithwaite, Hensingham and Skelton.3 The Commons 1386-1421, iv. 377-80. The Skeltons of Braithwaite and those of Whitrigg were distinct branches of the same family. In our MP’s time the former were represented by Richard Skelton, who died on 3 Oct. 1432, leaving a son and heir, John (d.1440).4 CIPM, xxiv. 39; xxv. 407. This John, contrary to the earlier biography, did not inherit our MP’s lands; rather they passed to our MP’s son, another John. The confusion has arisen from the fact that Sir John’s eldest son was also named Richard and died childless at about the same time as the other Richard.5 He died shortly before 30 Nov. 1430, when a settlement was made on his wid.: CCR, 1429-35, p. 121.

John’s military experience was more extensive than allowed in the earlier biography. He is, with a fair degree of probability, to be identified with the namesake who sued out letters of protection in April 1383 as about to depart for Flanders under Henry Despenser, bishop of Norwich; and it was certainly he who was serving soon after in the garrison in Carlisle castle under Sir Robert Parving and, in June 1393, sued out letters of protection for service under Thomas Mowbray, earl of Norfolk, at Calais.6 C76/67, m. 17; 77, m. 9; E199/7/11, m. 7. The earlier biography also underestimates his reward for the capture of Murdoch, earl of Fife, at the battle of Humbleton Hill in September 1402. During the course of the Parliament of 1406, of which he was a Member, he was awarded not only a royal annuity of 100 marks but also a cash payment of £1,000. On 21 May, during the second session, the King ordered the Exchequer to pay him 200 marks in part payment of this sum. There is no evidence that he received the rest.7 E404/21/226.

In the Cumberland subsidy returns of 1435-6 Sir John was assessed on an annual income of £118 6s. 8d., the highest in the county, but he derived a much lesser sum from his own patrimony. At this late stage of his career the bulk of his income was derived from royal annuities, totaling in excess of 100 marks, and the Ireby inheritance he held in right of his second wife.8 E179/90/26.

The earlier biography errs in stating that Skelton did not have a daughter by his second wife, Alice Ireby. Later pleadings make clear that her two daughters and coheiresses were half-sisters, the one by Tilliol, the other by our MP. Probably in about 1422, Joan, her daughter by Sir John, was married to the Lincolnshire knight, Sir Robert Roos*, who was, like our MP, a servant of Humphrey, duke of Gloucester. By this date Sir John had taken steps to secure the whole of the Ireby inheritance to Joan: by a fine levied in 1407 the manors of High Ireby and Embleton were settled on him and Alice and their issue, with successive remainders to Alice’s elder daughter, Katherine, and her issue and Alice and her right heirs.9 CP25(1)/35/13/4. This settlement is puzzling in that our MP’s eldest son, Richard, was already or was later to be married to Katherine, whose expectations it deferred, potentially indefinitely.10 It is tempting to conclude that Katherine married the other Richard, but his wid. was named Alice: CFR, xvi. 151; CIPM, xxiv. 40.

In these circumstances it is not surprising that the division of the Ireby lands should have given rise to a dispute after the deaths of Sir John and his second wife. On 1 July 1440 Katherine and James Kelom, her second husband, sued her half-sister’s daughter, Eleanor Roos, then a minor, Hugh Lowther*, then sheriff, and our MP’s son John, for a moiety of the manors of High Ireby and Embleton. Eleanor claimed the whole property on the basis of the fine of 1407; the plaintiffs claimed the moiety by virtue of earlier entails. Litigation between the half-sisters was continuing as late as 1453, but an agreement was reached two years later which represented a victory for Katherine. She was assigned the manor of High Ireby, leaving that of Embleton to Eleanor.11 JUST1/1544, rot. 41; CP40/727, rot. 318d; 730, rot. 420; 771, rot. 430; 778, cart. rot. In the meantime the disputing parties had been brought together by mutual interest to sue two of our MP’s executors, Alexander Coke, parson of Rothbury in Northumberland, and Thomas More, parson of Scaleby in Cumberland, for a pix containing charters, presumably relating to the Ireby inheritance.12 CP40/723, rots. 568, 603d; 738, rot. 126d; 743, rot. 329.