STURY, Richard

The family of Stury were resident in Shrewsbury from the time of Edward I, if not before, and at least two of its members represented the borough in Parliament in the fourteenth century. Richard Stury† is recorded as sitting on three occasions between 1295 and 1313, and his grandson, John Stury†, on as many as seven between 1341 and 1365. For the marriage contract of John’s son, another Richard: Salop Archs., Smythe of Acton Burnell mss, 1514/395. The family’s property in the town must have been extensive, but it is not well documented. In 1304 the MP of 1295 was granted in fee by the local community a piece of land behind the town wall called ‘La Mote’ at an annual rent of 1d.; his son, another Richard (father of John), is known to have settled four messuages in tail-male; and our MP’s father had land in Coton Hill. Shrewsbury assembly bk. 3367/67, f. 83v; CP40/590, rot. 118: CPR, 1429-36, p. 107. More tellingly, in 1431 the latter’s property in Shrewsbury was valued, for the purposes of a subsidy, at £5 6d. p.a., making him one of only 11 with holdings worth more than £5. The bulk of these probably lay in the parish of St. Mary, where our MP is known to have lived. This, however, was not the full extent of the Sturys’ income, for by the end of the fourteenth century they also had property a few miles away at Rossall and Onslow. Feudal Aids, iv. 260; H. Owen and J.B. Blakeway, Hist. Shrewsbury, ii. 335; Salop Archs., deeds, 6000/4534. In that sense they were more than simply townsmen, and our MP’s grandfather, Richard, is found as an attestor to a county election (that of 10 Apr. 1421). None the less, Shrewsbury remained the focus of their interests, and the same Richard served as bailiff of the town on no fewer than three occasions in the reign of Henry IV. C219/12/5; Shrewsbury assembly bk. 3367/67, ff. 11v, 12v, 13.

Richard Stury succeeded to his grandfather’s place in the town’s affairs. He was in possession of the family lands (subject, presumably, to the interests of his mother, who survived him) by October 1440 when his father’s feoffees settled upon him lands in Shrewsbury, Rossall and in other unnamed places in Shropshire. Salop Archs., deeds, 6000/3615. He did not have to wait long for his first election as bailiff, and while in office he was given the additional responsibility of representing his fellow burgesses in Parliament. The assembly was to prove of some significance to Shrewsbury. In the third session, meeting between 20 Oct. and 15 Dec. 1445, the borough successfully petitioned Parliament for a new and complex constitution. No doubt Stury and his fellow MP, John Horde*, played a part in the petition’s success, although, because of the delay in its presentation, there is no reason to suppose that they were elected by their fellows as its most potentially effective advocates. In view of his family’s standing, it is not, however, surprising that the borough authorities included Stury among a body of 12 ‘worthi Burgeys receantz housholders, most sufficient and discrete’ who they wanted to serve as aldermen. RP, v. 121 (cf. PROME, xi. 508).

The Parliament of 1445-6 was a very expensive one for the constituencies: it met for a total of 191 days over four sessions. Stury accepted payment at the rate of 1s. per diem, half the established rate for borough Members but in line with the reduced rate usually accepted by Shrewsbury’s representatives. Even so, the payments he received, totaling £11 5s., were a significant drain on the communal purse, particularly as the separate sessions meant that he received payment for four return trips between Shrewsbury and Westminster. These additional payments may have been a bone of contention, for while for each of the first two sessions he was paid for 11 days spent travelling he was paid for only eight and four respectively for the two final sessions. Shrewsbury bailiffs’ accts. 3365/377, mm. 4, 5. Whatever the reason for this, Stury did not find his experience of parliamentary service profitable enough to repeat. Although he was very active in borough administration, serving a remarkable five terms as either bailiff or coroner in only eight years, he was not elected to Parliament again.

Besides his life as a busy borough official, Stury also played the part of a minor county landholder. He attested the county parliamentary elections held on 12 Jan. 1447 and 15 Oct. 1450, being styled ‘esquire’ on both occasions, and on 3 Nov. 1451 he was a juror in the inquisition taken on the death of Sir Richard Vernon*. C219/15/4; 16/1; C139/145/8. His attention was, however, recalled to his native town by the crisis in its affairs in 1452. The bailiffs’ account for 1451-2 records the payment of 29s. 4d. to him and two other leading townsmen, Robert Scriven and Thomas Luyt*, for riding to see Richard, duke of York, almost certainly in response to the duke’s famous letter of 3 Feb. 1452 calling upon the town for support in his quarrel with Edmund, duke of Somerset. Shrewsbury bailiffs’ acct. 3365/380, m. 1; Paston Letters ed. Gairdner, i. 97-98. One can only speculate as to the purpose of their mission – the probability is that they were sent to make the burgesses’ excuses – but the result was that some inhabitants, below the rank of the elite represented by the delegation, either followed the duke to his armed demonstration at Dartford or made risings in his favour locally. Accordingly, they were indicted for treason when royal commissioners came to Shropshire in the autumn of that year. Stury was among the jurors who laid these and other indictments, serving on juries at Bridgnorth and Ludlow, and yet he and other of Shrewsbury’s leading men probably harboured some sympathy with the rebels. KB9/270A/12, 77a; 103/2/7, 24. In company with another of the aldermen, William Bastard*, he rode to the King and chancellor to secure pardons for the indicted, and the borough authorities rewarded them for their diligence with payments of five marks each. Wisely, Stury also secured some personal insurance against any adverse consequences from this troubled period: on 7 Aug., only three days before the first arrival of the royal justices, he sued out a general pardon. Shrewsbury bailiffs’ accts. 3365/380, m. 2; C67/40, m. 24.

Just as Stury’s political sympathies are difficult to judge from the events of 1452, so are they from what is known of his career in subsequent years. While serving his fourth term as bailiff in 1456-7, he confiscated a jacket of mail from a servant of (Sir) John Burgh III*, guilty of affray and the drawing of blood. Later, however, ‘ob amorem’ of the duke of York’s son, Edward, earl of March, he made restoration. Presumably Burgh’s servant was also a servant of the young earl, and the episode does not necessarily say anything about Stury’s own connexions. Later, early in 1459 the Shropshire peer, Richard, Lord Grey of Powis, named him among his feoffees to settle jointure on his wife, Margaret, daughter of James Tuchet, Lord Audley. Shrewsbury bailiffs’ accts. 3365/899, rot. 15; CPR, 1452-61, p. 475. Audley was a Lancastrian; the feoffor, on the other hand, had already shown himself to be sympathetic to the Yorkist cause and was to do so again. Perhaps, like many of his fellow townsmen, Stury shared these sympathies. If so, it did not prevent him attesting the Shropshire return to the Parliament that met on 20 Nov. 1459 in the wake of the rout of the Yorkist lords at Ludford Bridge. In the absence of the county’s leading men, he appears as high as 2nd on the list of 19 attestors: C219/16/5. His may have been a divided preference: he was influenced one way by the support offered to York by his native town; and the other by the connexion of his brother, Alan, with the Talbots, supporters of Lancaster. Interestingly, on 19 Apr. 1460, when the militant Lancastrian regime held control, Alan was granted the constableship of Shrewsbury castle when it should next be in royal gift. CPR, 1452-61, p. 587. A Talbot connexion seems the only explanation for this grant, although evidence for Alan’s service to that fam. is of later date: CAD, ii. C2305; vi. C6086, 6118; Owen and Blakeway, ii. 335-6.

After the accession of Edward IV, Stury’s administrative activities diminished, although he did serve one final term as bailiff in 1464-5. In Trinity term 1465, while he was in office, his name appears, as the only townsman, alongside those of many prominent Shropshire and Staffordshire gentry sued by Margaret, dowager countess of Shrewsbury, for breaking her closes and houses at Whitchurch and Blakemere. CP40/816, rot. 279d. Much more significant was his involvement, albeit only peripherally, in the major dispute that disturbed the peace of Shropshire in the late 1460s. J.R. Lander, ‘Straunge versus Kynaston’, Albion, vii. 1-10, provides an incomplete acct. of this dispute. On 31 July 1467 Howell ap Morgan, a Welsh esquire in the service of the Shropshire peer, John, Lord Strange of Knockin, was murdered at Hillingdon in Middlesex by a gang led by Strange’s stepfather, Roger Kynaston. In the appeal brought by Howell’s widow, Stury was named among the many accessories to the crime. Since three other prominent townsmen, including Edward Esthope*, were named in the same capacity, it seems that Kynaston’s campaign to deprive Lord Strange of a considerable part of his inheritance enjoyed significant support in Shrewsbury. KB27/827, rots. 65d, 103. Unfortunately here the evidence fails. Indeed, but for the appeal of Howell’s widow nothing would be known of the involvement of Stury and three other leading townsmen in the dispute. Nothing came of the appeal against them and no more is heard of the town’s involvement.

Thereafter, Stury makes no further appearances in the records in an active role. His will was dated 9 Nov. 1469, and he was dead by the following 12 Feb. when his brother, Alan, produced it before the bailiffs for enrolment. The document concerned the lands the testator had purchased in Shrewsbury and other unspecified places in Shropshire. Unfortunately, no further details are given concerning the location and extent of this property and it can hardly have been extensive, but our MP had clear ideas about its future disposition. It was to be settled on Alan in tail-male on condition that he find a chaplain in the church of St. Mary to pray for his soul for as long as he should be required to do so by their mother, Isabel, and Richard’s son, John, their heirs and assigns; if Alan should die without male issue the lands were to remain to John and his heirs. The chantry was duly founded in the church’s south transept, still known as ‘Stury’s aisle’. Shrewsbury assembly bk. 3365/67, f. 65v; Owen and Blakeway, ii. 333.