  Such as the lawfulness of suppressing reputed error by violence, or of contending for the faith and extirpating heresy by fire and sword. For instance, translating the scriptures into the vulgar tongue, and putting them into the hands of the common people, that they might examine and judge for themselves. Bucer owns, as will be seen further on, that their converts considered this doctrine as favourable to their licentious propensities. “I say, (says Calvin,) that by the ordination and will of God Adam fell. God would have man fall. Man is blinded by the will and commandment of God. We refer the causes of hardening to God. The highest and remote cause of hardening is the will of God. It followeth that the hidden counsel of God is the cause of hardening.” [See Barclay’s Apology, Edit. 1703, p. 113, where reference is made to those places in Calvin’s Works where these expressions are found.] Those who are acquainted with this reformer’s Institution, must know that many passages to the same purpose, and equally strong, occur there.—Others of the reformers come not a whit behind Calvin in the boldness of their language on this topic.—“God (says Beza) hath predestinated, not only unto damnation, but also unto the causes of it, whomsoever he saw meet. The decree of God cannot be excluded from the causes of corruption.”—“It is certain (says Zanchius) that God is the first cause of obduration. Reprobates are held so fast under God’s almighty decree, that they cannot but sin and perish.”—“God (says Peter Martyr) doth incline and force the wills of wicked men into great sins.”—“God, (says Zuinglius) moveth the robber to kill. He Killeth, God forcing him thereunto.” [See Barclay, as before.] Luth. Serm. in Postill. Evang. 1. Adv. Luth. Serm. Dom. 26, post Trin. Luth. in Serm. conviv. Bucer de regn. Christ. 1, i. c, 4. See Milner’s Letters to Sturges, 3d. Ed. p. 170, 171, &c. a work that contains a great deal of very curious matter on these subjects, and on most of the great points at issue between the catholics and their opponents. Calv. 1. vi. de scand. quoted by Milner, as before. Erasm. Ep. 1. vi. 4.—It appears by the mode of expression here used, that notwithstanding all the unfavourable and unchristian-like effects of their ministry, they actually did, like some modern, labourers in the same vineyard, boldly arrogate to themselves the exclusive name of evangelical ministers, or propagators of the genuine and pure gospel. Erasm ad. Frat. Infer. Germ, quoted by Milner, as before, p. 172. Mosheim, iii, 313. See Milner, as before: 182.—Carlostadius was Luther’s first disciple of any considerable note: and he co-operated with, and supported him with great firmness and ability. But having ventured to alter the mass, during Luther’s absence in the year 1521, and to deny the real presence, the latter commenced a furious war against him and his followers, and condemned them in terms of the utmost rancor and bitterness. Melancthon too (misnamed the mild) now calls him “a brutal ignorant man, void of piety and humanity, one more a Jew than a christian.”—a rare specimen of mildness and meekness! See Milner as before, 188.—It is not said how Henry brooked all this; but it was well for Luther that he was not within his reach. The most curious circumstance is that “Luther, in giving an account of his book, reproaches himself with having been too mild in it towards the king, saying that he did so at the request of his friends, in hopes that his sweetness would gain Henry.”—If such was Luther’s sweetness, what could his sourness, or his bitterness be? Milner, 181. Ibid, 132.—No wonder he should behave as he did to Cariostadius, whose chief crime seems to be his having acted without his authority, though in conjunction with Bugenhagius, Melanancthon, Jonas, &c. He continued afterwards to persecute him with unrelenting virulence, and nothing would satisfy him short of absolute submission to his sovereign will and pontifical mandates. His banishment ensued. He appears to have been one of the best men among the reformers. It seems, however, that Luther was at last convinced of his misconduct in this affair, and obtained permission for his return from exile. See Mosheim, IV. 30. See Milner, 123. See Milner, 185, 186, where the authorities are referred to. Their blindness generally proceeded from a fallacious kind of reasoning, which is still very common among their orthodox descendants or successors, but which, like a two-edged sword, cuts both ways. They plead that they are the people of God, and are in the right way, so that their cause is the cause of God and truth, and therefore the papists are cruel persecutors when they deprive them of their lives or liberties. When they are reminded of having themselves before now deprived the papists and other christian sects of their liberties and lives, they answer, that that was done very justly, as those sufferers were either seditious persons or heretics, and what they did to them was in the way of suppressing sedition or restraining heresy. When they are told that the papists excuse and justify their own violent proceedings against the protestants much in the same way and with equal plausibility, they will answer, that what the papists assert is not true. When they are further told that the papists insist upon the truth of their allegations and the falshood of those of the protestants, they will reply that the papists belonging to a false church and influenced by a lying spirit, are not to be credited, but as for them, being the people of God and followers of the truth, their testimony ought to be received without hesitation.—Thus their reasoning ends just where it began—We are God’s people, and therefore our proceedings are not to be impeached! No better reasoning can be expected in defence of injustice and persecution. Robinson’s Pref. to 3d. vol. of Saurin, p. xii. The French protestants, or Gallic Calvinists were no less bigoted and intolerant than their brethren elsewhere. Their ministers, in 1563, requested that in order to prevent the propagation of heresy and monstrous opinions, the king would be pleased to receive into his royal protection their confession of faith tendered to him in 1561, and the profession of it; and to provide that atheists, libertines, anabaptists, and Servetists should be severely punished. See Priestley’s Ecclesiastical History, 6, 135. See p. 636. “He was called up to the cardinal (Wolsey) for heresie, where he was content to subscribe and graunte unto such articles as they propounded unto him.” Fox A. and M. p. 1736. This happened in 1529. In 1531 he was cited before the archbishop of Canterbury, Wareham, on fresh charges of heresy, and forced to sign an abjuration of them—see Fox, p. 4738. The third time he was called upon, with certain others, to give an account of his opinions, by Henry himself, on which occasion he escaped by an absolute submission of himself to his supreme head in spiritual matters. His fourth and last recantation was when he was deprived of his bishopric, and committed prisoner to the Tower, where he lay till the end of Henry’s reign, on suspicion of heresy, and for violating the fast and abstinence of Good Friday.—It has been suggested that imprisonment did not constitute the whole of his correction or chastisement on this occasion, as Shaxton bishop of Salisbury was forced to recant his Lutheran opinions, and carry a faggot at the burning of four other protestants, in 1546; and it is not likely that Henry would have been content with less from Shaxton’s fellow prisoner, Latimer, than a solemn abjuration of his doctrine.—See Milner, as before, page, 196. See Milner, p. 196.—Latimer’s name is to the sentence of Joan of Kent, who was burnt in 1549. See Burnet’s Hist. Ref. part ii. b. i. rec. 35. It also appears from Collier and Fox that he was one of the leading bishops who sat at the trial of Lambert the martyr.—See Milner, as before. See his signature to the sentence against Van Parre; in Burnet’s H. Ref. as before. See Milner, 194. Fox A. and M. Collier vol. ii. rec. 22. Heylin Hist. Eliz. p. 89. Collier vol. ii. rec. 24. Collier, as before. Burnet, Collect b. ii. n. 47. The royal pair were married by Dr. Rowland Lee, in the presence of Cranmer, the duke of Norfolk, &c. Nov. 14, 1532. Heylin Hist. Eliz. p. 89. Stow fixes the marriage two months later, viz. Jan. 25, 1533. Elizabeth was born September 7. 1583. The prevailing notion seems to be, that Henry’s wish for a divorce arose from his attachment to Ann Boleyn; but from a paper in the 3rd. volume of the Harieian Miscellany it appears to be unfounded. We learn from that paper that archbishop Warham was from the first averse to Henry’s marriage with his brother’s widow, but that Fox bishop of Winchester inclined Henry VII. to be for it, as a dispensation from the pope would remove all difficulties. It appears further that the king (Henry VII.) afterwards thought with Warham: and the day the prince came of age he by his father’s order protested against it as null and void. His father also with his dying breath persisted in charging him to break it off. The king continued to have scruples, and at last sent Cardinal Wolsey to France to negotiate a match between him and the duchess of Alencon about August 1527. After that Lord Rochford came over from France with the picture of the duchess. His daughter Ann Boleyn, who was in the duchess’ service, came over probably at the same time; and then it was that Henry set his affection upon her.—There can be no truth therefore in the report that she was the cause of alienating the king’s affections from Catherine, and his scrupling the marriage. The Cardinal returned from France September 30, 1527; and it was not till afterwards that the king expressed to him his attachment to Ann Boleyn. Harl. Misc. vol. 3. p. 43. See letter in Burnet History Ref. b. iii. p. 200. Burnet, p. 203. The two sentences, the one of attainder for adultery, the other of a divorce because of precontract, did so contradict one another, that one if not both must be unjust. Burnet. Heylin, Edw. p. 28. Collier, vol. p. 218. Burnet. See Milner’s 5th Letter to Sturges, whence the above passages or quotations are taken, mostly verbatim. Fuller says: “It cannot be denied that he had a hand in the execution of Lambert, Frith, and other godly martyrs,” adding that he would leave him to sink or swim by himself where he is guilty. Ch. Hist. b. 5. sec. 2. He elsewhere accuses Cranmer of arguing against the aforesaid Lambert contrary to his own private judgment; and remarks that “as the latter was burnt for denying the corporal presence, so Cranmer himself was afterwards condemned and died at Oxford for maintaining the same opinion,” b. 5. sec. 6. She is also called Joan Butcher and Joan of Kent—“When he (Cranmer) was on the point of passing sentence upon her, . . . she reproached him for passing the like sentence upon another woman, Ann Askew, for denying the carnal presence of Christ in the sacrament; telling him that he had condemned the said Ann Askew not long before for a piece of bread, and was then ready to condemn her for a piece of flesh.” Heylin, Edw. vi, p. 89.—As three other protestants, Lassels, Otterden, and Adams were burnt with Askew for the selfsame cause, there is every appearance that Cranmer was as instrumental in their punishment as he was in that of Askew. (Milner, 207.) See the process of their condemnation in Burnet’s Collect. of Rec. part ii, b. 1, n. 35. In 1538 a special commission was granted to Cranmer, with two other bishops and six other persons, to try summaris el de plano, even though they had not been denounced or detected, all Anabaptists, &c. and to deliver them over to the secular arm. Collier vol. 2. sec. 46.—Within a month from the date of this commission, viz. Nov. 24. I find two Anabaptists burnt, and four bearing faggots. Stow.—About a year after this, by virtue of a special commission, Cranmer with certain other bishops tried Alexander Seaton for protestant opinions, and condemned him to bear a faggot and recant at St. Paul’s Cross, which he did accordingly. Collier, vol. 2 p. 184. The same year three other Anabaptists were burnt by virtue of the former commission. Stow—In Edward’s reign certain chiefs (of the Gospellers and Anabaptists) were condemned April 12, 1549, before the archbishop (Cranmer), the bishop of Westminster, and Drs. Cox, May, Cole, and Smith. Being convicted, some of them were dismissed only with an admonition, some sentenced to a recantation, and others condemned to bear their faggots at St. Paul’s. Heylin, p. 73. About the same time John Champneys of Stratford was convented before Cranmer, Latimer, and two other doctors, at which time he was forced to recant upon oath certain “heretical and damnable opinions” concerning regeneration, &c. as also to carry a faggot. In like manner John Ashton, priest, being convented before Cranmer, abjured his heresies, &c. and took an oath to submit to whatever penance was enjoined. Ex. Regist. Cranm. Collier part ii. b. i, rec. 35. Milnes, as before, p. 208. Perhaps she meant no more than that he was born free from that natural pollution or hereditary depravity implied in the orthodox doctrine of original sin. Burnet, past ii p, 111, 112. Milner, p. 208, 209. The two first of these retractions are without date. The third appears to have been signed Feb. 14. The fourth is dated Feb. 16; and the last is dated March 13. See Strype’s Mem. Ecc. vol. iii, p. 134. Cranmer retracted his recantations and was executed March 21. Milner, as before, 210. Stow’s Annals, an. 1546. Milner, p. 173. Hist. Ref. part ii. p. 226. Heylin’s Hist. Ref. Edward IV, 1550. Milner, 174. Strype’s Mem. Eccl. p. 440. Strype’s Mem. Eccl. B. 11. c. xxiii. Camden, Appar. ad Annal Eliz.—Milner 175. The unfavourable and ill effects of the reformation on the manners, and morals of the people, both at home and abroad, must be chiefly ascribed to some of the great defects of the system—some of its most prominent features or distinguishing doctrines, as was before suggested—such as justification by faith without works, predestination to perdition as well as to salvation, or election and reprobation representing all human characters and actions (even the most horrid crimes), as emanating or resulting from the decrees of Heaven, or will of God—doctrines which certainly cannot be said to be favourable to practical holiness or virtuous living. Yet they form a main part of what has been called evangelical religion ever since. As to their licentious tendency, Luther is known to have gone very far, and expressed himself very strongly on the above doctrine of justification; even so as to speak very slightly of the Epistle of James, calling it “dry, chaffy, and unworthy the apostolic spirit,” for no other reason than its manifest opposition to his views of this doctrine. He probably deemed that Epistle far inferior to his own writings when he called himself the second Elias and the Chariot of Israel, and said in his book against the king of England, “My ministry and calling are of that excellency that it is in vain for princes or any persons on earth to expect submission or forbearance from me.” Be this as it may, it is evident, from Bucer’s testimony, (see p. 628) that the reformed converts made a great handle of that doctrine, and considered it as excusing and encouraging their licentiousness: and Bucer was a witness of the effects of the reformation in England as well as on the continent.—As to those reformed doctrines relating to the Divine Decrees, or predestination to perdition as well as to salvation, and which are commonly comprehended under the terms Election and Reprobation, their loose and licentious tendency, must be obvious to every unbiassed mind, seeing they place good and evil, virtue and vice, truth and error, right and wrong, as it were upon a level, and in effect annihilate all the distinctions between them, making the worst as well as the best of human actions to be agreeable to the will of God and the offspring of his eternal counsel or purpose. Where such doctrines prevail it may be expected that moral restraints will be soon overpowered. So far they were evidently of use, and their suppression was a real and public loss, in that view and as things then stood. In the days of Wickliff, and for a good while after, there was among the common people a spirit of revolt against papal tyranny and corruption; but that spirit had been suppressed and extinguished before Henry had begun his work of reformation. Between his work and that of Wickliff there was a wide and striking difference—the former originated with the court, the latter with some thinking men at Oxford; the former was carried on by royal caprice, orders of council, and acts of parliament, the latter by the diligent and persevering exertions and eloquence of private individuals of integrity and learning, who were convinced of its importance, and who travelled on foot about the country to instruct and enlighten the people, in order to improve their manners, their morals and their religious principles. This might be the reason why so many places of worship besides the convents, and which had no connection with them, were here laid by and demolished at that time—such as the church or chapel of St. James, those of St. John, and of St. Catherine, &c. the demolition of which, except for the reason now suggested, must appear exceedingly unaccountable.—As to the church or chapel of St. Catherine, of whose site the author expressed much uncertainty at p. 559, he now begs leave to inform the reader that he has been since led to conclude, from some old MSS. that it stood in that small field without the East gate, on the left hand as we go out of the town, and which is now enclosed from the road by a brick wall. It appears that it retained the name of St. Catherine’s ground long after the church had disappeared. Many of them could hardly read; and as to preaching, it was what few of them were capable of. To supply that deficiency the Book of Homilies was provided, and the reading of those homilies, for a while, appears to have supplied the place of preaching. But the plan was ill calculated to instruct and enlighten the common people, though it might be of use to their superiors. Hist. Ref. 1. 317. Hist. Ref. as before. Burnet Hist. Ref. as before. Of the prodigious popularity and reputation of the friars, see above at page 495. The following is thought a pretty correct statement of the numbers of worshipers that might be accommodated in each and all our present places of worship—In St. Margaret’s church; 1322; in St. Nicholas’ chapel 1066; in All Saints, or South Lynn church, 388: in the Methodist chapel, 500; in the Independent chapel 450; in the Baptist chapel 500; and in that of the Friends or Quakers 100.—Thus all the churches might admit 2776; and all the Dissenting chapels about 1500, or 1550—in all 4326. But it is well known that the number of those that do actually attend falls greatly short of 4326, and we may very safely venture to affirm that they do not exceed 3000: so that there must be here between 7 and 8000 people whose minds are strangers to religious impressions, and whose conduct is very little regulated or affected by any sound moral principles. Would it not therefore be very desirable to increase among us the means of religious and moral instruction? Some more new chapels, under proper direction, might prove of no small benefit to the town, and help to bring from darkness to light another third part of its population. This hint deserves consideration. For an account of the Lynn Gilds, see above, Part iii. ch. v. p. 403. Thus in the old ballad of Truth and Ignorance, the latter, who is represented as a rustic, says, Che’ll tell thee what, good fellowe,
Before the vriars went hence,
A bushel of the best wheate,
Was zold for vourteen pence: And vorty egges a penny,
That were both good and newe;
And this, che say, myselfe have seen,
And yet I am no Jewe. (Andrews, 2. 282.)
These lines were quoted before imperfectly. They are now given correctly in the original orthography. We allude principally to the poor-rates and paving-tax, which are certainly most severely felt, and likely to be still more so. The former by frugal and wise management might, doubtless, be greatly reduced, without any material detriment to the poor: and the latter ought never to have existed till the times proved more favourable. When the project was brought forward it was firmly opposed by a large body of the householders: but it was carried against them, very wrongfully. They were told that the work would be completed at the expence of about 13,000l. and it has already far exceeded, if not doubled, that sum: yet the work is not finished. Thousands have been lavished, merely to suit the convenience, or gratify the caprice of a few opulent families, without being of the least use or benefit to the town at large; which must have been exceedingly disingenuous and dishonourable. So great was the liberality which the paviers experienced at Lynn, that they are reported to be satisfied to do their work at Norwich and Yarmouth, 25 per cent. under what they had here.—In short, the managers, or rather the mis-managers of this concern, went on lavishly and blunderingly, till they could go no further. They were aground for sometime this last autumn, and had probably remained so over the winter, and the summer too, and thrown the whole town into the utmost confusion, but for the timely assistance of a certain individual, who on this critical occasion stood in the place and acted the part of that good man noticed in holy writ, who by his wisdom delivered the city. Eccl. ix. 15. See Martin’s History of Thetford chap. xiii. p. 170. The Surrenders seem to have been all much of the same cast and tenor, and so were probably the confessions which accompanied them, a copy of one of these is given by Burnet, and is as follows— “Forasmuch as we Richard Green, abbot of our monastery of our blessed lady St. Mary of Betlesden, and the convent of the said monastery, do profoundly consider, that the whole manner and trade of living, which we and our pretensed religion have practised and used many days, does most principally consist in certain dumb ceremonies, and other certain constitutions of the bishops of Rome, and other forinsecal potentates, as the abbot of Cistins, and therein only noseled and not taught in the true knowledge of God’s laws, procuring always exemptions of the bishops of Rome from our ordinaries and diocesans: submitting ourselves principally to forinsecal potentates and powers, which never came here to reform such disorders of living and abases as now have been found to have reigned amongst us. And therefore now assuredly knowing, that the most perfect way of living is most principally and sufficiently declared unto us by our Master Christ, his Evangelists and Apostles, and that it is most expedient for us to be governed and ordered by our supreme Head, under God, the king’s most noble Grace, with our mutual assent and consent, submit ourselves and every one of us, to the most benign mercy of the king’s majesty; and by these presents do surrender &c.”
The Surrender follows in common form, Signed by the abbot, subprior, and nine monks, 15th Sept. 30th year of that reign.—From these samples one may from an idea of the tenour of the surrenders and confessions which went from Lyon. See Burnet, vol. I. Col. rec. p. 150. There were then dissolved 645 monasteries, 90 Colleges, 2374 Chauntrys, and 110 hospitals. The yearly revenue of the whole amounted then to 161,100l. a sum equal perhaps, to 3 or 4 millions of our money, which must be far less than the present ecclesiastical revenue of England and Ireland. From a part of the above fund the universities were indulged with some additional colleges and professorships; and six new bishoprics were erected. An immense sum too accrued to the king from the furniture, clocks, bells, lead, &c. of these edifices; and even from bullion, 5000 marks of which were found in one abbey. See Andrews, 2. 282. These have long been deemed here among the chief of sinners, as tippling and other vices are supposed to have abounded through their patronage or connivance. Mr. Man was minister of South Lynn till 1646, when he was succeeded by the worthy and learned John Horne, who was not likely to restrain his parishioners from eating meat in Lent, or require the sick to take out licences on that occasion. Of this memorable person we shall have occasion to say more hereafter. This Thomas Lilly was a respectable ancestor of our present representative in parliament, Sir Martin Browne Folkes, and original proprietor, it is supposed, of that gentleman’s valuable possessions in South Lynn. His daughter and sole heiress married Sir William Hovel of Hillington, and was grandmother of Martin Folkes Esquire, president of the Royal Society, and of William Folkes Esquire, the father of Sir Martin. Those Licences and Dispensations seem to have been no longer at the disposal or option of the parish ministers, for there was an office in London opened expressly for that purpose, as we find by an advertisement which appeared in the said Mercurius Publicus of Feb. 26. 1662, and the two following weeks, and which was expressed as follows—“An advertisement—The Faculties Office for granting Licenses (by Act of Parliament) to eat flesh in any part of England, is still kept at Paul’s-Chain, near St. Paul’s Church-yard.” The present writer cannot find when this notable office was first opened, or how long it existed, but thinks it not very likely that it was laid by, or shut up before the revolution. This is said to have been remarkably the case in a certain excursion which her majesty made to Coventry. The mayor, recorder, and corporation met her on the road at some distance from the city, with what they deemed an appropriate or suitable address. Versifying being then much in vogue, and the queen herself rather fond of such compositions, they had their address drawn up in that way, which the recorder read before it was presented to her majesty. It was but short, and said to run thus, “We men of Coventry, are very glad to see,
Your gracious majesty. Good Lord, how fair you be!”
Which drew from her immediately the following, not very gracious answer. “My gracious majesty, is very glad to see,
You men of Coventry: Good Lord! what fools ye be!”
Loyalty abounded then, it seems, at Coventry, not only among the members of the corporation, but also among those of the cathedral. Accordingly, on the following Sunday, Mr. Thomas Boyce, the clerk of the cathedral, had a hymn composed on purpose to celebrate this royal visit, and do honour to his sovereign, which he thus gave out, just as the queen was entering the church—“Let us sing to the praise and glory of God, a hymn of my own composing— Re—joice Tom Boyce, re—joice,
And echo Coven—try,
For that our gracious queen is come
To see poor we, we, we!”
One would fain hope that wisdom is not at quite so low an ebb at this time, in any of our corporations or cathedrals as it seems to have been then at Coventry. Each of our Convents is supposed to have been furnished with a library. But what became of those libraries after the dissolution does not appear. They were probably destroyed: for we learn that although Leland was employed to survey the libraries throughout the kingdom, and preserve the choicest books, yet Bale says that those who got possession of the religious houses at the dissolution of them, generally took possession also of the libraries, reserving the books, some to serve their jakes, some to scour their candlesticks, and some to rub their boots with: some they sold to the grocers and soap boilers, and some they sent over sea to the bookbinders, not in small quantities, but at times whole shipfulls, to the great wondering of foreign nations.—“A merchant (he says) bought the contents of two noble libraries for 40s. a-piece. This stuff he used for more than ten years instead of grey paper to wrap up his goods with, and yet he hath enough remaining for many years to come.” (See Seward’s An. vol. 1. 49.) All this discovers some strange mismanagement on the part of the government. This Fort is a platform battery, mounted with ten eighteen pounders, planted here in 1627; but having no defensive cover, could be of little use if the town were attacked from the river side. Of such an attack, however, Lynn could never be in much danger; the difficulty of approach that way by men of war, forming its best security. We are told that there is a copy of Paramo’s book now in Dr. Williams’s library in Red-Cross Street, London, and a most extraordinary production it appears to be. It was undertaken under the patronage of Don Gaspar de Quiroga, then abp. of Toledo, and Inquitor general, and first printed at Madrid in 1614.—It begins by proving God himself to have been the first inquisitor—He convicts Adam and Eve of pertinacious heresy, infidelity, apostacy, and blasphemy. God cited Adam, otherwise the process would have been null. On Adam’s appearance, He enquired, that is, made inquisition into the crime. The man accused his wife, then the judge questioned her: He did not examine the Serpent, because of his obstinacy.—The examinations were secret and separate, that there might be no collusive lying. He calls no witness; the inquisitor overlooks the reason, that there were none to call, and affirms that conscience and confession are a thousand witnesses, and save the judge all the trouble, except that of condemning. The whole was done secretly, that it might be a precedent for the holy office; and so closely does this holy office observe the precedent, that they make the dress of penitent offenders after the very pattern of the clothes which God made for Adam and Eve, and confiscate all the property of a heretic, because Adam and Eve were turned out of paradise.—The author further maintains, that Abraham was an inquisitor, and Sarah likewise; for she turned Ishmael out of doors for idolatry. In this manner he goes on through the Pentateuch, and the books of Joshua and Judges, finding inquisitors all the way through.—David was a staunch inquisitor. Zimri, who slew his master, was of the holy office: so was Elijah. Elisha and Jehu also are among the heroes of persecution; and Nebuchadnezzar most unexpectedly proves to be an inquisitor also.—Under the Gospel, Christ was the first inquisitor: the lice, which devoured Herod, and the rulers who spoiled the Jews, only executed the sentences of death and confiscation which he had pronounced. James and John, who proposed to have the Samaritan heretics destroyed by fire, were inquisitors, of course. Then follow the apostles, and after them the popes. &c. Thus the divine origin and authority of the horrid inquisition is proved from scripture—and proved as plainly and conclusively too, as many venerated religious tenets and usages are now every day proved by some of our most renowned protestant writers:—for instance the precious contents of the athanasian creed, the popular rite of infant sprinkling, and the whole ceremony of what is called christening. The scriptures seem no less violated or abused, in being brought to support these, than they are in being brought to support the inquisition. Let us therefore not be too severe on Luiz de Paramo for writing such book as that here noticed. Mackerel says that she was hanged; but the above account is supposed to be the most correct. See Mackerel 233. and Tour of Norfolk, last edit. 253. That notable book the present writer has never happened to meet with, or he might, perhaps, have been able to throw some further light upon this dark and doleful transaction. See Granger’s Biographical History, 2. 409.—Hopkins appears to have wrote and published an account of his own exploits in the way of his vacation; but the present writer has not met with it. The distinction between some of those, as pointed out sometimes by our law writers and others, is not a little curious: conjurers are said to differ from witches and wizards, in that the former endeavour by prayers and invocations to compel the devil to say or do what they command him; whereas the latter deal rather by friendly and voluntary conference with the devil, or familiar, to have their wishes obtained in lieu of blood, or other gift offered. Both conjuration and witchcraft differ from enchantment or sorcery. The sorcerer is supposed to have personal conferences with the devil, and by the use of certain superstitious words and incantations, or by means of images, is said to produce strange and preternatural effects.—All these false and wild notions must have originated from knavery and imposture, on the one hand, and credulity and superstition on the other. Juggling, or notable skill in the arts of dexterity might promote the imposture; but as to infernal agency, it will not be very wise and safe to give any credit to that part of the story. Andrews 2. 46. He was probably superior to the generality of his brethren, and therefore became suspected of being in league with Satan and the infernal powers, according to the curious and absurd notions which then prevailed. The author did not advert to the date of this law, when the last sheet was printed, or he would have said seventy or eighty, instead of sixty or seventy years, in page 725. Blackstone, iv. 61.—It is somewhat remarkable that France set us the example of prohibiting those bloody prosecutions for witchcraft, even in the reign of Lewis xiv. who thought proper by an edict, to restrain the tribunals of justice from receiving informations of witchcraft. It was right certainly to follow Lewis xiv, and the French in this instance; but one could have wished we had set the example to them, and not they to us. And if such was not always the case, they must, in those exceptions, have proceeded from extreme ignorance, or self delusion, as is the case also with many religious visionaries, who pretend to extraordinary gifts and divine revelations. In either case, therefore, it must have been extremely hard and cruel to take their confessions as any evidence of their reputed or supposed guilt, or proof that they had actually made a contract with the devil, and had been endued by him with extraordinary knowledge and miraculous powers. See Encyl. Brit. vol. 18. under Witchcraft.—The above sketch may suffice to give the uninformed reader an idea of what is called witchcraft; of the existence of which the present writer has expressed his disbelief. He is aware, however, that the word is used in our translation of the scriptures, but thinks it there misused, and applied to a different matter from what our language meant by that term. Even such men as Henry More and Dr. Cudworth could brand as atheists those who denied or doubted the reality of witchcraft. See Encycl. Brit. as before; where other matters relating to this vile subject, and equally disgusting, are related. The above statement reflects no honour on the memory of our ancestors. But that we are better, or less brutal and savage than they cannot be proved from our Indian history, our American War, our blowing up the Spanish frigates, our sacking and burning Copenhagen, or the recent cruelties exercised in Ireland. The circumstances which led, as it is said, to this trial, being not a little remarkable, may be here related for the reader’s edification. “Lord chief justice Holt, who had been wild in his youth, was once out with some of his raking companions on a journey into the country. Having spent all their money it was resolved that they should part company and try their fortune separately. Holt got to an inn at the end of a straggling village, and putting a good face on the matter, ordered his horse to be well taken care of, called for a room, bespoke a supper, and looked after his bed. He then strolled into the kitchen, where he saw a lass about thirteen years old shivering with an ague; he inquired of his landlady, a widow, who the girl was, and how long she had been ill. The good woman told him that she was her daughter, an only child, and had been ill near a year, notwithstanding all the assistance she could procure from physic, at an expence which almost ruined her. He shook his head at the doctors, and bade the landlady be under no further concern, for that her daughter should never have another fit. He then wrote a few unintelligible words in court hand on a scrap of parchment which had been the directions to a hamper, and rolling it up, ordered that it should be bound upon the girl’s wrist, and remain there till she was well. As it happened the ague returned no more; and Holt, having continued there a week, now called for his bill, with as much courage as if his pockets had been filled with gold. ‘Ah! God bless you,’ said the landlady, ‘you are nothing in my debt, I’m sure; I wish I was able to pay you for the cure you have performed upon my daughter; and if I had had the happiness to see you ten months ago, it would have saved me forty pounds in my pocket.’ Holt, after some altercation, accepted of his week’s accommodation as a gratuity, and rode away. It happened that many year’s afterwards, when he was lord chief justice of the king’s bench, he went a circuit into the same county; and among other criminals whom he had to try, there was an old woman who was charged with witchcraft: to support this charge several witnesses swore that she had a spell with which she could either cure such cattle as were sick, or destroy those that were well: in the use of this spell they said she had been lately detected, and it having been seized upon her, was ready to be produced in court: the judge then desired it might be handed up to him: it appeared to be a dirty ball, covered with rags and bound many times round with pack-thread: these coverings he removed with great deliberation, one after another, and at last found a piece of parchment, which he knew to be the same that he had used as an expedient to supply his want of money. At the recollection of this incident he changed colour, and sat silent: at length, recollecting himself, he addressed the jury to this effect: ‘Gentlemen, I must now relate a particular of my life, which very ill suits my present character, and the station in which I now sit: but to conceal it would be to aggravate the folly for which I ought to atone, to endanger innocence, and countenance superstition: this bauble, which you suppose to have the power of life and death, is a senseless scrawl which I wrote with my own hand and gave the woman, whom, for no other cause, you accuse for a witch.’ He then related the particular circumstances of the transaction, and expatiated on the evil of such prosecutions: and it had such an effect upon the minds of the people, who now blushed at the folly and the cruelty of their zeal, that the poor woman was acquitted, and was the last that ever was tried for witchcraft in that county, and, as some say, in this kingdom.”
This anecdote is related in the Brit. Biogr. vol. 7. and more at large in some other biographical works. See Beauties of Engl. Vol. 7. The above trial before lord chief justice Holt, is said to have been the last, but its date we cannot discover. The cart was overturned on the 5th of May, 1808. On the following Sunday Evening, the 8th of the same month, as the minister of the parish informs us, “a considerable number of people assembled together, as it grew dark, and taking with them the young women ridiculously supposed to be bewitched, about ten o’clock proceeded to the house of Wright Izzard, which stands alone at some distance from the body of the village. When they arrived at this solitary spot, so favourable for the execution of their villanous designs, they broke into the poor man’s house, dragged his wife out of bed, and threw her naked into the yard; where her arms were torn with pins, her head was dabbed against the large stones of the causeway—and her face, stomach, and breast were severely bruised with a thick stick that served as a bar to the door. Having thus satisfied themselves, the mob dispersed. The woman then crawled into her house, put on her clothes and went to the constable, who said, he could not protect her, because he was not sworn.” The humanity, protection, and assistance which she could not find at the constable’s very happily for herself she found under the roof of a poor widow; who unlocked her door at the first call, wrapped up her neighbour’s bleeding arms with the nicest linen rags she had, affectionately sympathized with and comforted her, and gave her a bed. But, horrible to relate! the compassion and kindness of this poor woman, were the means of shortening her days. “The protectors of a witch are just as bad as the witch, and deserve the same treatment!” cried the infatuated and savage populace, the next morning. This so affected and terrified the poor companionate widow that she actually died soon after.—The next evening, that of Monday the 9th of May, Ann Izzard was a second time dragged out of her house, when her arms were again torn with pins till they streamed afresh with blood. Alive the next morning, and apparently likely to survive this attack also, her enemies resolved to have her ducked, as soon as the labour of the day was over. On hearing this, she hastily quitted her home, and took refuge in the house of the minister of the parish; where the vile wretches durst not follow her.—The worthy clergyman, for taking her part, and becoming her protector, lost the good opinion, and incurred the detestation of a great part of his parishioners; and if he and his friends had not had recourse to the strong arm of the law it is impossible to say where the madness would have ended.—See Preface to a sermon against Witchcraft, preached in the parish church of Great Paxton, July 17. 1808. By the rev. J. Nicholson, curate of that parish. Of these occurrences, one relates to a certain farmer, not far off, with his neighbours, and a cunning man whom he went to consult on an interesting occasion.—It was intended to relate it somewhat circumstantially, as it proves the general belief in Witchcraft which still prevails among our country people: but for certain reasons, needless here to mention, we refrain for the present.—Another of those occurrences appertains to the town, and to such of its inhabitants who profess to think most freely for themselves, and to search most diligently after truth.—How little these good people have yet got beyond their blind and boorish country neighbours in some important points of doctrine, and how unlikely they are at present ever to make much progress in scriptural or religious knowledge, will appear from the mighty offence or alarm which many of them are said to have taken at a late attempt of one of their ministers to correct some of their absurd and stupid notions relating to the devil. Among these devout alarmists, or rather at their head, are said to be the revd. S. N. and the revd. I. A. two gentlemen of about equal respectability, as well as equal profoundness of understanding. But why need we to wonder at any thing of the kind at Lynn?—it is not very long ago since some of these very people took upon them to pronounce a certain case of insanity to be verily a case of diabolical possession: and as they thought the demon to be of that kind that would not go out but by prayer and fasting, they actually kept praying and fasting meetings for the express purpose of dislodging the foul fiend!—But these follies may, perhaps, be more properly castigated when we come to exhibit the present state of the town. We will therefore defer, till then, the final execution of the business. But it is really most disgusting to think, after the millions this nation pays annually to its moral and religious instructors, how ignorant the greatest part of the people still are. Most of these instructors must either be ignorant themselves, or desirous that the people should continue so. In either case, it is a shameful consideration.—With ten or twelve thousand pastors of our national church, and two rich and famous universities, nurseries of new pastors, all maintained at an annual expense, perhaps, of no less than ten millions sterling: (not to mention the numerous pastors and teachers belonging to all our other sects, maintained also at no small expense,)—with all these, we will venture to say, our country ought to be much better taught, and in a far more enlightened state than it now is. But while our pastors and teachers are either too ignorant to enlighten the people, or influenced by hypocrisy, fear, or worldly policy, so as to be loth to disturb the minds or offend their bigoted hearers, by attacking their favourite errors and endeavouring to undeceive them, there seems but little chance of our ever getting much further informed or enlightened. It was a perfect Helter Skelter, no doubt; but it was well it passed so harmlessly. In the same MS. it is added, that “a night or two before the surrender, most of the powder and shott were conveyed away by some of the town”—It was well, the commissioners of the besieging army, at the ensuing treaty, did not know of this, or they would probably have imposed upon the town much harder terms. Rushworth. Page 182. Those sufferings, as to loss of lives, seem to have been inconsiderable: even during the siege we hear of but four of the townsmen killed, and a few wounded. They made not many sallies, nor did they wait till the town was stormed, or the case might have been very different. We have seen no account of the loss of the besiegers. We do not presume that our list is yet complete: many more murders for what was called witchcraft, were probably committed here than we know of. Near two years after the above visit from Cromwell, Sir Thomas Fairfax appears to have visited this town: accordingly the following memorial of it stands in the town books—“Feb. 17, (1644,5.) ordered that Mr. Basset, chamberlain, shall pay for the Sack and Sugar at the entertainment of Sir Tho. Fairfax to this Towne.” His name is differently spelt. This plainly shews it had been previously customary to allow the members so much per diem, or appoint them daily wages while they attended their duty in parliament: and it was no doubt very right and proper, though it has been long ago discontinued. The mayor and corporation had before, it seems, taken upon themselves to send whom they pleased to parliament, without allowing the freemen at large to have any voice on the occasion. But the members sent to that parliament appear to have been chosen by the freemen at large: and they were the first ever so chosen here; as we learn from one of the old MSS. It seems by this, that the members had been used to receive their pay at the close of each session, and not before. They had also, about two months before, lent the parliament 100l. out of the town-stock, as appears from the town records. The celebrated and patriotic Andrew Marvell, member for Hull, who died in 1678, is said to have been the last who received an allowance from his constituents for his parliamentary services. Presuming that a view of some of the principal documents on which the above statement is founded may prove acceptable and satisfactory to the reader, the author takes the liberty of introducing them here from a MS. Volume of extracts from the town-books, in the handwriting of one of the former aldermen, whence some of the preceding quotations have also been drawn.—With regard to the short parliament of 1640 we meet in this MS. the following Note— “March 13. (1639, 40.) This day Mr Mayor, (Thomas Toll Esq) brought in and caused to be openly read in the House a Warrant or precept directed to him from Thomas Windham Esq. High Sheriffe of this county of Norfolk, to elect and choose according to Law two Burgesses for this Burgh to serve in the parliament summon’d to be holden at Westminster on the 13th April next coming: and Mr. Mayor, the Aldermen and Common Councell have now accordingly chosen Mr. Doughty and Mr. Gurlyn, two Aldermen of the said burgh, to be burgesses to serve in the said parliament for this borough; and have agreed that Indentures shall be presently made and sealed according to law between the High Sherife and the said Electors: and yt is farther ordered and agreed, that the said two Burgesses, during their service in the said parliament, shall have payd and allowed them, by the town, for their wages, five shillings a day apiece. (Wm. Doughty and Th. Gurlyn were the eldest Aldermen.”)
Of the election for the ensuing, or long parliament the following notice occurs— “1640, October, 12th. This day two Letters were by Mr. Mayor (Wm. Doughty Esq.) offered and read in the House, the one sent to the mayor, Aldermen, and burgesses, by the Earle of Arundell, Lord Gridall, the other to Mr. Mayor himselfe, the effect of both Lrs. being to elect a burgess to serve in the next insuing parliament, Contain[ing] whom his lordship hath nominated in his said Letter, and that it is unanimously agreed by this House, that they will choose no other burgesses to serve in parliament but only such as are resident and inhabitants within the Corporation.”
In this instance the Corporation discovered what may be called a dignified and independent spirit; and what was no less to their credit, they also discovered a regard for rectitude and equity, in allowing the freemen at large, as was before hinted, to have a voice now, for the very first time, in the election of their representatives. Of the parliaments of 1653, 1654, and 1656 we have spoken already: Of that of 1658, or rather 1659, we have the following notice in the same book— “December 31. (1658.) This day Mr. Mayor (Henry Bell) brought into this house a precept to him directed, from John Hedley Esq. Sherife of Norfolk for election of two burgesses to serve in the next parliament, to be holden upon the 27th. January next, for this burrough of King’s Lynn, which was read in this House, and it is thereupon ordered that the election of the said burgesses to sitt in parliament be made in this House by the members of this House according to the antient custome, on the 3rd January next, and that publication and warning thereof be made, to the end all persons concerned in the same election may take notice thereof.”
Four days after, the following note occurs, relating to the same election— “January 3rd. Whereas severall burgesses of this burrough, of the commons at large, have made their requests to this House, that they might be admitted to join with this House in the election of burgesses to sitt in the next parliament, it is ordered that the resolves of the Committee of Priviledges of the last parliament, and the Parliament’s orders thereon concerning elections be first read to them.”
Then it is added— “This day upon further debate, it being adjudged by this House that the right of election of the burgesses is at present in this House, according to the aforesaid order, it is therefore ordered that this House doe proceed to an election accordingly: and that in case the Commons at large shall after such election persist in their desires to have the Precept for the elections of burgesses to be read unto them, that the same be read unto them accordingly, for their satisfaction.”
Then it is added in another paragraph, as before— “This day the Mayor, Aldermen, and common Councel have elected and chosen Mr. Th. Toll, one of the aldermen of this burrough and Capt. Griffith Loyd to be burgesses for this burrough in the next parliament to be holden the 27th instant.”
Next after this we read as follows— “January 5th. This day by order of this House the Common Seal is taken out of the Treasury and affixed unto ane Indenture for the election of Mr. Alderman Toll and Capt. Griffith Loyd to be burgesses in the next parliament for this Burrough of King’s Lynn.”
Thus the affair then ended, and the freemen at large were excluded from any share or concern in the election. We accordingly find the following items in one of the Church books within the first year after the siege— | Received by virtue of severall warrants from Mr. John May maior.—1644, | | | July 13 | Of I. Hinderson, ostler, for an oath sweareing in Mr. mayor’s hearing | 00l. | 01s. | 00d. | | Dec. 23. | Of Mihill Turner, alehousekeeper, for suffering tippling in his house | 00. | 10. | 00. | | Dec. 24. | Of John Say, alehousekeeper, levied for the same offence | 00. | 10. | 00. | | Mar. 6. | Of John Pratt, dier, for tippleing in the said John Saves house | 00. | 03. | 04. | | Mar. 7. | Of Margarett Freeman, alehousekeeper, for suffering tipling in her house | 00. | 10. | 00. | | Mar. 15. | Of Phillip Murrell for loytring in time of church service on a Lords Day | 00. | 05. | 00. | | Mar. 16. | Of Richard Porter, pinner, for an apprentice boy of his offending in the like | 00. | 01. | 00. | This is the first account we meet with of these proceedings here; but a great deal in the same way occurs in the memoranda of succeeding years. See Abstract of Town-books under 1650. Under that year the following articles occur in the church-warden’s accounts, May 6. (received) from Hillar Browne, by the hands of Capt. Wm. Mann, levied upon the said Hillar Browne by him, for profanely swearing seven oathes, 7s. July 9. Levied by vertue of a warrant from Mr. John May maior, by distraining and selling twelve puter platters of the goods of Wm. Churston, for that the said Wm. and Jone his wife were convicted for profanely swearing each ten oathes, 1l. Under 1646 we find as follows— April 18. Levied upon Roger Gaunt by virtue of a warrant from Mr Edward Robinson, maior, for neglecting and refusing to serve overseer being chosen, 1l. Nov. 4. Levied upon Peter Dixon, a baker, by warrant from Tho. Toll, maior, for travelling on the Lord’s day 10s. whereof 12d. to John Gray informer. Nov. 22. Levied upon one Smith, a smith, of Wisbeach, for the like offence 10s. whereof to a soldier that informed 12d. and to the Court of Guard 12d. Nov. 23. Levied upon William Tabbott and Francis Pollard for the like offence 20s. whereof to John Rainer and William Disborough informers 2s. 6d. Nov. 24. Levied upon Mr. William Edwards of Swinstead, for the like offence 10s. whereof to Thomas Lyny, a soldier, informer, was given 12d. Feb. 9. Levied upon Daniell Rose for drunkeness 5s. and for 3 oathes sworne before Mr. maior 3s. but because he was poor he had 4s. given him, as to the poor. Feb. 24. Levied upon a servant of William Marches, innkeeper, for convicted drunkenness 5s. March 10. Levied upon James Yates for 2 oathes 2s. whereof to Miles Lawes, poor lame and blind, 12d. March 12. Levied upon a stranger at Peeter Lawes, innkeeper, for travilling on a fast day, 5s. March 26. Levied upon another stranger, for the same offence, 5s. to Brian Middleton, informer, 12d. Aprill 15. Levied more upon Richard Paule, alehousekeeper, for suffering tipling in his house, 10s. May 22. Levied more upon the said Richard Paule, alehousekeeper, for breaking of the assize of beere for six quarts 6l. convicted by oath of John Gibson, woolcomber.—More upon Katherine the wife of the said Rich: Paule, for swearing ten oathes, 10s. May 24. Levied upon Thomas Forster, Christopher Pert, and Dorothy Goreing widdow, three alehousekeepers, for drawing beere without licence, each of them 20s.—3l. June 22, Levied upon a stranger, for profanely sweareing one oath, 1s. July 21 Levied upon Edward Arther, alias Logstone, and John Mason, alehousekeepers, for drawing beere without licence, each of them 20s. July 26. Levied more upon William Medcalfe, alehousekeeper, for the same offence 1l. Oct. 15. Levied upon William Greene, alehousekeeper, for the same offence 1l.
“Mony collected in St. Margaret’s Church for charitable uses by breifes, since the feast of Easter 1653, to the feast of Easter 1654, by the then present Churchwardens, for the said yeare, Thomas Grinnell and Robart Greene. Imprimis—Collected for the poore inhabitants of Drayton in Shropsheire, for a loss sustained by fyre, and paid the 13th. of October 1653, to Robt. Blessed of King’s Lynn 1l. 17s. 4d. Collected for the poore inhabitants of Newmarkett, in Southfolk, for a losse sustained by fyre, and paid the 9th. of February, 1653, to George Howard of the same towne, 1l. 9s. 3d. Collected for the poore inhabitants of Long Sutton, in the county of Lincolnsheire, for a losse sustained by fyre, and paid the 28th. of Febr. 1653: to Elizabeth Plunkett of the same towne 1l. 13s. Collected for the poore inhabitants of the towne of Bungaye, in Southfolke, for a losse sustained by fyre, 1l. 15s.—[N.B. This is said not to have been paid; but no reason is assigned for that.] Collected for the poore inhabitants of Malborowe, in Wiltsheire, for a losse sustained by fyre: 224 houses and a church being consumed by the said fyre, which losse did amount to 70,000l. and was collected in the church, and paid 11th. of March 1653, to John Basset Esq. then maior, appointed to receive the same, the sum of 6l. 13s. 10d. Collected for the natives and distressed people of Newe England, and that from house to house, within this parish, and paid unto Mr. Joshua Greene the 20th. of November 1653, 25l. 13s.
“Moneys collected in St. Margaret’s Church for charitable uses, in the year 1654. Collected for the inhabitants of Glosco, (Glasgow) in Scotland, for a losse sustained by fyre to the vallew of 1,000000l. the 23d. of Aprill 1654, which was paid unto Mr. John Basset, then maior, the sume of 3l. 10s. 10d. Collected for a Greation, (grecian) towards the redemption of those that were prisoners in Argeare (Algier): their ransome amounting to 12,000 dollers; and paid unto him 13th. Sept. 1654. 5l. 4s. 6d. Collected (again) for the towne of Drayton, county of Salop, for a losse by fyre, and paid unto Pollicarpus Tooke, the 4th. of February 1654, 2l. 3s. 1d. Collected by the ministers and church-wardens, from house to house, for the poore Prodestance (protestants) in Savoy, the 17th. of June 1655, and paid to Mr. Tho. Greene, then maior, 47l. 15s. 9d.
Among subsequent collections we find 10l. 1s. for the relief of the distressed protestants in Poland. The number, if we mistake not, is eight; the recorder, three aldermen, and four common-council-men. What blame is imputable to them, may not be easy to say. We are willing to suppose it may not be very much; at least, not so much as what belongs to their resident brethren, who have it in their power to strike off their names from the list of members: and though it may not be of any material consequence to the community at large if they be still continued on the list of members, or if eight, or even eighteen more were to become absentees and retain their respective memberships; yet in point of good policy it may not be quite the thing, lest the unprivileged part of the townsmen should by decrees take it into their heads, that it would be no very serious cause of alarm if the whole corporation, except the mayor, recorder, and town clerk, were to set out in a body to make the tour of Europe, or to perform a voyage round the world. We also learn that the expense at this period of taking up one’s freedom in this town (according to ancient custom) amounted to only 7s. 3d. which was divided as follows, viz. To the prisoners 4d.—to the poor 1s.—to the officers 1s.—to Mrs. Mayoress 1s.—to the town-clerk 1s.—for the Seal and Burgess-Letter 3s. 4d.—(whereof 1s. 8d. to Mr. Mayor, and 1s. 8d. to the town-clerk,) total 7s. 8d.—The expense is a good deal more now; but to those who obtain their freedom by inheritance, or servitude, it is far from being exorbitant. See Laing’s excellent History of Scotland, where the fact here alluded to is clearly stated and established. Kimber. Ibid. Hist. Purit. IV. 270. In 1657 and 1658 our reforming magistrates carried on their rigorous measures with so high a hand that not a few of the drawers, or publicans, were heavily fined, and 30 of them, as was said before, actually imprisoned. No less than 300 tickets were also, in the mean time, issued or given out against different defaulters, as we learn from one of the MS. accounts of that period. They were not all, it seems, the daughters of respectable or opulent families: 200 of them, if we rightly understand one of our MSS. were poor girls, clothed at the expense of Captain Wharton and Mr. Kirby, two newly restored aldermen, and both flaming royalists. It was very natural for the young girls to be then brisk and joyful, if it were only to find themselves unexpectedly, and all of a sudden, so well and gayly clad. The other hundred lasses may be supposed to have been clothed at their own expense, or that of their parents and friends. The following hints from Kimber may serve to throw some further light on the above Address and the circumstances that led to it. “Such was the animosity between the court and country parties at this time (1679) that it looked as if the year Forty-One was going to be acted over again; which probably had been the case, if the king’s necessities had occasioned him to make the parliament perpetual, as his father had done—if Scotland had not been so effectually enslaved, by a standing army which the court kept there, that they had not power to stir—and if the bishops and clergy had been as disagreeable to most of the people as they were at that time. Besides, all the staunch episcopalians, fearing the presbyterians might again subvert the established church, forgetting the dangers of popery, joined themselves so firmly with the court, as to make it at last formidable to the other party. During the repeated prorogations of the present parliament abundance of addresses were presented from all parts to petition for its speedy sitting; which being highly distasteful to the court, means were found to have a number of counter-addresses, expressing the greatest abhorrence of such petitions, as an infringement upon the prerogative, which they took care in their expressions to advance as high as possible. And so the nation became divided into two parties, Petitioners and Abhorrers, soon known by the names of Whigs and Tories, which the parties, by way of reproach, gave each other: Tory being the name of an Irish robber, and Whig signifying sour-milk, an appellation first given to the Scotch presbyterians.”
Thus it appears that the Lynn corporation were then rank tories, or Abhorrers—that is, they abhorred liberty and loved slavery. How much things have changed among us for the better since, is a question that we will not now attempt to resolve. See Mackerell 253, 254. This prince afterwards, in 1715, made an unsuccessful effort to recover the throne of his ancestors, to which he and many others thought he had so undoubted right. This was perhaps the expulsion from the Hall of the mayor, town-clerk, five aldermen, and eight common-councilmen, by order of Council, and appointing others who were thought better of (and who were among the present addressers) in their room, by royal mandate. Among the latter was Henry Framingham. This happened in June. It is somewhat remarkable that our present members are descended from those two gentlemen who represented the town so long ago. One of the Walpoles has represented it almost ever since, and a moiety of the representation of Lynn is now considered as almost hereditary in that family. One of our present members is generally on the right and the other on the wrong side in the House: for they are mostly on opposite sides. A late friend of the present writer assured him that he was once servant to her grandfather, who, if he rightly recollects, was a baker at Downham. His enormous vanity, after he grew rich, caused people often to advert to the meanness of his origin. The author has a Norwich farthing of 1667, which it a year earlier than any of those of Lynn that have fallen in his way. Very few of these tokens appeared before the restoration. They became then very common for ten years or more. 1673 according to our reckoning. What follows is somewhat abridged occasionally. The above trial cost the people of South Lynn 42l. 1s. 1d.—The following are some of the items of their bill of costs—“For six horses hire to Thetford 1l. 16s.—Expences in our way out and home 6s. 6d.—Six men’s diet and horse meat at Thetford, 1l. 11s. 5d.”—A bill of costs or expences on a similar occasion at present, would make a very different appearance.—We cannot dismiss this subject without suggesting a wish, that this had been the very last foolish and disgraceful lawsuit that our corporation have been engaged in. Of this affair Burnet speaks as follows— “A bill of indictment was presented to the Grand Jury against Lord Shaftsbury. The Jury was composed of many of the chief citizens of London. The Witnesses were examined in open Court, contrary to the usual custom: they swore many incredible things against him, mixed with other things that looked very like his extravagant way of talking. The draught of the Association was also brought as a proof of his treason, though it was not laid in the indictment, and was proved only by one witness. The Jury returned Ignoramus upon the bill. Upon this the Court did declaim with open mouth against these juries; in which they said the spirit of the party did appear, since men even upon oath shewed they were resolved to find bills true or ignoramus as they pleased, without regarding the evidence. And upon this a new set of addresses went round the kingdom, in which they expressed their abhorrence of that association found in Lord Shaftsbury’s cabinet; and complained that justice was denied the king: which were set off with all the fulsome rhetoric that the penners could varnish them with.” H. O. T. 2. 153
See Burnet H. O. T. 2. 535. From the preceding extracts it appears that the corporation affected or pretended to have surrendered their old charters voluntarily, or as their own free and spontaneous act and deed: hence they speak of having done it with one assent and content—freely surrendering—as the act and deed of the mayor and burgesses, &c. Whereas it was all the effect of constraint, or imperious and unavoidable necessity. The same was the case with the monks and friers at the reformation, previously to the dissolution of the monasteries: they all solemnly declared, in their instruments of surrender, that they acted freely and without compulsion, though the contrary was well known to have been invariably the fact. Thus it is very clear that the surrendering of the charters as well as of the convents was a scene of hypocrisy and falshood. The Charter here alluded to, (being the 2nd. and last of those obtained from Charles II,) contains the following clause— “PROVIDED always, and full power and authority to Us our Heirs and Successors by these Presents we resume, and from time to time and at all times hereafter the Steward, Mayor, Recorder, Town-clerk, and all or any of the Justices of the Peace, or of the Aldermen, or of the Common-Councell, or of the Coroners of the Burgh aforesaid, or of other officers, members, or ministers of the same Burgh for the time being, at the will and pleasure of Us, or of our Heirs and Successors, by any of our order or any order of our Heirs and Successors in Privy Councell made and under the Seal of them signified respectively to remove, or to declare to be removed, and as often as We and our Heirs and Successors by any such our order made in Privy Councell declare the same Steward, Mayor, Recorder, Town-clerk, and all or any of the Justices of the Peace, of the Aldermen, and of the Common-Councell, or of the Coroners of the said Burgh for the time being, or of the other Officers, members, ministers, to be removed from their respective offices aforesaid, That then from thenceforth the Steward, Mayor, &c. &c. of the same Burgh for the time being so removed or declared to be removed from their several and respective offices, Ipso Facto and without any further process, really and to all intents and purposes whatsoever, are and shall be removed, and this as often as the case shall so happen, any thing to the contrary thereof in any wise notwithstanding.”
This sufficiently shews how completely in the king’s power this memorable Charter placed our corporation, so as to be no longer any better than mere and miserable tools and vassals of the court. The oaths being dispensed with seems to imply that some of them were catholics, or that way inclined. Their places and new honours, however, they did not long retain; for about a fortnight before the arrival of the prince of Orange they were all in their turn displaced, and the old ones were restored: only Mr. Cyprian Anderson was readmitted and chosen mayor. Of this event one of our old MS. histories gives the following account— “On the 20th of October John Davy was displaced and Cyprian Anderson was chosen mayor, by reason of the king’s proclamation for restoring Corporations to their ancient rights and priviledges; at which time all those members that came in with the New Charter, or by Mandamus, were displaced, and the old ones put in again: at which sudden alterations all expressed great satisfaction, appearing by the people ringing of bells and firing of guns: and on the 22nd. Mr mayor bringing home the mayoress out of the country was met with near a hundred horsemen and received with firing of guns and ringing of bells, and all sorts of people striving to exceed in their acclamations of joy.”
Thus it appears that even Lynn, at last, came to partake in some degree of the then prevailing national aversion to the system or measures of the court. They were again brought back and restored to their former places at the end of about eleven months; for it is noted in the Town Books, under the date of Sept. 27 1689. “The Gunns, &c. were returned from Hull.” That nobleman, if the author is not mistaken, was the last protestant duke of Norfolk before the present. He was very active after the arrival of the prince of Orange in promoting the cause of the revolution in this county, and nowhere perhaps more so than he was in this town. For we find that he came here himself on that occasion, assembled the inhabitants and harangued them, in the market-place and elsewhere, so successfully, that he seemed to have brought them over altogether to his own way of thinking before he left the town. It is therefore probable that the change which then took place in the politicks of Lynn was in no small measure owing to his exertions. A remarkable anecdote concerning him used to be related by some ancient people at Norwich 30 or 40 years ago, the substance of which was to the following purport.— “The duke, in the summer and autumn of 1688 was suspected by James and his ministers to be inimical to their proceedings, and was therefore narrowly watched by their emissaries, of which he himself was not unconscious. He resided then chiefly at his palace in Norwich, where his evenings were generally spent with large parties of the principal inhabitants of the city and its vicinity, which consisted not merely of protestants, but also of catholics, who would not be likely to connive at, or conceal any symptoms of dissaffection or disloyalty which they might discover in his conduct. Some correspondence was said to have been carried on between him and the prince of Orange; but on some very particular occasion, not specified by the narrators of the anecdote, he wished for a personal interview with the prince. This would be a hazardous undertaking, as he was then circumstanced; yet he resolved to make the attempt. It was now about Michaelmas, or later, when the prince had collected his forces, had arranged the plan of his expedition to this country, and was preparing to embark. The Duke procured a small fast sailing vessel with all possible secrecy, which was to wait for him, at a given time, somewhere on the Norfolk coast. The very day previous to his intended embarkation, he invited a large party of his accustomed guests to spend the evening with him at Norwich, and they staid there till a late hour. As soon as they were gone, he and a trusty servant mounted their horses and rode towards the sea-coast. Not far from the spot where the vessel lay, there was a farm-house occupied by one of his tenants. When they came nigh to that house he alighted, bid his servant take the horses to the farm house and stay there till he should come to him, as he had some business to transact in the neighbourhood, and would join him as soon as possible. He then walked towards the vessel and got aboard. The wind then proving fair, he was in a few hours conveyed to the Dutch coast, nigh to the place where the prince lay encamped. He went ashore without loss of time, walked towards the tent or head quarters of the prince. But as he was going along he overheard an English soldier say to his comrade, ‘There goes the Duke of Norfolk.’ Alarmed at finding he was discovered, he walked on, apparently unconcerned; but before he got to the Head Quarters he turned aside, returned another way to the vessel, went aboard again, and immediately set sail for England. The wind now proving fair, as before, he actually reached the Norfolk coast before night, near the selfsame spot where he had before embarked. He then walked to the farm-house, remounted his horse and arrived at Norwich early in the evening. He then sent for the same party that had been the preceding evening with him, who spent that evening there as they had done the former, no one having the least idea of his extraordinary adventure. This proved a wise precaution; for the soldier’s report having reached the ears of James’s emissaries in Holland, intelligence of it was immediately conveyed to the English court, when a messenger was forthwith dispatched to Norwich to arrest the Duke. His Grace, in order to discredit, or refute the report, appealed to the parties or guests above mentioned, many of whom were catholicks, who affirmed that he was at home at his own house in Norwich the evening immediately preceding and that immediately succeeding the day in which he was said to have been seen in Holland. This attestation was deemed a sufficient proof of an alibi, and it delivered the Duke from the danger which threatened him.”
This anecdote was related to the present writer above 30 years ago, at Norwich, by a Mr. Cubitt, a very intelligent and respectable old gentleman, who appeared to give it full credit, which he was not likely to have done on any slight ground, or without very good reason. “The right divine of kings to govern wrong.” Laing. That is, of the populace, who on the first discovery of his flight proceeded to plunder the popish chapels and houses, but were soon restrained and obliged to desist. “A voluntary desertion and a virtual renunciation, both of the government and realm, were meant to be implied in that ambiguous expression, in order to open the succession to the next protestant heir. But the abdication of government was irreconcileable with the premises, as it was neither applicable to his abuse of power, nor to his departure from the kingdom, which was more from constraint than choice.”—Laing, as before. For a more circumstantial account see Rapin, and especially Laing, from whose excellent History of Scotland much of the preceding account if taken. The chief of whom, we presume, was the famous Framingham, who was then mayor. There was another great man that was also deeply concerned in this vile business, perhaps the first Turner, but we are not sure, for a blank is left for the name in the printed account.—Of Framingham there can be little doubt, and Turner seems the most likely to be the other, as he was mayor the next year, when the persecution was still going on. They were, no doubt, very competent to judge, what sort of religion was fit to be allowed in the town: one educated at a bakehouse, and the other at a pot-house, or tavern. About this same time, if we are not mistaken, the informers affected to be very sorry for what they had done, and pretended great trouble of conscience and contrition, whereby they so wrought upon Marham, that they got from him a discharge from their false information, upon their giving bonds for their future good behaviour. But it was all a villanous contrivance, in order to escape out of their present danger, and be able more easily to effect his ruin; for, about a fortnight after, they came (says our account) “and actually seized his goods according to the former levy; which plainly discovered their design of agreement was but to have a safer advantage against him; and by seizing, to ruin him; and therefore it was that he was advised to sue the Bonds.”—See a small tract entitled The Lynn Persecution, printed in London in the early part of 1693. That affair appears to have been in agitation as early as 1685; whence the following note has been inserted in the town-books—“Nov. 23. 1665, Recommended a petition which was presented to this house, concerning the decay of the stocking trade in this towne, by weaving of the same, to the care of Sir Simon Taylor and Sir John Turner, our members of parliament.”—It would seem by this, that the case was, even then, laid before the legislature, or meant so to be; but we know not the result. Kimber. So it is in the Extracts, but it should, no doubt, be 1627l. This appears from a Letter sent by Dr. Little, then minister of this town, to the author of an Account of that storm, published soon after in a 12mo. volume: of which Letter the following is a copy— “Sir, I had answered yours sooner, but that I was willing to get the best information I could of the effect of the late dismal storm amongst us. I have advised with our merchants and ship-masters, and find that we have lost from this port seven ships, the damage whereof, at a modest computation, amount to 3000l. The men that perished in them are reckoned about twenty in number. There is another ship missing, tho’ we are not without hopes that she is gone northward: the value of ship and cargo about 1500l. The damage sustained in the buildings of the town is computed at a 1000l. at least. I am your faithful Friend and Servant,
Thomas Little.” Lyn, January 17. 1703–4.
So confident was he of the firmness of the structure, that he is said to have declared, when doubts were suggested of the danger it might be exposed to from a great storm, that he should have no fear to be there in the greatest storm that could blow. Of the general tenor of that proclamation the reader may form some judgment from the following extract— “Whereas by the late most terrible and dreadful storms of wind; with which it has pleased almighty God to afflict the greatest part of this our kingdom on Friday and Saturday, the 26th. and 27th. days of November last; some of our ships of war, and many ships of our loving subjects, have been destroyed and lost at sea, and great numbers of our subjects serving on board the same have perished, and many houses and other buildings of our good subjects have been either wholly thrown down and demolished, or very much damnified and defaced, and thereby several persons have been killed, and many stacks of corn and hay thrown down and scattered abroad, to the great damage and impoverishment of many others, especially the poorer sort; and great number of timber and other trees have by the said storm been torn up by the roots, in many parts of this our kingdom. A calamity of this sort so dreadful and astonishing, that the like hath not been or felt in the memory of any person living in this, our kingdom, and which loudly calls for the deepest and most solemn humiliation of us and our people. Therefore, out of a deep and pious sense of what we, and our people have suffered, by the said dreadful winds and storms, which we most humbly acknowledge to be a token of the divine displeasure, and that it was the infinite mercy of God that we and our people were not thereby wholly destroyed—we have resolved, and do hereby command, that a general and public fast be observed, &c.”
Of that address the following notice and copy are to be found in the Hall-books— “Sept. 25. 1704. It is ordered that the common Seale be affixed to the following address To the Queen’s most Excellent Majestie. May it please your Majestie, To admitt us (amongst the great number of your loyall subjects) with unfeigned hearts to congratulate the glorious success of your arms in the victory obtained by your successfull Generall John Duke of Marleborow over the French and Bavarians near Hochstet; a defeat so entire, that hardly foreign or English history can paralell, so seasonable that the safety of the whole empire was the consequence of it; and upon the distant Danube, where the English arms never triumphed before: and whilst reverence makes us approach leisurely to your Majesties Throne, every day still produces new trophies; the Sea as well as the Land, Affrica as well as Europe must loudly proclaime Your Majestie is every where, invincible.—These are blessings justly due to your Majesties Piety and Courage, who so steddily have pursued the example of your glorious Predecessor, that from his early years, and almost a private station was always the chiefe opposer of the torrent of France, Popery, and Slavery, and whose memory will always be valuable in all true English hearts; were it for nothing else, yet for paving us the establishment of a Protestant succession in the person of your sacred Majestie, Notwithstanding which by the treachery of your faithless Ennemys your Majestie upon your accession found the dreadful powers of France and Spain united, who singly have in their turns push’d fair for the western monarchy. This would have shaken any courage less firm than your own, who whilst all Europe lay gasping waiting for the result of your councell, you stretched out your powerful arme to support the then tottering frame of its liberty, and was alone able to preserve it, and in that ourselves. And whilst your Majestie so carefully nurses our established church, your charity extends to the whole Protestant interest of Europe, which must certainly appear very naturall to your Majestie whilst your capital Enemy prides himselfe in being the Head of the Roman Catholicks and they in him.—May Your Majesties Subjects unite in their acknowledgements to your Majestie that the last subterfuge of our conquered Ennemys (our Divisions) may not prevail amongst us; but that whilst our Armys are so bravely commanded, our Treasury so frugally expended, our Laws so equally administered—and above all, The whole by your Majesties providentiall care so wisely superintended, Our Religion and Liberty may under your most auspicious government be immovably secured to us and to our Posterity.”
Such was this notable specimen of the wisdom and loyalty, the genius and eloquence of our honoured ancestors. This teems to bespeak a consciousness that all was not right, and that some of their exactions were unjust and oppressive. It appears that they were now ready to relinquish, if hard pressed, all the exactions complained of, except the two particulars last specified; which certainly does not look well. Of this memorable address we have found the following copy extracted from the Hall-books; which will give the reader an opportunity to form his own opinion of its merits or character. “June 9. 1706—The Humble Address of the mayor, recorder, aldermen, and common-councell of your Majesties ancient Burgh of King’s Lynn.—May it please your Majestie—Having ever since our happy revolution (which restored our English Constitution) undergone the various events of a long war with the utmost cheerfullness and alacrity, our zeal can never slacken (but increase) under your Majesties reign of wonders, who is raised by Providence to extricate us out of the greatest difficulties, and to putt a hooke into the nostrills of that great Leviathan who hath so long sported himself upon our waters.—It is your Majesties genius that inspires, ’tis your choice that enables your brave generall the Duke of Marleborow to make our streets thus often resound with the joyfull noise of victorys. These strokes are master-pieces not to be found in the Louvre at Versailles. Whilst with one blow he reduces the treacherous Bavarian and makes him fly his own country; with the other he drives him out of his French government too, effectually confirming the just Ban of the Empire, (where your generall hath so well deserved the prime dignity) and restores the flourishing Provinces of Brabant and Spanish Flanders to its rightfull Prince. The haughty Spaniard will hereby see if they would preserve their unwieldy monarchy entire, it is your majesties protection they must have recourse to. But no lest wonderfull are all the rest of the steps of your Majesties government upon the main continent (even the farthest parts of Spain nearest France) wee see the large provinces of Catalonia and Valentia (with ane amasing success reduc’d to their lawful sovereigne), where our brave Englis’h Peterborough’s zeale, for the honour of his Prince and Country hath rivalled even the longest experience. And as it is as difficult to preserve as gaine, how have wee seen half a hundred capitall ships reach the length of the distant Barcelona before the time they almost used to put to sea. At their approach Lewis’s blood chills in the veins of Anjou and Tholouse. They fly from before us. Wee hope (the former) to increase the numbers of the French king’s pretended and abdicated Princes, who crye to him for succour (tho’ in vain) which might convince Lewis (as Alexander’s wound did him) that notwithstanding the statues and Panegyricks,) he is not yet arrived at immortality.—But our prospects are still more comfortable att home, wee find an universal calme amongst us, and as one effect of it the nationall credit advanced to a degree even beyond what the most peaceable times could boast off, which is the best evidence in the Body Politick as the face is of health in the body naturall. Wee are thankfully convinced your Majestie is the best Protector, as well as the greatest Ornament and Benefactor of our established Church, and are best Judge of what is for its advantage: and if any party ffaction (out of a private ambition) should endeavour to insinuate any groundless ffears, or erect as any other guarautees (that your Majesties daily actions) as wee are satisfied it is, endeavouring to allieniate and transfer from your Majestie the affection of your subjects and their just depending on your Person, so it is to robb us of our peace and quiett.—That your Majestie may be always fear’d and honor’d abroad and reverenc’d at home, as it shall be always (in our low sphere) our utmost wishes and endeavours, so may he be deemed unworthy of the name of ane Englishman that doth not heartily say Amen.”
What occasioned the decay and demolition of our water-mills seems to have been the want of a sufficient supply of water to work them, owing, perhaps, partly, if not chiefly to the neglect of keeping the different water-courses in due repair, and especially those connected with the Middleton river. The following articles from the Hall-books will throw some light on this subject—“August 29. 1706; ordered the cutting and opening a trench in the common ditch from Kettlewell to a sluce at Gannock gate in order to carry the water from thence to the same water-mills.” Again—“Nov. 8. It is ordered that it be referred to a Committee to state the case touching the flow and reflow of the salt waters in Middleton river for the service of the corn water-mills, and the benefite of continuing or deserting those priviledges to this corporation, and to inform themselves now far this corporation will be obliged, in case of deserting that river to the ditching or scouring the same or any or what part thereof.”—Again—Dec. 20. The committees report is,— 1. We find that the flow and reflow of the salt-waters for the service of the corn-water-mills is an antient right and priviledge enjoyed time out of mind by this corporation, under a fee farme rent of 20s. payable to the lords of the manor of Gaywood, heretofore the bishop, prior, and convent of Norwich—2. That whilst the said corn-mills did bear a considerable rent the charges of ditching and scouring the rivers and drains in which these waters had their course, were easy and supportable, and the said mills were of great service and benefits to this corporation—3. That the rents and profits of the same mills of late years are much reduced and lessened, and the rivers and drains so silted and grown up that the charges of ditching and scouring those rivers, will be greater than the future rents and profits thereof will compensate. We are therefore of opinion that it will be of less disadvantage to this town to disanul the said flow and reflow of the salt waters than to continue the same under the present great and unavoidable charges of opening the said rivers; and that the use of the fresh waters constantly descending in these rivers not being obstructed by the salts, will be of great advantage to the country adjacent draining by these rivers, and will also in a great measure be serviceable to the working the said mills and preserving the said drains and outfalls.—4. That in case the said flow and reflow be deserted, wee are of opinion that the said rivers and drains ought to be ditched and scoured at the equal charge of all the lands draining thereby according to the ancient laws and customs of sewers.—Signed by Ch. Turner Esq. mayor, Hen. Framingham, &c. &c.
It is not said who presented this address. Perhaps it might be the noted Framingham, who was then high sheriff of the county, as well as one of our leading aldermen. Perhaps too, it might be on this occasion that her majesty called him her cousin, which compliment is said to have so highly gratified his vanity, that he used to boast of it ever after, in his ostentatious way, to the no small divertisement of his companions and acquaintance. The circumstance is thus stated in the MS.—“1708—Michael Hamond and his Sister, both children—one seven and the other eleven, were hanged for felony on the gallows out of South Gates.” What the particular crime was does not appear. This affair is thus stated in our book of extracts— “June 27. 1709. We having taken several views of the condition of this Harbor and the banks, walls, and defences thereof, the dolphins and stakes antiently erected for the security and safe mooring of ships, and of the dangers of undermining the foundations of the houses and buildings next the Haven there: It appears to us that in the space of a few years last past, by the rapid and violent descents of the waters in the Ebb Tides, the course of the chanell is much altered and diverted and the deep run brought under the said Dolphins and stakes, and so near the said banks, walls, and defences, and the danger of undermining the said foundation daily more increasing, that the charges of preserving the said Harbour are become insupportable. Wee are [therefore] of opinion that it is absolutely necessary that some speedy care be taken for erecting one or more large Jettys of timber and stone in fitt places for reducing the chanell to its usuall course, and that Engineers experienced to such works, be consulted, and endeavours considered for obtaining ane act of parliament for some reasonable tax or assessment upon tunnage for the enabling the performance of such works, and that the vast charges and expences already laid out on this behalf be inspected and computed.—Signed Hon. Chennery mayor, Robt. Auborne, Ed. Rolfe, John Berney, Dan: Scarlett, Saml. Browne.”
Afterwards, under the date of Aug. 29, the same year, it is added, “Capt. Hawley is desired to come down to view the Harbor.” Then it immediately follows—“Referr’d to a Comittee Lord Townshend’s Letter respecting the employing of poor Paletines come over, and to consider how many.”—It would seem by this, that they were to be employed in improving the harbour, erecting jetties, repairing the sea-banks, &c. Of that benefaction Mackerell says nothing; but there is some account of it in the Town-books, under April 1. 1713, and in the Monthly Magazine for July 1810, page 568. See Coxe’s mem. of Walpole, vol. I. On the 26th. of the preceding January, it was decreed in the Hall, that no person under 60 years old should be elected, or admitted into Gaywood Hospital. The same rule, we presume, has been ever since strictly observed. Here it may be proper just to observe, that the author rather thinks he was mistaken at page 889, in supposing that Browne had been complimented with the freedom of this town. He has since examined the book which contains a list of the names of all our freemen, and cannot find the doctor’s name there. This is not to be wondered at, considering the bad terms on which he lived with the corporation. About the same time that the pens of Armstrong and Badslade were thus engaged, that of the elder Kinderley also was employed in the same cause, as appears by the dedication and preface to his son’s volume on the ancient and present state of the navigation of Lynn, &c. About these times, the names of Messrs. Steph. Allen, John Cary, and Geo. Hogg, became enrolled among our freemen, whose descendants have ever since figured among the first families of this town.—They are thus noticed in our volume of Extracts—“Augt. 29th. 1724. Mr. St. Allen to have his ffreedom, paying 20 nobles.—Sept. 27. 1727. John Cary elected free upon paying 20 nobles.—Febr. 3. 1728–9. Granted the ffreedom to Geo. Hogg, marriner, at the request of alderman John Kidd, as his mayor’s ffreeman.” Two Irishmen, as the story goes, served in the German or imperial army during a war with the Turks. One of them, in a skirmish with some Tartars, was by one of them overpowered and taken prisoner. Upon which he called out to his comrade, “By Jasus, I have caught a Tartar!” “Very well,” said the other, “bring him away then;’” “he wont come,” answered paddy; “then come yourself,” replied his comrade; “arrah now, my dear honey,” cried he, “but he wont let me.” Hence the origin of the proverbial saying, when a sharper has been overmatched, that he has catched a tartar. The gentlemen of this town, with all their superabundant zeal for the church, ought to consider how much they owe, for what morality and religion exist here, to the exertions of those who dissent from that church. Every candid and discerning person in the town must see and acknowledge that the labours of these dissenters have very largely contributed to the reformation of the inhabitants. But for our dissenting chapels, far more than one half, perhaps three fourths of our population would have been effectually precluded from the possibility of being benefited by the public ministry of the clergy, for want of room or proper accommodation in the churches. This is a known fact. Must not the labours of the dissenters therefore be evidently and unquestionably entitled to the gratitude and encouragement of our rulers, even if their mode of instruction had not been better calculated to enlighten the common people than that of the church ministers? The Harwicks seem to have been peculiarly unfortunate in being treated unhandsomely and rudely by some of their townsmen, during their mayoralty. Richard Harwick was said to be so treated, by Browne, in 1723, and Charles Harwick now by this Rudkin. How to account for this, we are unable to say. The Harwicks might carry themselves with too much haughtiness, or, on the other hand, with too much condescension; for the one as well as the other kind of conduct has sometimes exposed people to rude and unbecoming treatment. However that was, the fact itself, as above stated, appears no less clear than remarkable. Rudkin’s successor in the common-council was the late Thomas Sommersby, the elder. Hence the following note occurs in the Hall books—“Nov. 26. 1731, Mr. Th. Sommersby chosen into the common councel, in the room of John Rudkin amoved.”—Sometime previously to the expulsion of Rudkin, Edw. Bradfield, the Town clerk, was also expelled, or discharged from his office, as appears by the following notes in the same books—“August 29. 1729, Ed. Bradfield, Town-Clerk suspended.”—again . . . “Sept. 29. 1729; Ed. Bradfield, Town-Clerk discharged.”—His offence, or the cause and reason of his discharge is not mentioned: but by the Epitaph drawn up for him by his friend Dr. Browne, it would seem not to have been any thing very honourable or creditable to the corporation. This Epitaph, as it is of an unusual cast, and in the doctor’s best manner, may be worth preserving, and reads as follows.— “Behold a rare Monument of Friendship,
Dedicated to the Remains of
Edward Bradfield, attorney at law.
Happy while he was Master of himself;
Unfortunate when he became the Servant of others.
His fine Patrimony,
And a Profession wherein he excell’d,
Gave him Independency,
And every Enjoyment
That could make Life agreeable:
But alas!
His accepting the office of Town-Clerk
Subjected him to Servility,
And to every Disappointment
That could make Death desirable.
His Experience of both Fortunes was remarkable:
In the Prosperous, he was follow’d
As if he never had an Enemy;
In the Adverse, he was deserted
As if he never had a Friend.
He died September 6th. 1736, aged 47.
Leaving a Widow, and an only Daughter.
He was Defended while living;
He is Covered now Dead,
By one who commenced,
Almost from the Cradle,
And continues his Friend,
Even beyond the Grave.
William Browne, M.D. in both Universities,
And Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians.”
This Epitaph is certainly creditable to the feelings and memory of Sir William Browne.—Having this occasion to mention him again, the author begs leave here to correct what he said above at page 901 relating to the question, whether or not he had been complimented with the freedom of this borough? He has since ascertained that that honour was actually conferred on him gratis, Febr 3 1717–18; which must have been previous to his having incurred the displeasure of the Hall. Nor can this writer discover that the same honour was withheld from any physician, who had settled here for any length of time, before our two present ones: (only Dr. Hamilton purchased his freedom, but that was, it seems, before he had received his Doctor’s degree.) Nor yet does this same honour appear to have been withheld from any of the clergy who were Lecturers here, except the present Lecturer and his predecessor Eyre. We know not how to account for this omission on the part of our corporation, (at a time when the honour itself is daily decreasing in value,) but from a mere want of urbanity; and we hope, in what we may have occasion to say of them hereafter, we shall never have any reason to lay any thing worse to their charge. This Edmund Keene was the late bishop of Ely. The spire or steeple of South Lynn Church was not then blown down, but stood twenty years longer, and its fall was among the memorable events which distinguished the commencement of this reign. It is somewhat remarkable that the Grey Friars Steeple, the slightest of all our buildings of that kind, has hitherto withstood the severest blasts. It is said that when they had nearly completed one part of their work, and were ready to congratulate themselves on its impervious, impassable, and impregnable aspect, a greyhound that followed one of the gentlemen, making a sudden spring, flew over it in an instant, which so cooled their ardour, damped their spirits, and discouraged them, that they had no longer any heart at all to proceed: for they concluded, that if that greyhound could do so, the Highlanders, if they came, would not fail to storm every thing of that kind that might happen to stand in their way.—So apprehensive and confident were they for some time that the rebels would come this way, that they readily gave heed to every flying and idle report that coincided with that notion. It was at one time believed, that their vanguard had nearly reached Wisbeach, and even that some of their scouts or spies were actually in Marshland. The last belief arose from the circumstance of two travelling Scotchmen happening then to pass through Marshland, whom every body took to be no other than rebel spies. A strong party was sent from Lynn to take them up, who, among other things, questioned them, if they had arms? To which they answered, “Yes, they had twa,” lifting up both their arms at the same time. The present writer is earnestly desirous to do ample justice, and give all due commendation to the persevering and unwearied exertions of the different descriptions of our Lynn dissenters. They have certainly done much good, here as well as elsewhere. After all, it must be allowed and confessed that the miserable bigotry, illiberality and intolerance, which they have often discovered, and particularly on a recent occasion, constitute a vast and sad drawback from the merit of their exertions, and the praise to which their labours are entitled. But on this head we shall be more explicit, when we come to the present state of the town. That the evangelical clergy and their patrons should be at all alarmed, at the growth, or progress of methodism, seems not a little singular and strange, considering that they themselves are looked upon as one sort of methodists, and have certainly and evidently contributed, in a very large measure, to the increase and prosperity of that sect. They, sorely, did not mean or wish to make their hearers dissenters, but the spirit of their system and the drift of their ministry appear to have a strong tendency that way. At Lynn, and some other places, the Wesleyans alone bear the name of Methodists: whereas the Whitefieldians are here denominated Independents, which name they have likewise assumed in many other places. In some of the western parts the name of Methodists is given only to them, and the others are called Wesleyans, and sometimes Wesleys: but on this subject we will say more hereafter. Whether it will so happen or not, it is certain that the methodist Constitution is well worth the attention of the statesman and philosopher, as well as the historian. It is admirably calculated for making numerous proselytes, and becoming the predominant religion of a country—especially that of the Wesleyan community; whose whole plan and organization discover exquisite skill and judgment, with a most deep and accurate knowledge of human nature. In all which respects John Wesley appears no way inferior to any of the heads of our modern orders or sects, from Francis and Dominic down to Emanuel Swedenburg and Joanna Southcote; not excepting Ignatius Loyola, Martin Luther, John Calvin, or even Fox and Penu and count Zinzendorff. See Belsham v. 414, &c. Belsham v. 86. The writer of the above extract further says, that during the said electioneering tumult, “the insults on the T—rs family, the ladies not excepted, were prodigious, especially from young *—*, who exceeded every thing that was heard of, to my old lady and the margeries. The poor madams zealously espousing S. J—n’s cause were most grievously abused by him and others, with their s—rs drunkenness, their own fat a—s, and even much worse upon their spitting in young *’s face, in the heat of their passion out of a window, on the Election day. So that they have had fevers.—Dr. B— has declared eternal war, in those very words, against every branch of the T—s family, and supported Mr. F’s interest with the rage of a madman: his W. and D. did the same, and are yet the most billingsgate beasts imaginable.—A. T. purely for the sake of mischief reconciled himself to his Bro. and supported his cause with all the might of his tongue and purse.—S—*— after going about the town with the gentlemen to promote L—d O. and S. J’s interest, upon Mr. F’s breaking his promise he had made not to meddle, turned to him, and was as violent as any body.—T * voted for S. J. but did him privately all the mischief he could, and went out of town one day, that his W. might entertain F at Supper. J. * was a fury, and his W. the queen of furies, and to this hour is fit only for Bedlam. All others stood tight to S. J. But he and his * have had all their faults ript up and laid open.—At length Monday came; and after an expense of near 2000l. on each side, the dear bought poll stood thus W. 199. T. 184 F. 131.—There were players in town at the time; so the triumphant party gave their friends an entertainment of that sort. To ridicule D—r B— the Busy Body was the play, and a farce was added called the Mock D—r, which mock Dr. was dressed as like Dr. B— as could be. F—’s people on their part tho’ beaten, would shew they had good hearts; so they bespoke Pasquin, which is, you know, written to ridicule corporation Elections; there is a m—r and m—r—ss &c. They took care to dress the m—r and cripple him, so as to resemble poor P—, and Madam m—r—ss was most specially drunk. The shouting and insolence were prodigious, calling out, F— for ever! between the acts, and drinking his health throughout the house, and ending with an Epilogue made by Dr. B— comparing Sr. J—n to Tom Thumb. They keep up a most indecent rage yet, and swear they’ll never have done, till they’ve thrown out Sr. J—n. F. is coming again in a few days, and here’s to be dainty-doings. Upon the whole, they say, Sr. J—n was brought in upon L—d O’s shoulders, which, tho’ better than not brought in at all, sits not pleasantly upon his stomach, any more than the expense of 2000l. suits his temper and pocket.—I have been guilty of an unpardonable omission in saying nothing of your friend madam M—x—n, who espoused Sr. J—n’s cause with mighty warmth, and did him great service. She kept open house for all freemen, and waited on ’em herself, and look’d exactly like a woman that keeps a booth in a Fair, with, roast pork, bottled ale, cider, &c. When her husband was at home, she went abroad to outlyers, with presents, to keep them tight: and several of ’em she had at bed and board in her house, for fear of the enemy. Dr. B— came to her, and demanded the release of the men: she withstood him, and defended her castle, as bravely as Joan of Arc could have done, had she been raised from the dead, against the D—r, parson M—y, and other hussars, who were scouring every hole and corner of the town. The close of her gallant conduct was in free conference, or rather a pitched battle with Dr—B—’s W. upon what had passed, which was of some hours continuance, and better worth all the money you have in your pocket, to have seen and heard, than Pasquin, or the Busy Body was worth 6d.—Next to this Heroine deserves to be mentioned Harvey the ’Pothecary, who because Sr. J— gave a relation of his a place lately, turned against him, and against his own express promise; drank himself into a fever, and is dead and buried. He has left all he had to his wife, who seems very glad of her loss, as well as her gain. Nic. Elstobb was wild on the same side, and raved till he spit blood, and was at death’s door, and is not far from it at this time. Martin Sand—r on the other side lost his senses without a joke, and was given over for a week, but is now as well as ever.—There never was such a funeral at Lynn as Harvey’s. The number of persons invited was very great, but the volunteers made the chief figure. All F’s party met at the Dog, and joined the procession, going 2 and 2, and returned to the same place, in the same manner, where they spent the night in drinking F for ever, and to Harvey’s pious memory.—The next night after the Busy Body was played, my L—d and S. J. gave a Ball to all the freemen’s wives and daughters—After a few dances by the better sort of Ladies they sat down, and L—d *’s Son, (who rode for his cousin,) S. J, the C—r, Mr. B— and Sr. Wm. H—b—d and the rest took shopkeepers wives and daughters, and twirl’d ’em about all the rest of the night. This gave great content.—In return for Mr. M—x—n’s seal in S. J—’s service, the other party have played him a trick, by getting Johnson R—s D—r, who has a right in what remains above the mortgage in M—x—n’s House, to set it to sale; and so, by underhand management, they forced him to buy it at a dear rate, or he must have gone out of it.”
This long and striking extract gives a curious, but very unfavourable idea of the state of society here, or of the character and manners of our townsmen 64 years ago. The reader will hardly suppose the picture to be overcharged, when he is informed that the writer was no other than the revd. Edm. Pyle D.D. then Lecturer of this town, who would not be likely to represent his own flock as more unruly, mischievous, and graceless than what they really were. It is hardly necessary to observe here, that all the wars, and calamities, and revolutions, that have within the last twenty years agitated and devastated the European world, are pretty generally thought to have sprung from the American war, or those wrongheaded principle which occasioned it. Small as the above number may appear, yet, if the whole of what is now called the united kingdom had armed in equal proportion, it would have produced a very large force, consisting, if we are not mistaken, of no less than 200,000 men. Proverbs. 30. 20. It is said to be already between 8 and 900 millions—a continuance of the war for a very few years more will probably complete the sum. In the autumn or winter of 1782, the north mail was robbed one evening soon after 11 o’clock, a little beyond the long Bridge, by a lawless youth of the name of Beeton. A few days after he was apprehended and committed to prison, whence he made his escape on the 7th. of November, but was again taken on the 11th. at Rising. He was executed Febr. 17. 1783. The ancient usage seems to have been for the mayor to name and authorize twelve of his brethren of the Hall to elect two burgesses to represent the town in parliament. Hence we read in an old record, that in the year 1487 Robert Pillye, then mayor, called and empowered the following twelve men to elect two persons to represent this borough in the parliament which was to meet that year: viz. John Massingham, John Bilney, Tho. Carter, Wm. Yates, Robt. Powdich, Andr. Woley, John Thorisby, Hen. Gardyner, Robt. Umfrey, Tho. Symkenson, John Trunche, and Tho. Archer: who accordingly chose Robert Thorisbye and John Tygo.—Two years before (1485,) Robert Braybroke and William Munke had been chosen in like manner:—and the year following, (1488,) in the mayoralty of John Tyge, twelve men, called and authorised by him, chose John Gryndell and Thomas Carter to sit in the parliament called that year.—It seems by this that elections were then very frequent; annual perhaps, or nearly so: and each parliament continuing but one session.—The same old record mentions several other subsequent elections, always made by 12 persons called thereto by the mayor—only once, but it does not appear in what year, he seems to have nominated but eight, which eight are said to have called unto them four more, so making up the number of 12; which 12 chose for burgesses of parliament Robt. Braybroke and John Beels. This might be in 1486—If so, we have here an account of four annual parliaments at that period.—Let us not, however, blame our ancestors for leaving the election of their members in the hands of 12 persons; for we do not appear to have at all mended the matter yet: our efficient or real electors are even now less than 12. Unless we should choose so to denominate the following occurrence.—“At our quarter Sessions held Nov. 15. 1785, the recorder being absent by reason of illness, sentence of transportation was passed upon one Bradley and another convict by the then mayor, the late Mr. Wm. Bagge.” See New Annual Register for 1788, page (32.) “His majesty (says one of the journals of that time) is constantly at the Spa a little before six in the morning, where he drinks a glass of water, then walks half an hour with the queen and princesses, who likewise drink the water. The king takes a second glass, and about half after seven the royal party return to Fauconberg house: his majesty hands the queen and princesses to their carriages, and then sets out himself on foot. About eleven o’clock he is constancy on horseback, paying no regard to the state of the weather. The queen and princesses follow him in their carriages. They generally take the road to the hills, on the east of Cheltenham, return about two, and at seven appear again in the walks.—The great object (says the same journal) of the kings journey to Cheltenham is to keep off the gout. His complaint for some time past has been the flying gout, which his physicians could readily fix by the use of proper regimen; but his majesty dreads such a lodgment, as it would of course prevent him from using that exercise which has been so much his habit as well as inclination. Cheltenham waters are reckoned the best in the kingdom for this purpose.”—see N. A. Register vol. 9. p. (26) and (28.) This is said not to have been the first time when such symptoms had made their appearance. See New Annual Register, vol. 10. page 92. Pitt declared that the prince had no more right to assume the regency than he had; which was deemed by many a very extraordinary and extravagant assertion. See New Annual Register for 1791, page (7.) When some had written violent pamphlets against the elder Pitt, and he was urged to have them prosecuted, he smilingly answered, “No: the press, like the air, is a chartered-libertine.” The son, with all his reputed and boasted greatness, had not a mind capable of imitating such an example. (See Belsham, vol. v.) No real magnanimity, or true dignity of character was to be expected from one who could seek the ruin of his own original friends and coadjutors, the active supporters of his early politics and youthful fame, and that, forsooth, because they would not support his apostacy, but chose still to adhere to those principles which he himself used to tell them were inseparably connected with the welfare and salvation of the country. Should the work ever commence and go on, the commissioners will have to borrow money to a vast amount, which they will probably, not find a very easy matter, as other fen projects, such as those of the river Nene and Feltwell District especially, have turned out so miserably unpropitious to the respective creditors; that the interest of their money is now many years in arrears, with but little prospect of its being ever again liquidated. The Nene commissioners are so much above their business, and so regardless of the rights of their creditors, that they sometimes will not deign to meet, so much as once a year, to examine the state of their finances and see if any thing can be spared towards the payment of their debts.—As to the gentlemen, or commissioners of the “Feltwell new fen district,” they, some years ago, thought proper to represent themselves in a state of insolvency, and proposed that their creditors should advance at the rate of ten per centum of the money in their hands towards obtaining a new act of parliament to increase the drainage taxes, and so enable them thenceforth to pay interest regularly. The money was advanced, and the new act obtained, but not a shilling of interest has been yet advanced, under pretence that all the money is wanted for repairs and drainage improvements, &c. How far all this is honest or honourable we need not say; but that it will not fail to make some people in future more cautious in adventuring their money on such occasions, may be reasonably supposed and expected. That paragraph reads thus— “Lynn, May 11. 1802. Thursday last being the day appointed for the public reading of his majesty’s proclamation of peace in this town, the morning was ushered in by the ringing of bells and other demonstrations of joy. At noon the Lynn Loyal Volunteers, commanded by major Everard, paraded in the Tuesday market place. Soon after, the mayor, accompanied by the recorder, aldermen, common-council-men, and most of the inhabitants, proceeded in front of the line to the market cross, when the town-crier read the proclamation of peace. The Volunteers then fired a feu de joie, which was succeeded by reiterated shouts of applause from every person present, the band striking up ‘Rule Britannia.’ Major Everard then addressed the corps, and after thanking them for their zeal in defence of their country, read to them the thanks of both houses of parliament for their meritorious past services, and informed them they were now to be disbanded, conformably to the regulation of government, with a reward the most gratifying, their sovereign’s approbation of their conduct. The noncommissioned officers and privates were then severally presented with a pecuniary donation, in lieu of a public entertainment.”
Thus it appears that the conduct of these volunteers gained the approbation and applause not only of their fellow citizens or townsmen, but even of the higher orders of the nation, up to the very throne. The year 1797 was also distinguished in Norfolk for two great political meetings held there in the spring of that year, of which the Norfolk Remembrancer gives the following account.— “April 25th. a county meeting was held on the Castle Hill (Norwich,) in the open air, and a petition, praying his majesty to dismiss his present ministers, as the most effectual means of reviving the national credit and restoring peace, was moved by Mr. Fellowes, seconded by Mr. Rolfe, supported by Lord Albemarle, Mr. Coke, Mr. Mingay, Mr. Plumptre, and Mr. Trafford, and almost unanimously adopted.”
Had the whole nation done the same it might have proved of incalculable benefit. But three days after another meeting was convened by the opposite party, to counteract the effect of the former. At this meeting, (according to the work just referred to,) “a dutiful and loyal address to the king was moved by Sir T. Beevor, and seconded by R. Milles Esq. and afterwards numerously signed by the nobility, gentry, and freeholders, expressive of their reliance on the measures adopted by the ministers for obtaining a safe and honourable peace, and of their readiness to defend with their lives and fortunes, the religion, laws, and constitution of their country.”
These swaggering and blustering life-and-fortune men have had their day, and a pretty long one it has proved. If the nation be not yet quite tired of their swaggering, and sick at heart of their system of war, bloodshed, violence, and endless expenditure, it seems high time it should. We surely, ought, to be fully convinced, by this time, that the politics of their opponents, so long decried among us, are infinitely better calculated than theirs for the welfare of this country. During the whole continuance of this Paper scarce any thing more remarkable appeared among its contents than the memorable controversy about the termination of the century, which caused a sad division among our wise men of that period. Some affirmed that the century actually ended with that year, 1799; while others insisted that it could not end till the conclusion of the following year, for this plain reason, that ninety nine could not possibly make one hundred. In short, this controversy seems to have exhibited our wise men as somewhat akin to the wise men of Gotham. Of these two addresses the former, according to the Lynn Packet, was worded as follows— “To the King’s most excellent majesty: The humble Address of the Mayor, Aldermen, and Common-council of the borough of King’s Lynn, in the county of Norfolk, in Council assembled. Most gracious sovereign: We your Majesty’s Loyal Subjects, the Mayor, aldermen, and common-council of the borough of King’s Lynn, in the county of Norfolk, humbly beg leave to bear this public testimony of our horror and indignation at the late nefarious attempt upon a life so highly important to the welfare of these realms. We most cordially congratulate, not only your majesty, but all friends to our country, on your providential escape from danger so imminent; and beg leave to express our earnest wishes and prayers, that your majesty may long continue to reign over a free and happy people.—Given under our Common-Seal, at our Guildhall, the 21st. day of May, in the year of our Lord 1800.”
The Address from the inhabitants was somewhat longer, but to the same effect, though differently worded. The former mentioned the horrid act as having excited the indignation, and the latter the detestation of the addressers, neither of which could be very proper as applied to the conduct of a madman. The outrageous conduct of a maniac, may excite horror; but it is not easy to conceive how it can excite either indignation or detestation. Before we dismiss this subject we may just observe that Hadfield, Brothers, and Margaret Nicholson, were not the only personages who, in the course of this reign, were moved and impelled by the spirit of insanity to pay very extraordinary attention to the sovereign. Unless we should except the great accession of honour to our town in 1807, by the addition of the names of his royal highness William Henry duke of Clarence, and the right honourable George James, earl of Cholmondeley, to its list of freemen. The following appeared as officiating clergy or ministers in the two churches of this parish within the time of Dr. Arrowsmith’s residence here—Messrs Caston, Stalham, Hares, Swallowe, Emmotte, Nic. Toll, Caston junr. Rawlinson, Purchas, Gatford, Leech, Almond, Bell: but they were not all here at the same time; several of then being successors to such as had removed or died. There seem, however, to have been more stated and officiating ministers here then, than there are at present; and the same probably was the case afterwards during the common-wealth and protectorate. The chief document alluded to is an old quarto MS. or record, evidently extracted from an older one, or from the Hall-books, for the use, it seems, of the clergy, and probably by some of that body, as it has passed through that channel, and is written by different hands. In this record the following notices of Mr. Arrowsmith occur— “1630, Sept. 29. Mr. John Arrowsmith M.A. Fell. Kath. Hall, made choice of from the university of Cambridge to be one of the Lecturers of this town; and he is to have a ffee of 50l. per annum, and a convenient dwelling house, or 5l. in lieu thereof—to preach twice every Sunday, except 1st. Sunday in every month, and then but once, and with the other Lecturer, or to preach by several turns, viz. Days K’s entrance into ys kingdom 1st. Augt. 29th. Augt. 29th. Sept. 5th. Nov. 25th. Dec. and to help the curate in the mynistring Sacrament Ld’s supper, and if hereafter he shall take any benefice then this election shall be void.”
—again— “Dec. 10th. Mr. Arrowsmith chosen one o’Lecturers, 29th. Sept. &c. now ordered to preach at St. N. every Sunday morning, and be respited of’s aft. S. also to preach Wednesday every forenoon St. M. and Mr. Caston to preach afternoons St. N. and forenoons at St. M. as usual.—Mr. Arrowsmith and Mr Caston, Lecturers, had ffee either of ym 50l. a piece, and either of ym Dwelling house, or 5l. a piece in lieu yereof, thr. ffees to be made up 100 marks (66l. 13s. 4d.) apiece, and their houses continued, or 5l. a piece yearly as formerly, and yt the xii Sermons they were respited, shall in respect of ys increase be preached by each of ym: ye increase of this ffee to begin from Xtmas next.”
—again— “1631, July 1st. Mr. Arrowsmith’s ffee made up the whole to 100l. per ann. Qterly beg. 29th. Sept. next.”
—again— “Dec. 7th. a patent under com. seal M. and burg. at request of Mr. Arrowsmith M.A. for his ffee of 100l. a year to be paid Qterly, with such covenants and agreements as shall be thought fit to be inserted.”
—again— “1632, Sept. 28th. 10l. allowed Mr. Arrowsmith towards payment of house rent.”
—again— “Mar. 11th. Mr. John Arrowsmith commended to Ld. Bp. of Norwich and Dean and Chapter to be minr. St. Nic. Chapel, K’s L. on conditions and agreements hereafter following, viz. Yt Mr. A. still continue his place o’pching, and to admr. Sacr. Ld’s Supper, but not to be further tyed or charged with the duties o’ ye minister’s place, nor to receive any part of the benefits thereof, only to have his ffee as formerly granted him; but ye same to be performed by a man to be appointed by ye town, and that ye town shall also dispose of all the benefits of the place. Also agreed yt. Mr. A. shall suffer ye parishioners from time to time to make choice of the churchwardens and of the parish dark, as they shall think fit.”
—again— “1633. Augt. 26th. (loco 25.) Mr. A’s. patent sealed with com. seal for’s stipend of 100l. per ann. and 10l. for’s dwelling, but it is directed to be deposited in Town Clerk’s hand, till Mr. A. shall covenant in writinge with ye Major and Burgesses to perform ye order of this house in March last, touching ye minister’s place.”
—again— “1635, Apr. 10th. 100l. lent by ye House one yr to Mr. Arrowsmith, minister St. Nicholas parish gratis, &c.”
—again— “Sept. 14th. Mr. A’s patent delivered out to Mr. A. himself.”
—again— “Dec. 4th. Mr. Matts. Swallowe chosen Lecturer in this town, loco Mr. Edm. Caston decd. by M. A. C. C. as far as in ym lieth, viz. to preach 2ce every Ld’s day, in forenoon St. Margt. and afteroon at St Nic. and to help to admyn. sact. Ld’s Sup. every common. day, and to preach on ffestival days by turns with Mr. A. as Mr. Caston did, for 100 marks in money, and house, and a letter o’commendation to ye Bp. in his behalf. And this day M A. C. C as far as in ym lies chose Mr. Edm. Caston, son of Mr. E. C. late decd. to be curate St. Margaret’s Church, loco Mr. Matts. Swallowe this day chose into place of Mr. E. C. deed, he to preach every Ld’s day in ye afternoon at St. Margaret’s Church, and to read divine service, and perform other duties of the church as Mr. S. did for 40l. a yr. in money, and such ffees and church duties as Mr. S. had, and on such conditions as Mr. S. had the same.”
—again— “1637, May 12th at request of Mr. John Arrowsmith, B. D, min. and prcher of Word of God St. Nics. chap. K’s Lyn, on account of indisposition of body, and for his convenience, ordrd. ye Wednesday Lector in St. Margt’s shall be translated to St. Nic. chap. till Michs. next”
—again— “1641, Oct. 8th. Mr. Mayor to treat with Mr. Arrowsmith concerng. a minr. for St. Margt’s church, [in the room of Mr. Gatford] and Mr. Mayor to get some other minr. to preach on Sundays till we can be provided with a min. and they yt preach shall have for every S. 10s.”
[It appears that the place of minister of St. Nicholas’ was then preferable to that of St. Margaret’s; otherwise Mr. Arrowsmith, no doubt, would have had the offer of the latter]—again— “1644, Sept 29th. Mr. John A. minister St. Nic. chap, elected to ye Synod, and elected Mr. St. John’s Coll. Cambridge, by ye pliamt: discharged.”
He was succeeded about a fortnight after, by Mr. Thomas Hoogan. But Mr Arrowsmith continued long after to be highly respected here, as appears by their applying to him when in want of ministers, and accepting those whom he recommended. Mr. W. Falkner, Fellow of Peter House, came here as late as 1658, upon his recommendation, and that of Dr. Tuckney. We are assured that Dr. Tho. Goodwin, afterwards the memorable president of Magdalen College, Oxford, was at this time lecturer of Trinity Church, and fellow of Catherine Hall, in Cambridge, of which Arrowsmith, who was afterwards successfully invited to Lynn, was then likewise a fellow: there can therefore be no doubt of his being the very person who was now applied to from this town. (See Aikin’s Biography.) Granger speaks of him as follows— “John Goodwin, minister of Coleman Street, was a man who made more noise in the world than any person of his age, rank, and profession. He had the hardiness to introduce Arminianism among the Calvinists, which he bravely and jealously defended, both in his sermons and writings. It is hard to say whether he displayed more courage in attacking or repelling the enemy. It is certain he had a very powerful body to deal with, as it was said that he was a man by himself: was against every man, and had every man almost against him. His genius seemed to be adapted to polemical divinity, and to an age of faction and tumult. He was appointed by the council of war to attend upon Charles I. a little before his execution. This was deemed an insult upon fallen majesty; as no man more eagerly promoted, or more zealously defended the murder of the king. His discourses and writings on this subject were well remembered at the restoration; but it was also remembered, that he had sown the seeds of division among the sectaries, which is supposed to have saved his life.”
He was educated at Cambridge, and his sermons were much admired for their elegance and erudition. Brit. Biogr. 6. 378.—He died in 1665, aged 72. Of his matrimonial adventure we have met with the following anecdote— “The gentlewoman who afterwards was his wife, coming with her two elder sisters to hear him preach at Hareby, a village not far from Bullingbrook, the clerk, after sermon, insinuating himself into their company, asked them, which of them could like such a man as Mr. H. for a husband? The two elder declared against it, (though they could not but commend his preaching,) and gave their reasons drawn from the poor circumstances ministers’ widows were often left in: but the younger said she should think herself happy if she might have such a man, though she begged her bread with him. This was carried to Mr. H and she became his wife. She survived him [ten years] but never wanted while she lived.” (Nonconf. Mem. vol. 2.)
Mr. Palmer dates the commencement of his residence and ministry here in 1647, in which he is mistaken, as appears both from the document above referred to, and also from the old parish-book of South Lynn, which prove beyond all doubt, that he was here in 1646.—The former contains the following curious memoranda— “Oct. 2. 1646: ord. yt Wedn. 14th be a day set apart for public thanksgiving to God for his so mercifully freeing this town fr ye contagious disease of the Plague. Notice to be given to sevl minrs by Mr. ald. John May.—It is this day also agreed and ordered that the sevl. ministers of this Town, viz. Mr. Almond, Mr. Hoogan, Mr. Toll, Mr. Leech, and Mr. Horne if he please, shall every one of them be intreated in his turn weekly at the Hour appointed to pray every morning before the Hall here with the company of this House by the space of a quarter of an hour or thereabout; and that every one of the aldermen or comn. Counsell that shall at any time be absent frm. such Prayer shall pay for his respective fine or brogue 6d. to the use of the Poor, and yt. ys. order as to the sd. payment of 6d. for ye sd. absence from prayer shall be inserted in the Table of ancient orders.”
—again— “9, Dec. 1646: Whereas Mr. Almond, Mr. Hoogan, Mr. Toll, and Mr. Leech, ye now ministers of this Burgh did lately present a Petition unto ys. House concerning an order lately made in ys House for Prayer amongst ourselves by them and Mr. Horne: and this day 3 of ym came into this House to desire an answer thereof; which said Petition was now plainly read, wherein were some dark sentences and words not well understood, whereupon ys House hath intreated and nominated Mr. Hudson, Mr. Slany, Mr. Bassett, and Mr. Wormell, aldermen; Mr. Barnard Utber, Mr. Williams, Mr. Scott, and Captain Joshua Greene, a committe for that purpose, giving ym power forthwith to request all and every the said ministers to meet together, to make explanation of ye sd dark words and sentences; and then to draw up such an answer thereof as they shall conceive fitting, and tender it to this House, that being approved on may be returned in writing.”
—again— “14. Dec. 1646: Whereas the last Hall day the ministers’ Petition was twice read, and referred to a Committee to consider thereof and certify the several explanations of dark sentences by ye sd ministers. It is ys day upon the report of ye sd. committee ord. that Mr. Edward Robinson shall return this answer to ye sd ministers, that ys House doth adhere to their former vote, mentioned in a former order of ys House.”
That Mr. Man was settled here as early as 1593 appears from the following passage in the old record already quoted—“1593 Mar. 18. John Man B.A. Bennet Coll. Cambr. chose usher, wages 10l. a yr.”—Afterwards we have it noted—“1597, Sept. 26. John Man. M.A. eld. M Gr. Sch. loco Nic. Eston M A.” “Bartholomew-day (said Locke) was fatal to our church and religion, in throwing out a very great number of worthy, learned, pious, and orthodox divines.” He was doubtless more diligent and laborious in his ministry than any we have here now, or, perhaps, ever had since his time, of any denomination. His memory ought therefore to be revered. Some of them are controversial, in answer to Dr. Owen, Dr. Kendal, Mr. Grantham, &c. Others are funeral sermons preached at different times, at Lynn and other parts of Norfolk: one is a narrative of the penitent behaviour of Rose Warne of Lynn, a condemned malefactor; another is a Farewell to his parishioners at the time of his ejection in 1662; another a Poem, entitled The Divine Wooer, at the end of which is a long Epitaph drawn up by him for his friend and parishioner, Thomas Lilly, Great Great Grandfather of our Sir Martin Browne Folkes. Most of the rest are pious practical discourses, all very creditable to his memory.—From the Farewell to his Parishioners, it appears that the income of his vicarage was 80l. a year, equal we suppose to 500l. of our money. That income he sacrificed for conscience’ sake. It is not easy to conceive what should deter him from taking orders unless it were that he had some serious scruples as to the terms of ordination, which, to say the least of them, seem to be hard enough of all conscience. At his death he bequeathed his books to the town library: and he also bequeathed a handsome legacy to the corporation, as trustees, to lay out the interest of it in apprenticing poor children; which it is presumed, is still applied to the same benevolent purpose. Who immediately succeeded Mr. Horne, as minister or pastor over his people, seems uncertain. We have heard, a Mr. Williams mentioned as holding that situation previously to the settlement here of the elder Rastrick, which seems to have taken place about 1710 or 12. Whether he was here during the whole of the intervening period we cannot say: Nor do we know any thing further of him. The exact number of his publications the present writer has not been able to learn. The following were the titles of some of them—A Commentary on the seven first Chapters of Revelation, 4to London, 1678, pp. 935.—A Call to Repentance, &c. 8vo London, 1682 pp. 438.—Calling and Election: or many called but few chosen. 12mo. Lond. 1674—Needful councel for lukewarm christians, 4to Lond.—The object of love, &c. to the end we may love one another. 12mo. London. Dugdale does so repeatedly, in different parts of his works, and so does Parkin, if our memory does not fail us— “I have seen (says he, in one place) a memorandum wrote by Gybon Goddard Esq. Serjeant at Law and recorder of Lynn, who was a curious collector of Antiquities, and died in 1671, wherein he observes that in his time in digging to set down a new sluice a little beneath Magdalen fall, which is about half a mile from Magdalen bridge, on the Marshland side, there was found about 16 foot, within soyle a grave stone of about 8 feet long, and a cart wheel near to it. The grave-stone (he adds) is now in Magdalen Church Yard.”
They run thus— “Orders to be observed at the Society when met together—1. That there be a meeting of the several members every Lord’s day evening, after divine service, for religious conference, to be managed in manner following, viz. One of the Stewards with the whole society kneeling, to read the Collect for the second Sunday in Advent, adding thereunto any particular Collect according to his discretions (but he shall make choice of no other but those appointed for Sundays and holidays) and if a chapter be read out of the N. Test, then the Society to discourse of the contents of that chapter, aiming thereby each to improve himself in the undertaking thereof, and in the more lively application thereof to his own heart and conscience, and to render the influence more powerful to the mind both of himself and his brethren.—That every member at his going away, according to his ability, put what he please into the poor-box, which is heartily wished may be done not grudgingly or of necessity, but with joy and alacrity, for God loveth a cheerful giver: After which to conclude with two Collects, one of the Steward’s choice, and the last to be that in the Communion Service, (Prevent us O Lord, &c.) Moreover, beside the forementioned general method of reading and discoursing the scriptures in order, any member hath the liberty to raise any argument of a spiritual or religious nature, provided it be not above our reach and capacity, nor leading to doubtful disputations, but such as may conduce to general benefit and advantage, to counselling the doubtful, and instructing the ignorant, confirming the weak, and encouraging one another to run with patience the race that is set before us. But matters of controversy to be avoided, especially state affairs, as not belonging to us, who pretend to be instructed by that grace of God that teacheth us to be holy without blame before him in love. Wherefore upon deliberate consideration, reflecting upon the confusions and distractions that have been raised by societies on such occasions, it is ordered with full consent, that whosoever shall pretend to start any thing of debate or controversy concerning state affairs, after the first or second admonition, shall be excluded from the society: also all discourse of matters of trade, or other temporal concerns to be forborne.—2ndly, that every respective member shall have liberty to recommend an object of charity to the Stewards, to whom a satisfactory account being given of the particular circumstances of those unto whom they, with the consent of the rest of the society, or the greater part of them, shall give out of the aforesaid collections as necessity shall require.—3rdly, That every one that is absent from the society at their meeting together, if on a frivolous occasion, such as shews any backwardness to attend, or a mean and slight esteem for the society in conformity to these rules and orders, shall incur the penalty of 6d. to be paid into the bank for defraying the necessary charges of the society, for the convenience of meeting; and if a Steward, one shilling: but if any person’s absence appears to be involuntary, as from a master’s restraint upon a servant, or otherwise, not proceeding from sloth or backwardness, a sufficient answer being given to the Steward who shall enquire the cause, the said answer shall suffice for his absence: but if any one be absent four times together without a very sufficient cause, he is to be looked upon as dissaffected to the society until he gives the Stewards satisfactory reasons for his said absence.—4thly, That upon the Lord’s day next before Whitsunday there shall be an election of Stewards for the year ensuing, to be made in manner following, viz. Every member of the Society to put into a bason two tickets, whereon are written the names of the two persons he desires may be stewards: that is to say, the one name on the one, and the other on the other, each of the present stewards to have duplicate votes, each putting in four tickets, having on two of them the names of the one, and on the other two the names of the other person they prefer for stewards: then the tickets being told over by the old stewards, those two persons whose names are written on the greatest number of tickets are the Stewards elect; and if at any time an equality shall happen, then the determination to be made by lot.—5thty, That for the admitting a new member into the Society it is requisite to be introduced by one of the members, who is to accompany him into the Society at their usual meeting, where giving an account of the knowledge he hath of his life and conversation, if approved of by the Stewards and the rest of the Society, the rules and orders to be read to him; and after one month, if none of the society make objection against it, he is to be admitted, by subscribing his name to these rules and orders, expressing his approbation of them and resolution to live up to them.—6thly, That six times a year every member meet at St. Margaret’s Church to take the holy sacrament together, extent upon unavoidable hinderance.—7thly, That the major part of the society shall upon any necessary occasion have power to make a new rule or order with the approbation of a minister of the Church of England, which shall be equally binding with the present upon every member of the Society.—8thly, That the rules and orders be read over at least six times every year at the usual meeting of the Society, and every member have liberty to take a copy thereof.—9thly, That the person who hath the greatest number of lots next the Stewards, shall be deputy in the absence of one of the Stewards.—These are the Rules and Orders of a Religious Society in King’s Lynn, under the patronage of the reverend Doctor Littel, Anno Domini 1704.”
The author has more materials relating to this remarkable society, but what has been here given throws a sufficient light upon its character and its objects. Such a society in every parish would be no way dangerous to either church or state. It must not here be concealed, that his reputed heterodoxy, especially in regard to the Athanasian trinity, might also be among the causes, if it was not indeed the very chief cause of his failure in the point of ecclesiastical preferment. That he was decidedly averse to Athanasianism, and made no secret of that aversion, is very well known; a remarkable instance of which was related by his son Dr. Edmd. Pyle in a letter to one of his female friends, dated August 4. 1747; a copy of which has fallen into the hands of the present writer. The passage alluded to is as follows— “My F—r has been excessive hoarse and stuffed and oppressed on the lungs, and after physic had in vain attempted his relief, he went abroad, the weather being fine, to view his new ch—h, [1015b] where they are putting up a magnificent p—lp—t, as the finishing stroke. There the sight of the Tr—ty in Un—ty emblematically displayed in the front pannel of the said p—l—p—t put him into such a passion, that you would have sworn, that with distemper and indignation he must have been suffocated: but G—d be praised nature got the better both of the m—st—y and the disease, and the conflict produced, what medicines could not, a free and large expectoration, which was succeeded by a fit of as clear and audible raving, as a man would wish to hear from a sound protestant divine, on so provoking an occasion.”
This letter-writer to be sure was an arch and wicked dog; but there can be no doubt of his statement being founded on fact: and when it is considered how their reputed heterodoxy affected Clarke, Whiston, and others of Pyle’s eminent contemporaries, it will not appear very strange that his rewards were not equal to his merits, or that his preferments were few and inconsiderable. This was St. Margaret’s then rebuilt. The correspondence between these two eminent men did not close here. It is certain that some letters afterwards passed between them, as appears from the fragment of Mr. Pyle’s answer to one he had received from the primate, and which reads thus— “I no sooner received the great favour of your Grace’s kind and good Letter than I wrote to the person intimated therein, and deferred my dutiful answer to it no longer than till I was enabled to acquaint you with his truly filial reply, that he should never find greater pleasure than that of complying with every desire of a father, and the honorable friends of that father.—Meantime I am sorry for the ill state of my friend C—st—l, which gives occasion to this affair. I loved the man: my Sons honoured him much. I thank your Grace for your very good remembrance of me and my Sou. Age, my Lord, confines me at home, when yet good providence blesses me with eyes and faculties, still enabling me to read, and even to preach once a day generally. I read every thing and make use of the glorious prerogative of private judgment, the birth-right of protestants. I pass free sentiment upon Mddltn, and on all his opponents stronger or weaker. So I shall upon what he is going to say on the only piece of that great man of L— that ever gave me pleasure.—I read Disquisitions, and when I’ve done fall to my prayers and wishes, that the good thing desired may be put into the hands of the able, knowing, and impartial, that no church-tinkers may be suffered to mend some few holes and leave others open, at which some vital part of the noble christian scheme may run out and be lost. But no wish of mine is so ardent as that your Grace may live with that excellent [mind [1018]] of Tlltsn, which is in you, to preside in, to direct this same good thing, and bring it to perfection.”
Of the residue of this letter we know nothing: this part of it sufficiently shews whereabout Mr. P. and the Primate stood as to the points afterwards agitated in the Confessional &c. This epistle is supposed to have been written about 1753, three years before the death of Mr. P. and four years before that of the Abp. than whom it does not appear that a worthier prelate ever occupied the See of Canterbury. There is a word wanting here in the MS. Copy, which probably was mind or spirit; alluding it is supposed to Tillotson’s liberal mindedness, and wish to get rid of the Athanasian Creed, &c. Something is here wanting; vacate perhaps or relinquish. The same MS. volume, or Collection, from which the above has been taken, contains the following curious fragment or P.S. of a letter of the date of 1742 from the same respectable prelate, to the same correspondent, as we presume, for it has no superscription.— “I find by the direction of one of your correspondents, whose hand and head I guess at, how great a man a C—n of S— must be, that his titles must follow him into all countries. The other, whose hand and head I pretty well know, has more sense than to adorn the outside of his letters in that manner.—I remember a story of a clergyman of great form in Surry, who directed a post letter to Abp. Sancroft—To his Grace, my Lord Abp. of Canterbury, Primate of all England and Metropolitan:—which letter a man famous for imitating hands happened to see brought to the post-office at Epsom, and finding a little room left after the word metropolitan, added the words to boot, which caused great wrath in old Sancroft, and a thorough reprimand to the poor man next time he appeared at Lambeth, who could not distinguish the addition from his own hand. B. W.”
Of those letters of his which have fallen in this writer’s way all are of a date posterior to his removal from this town, except that which contains the account of the contested election in 1747, of which we have already given large extracts.—Of the rest the most remarkable is dated 24. July 1756, at Chelsea, where the Bp. of Winchester has a town house, with whom he then resided as his chaplain. Who his correspondent was does not appear; but he writes to him as follows— “Dear Sir, I returned to this place a few days ago from Winch—r, after taking possession of a warm stall in the Cathedral, and a very good house in the close. My going thither was delayed a fortnight, by a feverish disorder, attended with some very odd and disagreeable circumstances of inflamation, from which I thank God I am very well recovered. I find that as my constitution is, I must, now and then, sacrifice something in point of health, to the plenty, that flows in this noble house. However I am not worse upon the whole, than when I lived in Norfolk: in that respect and all others I am sure I am a thousand times better. Winch—r and all the large towns in that county were full of Hessian troops, whose appearance and sober behaviour was pleasing. I saw them in several different circumstances. First In their military Exercise, out of the City, in a spacious plain on the top of a hill, every fine morning. Secondly. At their devotions, on Sundays, in the Body of the Cathedral; which was a most grave and edifying sight. Their service, (both of such as are Lutherans, and of others of them that are Calvinists,) is in the way of our Dissenters—1st. a psalm, very long, in which every Soldier bore his part; each having a book, and behaving in that, and the other parts of the service, with all possible decency and attention. I saw about 700 each time that I was present. They sing very well. The psalm was set by a Serjeant of Granadiers, a noble stately fellow; who had a vast pair of whiskers like birch brooms. All their granadiers wear this distinction in their faces. When the psalm was ended, a very solemn divine (tho’ he had no whiskers) in a black cloak, gave us a sermon in their language; after a prayer, which ended with the Lord’s Prayer; at which they all went down on their knees on the floor. The preacher used no great action, but he had a very great voice, great earnestness, and was in a great sweat. Then followed another psalm, much shorter than the first, and all was closed with a prayer shorter also than the former.—There was a Collection of money, but for what purpose I know not certainly. There were few of the common-people but gave something. It is said to be made for the preacher’s service, by some; others say it has relation to the Sacrament, which they receive monthly; but I saw not the administration of it. The generals and officers were all present and behaved with all seriousness. The officers are very genteel and frugal; yet generous enough to give the ladies of the place a Ball once a week.—Another circumstance I saw them in was at a Ball, in a garden, from 6 to 9 o’Clock, which was by far the prettiest entertainment I ever was at. The Dean of Winch—ter has a fine and large Garden, which is a place of resort on summer evenings, for all the persons of fashion (which are many) in the city. It consists of a large lawn, at the end of which, (or rather through which) passes a quick river, that has a Chinese bridge over it, and is formed into two cascades, as it runs along. There is also a large grove, fine walks of gravel, and two or three alcoves. Here the officers desired leave to introduce the music, and give the ladies a Ball. The Dean consented, and all the gentry and quality in and about the place were put together there. And for the three hours I spake of, 25 couples danced on the lawn on one side of the river, the musicians standing on the other. There were 25 hands, and all good ones. They have learnt at home the tunes of our English Dances, which are practised there in compliment to our sovereign and country. In the dancing one could not but observe, how true the officers stept both to the time and tune: whereas the dancing of the English gentlemen, and most of the ladies too, was what one may call Romps run mad. The day before I came away, the troops from all the towns were encamped, about a mile and a half from the city, which afforded me a mornings amusement of the most agreeable sort. The Dean and Prebendaries, who have each of them a good income; [and I’ll assure you, most of ’em, live up to it, as Peg B— said of the Week’s Preparation] have done these Foreigners honour at their Tables with high gentility. They almost all come to the Cathedral, and one of ’em who sat next me, by some broken English of his, and some bad latin, both of his and mine, was made to understand all the ceremonies that were performed by and upon me in the church, on the sunday I took possession. He seemed better satisfied with all other things, than with our surplices, scarves, and scarlet hoods; which he looked upon with somewhat of an evil eye: For, you know, that from the days of good Q. B—ss to these days some of the protestants abroad have objected to our Ecclesiastical Dresses as Popish—and some even of our own Divines have boggled at them in her time.—They have brought no women with them, but a few of the soldiers wives, who are very clean, large, and fleshy. They put on when they get abroad a Straw Bonnet, which shades and almost hides their faces, and a callico or printed linen cloak, very long and full.—The persons at Winch—r of the female sex [like those of another place that we know] are all, or would all pass for, fine gentlewomen. And I could not for my life help being diverted with a question asked by the simple Hessian Women concerning them. Pray, said they, have you none but ladies of quality in this place? The answer was, that there was but one lady of quality [Lady Jernegan] in the city. Well, said they, we thought they were all such; for in our country, they who are always dress’d out, and going from home, are ladies of quality: so we thought that ye were all quality.—One of the superior officers quartered at Southampton (where the resort of company to drink and bathe in the sea water, has benefited the place and spoilt the people) seeing all the gentlewomen of the town gadding abroad o’mornings, to the public rooms, or idle visits, bought up all the Thimbles he could get; and one morning when abundance of them were together in a public place, he presented each with a Thimble, saying, it must needs be, that they wanted the requisites to employ them properly at home, or they would not be constantly from home. This pretty reproof has produced a great deal of mirth, but very little reformation, that I heard of, among the Southhampton Quality.—The emoluments of churchmen as well as others who live in Hampshire, [at Winch—r especially] ought to be good. For (put all articles together that belong to house-keeping) and things are dearer there, than with you, by 7 and 6 pence in the pound. There is very little difference between the rate of eatables, coals. &c. there and in London. Fowls of all sorts, pigs, rabbets, are very high priced, and fish is 6d. a mouthful, tho’ Southampton is so near. For the fine folks that come down from London have in a very few years more than doubled the rate of that sort of food, even upon the place. But the worst circumstance belonging to both that city and county, is that there are many Roman Catholicks. One of that persuasion would have hired my prependal house at a considerable rent, for the term of the bishop’s life, till the end of which I shall not fit it up for my own use. I sent such an answer that I shall ne’er be applied to again by any body of that stamp: ‘any other person of fashion shall have it for half the money, and be thanked into the bargain.’ In looking over what I have writ, I find I have filled a sheet; this surprizes me, for I did not intend to fill more than a side. If you have as much patience as you used to have, may be you have read it all. You can’t do a more acceptable thing than to write to me, at any time, and at this time, it will be a sort of charity, I being greatly dejected in spirit, at the state of public affairs. Our Common prayer says, what is entirely true, ‘There is none that fighteth for us but only God:’ and I wish I could be sure we had him on our side. God bless us all. God bless you and yours, and all that you and I love, and that love us—But, as Falstaff says, ‘a pox on all cowards.’—So says your most humble servant, E. P.”
To the preceding we beg leave to subjoin the following letter, or rather fragment of a letter. That it is from the same hand seems sufficiently certain from both external and internal evidence. It was written in 1756, probably to his father, and it might be one of the last, if not the very last that passed between them. We insert it the more readily because so honourable to Bp. Hoadly’s memory, and not otherwise to that of Dr. F.— “Dr. Thackery, who keeps a school an Harrow on the Hill, has one living and 14 children. A man bred at Eaton, and a great scholar in the Eaton way, and a good one every way, a true Whig, and proud to be so by some special marks of integrity. He was candidate for the Headship of King’s, and would have beat all men but George, and George too, if Sir R. W. had not made George’s promotion a point. Since this disappointment he took the school of Harrow to educate his own and other people’s children; where he has performed all along with great reputation. The Bp. of W. never saw this man in his life; but had heard so much good of him, that he resolved to serve him some way of other, if ever he could—but said nothing to any body. On friday last he sent for this Dr. T. and when he came into the room, my lord gave him a parchment, and told him he had long heard of his good character, and long been afraid he should never be able to give him any serviceable proof of the good opinion he had long conceived of him: That what he had put into his hands was the archdeaconry of Surry, which he hoped would be acceptable to him, as he might perform the duty of it yearly, at the time of his leisure in the Easter Holidays. Dr. T. was surprized and overcome with this extraordinary manner of doing him a favour, that he was very near fainting as he was giving him institution.—Tis 130l. a year, with dependencies that may bring in a deal of money.—1756.”
What led the author to this supposition or conclusion was an anecdote said to have been written by Dr. H. himself; in these words— “In Turner de morbis cutaneis See Wts. related by Langius of a woman longing to bite a baker’s shoulder.—Somewhat like this was the case of Mrs. Forest the wife of an alderman (or baliff as they are called in Scotland) of Haddington in East Lothian; who having had 4 or 5 daughters, and then with child of a boy, and lying by her husband awake, while he was fast asleep, in a summer-morning, his shoulder lying bare, she long’d to taste of it, and after a great desire could not forbear fixing her teeth. He waking jump’d out of bed thinking she was mad, but being soon convinced of what was the matter, easily forgave the fact, but would not venture a second trial. After dressing and taking care of the slight wound, he soon after made a jest of the news to his companions at the tavern: but while they were a whetting, news was brought him that his wife was miscarried of a boy; upon which he merrily said, ‘d—mn it, if I had known it was a boy her longing should have been satisfied.’—This I had from the woman herself upon enquiry: for the story was notorious about the time I was born, 1669. G. H.—M. Dr.”
Those traits in his character have been often elucidated by divers well known anecdotes, two or three of which we will here take the liberty of inserting.—One of them is given in a letter of Dr. Pyle, if we are not mistaken, of the date of 1752, addressed perhaps to his father.— “Your old friend Sir W. B. came to my Lord Bp. of Winch—r some weeks ago, and told him that he waited upon him for a pension payable out of his estate to the College of Physicians. My Lord said, he never heard of any such pension paid out of his revenues; and as to an estate of his own, he had none. Yes, says the knight, you are chargeable herewith out of such an estate. My Lord said, he had no estate any where of his own, and as Bp. of W. he had no such estate as was named. Bp. of W—! quoth the knight; why then lam wrong; you are not the person. I wanted Sir Cecil Bishop, and they told me he lived here. Is Sir C. B. a clergyman, says my Lord? No, says the knight. Why then Sir you might have seen your mistake immediately, and so your Servant. This dog certainly wanted to see how the Bp. look’d, and thence judge of his being likely to live or not, on account of some estate that somebody he knows, is to buy or renew, who hold of the Bp. of W. and nobody but a man of his parts and assurance could, have got to the sight of him;” [July 1752.]
Another anecdote of him is related by Bp. Warburton in a Letter to Hurd; dated Prior Park, Nov. 18th 1767.— “When you see Dr. Heberden pray communicate to him an unexpected honour I lately received. The other day word was brought me from below, that one Sir William Browne sent up his name, and would be glad to kiss my hand. I judged it to be the famous physician, whom I had never seen, nor had the honour to know. When I came down into the drawing room I was accosted by a little, round, well fed gentleman, with a large muff in one hand, and a small Horace open in the other, and a spying-glass dangling in a black ribbon at his button. After the first salutation he informed me that his visit was indeed to me, but principally, and in the first place, to Prior Park, which had so inviting a prospect from below: and he had no doubt but on examination it would sufficiently pay the trouble he had given himself of coming up to it on foot. We then took our chairs; and the first thing he did or said, was to propose a doubt to me concerning a passage in Horace, which all this time he had still open in his hand. Before I could answer he gave me the solution of this long misunderstood passage: and in support of his explanation had the charity to repeat his own paraphrase of it in English verse, just come hot, as he said, from the brain. When this and chocolate were over, having seen all he wanted of me, he desired to see something more of the seat; and particularly what be called the Monument, by which I understood him to mean, the Prior’s tower, with your inscription. Accordingly I ordered a servant to attend him thither; and, when he had satisfied his curiosity, either to let him out from the park above into the down, or from the garden below into the road. Which he chose I never asked; and so this honourable visit ended. Hereby you will understand, that the design of all this was to be admired. And indeed he had my admiration to the full; but for nothing so much, as for being able at past eighty to perform this expedition on foot, in no good weather, and with all the alacrity of a boy, both in body and mind.”
[Before we dismiss this anecdote, it ought to be observed that the bishop was somewhat incorrect in two instances at least: 1st. in representing our knight as a little man; 2ndly. in saying that he was then past eighty. Those who knew and remember him, speak of him as a tall man; and it is certain that he wanted several weeks of seventy six when he visited Prior Park.]—The next anecdote and the last that we shall here relate, came from the late Thomas Hollingworth, many years a respectable bookseller in this town, and who settled here under Dr. Browne’s patronage. He used to say that the first time he had to make out his bill after the doctor had been dubbed a knight, he wrote Sir William Browne debtor to Tho. Hollingworth. When he delivered it into the knight’s hand, he looked at it a short time, and then looking at him said, Mr. H. you might have said the honourable Sir Wm. Browne. I beg your pardon Sir Wm. replied the bookseller, but upon my word I did not know that it was customary to prefix to the name of a knight the word honourable. As to that, rejoined the knight, tho’ it be not customary, it would yet have been pleasing.—That to be sure was childish and ridiculous enough; but we believe that with all his eccentricities and foibles, Sir. Wm. B. was far from being one of the most disreputable or unworthy characters that were to be found among the gentlemen of this town and its vicinity during his long residence here. The rough draught, or fragment of a translation of the inscription is longer, but the rest the present writer could not well make out.—The above seems enough to give the reader a pretty just idea of the tenor of the whole.—Before we entirely dismiss this article, or take our final leave of Sir Wm. we should not omit to notice the much admired impromptu, or extemporaneous epigram produced by him when a regiment of horse happened to be quartered at Oxford, and the king having purchased the noble library of Bp. Moore, made a present of it to the university of Cambridge. The epigram was an answer to one that had been made by a Dr. Trapp, a witty, torified clergyman, on that occasion, in these words, “The king, observing with judicious eyes
The wants of his two universities;
To Oxford sent a troop of horse, for why?
That learned body wanted loyalty:
To Cambridge he sent books, as well discerning,
That that right loyal body wanted learning.”
Which drew from Sir Wm. the following reply, said so have been much commended, even by Dr. Johnson. “Contrary methods justly George applies,
To govern his two universities;
To Oxford is dispatched a troop of horse,
Since Tories own no argument like force;
To Cambridge Ely’s learned books are sent,
Since Whigs admit no force like argument.”
The loose livers, (or whores and rogues of the parish, as some would call them) used to bring their bastard children to him to christen, or make them christians, although they discovered no desire or inclination to live soberly, righteously, and godly, or become christians themselves. This he thought very improper and objectionable, and no less than a direct profanation of a religious rite; and therefore refused to christen such children, unless their parents made a profession of repentance, and solemnly promised to forsake those irregular and vicious courses, and lead for the future virtuous and pious lives. Some willingly complied with his requirement, upon whose children therefore he performed the said rite. Others could not be prevailed upon to submit to this requirement, for which reason he left their children unchristened, which gave great umbrage, not only to their parents and such like folk, but even to his own ecclesiastical superiors, up to the very bishop—all blamed him for having any scruples about such frivolous, harmless, and indifferent matters as these. Some also even of the most decent among his parishioners disapproved of his refusing to christen the said bastard children, it being, as they said, punishing the poor things for the sins of their parents. Forbidding those of loose or immoral lives to come to the Lord’s Table was another circumstance that gave great offence, and caused him no small trouble. One of these was the greatest man in the parish, or head Squire of the place; and a very fierce and dashing fellow he certainly was. He, by way of retaliation and revenge, set himself about picking holes in Mr. R’s coat. They were not indeed of an immoral, but rather an uncanonical nature. Mr. R. had allowed a certain worthy person to partake of the Lord’s Supper sitting instead of kneeling. He also had not made a point of wearing the surplice while performing the burial service and some other duties. He had likewise taken the liberty of using the word honour instead of worship in the marriage service, and moreover of curtailing occasionally the liturgic part of the public service. These deviations were magnified into serious misdoings, and looked upon by his superiors in a very unfavourable light. Wherefore his conduct was afterwards more closely scrutinized; and from the examination and confession of his church-wardens the following articles of accusation were extracted, upon which he was proceeded against in the ecclesiastical court—1. That he did not read the Litany on Wednesdays and Fridays: 2. That he did not constantly wear the surplice in all his administrations: 3. That he did not usually administer the communion on Christmas-day, unless it fell on Sunday. Nor on Whit-Sunday. 4. That he did not read over the Canons and Articles twice a year. 5. That there were two children unbaptiz’d in the parish, which he refused to baptize. 6. That he was in the habit of conversing (or was on friendly terms) with one Mr. Richardson, an excommunicate person.—[Now this person was a worthy, pious dissenting minister, who had been persecuted for conscience sake, or for nonconformity, and excommunicated: and it was expected that no clergyman would converse or associate with him, unless he recanted: which was a sort of morality or religion which Rastrick did not approve, and therefore did not choose to practise.] The first time he appeared before the spiritual Court at Lincoln to answer to the above articles or charges, he had nothing to do but only to retain a Proctor against the next court-day. When that time came, it fell out to be the very day when king James’s Declaration for liberty of conscience came first down into the country, which must have been in the spring of 1687. At this his second appearance he found the court very much down in the mouth (as he expresses it) and far from the heat and violence in their proceedings that he expected. They did however proceed to business, and went over each of those charges, but came to no determination: not thinking perhaps the then aspect of things favourable enough to warrant a rigorous decision. However that was, Rastrick was now becoming more and more dissatisfied with the terms of conformity, and began soon to think of availing himself of the royal Declaration of liberty of conscience to quit his public station in the church, as he actually did before the close of that same year. After which he seems to have continued disengaged till 1701, when he settled with the Presbyterian congregation in this town. The author therefore requests the reader to correct his mistake at p. 1002 in dating Rastrick’s arrival here in 1710 or 11. Something similar has occurred here within the present year (1811,) only with this difference, that the disaffected gained their point, and obliged the minister to resign and withdraw; whereas Mr. R. maintained his ground and retained his situation, in spite of all opposition, to the last. But he was constantly supported by the most respectable part of the congregation. As a manuscript it is very curious for the neatness and smartness of the writing, especially as it appears to be written when the author was above 70 years of age. The beginning of the Preface, where matter corroborative of what was above suggested occurs, reads thus— “Perceiving that Antinomianism is in a great part grown to be the completion of the dissenting interest in England, as far as my observation reaches, to the great reproach of the reformation, and scandal of the opposers of its progress: and that many who pretend to be against it are yet fond of the doctrines and opinions on which it is founded; grounding all their divinity on the decrees of God alone, abstracted from his rule of government; falling in with the hypothesis of necessity and fate, on which Hobbes founded his Atheism: making all God’s government to be merely physical, to the destruction of all religion and morality: not enduring to hear of a justification by works in any sense, though it be undeniably a scripture doctrine and expression, Jam. 2. 24:—asserting such an imputation of Christ’s righteousness as is essentially and formally altogether unscriptural; and the like: by which means sinners are hardened in their sin, comforted against necessary fears conducive to their safety; charity, alms-deeds, and all good works at a fatal stop; people taught to presume without ground; calling a good conscience, or a consciousness of keeping Christ’s commandments, the building on a rotten foundation: tho’ Christ saith the contrary. Math. 7, 24. Learned, able, and faithful ministers rejected and discouraged, and illiterate persons that will indulge men in their soporiferous notions set up in their room—I say, perceiving and musing on these things, and exercised by a party of weak christians under the aforesaid impressions; understanding the state of christian doctrine amongst us, and the divided condition of the Churches about it, and casting my eyes upon that text in John 15, 10. as one of the plainest and fullest decisive of these controversies: so many thoughts sprung up in my mind upon it, that to preserve them. I immediately set pen to paper and wrote down above twenty of the following propositions before I took it off; to which the rest were quickly added. By which time I purposed to preach from that text, and lay them all before my own congregation who so much needed it: which I did with different success; viz. the usual distaste of the discontented party, but so much to the satisfaction and acceptance of others, my worthy friends, that I was greatly and constantly importun’d to present them to their eyes, as I had done before to their ears. And having been called to preach at a meeting of ministers at Nottingham on the 26th of June 1718, I made no particular preparation for it, but took a text out of the 22 chap. of Math. part of the parable of the marriage feast, the whole of which I had preached over at home, but now only so much of it as would afford me matter suitable to the whole congregation, both ministers and people. And being by my brethren desired to publish my Sermon, I was forced to deny them their request at that time, because what I had delivered was pick’d out of a great many discourses, and what I thought most proper for the auditory at that time only, but would have been a maining to the whole. Yet I did not despise their motion, nor lay aside all consideration of it. The importunity of some of them ran so much in my mind, that . . . I thought if I must write I might digest the matter of that sermon into the following Treatise, without deviating from the design of it, but rather conveniently adding to the principles of it, which I have done, hoping that they will accept it here, with the rest, by which the doctrines of that sermon are better stated, cleared, and confirmed, than they would have appeared to have been if that sermon had gone alone. So in this way I shall answer the desires of my friends at home and my reverend brethren abroad at once; and do what service I can to the Church of God before I die.”
The whole preface is very long, this being but a small part of it. But this is enough to shew that there was in this congregation a party that disapproved of his ministry, as well as another that highly approved of it, and that he experienced a great deal of discomfort from the former, who appear to have been very calvinistically or antinomianly inclined, and withal very contentious, as their descendants or successors have been almost ever since. Some of those thoughts relate to the Theory of Comets, which he supposed to be worlds in a state of conflagration and dissolution; and he thought it probable our Earth will hereafter become a comet and be seen as such in remote regions of the universe. This comet state of a Heavenly body he considered as a state of judgment, and indicating the previous apostacy and irreclaimable impenitence or rebellion of its rational inhabitants, which caused the very world they inhabited to be so devoted to destruction. Each of those devoted worlds, he thought, had its saviour and offers of mercy sent to it long previous to that awful and fatal catastrophe. Christ he believed to be the saviour only of this world, from which he draws some curious inferences favourable to his own system.—According to his notion the same comet could not be expected to appear twice in our system: nor would that, perhaps, even in this day, be very easily refuted. He was buried in St. Nicholas’ Chapel towards the west end, where his grave stone is still to be seen, with a long Latin Inscription or Epitaph, of which the following translation has been given many years ago by the late Dr. Thomas Gibbons, exclusive of two expressions here added. “Here lie the remains
of the revd. John Rastrick, M.A.
Born at Hackington near Sleaford
in the county of Lincoln;
and educated at Trinity-College in Cambridge.
He was formerly vicar of Kirkton
in the same county, fourteen years:
And afterwards, as he could mot comply
with some regulations of the Church of England
with a safe conscience,
Was an undefatigable preacher of the gospel
in this town twenty-six years
To a christian church in separation from the establishment.
He was a man of eminent piety,
charity, and modesty;
of approved integrity,
of remarkable study and pains;
And an adept in almost every part of learning,
But especially the mathematics.
He was a pleasant companion,
A truly christian divine,
An eloquent and powerful preacher,
A faithful and vigilant pastor,
An intrepid reprover of vice
And as warm an encourager of virtue.
Having finished his course,
Imbittered, alas! with many trials,
He joyfully yielded up his soul to God,
August 8, 1727. Aged 78.”
On a slip of paper, in his hand writing, pinned to a blank leaf fronting the title page are the following directions to his son— “My dear son William, I suppose you will be inclined when I am gone to publish the following Treatise called ‘Plain and Easy Principles, &c.’ If you do, I leave it to you to tell the world, that these are the notions that I am most inclined to; and that it was the division among the ministers at Salter’s Hall, that begat them, and put me upon a more deliberate perusal of Dr. Clarke’s and Mr. Jackson’s books, &c. as well as Dr. Waterland’s: and that my case was just the same with that of Mr. Peirce of Exeter, &c.—It’s probable that you may write an Epistle of your own to the Reader (and so stile it, as mine it stiled the Preface). In that Epistle you may account for my sentiments as now mentioned, and add what more of your own you please. But I would not have you publish my book till you have let some learned pious persons peruse it and give their approbation.—Mr. Sam. Wright’s thoughts you will find in his Letter, and my undigested notions in that matter, you will find in his said Letter before my book: if you can put them into order you may, and may punish them in the nature of an appendix: as also you may a great part of my last Thoughts about the Trinity and Son of God. Or let Mr. Wright put them in Order.”
N.B. The above words in italics have the pen drawn through them, and may therefore be considered as cancelled. See the preface to a modern poem called Sleep. Of those little poems, one is entitled The Dissolution; and as the name of Martha Rastrick is affixed to if, we may presume it was a present, perhaps a new years gift to that daughter. The greatest part of it we will here take the liberty of inserting, thought we have no reason to think that the author had the remotest idea of its publication. Yet as it cannot dishonour his memory, and has lain in MS. now nearly if not quite a hundred years, it may be placed here as a curious relic. It runs as follows— “Happy the man to whom the sacred Muse
Her nightly visits pays,
And with her magic rod
Opens his mortal eyes:
He nature at one glance surveys,
And past and future, near and distant views. I’m mounted on Fancy, and long to be gone
To some age or some world unknown,
Swifter than time and impatient of stay,
To the west, to the uttermost limits of day,
To the end of the world I’ll hasten away:
Where I may see it all expire
And melt away in everlasting Fire. ’Tis done! I see a flaming Seraph fly,
And light his Flambeau at the Sun;
Then hastening down to the curst globe
His blazing torch apply—
See the green forests crackling burn,
The oily pastures sweat
With intolerable heat:
The mines to hot volcanos turn;
Their horrid jaws extended wide,
The sulphurous contagion spread. Why do the aged mountains skip,
And little hills like their own sheep,
Like lambs, which on their grizzly head
Once wanton play’d?
Expanded vapours, struggling to the birth,
Roar in the bowels of the earth. And now the Earth’s foundations crack assunder,
Burst with subterraneous thunder.
Dusky flames and vivid flashes
Reduce the trembling Globe to ashes
Fiery torrents rolling down,
The naked valleys drown;
And with their ruddy waves supply
The channels of th’exhausted sea. Seas, to thin vapours boil’d away,
Leave their crooked channels dry:
And not one drop returns again,
To cool the thirsty Earth with rain. And must all Earth th’impartial ruin share?
Spare ye revengeful angels, spare!
Spare the Muses blissful seat:
Let me for Wickham’s peaceful walls intreat.
No, ’tis in vain: and Bodley’s spicy nest
Of learning too must perish with the rest;
—The Oracles of God alone
An hasty Angel snatch’d away,
And bore them high through parted flames
To the Eternal throne. Behold! fond soul, all thou didst once admire,
The objects of thy hope and thy desire;
Houses and lands and large estate;
The little things that make men great:
The empty trifles are no more,
But vanish all in smoke, scarce lighter than before. Was it for this the Statesman wrackt his thought?
Was it for this the Soldier fought?
While grumbling drums like thunder beat,
And clanging trumpets rais’d the martial heat? Now Nature is unstrung,
The Spheres their musick lose,
The Song of ages now
Ends in a solemn close.”
He had left Lynn the year before, so that the congregation had but four ministers in a hundred years, whose labours here were nearly of equal duration: J. Rastrick 26 years; W. Rastrick 25 years; A. Mayhew 25 years; W. Warner 24 years.—The Baptists, in little more than 40 years, have had at least half a score ministers, and the Methodists ten times as many. Coxe’s Memoirs of Walpole. Biographical account of Sir B. Keene, by Bailey Wallis D.D. who married his niece, a daughter of the rev. Venn Eyre, formerly lecturer of Lynn. Of their intellectual character, or mental endowments not much seems now to be known. The father being an alderman may furnish a sort of presumption, that he must have been a person of no common or mean parts: the mother has been spoken of as possessed of a well-cultivated mind; which seems to be corroborated by the following extract of a Letter from her to her son, the ambassador, in 1745, when this town assumed such a warlike appearance; as was observed at p. 920.— “This place, heretofore famous for the arts and blessings of peace, is now entirely in the guise of war. Every thing has a military air. The ditch before the walls is scoured; but there are unhappily so many hay-stacks just by, that a few Highlanders, or French, by casting two or three of them into the deepest part of it, might be masters of the town in about four hours. The bridge of St. Germans and those above it are to be cut down, if we hear any of the rebels have escaped through the Fens, and are coming towards us. But the river is fordable in many places, and several of them are near the town. The body of the people are formed into 5 regiments, which are commanded by proper officers, chosen out of the body politic. Those whose spouses bear rule over them being disposed into one regiment called greys. Those heroes spend their mornings and evenings in the Guildhall, there learning the trade of war, under able and experienced masters. No merchant sells deals, salt, pitch or tar, without a weapon by their side. Shopkeepers have taken to the sword, and divide their cags of soap with their blades. You can’t purchase a joint of meat, or a loaf of bread, or a pound of candles but of an armed man. Even clergymen are engaged in these death-doing measures. One bears a captain’s commission. Another is a sutler. Most of the fair and timerous persons of the other sex, who had any wits a while ago, have very few remaining now. An ancient Lady indeed of the illustrious house of the R— commands a fortress adjoining to the town-wall, in which are some veteran troops, natives of Spain. [1074] With these she supports herself and wonderfully animates her neighbours whose courage fails; and let the enemy come when they please, ’tis generally believed she will be in a condition to make a sally.”
“Bottles of Mountain Malaga.” On his promotion he was congratulated by his venerable relation, the elder Pyle, to which the bishop returned the following answer— “My dear uncle, I return you my hearty thanks for your kind congratulation on my advancement to the see of C. and was proud of shewing my respect and veneration for you by doing a small piece of service to so worthy a young man as my C. P. [cousin Philip] I hope these cold winds will not set you back again and I may once more visit you and survey you as I did then, in the light of an ancient prophet or patriarch. Truly I have often wished that my fortune had permitted me to have enjoyed you more than I have done, to have sat at your feet and suckt in the true unpoluted streams of goodness and religion, which you have poured forth for so many years, so much to your own reputation and the welfare of others. Be assured you leave a Nephew behind you who is determined to support the cause of Truth and Righteousness, and has courage enough to attack the f. [false] principles both of gt, and rn. [government and religion] that universally prevail among ch. Divs. [church Divines] With my most sincere Benediction I am. Dear Sir. your affectionate Nephew 28 Mar. 1752. E. C.”
A degree which was exactly the reverse of the initials of his name D.LL. Dr. H. was respectable in the line of his profession, not only as a practitioner, but likewise as a writer; though he was not rewarded according to his merit. Many of his works, at his death, were left in manuscript, most of which still remain in that state; but some have been since published, in addition to those that appeared in his life time. Of his published works the following are thought the most remarkable—1. “A paper on a puncture in the bladder,” inserted in the Phil. Trans. vol. 66.—2. “A paper on the disease called the mumps,” inserted in the Edinb. Phil. Trans.—3. “A paper on the use of mercury and opium,” published in Dr. Duncan’s Medical Commentaries.—4. “A Treatise upon Scrophula,” published in London by Dilly.—5. “A Treatise on the Eau-brink-Cut,” published at Lynn, in 1793.—6. “Observations on the Marsh remittent Fever and on the Water Canker, &c.” published by Mawman, London, 1801.—7. “Letters on the cause and treatment of the Gout, in which some digressive remarks on other medical subjects are interspersed;” published by Whittingham, Lynn, and Sold by Crosby, London, 1806. Before we close this brief memoir of Dr. Hamilton we may just observe that he, as was before said of Mr. Rastrick and another person, sometimes left his profounder studies and amused himself in writing verses, of which a specimen may be seen at the beginning of his “Observations on the Marsh Remittent Fever.” In the same work, at page 89, we also learn how long it was that Dr. Hepburn practised physic in this town, and consequently at what time he settled here, which appears to have been about the spring or early part of the year 1694, whence was about 25 years of age. This had escaped the author’s observation till after the memoir of Dr. Hepburn had been printed off, otherwise he would not have represented the doctor’s settlement here as taking place at or about the commencement the last century, which is six years at least later than the time when it did take place. This is mentioned here for the purpose of correcting that mistatement, and enabling the reader to fix the true date of Dr. Hepburn’s first settlement here.—The passage referred to in Dr. Hamilton’s book reads thus, “The late Dr. George Hepburn, who practised physic at Lynn upwards of 65 years, [1082] and whose medical ability, sagacity, and judgment, were equalled by few, and surpassed by none of his contemporaries, told me that he was so folly convinced of the great efficacy, as well as perfect innocence and safety of large doses of the Peruvian bark, that being attacked by an intermittent fever himself at an early period of his medical career in this town, and at a time when he had, in an epidemic season, a great deal of practice in the country, took at one dose an ounce of the Peruvian bark in powder, mounted his horse immediately after it, went to visit his patients, and had no more of his disease.”
During so extraordinary a course of practice and longevity he must have seen the whole population of the place buried two or three times over. Their godships or high mightinesses would do well however to be constantly upon their guard against that formidable natural enemy of theirs, the high bailiff of Marshland, who has before now overpowered and overthrown as potent beings as any of them. If they escape the mighty hug, or unfraternal embrace of this formidable adversary, this ancient lord and master and demon of this lower region, they may think themselves peculiarly fortunate, and need not fear afterwards to breathe the deleterious air of any other spot in Britain, or even in the very island of Walcheren itself. This female and virgin saint is said to have been born at Antioch in the 3rd century. Some say her father was a heathen priest, while others say that it was Theodosius patriarch of Antioch. All agree that she was a christian; and some assert that she was very beautiful, which excited in Olybius, preside of the east, under the Romans, a desire to marry her; but finding she was a christian, deferred it till he could persuade her to renounce her religion. Not being able to accomplish that object, he first put her to extreme tortures, and then beheaded her. She has the same office among the papists, as Lucina has among the heathens, viz. to assist women in labour: So she seems to be the patroness, or tutelar saint of the midwives. Her holiday, (20th July) is very ancient, not only in the Roman, but also in the Greek-church, who celebrate her memory under the name of Marina. She suffered in the year 278. [See Wheatly on the common Prayer, p. 69—also Mackerell’s History of Lynn, p. 4.]—Her victory over the Dragon by means of the cross has probably only a figurative meaning. Of the former and present state of this church, the following descriptions have been given by writers who had visited and examined it, and had consequently undertaken to give of it a correct account.— “This church (says Mackerell) deserves to be taken particular notice of, as it is of no mean extent, being a very large, stately, and magnificient pile, built, as most cathedrals in England are, in the perfect form of a cross, and contains in length within the walls, by mensuration 240 feet; in breadth, including the cross, 118 feet, and in height from the highest battlements 52 feet. About the middle or cross isle it is graced with a very fair and lofty Lanthorn, all covered with lead, mounted on four main arches within the body of the church, in which hangs the Clock-Bell, which may be heard all over the town. The height of this ornamental fabrick is 132 feet. It was neatly painted within with several coats of arms and other decorations in 1621.—At the west end is a tower of stone 82 feet high; on the outside of which towards the street, is placed a Moon-Dial, shewing the increase and decrease of that planet, with the exact hour of the day to all that pass by, actuated within by clock work, and new beautified and gilt in 1710. On this tower is a very high and regular spire, of timber, all covered with lead, resembling a pyramid, in height 193 feet; [but] in all, from the superficies of the ground, it is 275 feet, including the spindle of iron with a cross on the top, and under it a vane in form of a hand, both gilt, which was new set up in 1630; the former one having continued full 70 years, being erected in 1568. [rather 1558.] The model of the spire is surprizing. Near this [and parallel with it on the north side] is the Bell-Tower, built of freestone 86 feet high, in which formerly were five very large bells, of which the biggest was called the Margaret, and was for her curious sound one of the fairest of that kind, and might be heard (the wind favouring, as I have been assured) full ten miles distant. Others had likewise their distinct names, as the Trinity, the St. Thomas, &c. So christened, I suppose, as was usual before the reformation. But the biggest and the least of these were purposely broken, and with some addition cast into others, to make a ring of eight, which was effected in 1663.—This noble structure is illuminated with above 70 arched windows, and others, all formerly of painted glass, representing the pictures of saints in sacred scripture, with other holy men and women, martyrs and confessors; of which that high and lofty one on the south side and cross isle is [was] very remarkable, [exhibiting] as I am informed, the whole history of St. Margaret, the patroness of this church; and that circular one over the altar [containing] the genealogy of the kings of Israel, is now to be seen almost all entire, where also underneath the same are depicted the Town-Arms, and on the south windows in the Quire are still remaining several coats of arms in lively colours, and very fair.”
[In the time of the civil wars most of the painted glass in those windows was, it seems, taken down and replaced with white glass, the former being looked upon, by those who were then in power here, as savouring too much of popery and superstition. See Mackerell, p. 8, &c.—Of its present state Mr. Britton writes as follows. “The church was a large spacious structure, and though curtailed of its original dimensions, is still a noble pile. Internally it displays a nave, with ailes, which constitute the present place for service; a chancel or choir, with ailes; a transept and two towers at the west end. The roof is supported by 22 columns; of which those east of the transept are formed by a cluster of five shafts each. In this part of the building are some ancient carved stalls, and several flat monumental stones, with inscriptions; also some very large and fine brasses. At the east end is a circular window, with ten transverse mullions. This part of the church is divided from the transept by a wooden screen, which was erected in 1622. A lofty tower, or lanthorn, is said to have been originally at the intersection of the cross ailes; and a high spire to have surmounted one of the western towers. The latter display different styles of architecture, and the lower parts of them are very ancient. The buttresses of the angles to the southern tower consist of several small shafts of columns. The church formerly contained numerous brasses [1091a] and inscriptions, some of which remain.” [1091b]
This account, we presume, is pretty fair and correct as far as it goes, and our limits will not well allow us here to attempt any further enlargement. We will, however, just add, that the interior of this church is, for so large a building, kept in a style of uncommon cleanliness and neatness. Since Mr. Britton wrote this passage, an unprincipled and sacrilegious Sexton made much havoc among those brasses, many of which he carried away and sold; but being detected, he was so ashamed and frightened, that he actually went and hanged himself. See Beauties of England, vol. xi, page 293. From the period in which he flourished, the date of his canonisation, and the great regard then paid to the memory of new saints, (compared with the date of the original erection of this chapel,) it appears more than probable that the personage in question was St. Nicholas called Peregrinus, who became famous in Apulia, and of whom Jortin says— “He was a Greek, born in Attica. His parents were poor, and he had not learnt to read, or been bred to any trade. When he was eight years of age, his mother sent him out to take care of the sheep. From that time he began to sing aloud, Kyrie eleison, which he did night and day; and this act of devotion he performed all his life long. His mother not being able to make him leave it off, thought that he was possessed of the devil, and carried him to a neighbouring monastery, where the monks shut him up and chastised him, but could not hinder him from singing his song. He suffered punishment patiently, and immediately began again. Returning to his mother, he took a hatchet and a knife, and clambering up a mountain, he cut branches of cedar, and made crosses of them, which he stuck up in the highways, and in places inaccessible, praising God continually. Upon this mountain he built himself a little hut, and dwelt there sometime all alone, working perpetually. Then he went to Lepanto, where a monk joined himself to him and never forsook him. They passed into Italy, where Nicholas was taken sometimes for an holy man, and sometimes for a madman. He fasted every day until evening; his food was a little bread and water, and yet he did not grow lean. The nights he usually passed in prayer, standing upright. He wore only a short vest, reaching to his knees, his head, legs and feet being naked. In his hand he carried a light wooden cross, and a scrip at his side, to receive the alms that were given him, which he usually laid out in fruit, to distribute to the boys who went about with him, singing along with him Kyrie eleison. His oddities caused him to be ill used sometimes, even by the orders of the bishops. He performed, [as was said] various miracles, and exhorted the people to repentance. At last falling sick, and being visited by multitudes who came to beg his blessing, he died, and was buried in a Cathedral, with great solemnity: and according to custom (our author adds) a great number of miracles was wrought at his tomb.”
This is related under 1094, which we take to be the year of his death, or canonization. See Jortin Rem. Eccl. Hist. 5. 66. Such was our St. Nicholas: a more harmless and far better saint, without doubt, than Dominic and many others that might be mentioned; so that his memory, comparatively speaking, ought to be held in very high estimation. Had the wielders of the whitening brush totally effaced this impious representation, or had the reformers of the time of Edward the sixth, or of Charles the first completely obliterated it, they had done a good thing, and deserved our commendation; and so would our present rulers were they to do the same; for what can be a more absurd and impious object in a place of worship, or any other place, than a picture or image of the Almighty! The passage alluded to is as follows— “1585 Feb. 21. An order made III and IV Ph. and Mary conc. the derision of St. Margts. parish and the parish of St. Nic. and yt. of late yt. order notwithstanding prcell of the Checker-warde and of New Condutt-warde have been accounted prcell of St. Nic. Chap. ctrarie to the same order: yt. is ord. yt. those 2 wards aforesaid shall hollie be accounted of St. Margt’s parishe and shll paie clarcks wages and other charges, as prishrs. of the parish of St. Margt. according to ye sd. resited order.”
That affair is thus related in the record— “1579, May 23. Controversye about the Tytle of St. Nicolas church yard. Opinion of the Recorder 19. June. Maior Ald. C. C. stand to their Tytle and Int. in S. N. ch. yd. and defend it by Law of Arms.”
p. 391. In the White Friars Yard Chapel at Norwich, where he used to preach, a monumental inscription in memory of him was set up long after his death by his grandson the late Grantham Killingworth Esq. the chief part of which is as follows— A Memorial
Dedicated to the singular merits of
A faithful confessor, and laborious servant of Christ,
Who with true christian fortitude endured persecution
Through many perils, the loss of friends and substance,
And ten imprisonments for conscience sake;
The rev. Mr. Thomas Grantham,
A learned Messenger of the Baptized Churches,
And pious founder of this church of believers baptized,
Who delivered to king Charles the second
Our Declaration of Faith,
And afterwards presented to him
A Remonstrance against Persecution.
Both were kindly received, and redress of grievances promised.
He died Jan. 17. 1692, aged 58 years:
And to prevent the indecencies threatened to his corpse,
was intered before the west doors,
In the middle aile of St. Stephen’s Church, in this city,
Through the interest, and much to the credit of
The rev. Mr John Connould
By whom, with many sighs and tears,
The burial service was solemnly read to a crowded audience:
When at closing the book he added,
“This day has a very great man fallen in Israel.”
For after their epistolary dispute, in sixty Letters, ended,
That very learned vicar retained
The highest esteem and friendship for him whilst living,
And was by his own desire buried by him, May 1703.
A narrative of this memorable affair has been published by Mr. Finch, and may be had of him, or of the booksellers. With whom such connection might be desirable for this infant society; and it certainly would not be dishonourable, or inconsistent with their avowed aversion to religious thraldom; as it would require no sacrifice of their religious liberty or christian freedom: both parties being equally advocates for the full enjoyment of that inestimable right, and most invaluable blessing. Of the origin and progress of Methodism in the kingdom, see a brief account at page 934 of this work.—It is a remarkable instance of deep policy in the history of methodism, that the sect, when young and weak, placed itself under the wing of the established church, and bitterly inveighed against all who separated from it; but when it acquired strength, so as to feel itself able to go alone, it threw off the mask, and scrupled not to avow and prove itself, to all intents and purposes, a dissenting sect. Should they soon assume a different character, or become disposed like their neighbours to congregate and form themselves into a distinct society, for the purpose of instructing their dear townsmen by public lectures, respecting that better way of thinking with which they deem themselves so well acquainted, an admirable opening for putting such a project in execution now presents itself—that of buying or hiring the Methodist Chapel, which is expected to be disposed of to the best bidder as soon as the new edifice is completed, or perhaps sooner. Yet Hiram was dead many centuries before Euclid was born. So it may be supposed that Euclid and Solomon, and Hiram and Mannon, and Marcel and king Athelstan lived all about the same time!—an idea too monstrous surely, for English, or even Masonic credulity to imbibe or adopt!—See Prichard’s description of Masonry. 21st. Edit, p. 3, &c. Its constituents during the first stages of its existence bore the following names—Asty Harwick, Abel Hawkins, Geo. Foley, N. Elstobb, Sam. Browne, Peter Elyson, Rich. Marshall, John Mountaine, Nic. Anderson, John Bagge, Dan. Swaine, Jos. Lee, Wm. Taylor, Rob. Fysh, Edm. Elsden, Tho. Day, Rich. Sands, Henry Fysh, Robert Hamilton, Rich. Allyson, Wm. Ward, Scarlet Browne, Geo. Patteson, Tho. Berneye, Tho. Hawkins, and Jos. Taylor.—Most of these seem to have continued in the society to the last, though some were expelled for different reputed delinquencies.—It is curious enough to observe their mock formalities in the administration of their laws, and the maintenance of the government and discipline of the society, as they appear in their written transactions, which are still extant. A few specimens here may not be ungrateful to the reader—At one time Asty Harwick is indicted, tried, found guilty, and fined, for carrying home the sword, contrary to the rules of the society—at the same time Richard Marshall is indicted, tried, found guilty, and fined, for throwing a piece of pipe at Mr. Deputy governor—another time Samuel Browne is indicted, tried, found guilty, and fined, for tearing the bill before it was discharged—another time Joseph Lee is indicted, tried, found guilty, and fined, for interrupting Mr. deputy govr. Harwick—another time Jos. Lee is indicted, tried, found guilty, and fined, for pulling the governor Capt. Nic. Anderson’s wig awry—same time Asty Harwick and John Bagge, were indicted, tried, found guilty, and fined, for insulting the secretary in his office—another time Mr. Bagge was indicted, tried, found guilty and fined, for not attending the then governor, Mr. Richard Marshall, with the sword, Mr. Bagge being then sword-bearer.—Those who were indicted and tried were all found guilty, with only one exception, which was in the case of Wm. Ward, (April 14, 1750) who was indicted, tried, and acquitted, under the charge of affronting the then govr. Mr. Bagge, by conferring upon him the unworthy and degrading office of deputy secretary.—Thus did some of our most hopeful and reputable townsmen employ themselves between 60 and 70 years ago. Whether their successors or representatives of the present day employ themselves more worthily, may deserve some consideration. As to our courtiers and statesmen, it cannot well be supposed that they would have any great objection to our gentlemen and all the rest of the nation employing their leisure time in such a frivolous manners, as it would leave them at liberty to pursue their course with less observance or interruption. After all, had our society of True-Britons, been still continued we are not sure but they might have proved by this time, as useful to themselves, and as beneficial to the community at large, as either of our present Lodges of Free Masons. For further information relating to the original history of these two houses the reader is referred to the account of St. Gyles and St. Julian’s gild, in a former part of this work.—p. 422, &c. This gentleman did not acquire his wealth here; nor did he follow the example of our Aldersons, our Cases, our Freemans, our Adlens, our Bowkers, our Bagges, &c., who went out of the world apparently without ever remembering the poor, or wishing to leave behind any memorials of their names in such charitable bequests. Some years ago, as one of the present pensioners told this writer, the governor of that time went so far as to talk of furnishing those chambers with that desirable appendage, but that the reader of that period, with one of the women, (both of whom had a fireplace in their rooms,) most unfeelingly dissuaded him from it, and he gave it up.—The present occupier of one of those rooms is said to have been for a long time confined to it, if not to her bed. The want of a fireplace must doubtless be severely felt by her. In another place he is called Loningston and Lovingstone. Over against the above passage is inserted the allowing note, seemingly in the same hand—“The above 10l. annuity is applied to the clothing of the poor yearly, and payd by the chamberlain, to the overseers of St. Margaret’s parish.” Then it is added,—“I take this to be the 10l. payd to the Treasurer of St. James’s Workhouse, by the name of Loningston or Lovingstone, which I take to be the same.” But this modern note-writer, and conjectural commentator, ought to have known that St. James’s Workhouse could not be called an Almshouse or Hospital in 1594, nor till near a whole century after. The said annuity must therefore have undergone some foul play. There are happily still some such contributors, and among them one conspicuous above the rest, to whose unostentatious charities the poor pensioners in all our almshouses are not a little indebted for their comforts; as this writer could easily perceive by what dropt from divers of them, in the course of conversations he has had with them at different times. It is here neither needful nor proper to mention the name.—Of the land charged with the 10l. a year to this almshouse, the following memorandum occurs in the said MS. volume; written seemingly about 1729: “I find 76 acres on the S. marsh; viz. Godfrey Hill, 5 acres; 7l. 10s.—Tho. Miles, 5 acres; 7l. 0s.—Jer. Ink. J. King, and J. Lay, 14 acres; 16l.—Widow Carleton, 16 acres; 18l. 2s.—R. Richmund, 36 acres; 39l.—Total 76 acres: 88l.—This I take to be the land to maintain this almhouse.”—A little after we find the following memorandum,—“Payd the Hoipital 1729, 19s. 8d. per week, for 52 weeks; 51l. 2s. 8d.—Mr. Quartereder, 5s.—Straw money, 6s.—9 Chald. coles, boatidge, and porter, 9l. 16s. 6d.—200 Sedge, 1l. 4s.—12 brooms, 1s. 4d. 4 Skeps 20d; 2s. 8d.—this is the fixt yearly pay, 62l. 16s. 10d. besides other incident charges, repairs, &c.”
On the whole therefore it appears, that the poor occupiers, or pensioners of this almshouse were much better off 80 or a 100 years ago, than they have been for many years past, as well as that our rulers were than better disposed towards them than they have been latterly. Since that period, the weekly allowance of these pensioners appears to have differed at different times—down to 1772 it was 19s. 3d. in all, or about 18d. each: From 1772 to 1791, 1l. 5s. 5d. or about 2s. each: From 1791 to 1803, 1l. 8s. 5d. or about 2s. 3d. each: From 1803 to 1811, 1l. 12s. 3d. or 2s. 6d. ¾ each.—But here it ought to be observed, that the Reader has had always allowed him 1s. 6d. a week more than the women. He has also a Chalder of Coals allowed him, as has likewise each of the women who have fire-places in their chambers. Nine chalders a year are allowed this house in all;—the rest are appropriated to the kitchen or common fireplace. Of two of these we learn, that the first was established on the 1st. of June 1795 for a hundred members, who receive relief in sickness, lying-in, old age, and upon the death of their husbands. The fund is supported by a small monthly payment of their own, and annual subscriptions from honorary members.—The second beneficial society for the same number of poor women, (100;) was established July 1, 1799, affording the same allowances to them, except the pension in old age, which it was found by experience could not be supported without the assistance of many honorary members. It was hoped that this society would be able to support itself; in which case the advantages resulting from it might have been extended to any number of poor women who might choose to embrace them. But either the allowance must be still further reduced, or the monthly payment increased, before it will be released from the necessity of requiring at least occasional benefactions.—It is to be hoped therefore that it will not fail of obtaining every necessary aid and support. Of the number of these societies, and their respective meeting places, the following account is supposed to be pretty correct—Two at the Crown Tavern; one at the Three Tuns; one at the Three Pigeons; two at the Valiant Sailor; one at the Coach and Horses; one at the Tailor’s Arms; two at the Plough; one at the Angel; two at the Oak; one at the Dog; four at the Three Fishes; two at the Sun; two at the Green Dragon; one at the Boar’s Head; one at the George and Dragon.—in all 23. There may be more, but we have not been yet able to find them out.—As to the number of Inns and Public Houses now in the town, they are said to be near 70, but they were formerly much more numerous: even as many as 87 some years ago. This decrease is not to be ascribed to a decrease of our population, but rather to a decreasing propensity in the inhabitants to frequent those houses, owing probably, in part at least, to the great increase of conventicles, and the increasing frequency of evening services in those places, where a large proportion of the inhabitants find themselves entertained much more innocently, profitably, and agreeably, than at the public house:—all which however cannot be supposed very pleasing to our publicans and common-brewers. There are, it seems, many benevolent societies so named in different places; and some of them unconnected with Methodism—of which there is one of a very respectable appearance at Liverpool, among whose members is the name of the celebrated William Roscoe. In the annual account of this society for 1809 appears the following remarkable passage— “The Subscribers to the Stranger’s Friend Society, are, in general, already well acquainted with the nature, design, and excellency of the institution. It may not, however, be unnecessary to state once more, for the information of that part of the public, whose attention has not been hitherto duly excited towards this charity, that its object is, to visit, at their own homes, the SICK and DESTITUTE POOR of all countries and denominations, (the Methodists only excepted, in order to exclude even the suspicion of sectarian partiality,) and administer such relief and consolation as their wants and sorrows may appear to require.”
But how the exception, in regard to Methodists, could exclude all suspicion of sectarian partiality, we cannot clearly understand. This appears from the following passage in an old MS. extracted from the Hall Books— “1580. Sept. 26. Mr. Iverye recd. 4l. to buy books necessarye to be in the school for his scholars. This day he accounted for the bookes, and also repaid ye sd. moneye: 5l. allowed him for reparations and other necessarie charges by him bestowed about his house.”
Decr. 15. 1587, it was agreed in the Hall to provide an usher, with a salary of 8l. a year. The first usher was John Gybson, clerk, but after a few months he had 5l. given him, for the town to be discharged of him and family. His successor was Rich. Emott, B.A. whose salary was advanced to 10l. a year. He was succeeded in the spring of 1593, (or rather 1594) by John Man, B.A. of Bennet Col. Cambridge, with the same salary. It does not appear who, if any, immediately succeeded him; but 18 Decr. 1612, the Hall agreed to choose an usher, whose salary, (he boarding himself,) should be 16l. a year. The person chosen was probably Edwd. Labourne, who held that situation in 1617, and had 5 marks gives him towards his commencing M.A.—He appeared to be much approved and held his place in 1626, and perhaps much later. Of his successors we have no regular account. Our school, in Knox’s time was rendered very remarkable by having Eugene Aram for its usher; a man of uncommon acquirements and learning, but still more distinguished by his unhappy and miserable exit, and the horrid flagitiousness of at least one part of his life. He was apprehended here in 1759, under a charge of murder, committed in Yorkshire, 14 years before, and tried and convicted at York the ensuing assizes, and soon after executed. His defence at his trial was plausible and masterly; but it could avail against the preponderating evidence of his guilt. The extent of the learning in which he had made eminent proficiency was wonderful, considering the disadvantages under which he acquired it; and he died a melancholy proof that a very learned man may yet be desperately wicked, and commit the most heinous crimes. It is remarkable that this seminary, founded about 232 years ago, has had but three masters for the greatest part of that time—viz. Edw. Bell, John Horne, and David Lloyd: who presided here in the whole 125 years—and all the rest but 107. It ought to have been for a much larger number. The amount of the expenditure for the last year was 73l. 19s. 3d. ½ which seems a large sum for a mere Sunday school. Half the sum, it is presumed, would go much further, and do far more good, if the Lancasterian plan were adopted.—Some such measure is understood to be now in the contemplation of some of our good townsmen. Mr. Keed, senior, and Mr. S. Newham, were two of the most active promoters of this institution, and the late Dr. Bagge, much to his credit, was one of its very zealous patrons, and used to subscribe for the support of it Five Guineas a year. At some former periods, and especially before the reformation, our corporation members or officers appear to have been more numerous than at present, and some of them differently denominated. Hence in some records of the time of Henry V. we read of aldermen of the Gilds, twenty four Jurats, twenty seven Common-council-men, TWELVE burgesses annually elected, whose business it was to choose the new mayor, and nominate divers other officers, including even the town-clerk and chamberlain. These twelve were chosen as follows: The Alderman of the gild of merchants chose four burgesses: those four chose eight more, making their whole number then twelve.—These twelve chose the mayor, &c. for the ensuing year, after taking an oath which was tendered to them thus— “Serres [i.e. Sirs,] ye shall well and truiye, upon your discressions, without affection, favour, fraude, or male engyn, chese our mayster the Mayre for the yeear coming from Mighelmass forth, a burgess of the 24, abyll, sufficient, and profitable, for the worship and profitt of the commons; and also ye shall chese 4 sufficient burgesses to occupye the office of Chamberlein for the same yeear, a comon Clerke and two Sergeants, thereof one shall be clerke of the Markett and keeper of the East Yates, a porter for the South Yates, and anoder for Doucehille’s Yates: which officers chosen, theyr names with my mayster the Mayre that shall be, ye shall present; so God ye help at the holy dome.”
The oath tendered to the said four burgesses was worded thus.— “Serres—ye shall well and trulye, upon your discressions, chese and call to you eight abyll burgeys, without any affection, fraude, or male engyne, of the most indifferent, and not suspect persones, for the election of my mayster the Mayre that is to come; so God you help at the holy dome.”
The oath tendered to the Gild alderman (or rather, as it would seem, aldermen) empowered to choose the above four burgesses, was thus expressed— “Serres;—ye shall well and trulye upon your discressions, without any affection, favour, fraude, or male-engine, chese and call up four burges, abyll, of the most indifferent, and not suspect persons, for the election of my mayster the Mayre: so God you help at the holy dome.”
The oath tendered to each of the 24 Jurats was as follows— “Serre;—ye shall be ready and buxom to my mayster the Mayre at all tymes when ye be called by him, or warned by the Sergeante, for the nedes and worship of this towne and the commonaltie thereof, and well and trulye councill him, for the proffitte and worshipe of this towne after your discression, and the counsell of this towne trulye kepe; so God you help at the holy dome.”
As to the 27 Common-councilmen, their oath ran in much the same strain, only referring to their particular designation, as overseers or superintendents of all taxes, tallages, dymes, fiftenes, loones, reparacions, amending of houses, walles, brigges, fletes, and dyches, &c. That tendered to the Sergeant began thus— “Ser; ye shall swere that ye shall be redy and buxom to my mayster the Mayre at all tymes, and truelye warne the 24 and 27 to come to the gild halle, or into any other place.” &c. &c.—
That tendered to the Keeper of the East Gate was expressed thus— “Ser; ye shall well, duelye, and truelye kepe the East Yates, and the Gannock Yate, and lete out and in the pepyll in dewe tyme, and lete the Couses shake in dewe tyme, to scoure the fletes of this towne, and oversee the markett, that the vitalls that come to the towne by land or by water be not ferestalled, nor hydde in no prive place, and every day be attendant on your mayster the Mayre, and all other things truelye to do and use that belongeth or perteyneth to the office of the portership, and keper of the markett; so God you help at holy dome.”
The oath tendered to the keeper of the South Gate was in this form.— “Ser, ye shall well and trewlye kepe the South Yates, and lete the pepyll in and oute in lawful tyme, and buxom be to my mayster the Mayre, and to his commandments, for the proffitte and worshipe of this towne; so God you help at holy dome.”
The oaths tendered to the rest of our officers and functionaries of those times are in a similar strain, and they are very curious, but are too long to be all inserted here. All the other officers being sworn by the town-clerk, the oaths are so expressed as to denote that circumstance; but the case in respect to his own oath being different, it is varied in its form accordingly, and thus worded— “Ser, I shall be obedient to you as my mayster Mayre, and truelye write and trewe recorde make and trewe councell gyffe after my discression, when I am cleped thereto or boden, and all other things truelye do and use that perteyneth to the office of common clerk of this towne, and the councell of the towne truelye kepe: so God me help at holy dome.”
Such were our forms of swearing before the reformation.—As to a Lord High Steward, it does not appear that there was here then any such officer or functionary; which appears to have sprung up about the time of the first or second Charles: and it seems an empty insignificant office.—Quere, if its origin was not suggested or occasioned by the bishop’s High Steward of former times? A like refusal to serve the office of alderman is liable to a fine not exceeding 40l. and that of a common-council-man 20l. The mayor, recorder, aldermen, common-council-men and all other officers and their deputies, take the oaths of allegiance and supremacy when they enter into office, and thereby have all the laws, liberties, usages, & customs, granted and confirmed to them, without lett or molestation.—See Charles 2nds first Charter; also Mackerell, 213. Lovecop, or Lovecoup is what some now improperly call Lastage two a-penny per quarter on corn carried out by unfreemen. The mart is said to have been formerly kept in Damgate; but latterly, for a great length of time, it has been kept in the Tuesday market place. Thither, at the opening of it, the mayor and his brethren set out from the Hall in solemn procession, when the following proclamation, according to Mackerell, is made by the crier— “Whereas by a charter granted unto this corporation by king Henry viii. in the 27th. year of his reign, that the mayor and burgesses of the burgh of King’s Lynn, and their successors, might from thenceforth for ever, have, hold, and keep, within the said burgh, one mart, or fair, to begin upon the day next after the feast of the purification of the blessed virgin Mary yearly, and to continue six days then next following, with all the liberties, jurisdiction, and privileges, there contained in the Letters patents, granted by the said king unto the said mayor and burgesses; any act of parliament before that time made to the contrary notwithstanding; as by the transcript of the said patent under the great seal of England, more at large appeareth:—Now Mr. Mayor, the Aldermen and Common-council-men of this burgh Do Publish and make Known, That the said Fair or Mart to be holden this year, doth Begin this present Day, and shall continue for the space of Six Days from hence next following, with the ancient liberties, jurisdictions, and privileges thereof, and of holding the court of Pie-Powder for the hearing, trying, and determining, of all accidents and suits incident thereunto.—Also the mayor commandeth all common victuallers, that they utter and put to sale no other victuals but such as shall be sweet and wholesome for man’s body, and that they do afford the same at reasonable prices; and keep all assizes according to law.—And that all weights and measures which shall be used, be lawful and sealed according to the laws and statutes in that behalf made.—And also that all persons do forbear to put to sale, or shew forth wares on the Lord’s day.—And further, that all such persons as may be justly suspected of evil behaviour, do avoid this burgh and the liberties thereof; and that all others do keep within their several lodgings from nine of the clock every evening until six of the clock next morning. God Save the King.”
Afterwards in the Common Stath-yard— “All persons that have any Lastage, Wares, or Linen Cloth, to sell by wholesale, shall lay the same in the Common-stath-yard, or in Warehouses, Booths, or Chambers there, as heretofore hath been used, or as they or any of them shall be thereunto appointed. God Save the King.”
Lastly in the Custom House Porch [or rather at the Cross]— “All manner of persons that have any Action, Suit, or Plaint, to enter or prosecute for any matter, cause, or thing, arising within the jurisdiction of the court of Pie-Powder, here to be holden for and during the time of this open Mart, or Fair, let them repair to this place, and the same shall be retorted. God Save the King.”
? But here again, before he proceeds further, or begins the next section, the author begs leave to acknowledge that be was mistaken at page 1140 in supposing the Lynn Grammar School to have been established in 1580, or about the middle of the reign of Elizabeth. He has since discovered that this seminary existed in 1570, in which year, on Monday next after the feast of St. Michael, or Michaelmas-day, at the commencement of the mayoralty of Edward Waters, Ralph Johnson was chosen master, in the room of Mr. Bacster. How long the latter held the mastership does not appear. If we suppose ten or a dozen years, and that this Bacster, or Baxter, was the first master, it would fix the origin of this school about the commencement of that queen’s reign, which seems not an unnatural supposition. The reader therefore is requested to correct what may appear contrary to this statement in the page above referred to; and also in the last line of that page instead of 1570 to read 1590.—The author also apprehends that he was not quite correct at page 1133 in supposing the South Lynn Almshouse not originally endowed with any land of money. Exclusive of fishing smacks. Comparative view of the imports and exports to and from Lynn from 1761 to 1811, with the revenue thence arising. | In the year | Tons of Wine imported. | Chaldrons of Coals imported. | Quarters of Corn exported. | Amount of Revenue. | | 1761 | 810 | 64,100 | 207,700 [1162b] | £37,600 | | 1771 | 1030 | 103,900 | 151,900 | 58,800 | | 1781 | 350 | 69,400 | 118,800 | 36,900 | | 1791 | 1030 | 90,600 | 183,200 | 56,600 | | 1801 | 1280 | 79,100 | 195,600 | 74,800 | | 1806 | 560 | 103,700 | 147,600 | 84,200 | | 1811 | 450 | 115,500 | 212,500 | 75,300 | The correctness of the above may be relied upon; and so it is supposed may also that of the following table, which has appeared in the Norfolk Tour, and is there said to have been extracted from the Lynn Custom-house books, and is to be considered as the yearly average which has been exported to foreign markets and coastways, for the years 1791, 1792, and 1793. | Quarters | Per Quarter | Amount | | | £. | s. | d. | £. | s. | d. | | Wheat | 30,016 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 66,035 | 4 | 0 | | Wheat flour | 3,138 | 2 | 16 | 0 | 8,786 | 8 | 0 | | Barley | 112,944 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 135,532 | 16 | 0 | | Malt | 10,703 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 21,406 | 0 | 0 | | Rye | 12,298 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 15,372 | 10 | 0 | | Peas | 3,855 | 1 | 8 | 0 | 5,397 | 0 | 0 | | Beans | 4,708 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 5,649 | 12 | 0 | | Vetches | 73 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 109 | 10 | 0 | | Rape Seed | 2,423 | 1 | 16 | 0 | 4,361 | 8 | 0 | | | | | | 262,650 | 8 | 0 | Of which 125,000 were exported to foreign parts. Here we must own that the service in our churches, defective as it is in many respects, has yet greatly the advantage over that of our meeting houses in regard to the reading of the scriptures; for large portions of them are there read every time: and even in the cathedral service we may find a nearer resemblance of the primitive practice than in most dissenting chapels, in the frequency of the administration of the Lord’s supper, which is there administered weekly, as it was in the first age, and a good while after. There is something very queer and whimsical in the lunatic administration of that ordinance in most dissenting congregations as well as parish churches. The knowledge and mental culture of these assuming beings have been said to be chiefly derived from Cocker and the venal newspapers; but the present writer looks upon that as an incorrect and hyperbolic representation; though he suspects that but few of them possess very expanded minds. In time, it is to be hoped, they will become more wise, liberal, public-spirited, and patriotic. Seventy two baskets per week, upon an average, each of 40 pounds weight, have been, we are told, sent from hence by the coaches to London, which in the whole year amounts to 65 tons 12 hundred and eight pounds. It is supposed that no other port or place beside has ever supplied the metropolis with so large a quantity of the said article, and that Boston, though it is known to deal largely in the same line, yet falls much short of the quantity here specified. We are told that by the report of the commissioners for auditing the public accounts in 1784, the annual duties of Lynn exceeded those of all the other English ports, except London, Bristol, Liverpool, and Hull.—They might then amount to about 40,000l. But they have since more than doubted that sum.—See Britton’s account if Lynn, p. 299, and the table here at page 1162. It may be however not altogether improper just to observe here that the Gaol or prison, and Bridewell or House of Correction, stand contiguous to the town-hall. This building makes a respectable appearance on the outside, and probably no less so within; but that it is really so, the present writer cannot positively say, having never had the curiosity to visit the inside of it.—Here he begs leave to observe in addition to what he has before said of our Grammar-school, that that seminary now appears to have existed before the reformation, as may be concluded from the following note extracted from the Hall-books, and transmitted to the author by the present worthy town-clerk.— “Friday next after the Feast of holy Gregory the pope, anno 25 Hen. 8. [i.e. 1534.] Lynn Bishop: the Mayor, Aldermen, and Com. Council have elected in to their Charnel priest William Leyton, Chaplain; he to have it from Lady Day next coming, during his life natural, except cause reasonable, and he to perform the testament of old Mr. Thorsby, and maintain a grammar school; and further to keep the house, and tenements, in sufficient repairations in all things as he can, as it has been used.”
The first of them runs thus— “Every subscriber to this Library shall pay one guinea annually in advance, or in proportion to the time of the year when his subscription commences. And after the general meeting in 1798, each subscriber shall pay half a guinea on his admission, and the same annual subscription as above. The sum to be paid upon admission to be afterwards increased by five shillings and three pence every year, until it shall amount to two guineas. But the property which each subscriber has in the Library may be transferred to any other person, who shall subscribe and conform to these rules; in which case such new subscriber shall pay nothing upon admission.”
The 17th is as follows:— “No book or pamphlet, except it be a duplicate, shall on any account be alienated from the Library, without the consent of every subscriber. But if ever the number of subscribers should be reduced to Five, and continue at or below that number for three years together, the whole Library shall be transferred to the Mayor and Burgesses, to be added to that of St. Margaret’s church.”
Thus the want of liberality in the Mayor and Burgesses, who neglect to contribute towards any augmentation of their own Library, will eventually be made up, probably, by this institution, most of whose members, it is presumed, are unconnected with the corporation. Had the latter shewed some liberality in furnishing this society with a convenient place for a library, there would have been certainly a more colourable pretence for this article, or proviso. Old Lynn is said to contain 345 souls, and Gaywood about 500. Here it may be expected that some notice should be taken, and some use made of Mr. Zachary Clark’s lately published Account of the Norfolk Charities, which makes some mention of those of this town and suburbs. That account indeed, as it relates to this place, is very incomplete; but we shall here insert such of the articles as are not included in the preceding statement.—He mentions a house given by deed, by William Cleave, in 1616, and vested in the Minister and Church-wardens of St. Margaret’s; the rent, 4l. 4s. per annum, to be distributed by them among the poor of that parish:—also that in 1689, the mayor and burgesses granted a duty of 4d. per chalder on all coals imported here, by owners of ships, or part of ships, not paying to the poor’s rates, towards the maintenance of the poor in St. James’s Workhouse, and which is vested in the governor and guardians thereof. The average amount of the last three years was 214l. 8s. 3d.—Also 6l. payable annually out of Grey Friars, given by the mayor and burgesses in 1705, towards the support of the aforesaid workhouse.—Likewise for the same purpose, the annual sum of 10l. being a gift, during pleasure, of the High Steward of the town, and commencing in 1724.—Also that John Kidd esq. in 1715, bequeathed 36l. vested in the mayor and burgesses, the interest 36s. to provide 6s. worth of bread, in two-penny loaves, to 36 poor people, the six Sundays in Lent. The principal vested in the mayor and burgesses.—Also 100l. vested as the last, a legacy by Peter Ward in 1720; 50s. of the interest to be given in bread to the poor, viz. 25 two-penny loaves the first Sunday in every Calendar month; and 50s. for teaching two poor boys writing and arithmetic.—Also a legacy of 150l. vested in the mayor and burgesses, left by Sarah Dexter, in 1753, the interest to be paid to the poor men in Framingham Hospital, (Broad Street Almshouse) and to the poor women in St. James’s Hospital, (the Bedehouse.)—Also a legacy of 36l. vested as before, and left by James Stapleton, in 1778, the interest to be distributed to the poor by the Chapel wardens.—Also of the South Lynn Almshouses he says, that the founder left 20l. to be secured on a freehold, and the income therefrom to be applied, one half for the repairing of the said almshouses, and the other half to provide coals for the inhabitants of them. This legacy was put out to interest till 1641, by which time it had accumulated to 55l. 5s. This latter sum purchased 5 acres of land, in Wiggenhall St. Germans, the rent whereof, nearly 4l. 10s. per annum, is applied as above directed.—As to West Lynn, (or Old Lynn,) he mentions there 4 acres of land at Islington, vested in the minister and parish officers, for the benefit of the poor; left for that purpose by John Swaine, in 1678. The rent is supposed to be regularly distributed according to the will.—He also mentions a legacy of 5l. 5s. for the use of the poor there, left by the late Henry Whall, Deacon.—Also in Gaywood, (which may be deemed another suburb of Lynn,) he mentions the following charities—Tho. Thurston D.D. in 1714, by his will, left 40s. yearly for ever, toward cloathing three of the poorest inhabitants; which money is payable by the mayor of Lynn.—Also 2 roods of land there, annually let to the highest bidder, and the rent applied for the benefit of the poor.—Also a house in Lynn, the rent of which (8l.) is received by the officers of Gaywood, and applied as above: but when, or by whom these donations were made he gives no account.—So much for the Lynn Charities; of which this is the best account we have been able to procure. As to such as belong to the respective almshouses, that are not here particularized, the reader is referred for information respecting them to the account that has been already given of those houses. She was possessed of many virtues, and was universally respected: to her we owe the introduction of side-saddles: our women before used always to ride astride like the men. However this affair was finally settled between the bishop and mayor, these articles seem clearly to shew that a sword then really formed a part of the Lynn regalia, which has been by some thought very doubtful. The author begs leave to acknowledge a mistake of his at page 763, in placing Cromwell’s visit to Lynn before the siege, whereas it was in fact about half a year after that event. This correction invalidates several of the remarks and conclusions in that section. See vol. I. page 572, &c. The errata has been applied in this transcription.—DP.
|
  |
