On the same day the merchantmen were permitted by common consent to

pass up the river, and such a multitude of ships certainly had never

before entered a port by one tide.

Fresh desertions now occurred every day, and all hope of concerted

action was ended by stormy discussions, in which contradictory

suggestions were made with such heat as to lead in many instances to

acts of violence. Upon ship after ship the red flag was hauled down and

replaced by one that was white, signifying submission. On the 12th only

seven ships had the red flag flying. Such was the confusion, every crew

being divided into two hostile parties, that five ships were taken up

the Thames by those in favour of surrender, aided by their opponents

under the belief that an attack was about to be made on the shore

defences. The discovery by the latter that they were betrayed aroused

terrible strife. The deck of the _Iris_ frigate became a battlefield;

one party in the fore, the others in the after-part, turned the great

guns against each other, and fought till the mutineers were worsted.

By the 16th the mutiny had terminated, every ship having been restored

to the command of its officers. A party of soldiers went on board the

_Sandwich_ to which Parker had returned, and to them the officers

surrendered the delegates of the ship, namely a man named Davies and

Richard Parker.

Richard Parker, to whom the title of admiral had been accorded by

the fleet and by the public during the whole of this affair, was the

undoubted ringleader, and was the individual on whom all eyes were

turned as the chief of the mutineers. He was brought to trial on the

22nd of June, after having been confined during the interval in the

Black-hole of Sheerness garrison. Ten officers, under the presidency

of Vice-Admiral Sir Thomas Pasley, Bart., composed the court-martial,

which sat on board the _Neptune_, off Greenhithe. The prisoner

conducted his own defence, exhibiting great presence of mind, and

preserving a respectful and manly deference throughout towards his

judges.

The prosecution on the part of the Crown lasted two days, and on the

26th, Parker called witnesses in his favour, and read a long and able

defence which he had previously prepared. The line of argument adopted

by him was--that the situation he had held had been in a measure

forced upon him; that he had consented to assume it chiefly from the

hope of restraining the men from excesses; that he had restrained them

in various instances; that he might have taken all the ships to sea,

or to an enemy’s port, had his motives been disloyal, etc. Parker

unquestionably spoke the truth on many of these points. Throughout the

whole affair, the injury done to property was trifling, the taking of

some flour from a vessel being the chief act of the kind. But he had

indubitably been the head of the mutineers. It was proved that he went

from ship to ship giving orders and encouraging the men to stand out,

and that his orders were given as though he were actually admiral of

the fleet. Nothing could save him. He was sentenced to death. When his

doom was pronounced, he rose, and said, in firm tones, “I shall submit

to your sentence with all due respect, being confident in the innocency

of my intentions, and that God will receive me unto His favour;

and I sincerely hope that my death will be the means of restoring

tranquillity to the Navy, and that those men who have been implicated

in the business may be reinstated in their former situations, and again

be serviceable to their country.”

On the morning of the 30th of June, the yellow flag, the signal of

death, was hoisted on board the _Sandwich_, where Richard Parker lay,

and where he was to meet his fate. The whole fleet was ranged a little

below Sheerness, in sight of the _Sandwich_, and the crew of every ship

was piped to the forecastle. Parker was awakened from a sound sleep

on that morning, and after being shaved, he dressed himself in a suit

of deep mourning. He mentioned to his attendants that he had made a

will, leaving to his wife some property in Devonshire that belonged to

him. On coming to the deck, he was pale, but perfectly composed, and

drank a glass of wine “to the salvation of his soul, and forgiveness of

all his enemies!” He said nothing to his mates on the forecastle but

“Good-bye to you!” and expressed a hope that “his death would be deemed

sufficient atonement, and save the lives of others.”

He was strung up to the yard-arm at half-past nine o’clock. A dead

silence reigned among the crews around during the execution. When cold,

his body was taken down, put in a shell, and interred within an hour

or two after his death in the new naval burying ground at Sheerness. A

remarkable and pathetic sequel to the account has served as the basis

of a popular ballad still sung.

Richard Parker’s unfortunate wife had not left Scotland, when the

news reached her ears that the Nore fleet had mutinied, and that the

ringleader was one Richard Parker. She could not doubt that this was

her husband, and immediately took a place in the mail for London, to

save him if possible. On her arrival, she heard that Parker had been

tried, but the result was not known. Being able to think of no way but

petitioning the King, she gave a person a guinea to draw up a paper,

praying that her husband’s life might be spared. She attempted to make

her way with this into His Majesty’s presence, but was obliged finally

to hand it to a lord-in-waiting, who gave her the cruel intelligence

that all applications for mercy would be attended to, except for

Parker. The distracted woman then took coach for Rochester, where she

got on board a King’s ship, and learnt that Parker was to be executed

next day. She sat up, in a condition of unspeakable wretchedness, the

whole of that night, and at four o’clock in the morning went to the

riverside to hire a boat to take her to the _Sandwich_, that she might

at least bid her poor husband farewell. Her feelings had been deeply

wrung by hearing every person she met talking on the subject of her

distress, and now the first waterman to whom she spoke refused to take

her as a single passenger. “The brave Admiral Parker is to die to-day,”

he said, “and I can get any sum I choose to ask for carrying over a

party.”

Finally, the wretched wife was glad to go on board a Sheerness market

boat, but no boat was allowed to run up alongside of the _Sandwich_. In

her desperation she called on Parker by name, and prevailed on the boat

people, moved by the sight of her distress, to attempt to approach, but

they were stopped by a sentinel who threatened to fire at them, unless

they withdrew.

O Parker was the truest husband,

Best of friends, whom I love dear;

Yet when he was a-called to suffer,

To him I might not then draw near.

Again I ask’d, again I pleaded,

Three times entreating,--all in vain;

They even that request refused me,

And ordered me ashore again.

As the hour drew nigh, she saw her husband appear on deck walking

between two clergymen. She called to him, and he heard her voice, for

he exclaimed, “There is my dear wife from Scotland.”

Then, happily, she fainted, and did not recover till some time after

she was taken ashore. By this time all was over, but the poor woman

could not believe it so. She hired another boat, and again reached the

_Sandwich_. Her exclamation from the boat must have startled all who

heard it. “Pass the word,” she cried in her delusion, “for Richard

Parker!”

The ballad says:--

The yellow flag I saw was flying,

A signal for my love to die;

The gun was fir’d, as was requir’d,

To hang him on the yard-arm high.

The boatswain did his best endeavour,

I on the shore was put straightway,

And there I tarried, watching, weeping,

My husband’s corpse to bear away.

On reaching the _Sandwich_ she was informed that all was over, and

that the body of her husband had just been taken ashore for burial.

She immediately caused herself to be rowed ashore again, and proceeded

to the cemetery, but found that the ceremony was over and the gate was

locked. She then went to the Admiral and sought the key, but it was

refused to her. Excited almost to madness by the information given her

that probably the surgeons would disinter the body that night and cut

it up, she waited around the churchyard till dusk, and then clambering

over the wall, readily found her husband’s grave. The shell was not

buried deep, and she was not long in scraping away the loose earth that

intervened between her and the object of her search. She tore off the

lid with her nails and teeth, and then clasped the hand of her husband,

cold in death, and no more able to return the pressure.

Her determination to possess the body next forced her to quit the

cemetery and seek the assistance of two women, who, in their turn,

got several men to undertake the task of lifting the body. This was

accomplished successfully, and at 3 a.m. the shell containing the

corpse was placed in a van and conveyed to Rochester, where, for the

sum of six guineas, the widow procured another wagon to carry it to

London. On the road they met hundreds of people all inquiring about,

and talking of, the fate of “Admiral Parker.”

The rude ballad thus relates the carrying away of the body:--

At dead of night, when all was quiet,

And many thousands fast asleep,

I, by two female friends attended,

Into the burial-ground did creep.

Our trembling hands did serve as shovels

With which the mold we moved away,

And then the body of my husband

Was carried off without delay.

At 11 p.m. the van reached London, but there the poor widow had no

private house or friends to go to, and was constrained to stop at the

“Hoofs and Horseshoe” on Tower Hill, which was full of people. Mrs.

Parker got the body into her room, and sat down beside it; but the

secret could not long be kept in such a place, more particularly as the

news of the exhumation had been brought by express that day to London.

An immense crowd assembled about the house, anxious to see the body of

Parker, but this the widow would not permit.

The Lord Mayor heard of the affair, and came to ask the widow what she

intended to do with her husband’s remains. She replied, “To inter them

decently at Exeter or in Scotland.” The Lord Mayor assured her that the

body would not be taken from her, and eventually prevailed on her to

consent to its being decently buried in London. Arrangements were made

with this view, and in the interim it was taken to Aldgate Workhouse,

on account of the crowds attracted by it, which caused some fears lest

“Admiral Parker’s remains should provoke a civil war.”

Finally, the corpse was buried in Whitechapel Churchyard, and Mrs.

Parker, who had in person seen her husband consigned to the grave, gave

a certificate that all had been done to her satisfaction. But, though

strictly questioned as to her accomplices in the exhuming and carrying

away of the body, she firmly refused to disclose the names.

Parker had, as he said, made a will, leaving to his wife the little

property he had near Exeter. This she enjoyed for a number of years,

but ultimately lost it through a lawsuit with Parker’s sisters,

who claimed that it was theirs by right. She was thrown into great

distress, and, becoming almost blind, was obliged to solicit assistance

from the charitable. King William IV gave her at one time £10, and at

another £20.

In 1836 the forlorn and miserable condition of poor Parker’s widow

was made known to the London magistrates, and a temporary refuge was

provided for her. But temporary assistance was of little avail to one

whose physical infirmities rendered her incapable of any longer helping

herself. When Camden Pelham wrote in 1840, she was aged seventy, blind,

and friendless; but time and affliction had not quenched her affection

for the partner of her early days. However, in 1828, John C. Parker,

the son of the mutineer, obtained a verdict against his aunts for the

possession of the little estate of Shute that had belonged to his

father’s elder brother. The question turned on the legitimacy of the

plaintiff, which was proved by his mother, a woman who then exhibited

the remains of uncommon beauty, and who was able to prove that she had

married Richard Parker in 1793.

Then farewell, Parker, best beloved,

That was once the Navy’s pride,

And since we might not die together,

We separate henceforth abide.

His sorrows now are past and over,

Now he resteth free from pain--

Grant, O God, his soul may enter

Where one day we meet again.[16]

The melody to which the ballad of the “Death of Parker” is set is much

more ancient, by two centuries at the least, than the ballad itself. It

is plaintive and very beautiful, and the words are admirably fitted to

the dainty and tender air.

Richard Parker was a remarkably fine man. The brilliancy and expression

of his eyes were of such a nature as caused one of the witnesses, while

under examination, to break down, and quail beneath his glance, and

shrink abashed, incapacitated from giving further testimony.

Douglas Jerrold wrote a drama upon the theme of the “Mutiny at the

Nore.” But it is a mere travesty of history. The true pathos and beauty

of the story of the devoted wife were completely put aside for vulgar

melodramatic incidents.

For authorities, the _Annual Register_ for 1797; _The Chronicles of

Crime_, by Camden Pelham, London, 1840; _The Mutiny at Spithead and the

Nore_, London, 1842; “Richard Parker, of Exeter, and the Mutiny of the

Nore,” by S. T. Whiteford, in _Notes and Gleanings_, Exeter, 1888.

BENJAMIN KENNICOTT, D.D.

Benjamin Kennicott was born at Totnes on 4 April, 1718, and was the

son of Benjamin Kennicott, the parish clerk of that town. The family

had been one of some respectability, as in 1606 one Gabriel Kennicott

was mayor of Totnes. Probably, if a well-to-do tradesman family at one

time, it had sunk, and Benjamin senior was quite content to act as

clerk on a small stipend. His son was educated at the Grammar School,

founded by King Edward VI in 1554, and held in a building adjoining the

Guildhall, both of which occupy a portion of the old dissolved priory

of Totnes, on the north side of the church. The trustees of Eliseus

Hele had endowed the school, and the corporation were empowered to send

three boys to the school to receive their education free of expense;

and there can be little doubt that Benjamin the younger was one so

privileged. After quitting school he was appointed master of a charity

school for poor children, male and female, at Totnes; which same

charity children were provided with quaint and antiquated garbs. Young

Kennicott now doubtless thought that he was provided for for life.

In 1732, when he was only fourteen years of age, the bells of Totnes

tower were recast, and at the same time the ringers presented to the

bell-ringing chamber an eight-light brass candlestick inscribed with

the names of the ringers. Benjamin Kennicott the elder headed the

list, and Benjamin Kennicott the younger brought up the tail. But in

1742, when new regulations were drawn up and agreed to by the ringers,

the youngest ringer had become the leader.

Bell-ringing was a pastime dearly loved and much practised in Devon at

the time. There were contests between the ringers of various churches,

and challenges, the prize being either money or a hat laced with gold.

All over the county one comes on old songs relating to these contests,

and in these songs are recorded the names of ringers who are now only

represented by moss-grown stones in the churchyard. A party of ringers,

say of Totnes, would sally forth to spend a day in contest with those

of Ashburton or Dartmouth, and all day long the tower would be reeling

with the clash of the bells. Here is one of the songs touching the

ringers of Torrington:--

1. Good ringers be we that in Torrington dwell,

And what that we are I will speedily tell.

1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 5 . 6; 6 . 5 . 4 . 3 . 2 . 1.

The first is called Turner, the second called Swete,

The third is a Vulcan, the fourth Harry Neat.

1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 5 . 6; 6 . 5 . 4 . 3 . 2 . 1.

2. The fifth is a doctor, a man of renown,

The tenor the tailor that clothes all the town.

1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 5 . 6; 6 . 5 . 4 . 3 . 2 . 1.

The breezes proclaim in their fall and their swell,

No jar in the concord, no flaw in a bell.

1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 5 . 6; 6 . 5 . 4 . 3 . 2 . 1.

3. The winds that are blowing on mountain and lea,

Bear swiftly my message across the blue sea,

1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 5 . 6; 6 . 5 . 4 . 3 . 2 . 1.

Stand all men in order, give each man his due,

We can’t be all tenors, but each can pull true.

1 . 2 . 3 . 4 . 5 . 6; 6 . 5 . 4 . 3 . 2 . 1.

[Illustration: /B. Kennicott. S.T.P./

olim Socius.

_From the portrait at Exeter College, Oxford_]

There is another, wedded to an exquisitely sweet and expressive melody,

concerning the ringers of North Lew, who challenged Ashwater,

Broadwood, S. Stephen’s, and Callington. I give but the opening verse:--

One day in October,

Neither drunken nor sober,

O’er Broadbury Down I was wending my way,

When I heard of some ringing,

Some dancing and singing,

I ought to remember that Jubilee Day.

’Twas in Ashwater town,

The bells they did soun’;

They rang for a belt and a hat laced with gold.

But the men of North Lew

Rang so steady and true,

That never were better in Devon, I hold.

On this song the late Rev. H. H. Sheppard remarked: “There is an

indolent easy grace about this tune which is quite in keeping with the

words and charmingly suggestive. The sunny valleys, the breezy downs,

the sweet bell-music swelling and sinking on the soft autumn air,

the old folk creeping out of their chimney-nooks to listen, and all

employment in the little town suspended in the popular excitement at

the contest for the hat laced with gold; all this, told in a few words

and illustrated by a few notes, quite calls up a picture of life, and

stamps the number as a genuine folk-song. The narrator is unhappily

slightly intoxicated, but no one thinks the worse of him; stern

morality on that or any other score will in vain be looked for in songs

of the West.”

Such a picture as this must have occurred again and yet again in young

Kennicott’s life whilst head of the ringers at Totnes.

Kennicott’s sister was in service as lady’s-maid to the Hon. Mrs.

Elizabeth Courtney, of Painsford in Ashprington, near Totnes; and

in 1743 that lady had a narrow escape from death, having eaten a

poisonous herb in mistake for watercress, which it much resembled.

The charity-school master, on hearing of this, composed a poem on her

recovery, which he dedicated to “Kelland Courtney, Esq., and his Lady.”

It consisted of no fewer than three hundred and thirty-four lines;

and this effusion having gained him the favour of the family, he was

taken in hand, and sent in 1744 to Oxford, where he became a student of

Wadham College. But the Courtneys, though his principal patrons, were

not the sole. Archdeacon Baker, the Rev. F. Champernowne, and H. Fownes

Luttrell, Esq., subscribed to send him to college.

At Oxford he speedily attracted attention by his industry and

abilities, and was elected Fellow of Exeter College in 1747, and was

admitted to his B.A. degree a year before the usual time. He took

his M.A. degree in 1750, about which time he entertained a design of

collating the Hebrew texts of the Old Testament. In 1753 he published

his first volume on the state of the printed text, and in 1760 his

second volume. In these works he pointed out various discrepancies, and

proposed an extensive collation of manuscripts.

Subscriptions were obtained, and between 1760 and 1769 no less than

£9117. 7s. 6d. had been raised for the work. This work occupied ten

years. To aid in it, persons were employed to examine the MSS. in all

parts of Europe. In 1769, Dr. Kennicott stated that of the 500 Hebrew

MSS. then in Europe he had himself seen and studied 250; and of the

16 MSS. of the Samaritan Pentateuch eight had been collated for him.

Subsequently other MSS. were heard of, and the collation extended in

all to 581 Hebrew and 16 Samaritan MSS.

In 1776 appeared the first fruit of all the labour, being the first

volume of his _Vetus Testamentum Hebraicum cum variis lectionibus_,

and the second appeared in 1780.

Kennicott took his degree of D.D. in 1761, and received from the Crown

a pension of £200. In 1770 he was made Prebendary of Westminster, but

this he afterwards exchanged for a canonry at Christchurch. He was

also rector of Culham, a valuable living, but resigned it, as owing to

his studies he was unable to reside and pay attention to his pastoral

duties there.

Against the garden wall of Exeter College grew a fig tree, and

Kennicott was very partial to figs. Now in a certain year there was

but a single fig on the tree. The Doctor watched it, eagerly expecting

when it would be ripe, for a fig is like a pear, it ripens and reaches

perfection all at once, before which moment it is no good at all. To

secure this fruit for himself he wrote out a label, “Dr. Kennicott’s

Fig,” and hung it above the fruit on the tree. But just as the fig was

fit to be gathered and eaten, some audacious undergraduate managed

to get it, plucked, ate, and then reversing the label wrote in large

letters thereon “A Fig for Dr. Kennicott.”

When the reverend divine was at the height of his fame he visited

Totnes, and was asked to preach in the parish church. This he consented

to do. In the vestry he found his old father, still parish clerk,

prepared to robe him. The Doctor protested. No--on no account would he

suffer that. He could perfectly well and unassisted encase himself in

cassock and surplice and assume his scarlet doctorial hood. But the old

man was stubborn. “But, Ben--I mean Reverend Doctor--do it I must, and

do it I will. You know, Ben--I mean Reverend Sir--I am your father and

you must obey.” So the Hebrew scholar was fain to submit and give to

the old parish clerk the proudest hour of his life. Dr. Kennicott died

on 18 September, 1783, in the sixty-sixth year of his age.

For authority see an article on “Benjamin Kennicott, /D.D./,” by

Mr. Ed. Windeatt, in the _Transactions_ of the Devonshire Association,

1878.

The portrait given with this article is from one in Exeter College.

CAPTAIN JOHN AVERY

Concerning this captain it is not easy to give a trustworthy account as

the discrepancies between the narratives of his life and adventures are

considerable, and the means of discriminating between the true and the

fictitious are not available. He is a Flying Dutchman who appears in

weird and terrible scenes, and then vanishes into mist.

The authorities for his adventures, such as they are, are these:--

(_a_) _“The Life of Captain Avery” in Captain Charles Johnson’s

General History of the Robberies and Murders of Notorious Pyrates,

from 1717._ London, 1724.

(_b_) _The Life and Adventures of Captain John Avery._ I. Baker.

London, 1709.

(_c_) _The Famous Adventures of Captain John Avery of Plymouth._

Falkirk, 1809. Probably a reprint of an earlier Life.

(_d_) _The King of Pirates._ (Supposed to be by Daniel Defoe.)

London, 1720.

With regard to (_a_), Johnson gives no authority for his narrative, and

it widely differs in the sequel from (_b_) and (_c_).

(_b_) purports to be written by Adrian Van Broeck, a Dutchman, who was

a prisoner for some time with Avery in Madagascar, but he effected

his escape in a vessel of the East India Company, and his narrative

terminates abruptly with the severance of his connexion with the

pirates.

(_c_). In this--as we have it--late version, all the early life of John

Avery is given totally different from (_a_) and (_b_). Little or no

reliance can be placed on it, and as to (_b_) it is hard to say whether

Van Broeck’s is a fictitious narrative or whether he records actual

facts. It is singular that Johnson should not have spoken explicitly

about this, the first published record of the pirate’s adventures.

(_d_) purports to be Avery’s story of his own life, but it is almost

certainly a product of Defoe’s lively imagination.

Devonshire Characters and Strange Events · 第 25 / 59 段