SECTION VIII.

OF RELIGIOUS SECTS.

THE town of Lowestoft has been much distinguished in religious concerns,

for its invoilable attachment to the establishment of the Church of

England, as in civil affairs, for its unshaken loyalty to its sovereign.

Nevertheless, it is not without its sectaries, which, at different times,

have arisen in the town; the principal of which sectaries is that society

denominated Independents or Congregational Dissenters. At what time it

was that this religious sect first began to make its appearance in

Lowestoft is uncertain. Previous to the year 1689, when the learned Mr.

Emlyn came to reside in the town, and commenced as minister to the

Congregational dissenters, it was but an inconsiderable body, destitute

of a regular pastor, and also of a decent structure for the purpose of

religious exercises. {143} The congregation of Protestant dissenters at

Lowestoft might be considered also, at that time, as a kind of dependent

assembly on the Dissenting congregation at Yarmouth; as it was customary

for the members belonging to the former congregation to repair to that at

Yarmouth at the usual seasons of receiving the holy communion, and was

much in the same state of dependence on that society as a chapel-of-ease

is on the mother church.

At this early period the Dissenters of Lowestoft had no other building

for the public exercise of religion than a barn situate in a lane called

Blue Anchor lane, opposite Rant’s score; and they continued in this

obscure situation till the year 1695, when a decent structure was erected

for religious uses. Probably the Society was much increased after the

year 1689, when so distinguished a character as Mr. Emlyn became their

minister, and in consequence thereof might be enabled to erect this

building. This meeting house was erected in 1695 upon a small piece of

ground given for that purpose by Mr. James Ward of this town. The

eminent Mr. Emlyn was born at Stamford, in Lincolnshire, May 22, 1663.

In August, 1674, he was put to a boarding school at Walcot, near

Folkingham, where he continued four years, and on Sundays was the

constant auditor of the noted Mr. Brocklesby, the then incumbent of that

parish. Mr. Emlyn’s parents were of the established church, and were

very intimate with the very learned and worthy Dr. Cumberland, then

minister at Stamford, and afterwards Bishop of Peterborough, but being

inclined to the Puritans, they choose to educate their son among that

sect; for this purpose he was sent, for academical education, in 1678, to

Sulby, near Welford, in Northamptonshire, where he continued four years.

In 1679 he went to Cambridge; and in 1682 was admitted of Emanuel

College, but, returned again to Sulby; and in the same year he removed to

Mr. Doolittle’s academy, first at Islington, then at Clapham, and

afterwards at Battersea. He made his first essay as a preacher December

19, 1682, at Mr. Doolittle’s meeting house, near Cripplegate. In 1683 he

was chaplain to the Countess of Donegal, a lady of great quality and

estate in the north of Ireland, but resided then in Lincoln’s Inn Fields,

London, and the year following accompanied the family to Belfast. While

in this station he made a journey to Dublin, and during his continuance

in that city, preached once before that congregation of which Mr. Daniel

Williams and Mr. Joseph Boyce were at that time pastors, in a manner so

acceptable to the audience, as gave occasion for that people afterwards

to invite him to be their minister. A favourable opportunity for this

purpose offered shortly after; for Mr. Williams having quitted the

congregation at Dublin, Mr. Boyce made some overtures to Mr. Emlyn

relative to his succeeding him, which he declined accepting. Mr. Emlyn

still continued his station as chaplain in this family; but in 1688, when

the disturbances in Ireland occasioned his patron’s family to leave that

Kingdom, he returned to London. On his arrival at that place, and being

out of employment, he was invited by Sir Robert Rich, one of the Lords of

the Admiralty, to his house at Rose Hall, near Beccles, and was by him

prevailed upon to officiate as Minister to the Dissenting congregation at

Lowestoft; which place he supplied about a year and a half, but refused

the invitation of being their pastor; for as he disapproved of Ministers

changing and shitting from one place to another, so he had determined not

to accept any pastoral care but where he thought he should settle, and

purposed to continue. It was during his residence at Lowestoft, that,

reading Dr. Sherlock’s piece on the Trinity, he first began to entertain

some scruples concerning the received doctrine in that point of faith.

Here also he contracted a close and intimate acquaintance with Mr.

William Manning, a Nonconformist Minister at Peasanhall, and corresponded

with him during Mr. Manning’s life. As both were of an inquisitive

temper, they frequently conferred together on the highest mysteries of

religion; and Dr. Sherlock’s book on the Trinity became a stumbling block

to both. Manning even became a Socinian, and strove hard to bring his

friend into those opinions, but Mr. Emlyn could never be made to doubt

either of the pre-existence of our Saviour, as the Logos, or that God

created the material world by him.

King James having fled into France, and Ireland being nearly reduced by

King William, the affairs of that Kingdom began to be in a more settled

state, and the dissenting congregations assembled in larger numbers.

This induced Mr. Boyce to renew his application to Mr. Emlyn, to accept,

jointly, with himself, the pastoral care of his congregation at Dublin;

and to effect his purpose, wrote him a very pressing letter, and sent it

to Mr. Nathaniel Taylor, minister at Salter’s Hall, London, who

transmitted it enclosed in one from himself, to Mr. Emlyn, at Lowestoft.

Mr. Emlyn being so strongly solicited to accept the office of assistant

pastor to the congregation at Dublin, complied with the invitation, and

accordingly arrived in Dublin in May, 1691, and continued there until

1702, when his troubles began; for Dr. Duncan Cummins, a physician in

that city, suspecting him of heterodox notions, about the Trinity, put

Mr. Boyce first upon the enquiry, and went afterwards with him to Mr.

Emlyn’s house, where the Unitarian freely confessed his belief “That God

the Father of Jesus Christ, is above the Supreme Being, and superior in

excellency and authority to his Son, who derives all from him.”

Protesting, however, that he had no design to cause strife among them, he

offered to leave the congregation peaceably. But, Mr. Boyce, not willing

to take such a weighty matter on himself, brought before the meeting of

the Dublin ministers; in consequence of which, Mr. Emlyn was immediately

prohibited from preaching, and in a few days obliged to withdraw into

England. But some zealous Dissenters, having resolved to prosecute him

with the utmost rigour, they obtained a special warrant from the Lord

Chief Justice to seize him and his books, and went with the keeper of

Newgate to execute it upon him. The Chief Justice refused at first to

take bail, but at length accepted of a recognizance, from two sufficient

persons, of £800 for his appearance. On his trial he was found guilty.

He was moved to retract, which he absolutely refused; and was therefore

sentenced to suffer a year’s imprisonment, to pay a fine of £1,000 to the

Queen, to live in prison till it was paid, and to find security for his

good behaviour during life; telling him that the pillory was the

punishment due, but because he was a man of letters it was not inflicted.

After this he was led round the four Courts to be exposed, with a paper

on his breast, signifying his crime. The fine was afterwards mitigated

to £70, and this, together with £20, claimed by the Primate, as the

Queen’s Almoner, was paid. Thus, after an imprisonment from the 14th of

June, 1703, to the 21st July, 1705, and on giving security for his good

behaviour, during life, he obtained his discharge. Soon after Mr. Emlyn

returned to London, where a few friends gathered a small congregation, to

whom he preached once every Sunday; this liberty gave great offence to

several clergymen of the Established Church, and complaint thereof was

made to Archbishop Jenison; but His Grace, being fully acquainted with

the proceedings against him in Dublin, and his accusers not alleging that

Mr. Emlyn made the controverted points the subject of his sermons, on the

account of his character, was not inclined to molest him. This

congregation was dissolved by the death of the principal persons who

supported it, and their preacher retired into silence and obscurity, and

died July 30th, 1741. Mr. Emlyn was a man of a lively and cheerful

temper, of strong parts, and clear way of thinking, of great learning,

and abounding in all religious graces; he was a popular and much admired

preacher, for he not only had a portly presence, a strong clear voice,

and a graceful delivery, but his discourses were, for the most part,

rational and persuasive, always concluding somewhat serious and

pathetical. He wrote several tracts, which, with his sermons on

practical subjects, were collected and printed, in 1754, in three

volumes, octavo, to which are prefixed Memoirs of his Life and Writings.

During Mr. Emlyn’s residence in Lowestoft, he cultivated the most

friendly intercourse with the Rev. Hudson, at that time vicar of the

parish; accompanying him in collecting public charities, and would

frequently himself with several of his society attend the service of the

church, by which means a perfect harmony subsisted between the members of

the Establishment and the Dissenters. Nevertheless, his conduct in this

respect was not approved altogether by those of his own community. Mr.

Emlyn was also intimately acquainted with the Rev. Whiston, vicar of

Lowestoft, and a successor of Mr. Hudson; and he was also particularly

intimate with Dr. Samuel Clarke, who entertained nearly the same

sentiments in religion as Mr. Emlyn and Mr. Whiston.

It is a little difficult to ascertain precisely who the ministers were

that officiated at Lowestoft from the departure of Mr. Emlyn to the year

1698. There is an account of one Mr. Manning, who was an occasional

preacher in the latter end of the reign of Charles II, or in the time of

his brother James; but who this person was, whether he was an ejected

minister (as there were several of that name in this country) or some

other minister of the name of Manning, does not appear. It is not

improbable that he was the Rev. Manning, of Peasanhall, previously

mentioned, who was the intimate friend of Mr. Emlyn. Be this as it may,

authentic accounts say that the Rev. Samuel Baxter, the eldest son of an

ejected minister of Lancashire, settled here as minister to the

Dissenters about the year 1698. He left the congregation about the year

1703, and removed to Ipswich. He was succeeded by the Rev. Henry Ward,

who left Lowestoft about midsummer, 1707, and settled at Woodbridge,

where he died at the close of the year 1734. Mr. Ward was succeeded at

Lowestoft by Mr. Samuel Say, in 1707 or 1708. Mr. Say was born in the

year 1675, and was the second son of Mr. Giles Say, minister of St.

Michael’s parish, in the town of Southampton, but rejected thence by the

Act of Uniformity in 1662. But after the grant of liberty of conscience,

in the reign of James II, he was chosen pastor of a Dissenting

congregation at Guestwick, in Norfolk, where he continued till his death,

April 7th, 1692. Mr. Samuel Say, the son, received his first education

at Southwark; and having discovered when he was but a young man, a strong

inclination to the ministry, his father accordingly took care to have him

educated in the best manner he could for that purpose, from his earliest

years; and about the year 1692 he entered as a pupil the Rev. Rowe’s

academy at London, where he had for his fellow students Mr. (afterwards

Dr.) Isaac Watts, Mr. John Hughes, and Mr. Josiah Hort, afterwards

Archbishop of Tuam. When he had finished his studies, he became chaplain

to Thomas Scott, Esq., of Liminge, in Kent, a gentleman eminent for piety

and goodness. Mr. Say continued in this family three years, and was well

esteemed by all for his Christian behaviour and exemplary conversation.

From thence he removed to Andover, in Hampshire; but in a short time came

to Yarmouth, in Norfolk, and soon after that became a constant preacher

at Lowestoft. Here he continued eighteen years, labouring in word and

doctrine; but not being able all the time to bring the people among whom

he ministered into a regular church order, he never settled with them as

their pastor. During the residence of Mr. Say, at Lowestoft, the

Dissenters had not the sacrament administered here; but after that Mr.

Say had preached at Lowestoft in the afternoon, on Sundays, he would ride

to Yarmouth, attended by such of the congregation as were so disposed,

and there he administered it. Mr. Say left Lowestoft in 1725, being

invited to a co-pastorship with the Rev. Samuel Baxter, of Ipswich, where

he remained nine years; and from thence was called to succeed Dr. Edmund

Calamy, then lately deceased, in the pastorship of the Church of

Protestant Dissenters in Westminister. He removed thither in 1734, and

continued in his pastoral relation till April 12th, 1743; where, after a

week’s illness of a mortification in his bowels he died at his house in

St. James’ street, in the sixty-eighth year of his age. He was a very

ingenious and sensible man; had great candour and good breeding, without

stiffness and formality; an open countenance, and a temper always

communicative; he was a tender husband, an indulgent father, and of a

most benevolent disposition, ever ready to do good, and relieve the wants

of the distressed to the utmost extent of his abilities. He was well

versed in astronomy and natural philosophy. This is evident from an

astronomical and meteorological journal kept by Mr. Say from the year

1713 to 1734; wherein, among the various occurrences related by him, as

an account of the great consternation excited among the inhabitants of

Lowestoft at what is called _the first_ appearance of the Aurora

Borealis. Mr. Say writes: “The market this day is full of discourse

concerning a great and unusual light, from seven to twelve last night,

seen in Lowestoft, Beccles, and at sea. Women rose out of their beds

through fear, others screamed, ships came to anchor fearing an unusual

tempest, so dreadfully the sky opened; the angry clouds also seemed, in

the imagination of the superstitious beholder, to flash one against

another. This curious phenomenon had never been seen either in England

or foreign countries from 1621 to 1707, and then only in a small degree;

therefore the splendour with which this appeared attracted universal

attention. The vulgar viewed it with consternation, and considered it as

marking the introduction of a foreign race of princes into this country;

so strangely do people perplex and bewilder themselves when they depart

from true philosophy, which never fails both to ennoble and enlighten the

human mind.” He had also a taste for music and poetry, and was a good

critic and master of the classics. Soon after his death a thin quarto

volume of his poems with two essays in prose “On the Harmony, Variety,

and Power of Numbers,” written at the request of Mr. Richardson, the

painter, were published for the benefit of his only daughter, who married

the Rev. Mr. Toms, a Dissenting Minister at Hadleigh, Suffolk. The poems

are not destitute of merit, but the two essays have been much admired by

persons of taste and judgment.

In the year 1725 Mr. Say was succeeded by the Rev. Whittick, who removed

to Kingston-on-Thames in 1733. It was during the ministry of Mr.

Whittick, that the dissenting congregation at Lowestoft became a

perfectly distinct body, and dissolved the connection which hitherto had

subsisted with Yarmouth, Mr. Whittick declaring that unless they became a

separate body, distinct from any other congregation, he would leave them.

In 1733 Mr. Whittick was succeeded by the ingenious Mr. Thomas Scott, son

of a Dissenting minister at Norwich. Mr. Scott, the grandfather of Mr.

Thomas Scott, was an eminent merchant in London. He had two wives. By

his first wife he had the above-mentioned Mr. Scott, Dissenting minister

at Norwich, who had (besides other children) two sons of considerable

note in the learned world, namely Mr. Thomas Scott, who was minister at

Lowestoft, and Dr. Joseph Nicoll Scott, who was first a Dissenting

minister, and published two volumes of sermons; but afterwards practised

physic in London, and was well-known by the hand he had in several

ingenious and useful publications. He was an assistant to his father in

the congregation at Norwich; but embracing the Arian principles,

(received there only by a few at that time) his father was under the

painful necessity of expelling him from that society. By his second wife

he had Dr. Daniel Scott, author of the Appendix to H. Stephens’s Greek

Lexicon, in two volumes, folio, dedicated to Archbishop Secker and Bishop

Butler—the New Version of St. Matthew’s Gospel, with critical notes,

etc., a learned and accurate performance—and an Essay towards a

Demonstration of the Scripture Trinity. The design of this last work is

to prove that the common notion of the doctrine of the Trinity (or the

Athanasian scheme) is erroneous. He had the highest esteem for Dr.

Doddridge, notwithstanding he differed so much from him respecting the

Trinity; and had such a particular regard for that author’s Treatise on

the Rise and Progress of Religion, that he made it a constant travelling

companion. And Dr. Doddridge seems to have held Dr. Scott with equal

estimation; for in his Family Expositor he called him the learned,

ingenious, candid, and accurate Dr. D. Scott. Mr. Thomas Scott, minister

at Lowestoft, in the early part of his life, kept a small boarding school

(for ten scholars only) at Wortwell, near Harleston, and used to preach

at the meeting house at Harleston once every month. From Wortwell Mr.

Scott removed to Lowestoft, where he continued five years; but the

keenness of the air being too severe for the tenderness of his

constitution, he was under the necessity of leaving Lowestoft about the

year 1738, and removed to Ipswich. {147}

After Mr. Scott’s removal to Ipswich, he became well known to the learned

world by several very ingenious publications, particularly by his poetic

translation of the book of Job, with critical notes, and some other

poetical pieces. But finding, during his residence at Ipswich, the

infirmities of age coming on him very hastily, and rendering him

incapable of discharging the duties of his function with that care and

exactness which he had always observed with the most scrupulous

attention, he quitted that town in 1774, and retired to a small

congregation at Hepton, in the neighbourhood of Norwich, where he died

about two years after. Mr. Scott was succeeded in the year 1738 by Mr.

Alderson, who continued pastor till his death, which happened in 1760.

Mr. Alderson having a large family, and the stipend at Lowestoft being

small, Mr. Elisha Barlow, a dissenter and eminent merchant of the town,

was so far influenced by the considerations as to bequeath by will to the

dissenting congregation at Lowestoft a considerable estate in the

adjoining parish of Mutford, as an augmentation of the salary of the

minister; but on this condition, nevertheless, that if Mr. Alderson was

not continued pastor, the said estate should devolve to him and to his

heirs for ever. In pursuance of this obligation, it was agreed on by the

whole body of Dissenters at Lowestoft (in consequence of their great

esteem for Mr. Alderson) to draw up an instrument, in which they formally

expelled him as pastor, in order to give him a legal claim to the estate

and afterwards re-chose him into his former pastoral office. But

notwithstanding all these endeavours on the part of the congregation to

render Mr. Alderson so essential a service, they were soon after entirely

frustrated by the heirs at law of Mr. Barlow, who disputed the legality

of the donation on the Mortmain Act, and commenced a suit in Chancery for

recovering the estate. The result of this suit was, that Mr. Alderson

was obliged to relinquish all future claims whatsoever to the same. This

misfortune was an irreparable loss to Mr. Alderson. The anxiety which he

suffered during the contest greatly impaired his health and shortened his

days; for soon after, as, on the Lord’s day, he was preaching to his

congregation, he was suddenly taken ill, was obliged to be led home, and

died in a short time. Mr. Alderson was a worthy, well-disposed man, of

an exceedingly affable and peaceable disposition, much esteemed by the

whole circle of his acquaintance; and as he lived much respected, so he

died universally lamented.

The Dissenting congregation at Lowestoft appears to have been but very

small before the year 1689, when Mr. Emlyn became their officiating

minister; after this period they became a more numerous body, and

continued increasing till the year 1735, when their number was become

very considerable; after that year they appear to have been in a

decreasing state, and declined very fast, especially since the death of

Mr. Alderson; for, according to an account taken in 1776, the number

amounted to only 35, that could be properly called Independents and

Congregational Dissenters. The number of Dissenting families in 1780 to

1790 (exclusive of the Methodists) was under twenty, but the congregation

usually consisted of 150 and 200 persons.

While the law suit was pending, and for a short time after the death of

Mr. Alderson, the congregation at Lowestoft was under the care of the

Rev. Nasmith. After Mr. Nasmith came Mr. Gardner. From 1760 to 1785

about fifteen ministers had charge of the Dissenting congregation.

A digression may be interesting respecting an extraordinary trial,

concerning two poor old widows belonging to Lowestoft who were tried,

condemned, and executed on a charge of witch-craft.

In the year 1663 Mr. Samuel Pacey, an eminent Dissenter at Lowestoft,

commenced a prosecution against two widows, on a suspicion of witchcraft.

Mr. Pacey had conceived an opinion that two of his daughters, Elizabeth

and Deborah, respectively eleven and nine years of age, were bewitched;

and that these two women, whose names were Rose Cullender and Amy Duny,

were the cause of the misfortune. In consequence of this suspicion, he

caused Amy Duny to be set in the stocks; but not thinking this a

sufficient punishment, he caused both women to be apprehended; and at the

ensuing Lent assizes, held at Bury, the 10th March, 1664, before Sir

Matthew Hale, Knt., Lord Chief Baron of his Majesty’s Court of Exchequer,

they were severally indicted for bewitching (amongst others) the said

Elizabeth and Deborah Pacey; and being arraigned on the said indictment,

pleaded not guilty; but being afterwards, after a long course of

evidence, found guilty, they were thereupon, on Thursday, March 13th,

sentenced to die for the same, and accordingly, on Monday, the 17th of

March following, they were executed.

Dr. Hutchinson, in his historical essay concerning witchcraft, has given

many pertinent observations respecting this very extraordinary trial;

intending thereby to expose its absurdity, and to detect and ridicule the

evidence on which the sentence was founded. To give a detail of every

ridiculous circumstance that was urged in the course of the evidence,

would be both irksome and disgusting; but two of the most material points

may be related, which were adjudged to have the most weight, and

principally to affect the cause then before the Court; adding thereto the

remarks made thereupon by Mr. Hutchinson.

In the course of the trial it was deposed by Samuel Pacey, that his

younger daughter Deborah, was suddenly taken ill with a lameness in her

legs, was seized with violent fits, and felt the most excruciating pains

in her stomach, like the pricking of pins, which caused her to shriek in

an alarming manner; and also, that his daughter Elizabeth was afflicted

in the same manner, and that they could not open their mouths wide enough

for respiration, sufficient to preserve life, without the help of a tap.

But Dr. Hutchinson says, there was no necessity for putting taps in the

children’s mouths when a sufficient quantity of air to preserve life

could have been drawn through their nostrils. John Soam, of Lowestoft,

deposed, that, in harvest time, as he was going into the field to load,

one of the carts wrenched the window off Rose Cullender’s house,

whereupon she came out in a great rage, and threatened him for having

done wrong. The consequence whereof was, that the cart was overturned

twice that day; and the last time of loading it, as they brought it

through the gate which led out of the field into the town, the cart stuck

so fast in the gate’s head that they could not possibly get it through,

but were obliged to cut down the post of the gate, to make the cart pass

through, although they did not perceive that the cart did of either side

touch the gate-posts. Dr. Hutchinson says, very true, Rose Cullender

might well be in a passion when they ran the cart against her house and

damaged it; and an unruly horse or a careless driver might easily

overturn a cart two or three times a day; and if the cart stuck so fast

in the gate’s head so as they could not get it through (though it did not

touch the gate-post as they could perceive), what made them cut the post

down? These depositions shew the kind of evidence it was on which these

poor unfortunate women were condemned and executed, the ludicrous manner

in which Dr. Hutchinson has treated it, as well as the contemptible light

in which it was regarded by all the wise and discerning part of mankind.

But exclusive of the evidence, they had also recourse, during the trial,

to art and stratagem; for they caused one of Mr. Pacey’s daughters to be

blindfolded and to be touched by one of the supposed witches, in order to

discover what effect it would produce; and on using this experiment, the

girl fell into a violent rage, and gave the Court what they deemed the

most evident demonstration of the criminality of the prisoners.

Nevertheless, Mr. Sergeant Keeling seemed so much dissatisfied with this

proof, that he thought it not sufficient to convict the prisoners; and

therefore Sir Matthew Hale privately desired the Lord Cornwallis, and Mr.

Sergeant Keeling to try the experiment in another place, and by a

different person; but notwithstanding they perceived the same effect, yet

these gentlemen, on their return into Court, declared, that from what

they had discovered, it was, in their opinion, that the whole of the

charge was groundless, and without any foundation. This was a favourable

circumstance in behalf of the prisoners, as it tended to acquit them, and

it actually stopped the proceedings of the Court a considerable time. At

last, however, it was resolved to take the opinion of Dr. Brown, a

physician from Norwich, and who was desired by the Court to give his

sentiments concerning the prisoners, whether he really thought they were

witches or not. The doctor’s evidence amounted to this: “That he was

clearly of opinion that the two girls were really bewitched; for that in

Denmark there had been lately a great discovery of witches, and from some

books that had been published in that kingdom, it appears that the

witches there had used the same methods of afflicting persons as had been

practised by the prisoners.” This evidence of Dr. Brown turned the scale

against these unfortunate women, and appears to have been decisive.

The eyes of all the sensible and inquisitive part of the nation were

fixed on this very extraordinary trial, and waited with impatience the

decision of the Court. They were full of expectations that the point

would be so fully discussed as finally to determine it, and leave no room

for posterity to engage in any farther controversy concerning these

notions. But this was reserved for a more enlightened age; for it

appears that nothing but perplexity and confusion ensued thereupon. The

judge himself was so far from being satisfied with the evidence, that, on

the contrary, he was extremely doubtful concerning it; and was under such

distressing fears and apprehensions during the trial, and proceeded with

such extreme caution therein, that he forebore summing up the evidence,

but left it to the jury, with prayers to God to direct their hearts in so

weighty a matter. Accordingly the jury, after withdrawing about

half-an-hour, returned with their verdict, which pronounced the prisoners

guilty. After this the judge gave the law its course, pronounced

sentence of death upon them, and they were executed very soon after.

Thus were these two unfortunate widows, whose only misfortune was either

the poverty of their circumstances, the deformity of their persons, or

the weakness of their understandings, sacrificed to the superstition of

the age, the insufficiency of the evidence, and the ignorance and

credulity of the jury.

Possibly it may be admitted, as some extenuation of the absurdity of this

prosecution, to remember that it was undertaken in an age in which the

notion of witchcraft was generally received; _that_ not only among the

illiterate and vulgar, but even amongst those who were in the highest

estimation for rank, piety, and learning.

It was in consequence of this ridiculous notion that one Matthew Hopkins,

of Manningtree, in Essex, together with some others, were commissioned by

Parliament in 1664, and the two following years, to perform a circuit, in

order to discover witches. By virtue of this commission they went from

town to town through many parts of Essex, Suffolk, Norfolk, and

Huntingdonshire, for the purpose of detecting them; and caused sixteen to

be hanged at Yarmouth, forty at Bury, and also as many more in different

parts of the country as amounted in the whole to nearly one hundred

persons. It is to this absurd commission that Butler alludes in

Hudebras, when he says:

Hath not this present Parliament

A ledger to the devil sent,

Fully empow’d to treat about,

Finding revolted witches out?

And has he not within a year

Hang’d three score of them in a shire?

This Hopkins used to call himself Witchfinder General, and had twenty

shillings allowed him for every town he visited. He used many arts to

extort confession from suspected persons, and when they failed he had

recourse to swimming them; which was done by tying their thumbs and toes

across one another, and then throwing them into the water. Thus he went

on searching and swimming the poor creatures, till some gentleman, out of

indignation at the barbarity of it, took him and tied his own thumbs and

toes as he used to tie others, and when he was put into the water he

himself swam as others had done before him. This method soon cleared the

country of him, and it was a great pity the experiment was not thought of

sooner.

Returning from the digression it may be noted that another religious sect

which appeared in Lowestoft is the Methodists. The society first made

its appearance here in the year 1761; and was introduced by that great

leader of the sect, the Rev. John Wesley, and has continued. In the year

1776 their number was increased to about fifty; they purchased a piece of

ground on the north side of Frary lane, and soon after erected a meeting

house there, which was opened on the 19th November, 1776, by Mr. John

Wesley, who came to Lowestoft for that purpose.

Gillingwater's History of Lowestoft a reprint: with a chapter of more recent events · 第 10 / 17 章