[Illustration: QUATFORD.]
THE ANTIQUITIES, &c.
In the foregoing pages I have brought before the reader many historical
notices of Bridgnorth from a very early period down to the reign of
Edward III; but I regret that I have been able to collect only a very
few from the commencement of that reign to the era of the Reformation,
and still fewer between that period and the time of the Civil Wars; but
the few which I have been able to collect respecting these intervals,
though of minor importance, may not be without their interest, inasmuch
as they serve to connect our town, however slightly, with some of the
memorable events in English history.
The reign of Edward III. is one of the most brilliant in the annals of
England. The military prowess of the nation, directed by the genius
and intrepidity of the King himself, and by the youthful heroism of
his son Edward, the Black Prince, acquired a fame which has never
since been eclipsed. This enterprising monarch had not been many years
on the throne before he invaded the territories of France, and there
obtained triumphs, so marvellous, when the superiority of the enemy’s
forces is considered, that the names of his victories, _Cressy and
Poictiers_, are “household words” with Englishmen, even in this day.
It is very possible that some of the men of Bridgnorth may have taken
part in these famous battles; for it appears from a public document,
that just before the invasion of France by King Edward, a writ was sent
to Bridgnorth, as well as to other towns in Shropshire, for raising a
small contingent to the war. In this document it is stated that “Sir
Roger de Strange of Knockin, John Aston and others, as chief persons
within the County of Salop, were summoned to raise 40 men at arms,
within the said County, and 30 Hobelers within the town of Salop; 10
Hobelers in Ludlow; 6 in Wenlock; 10 in Bridgnorth; 4 in Newport;
and 40 in the rest of the County.”—(_History of Shrewsbury, p. 163,
note 1._) The _men at arms_ were horsemen who wore a complete suit
of armour, and were mounted on strong war horses, answering to our
heavy dragoons; the _hobelers_ were light-armed horsemen, who rode on
“hobbies,” or small fleet horses, and were in the armies of the ancient
English what the troops of light cavalry are in ours. They served the
same purpose for Edward in his French campaign that our light brigade
did for us in the famous charge at Balaklava. I do not know whether any
man from Bridgnorth was among those gallant 600; but I know that some
of our townsmen were exposed to other perils in the Crimean campaign,
and met them with a fortitude that did no dishonour to their ancestors,
who were enrolled under the banner of the Black Prince.
I have not been able to find out any other fact of any particular
interest respecting Bridgnorth, during the reign of Edward III, except
that the Burgesses of the town petitioned him, that they might have
the use of his chapel, within the Castle, as a parish church. Hitherto
this chapel of Saint Mary Magdalene had been exclusively allotted to
the Castle, and perhaps was used solely by the garrison, and Saint
Leonard’s was the only parochial church belonging to the town; but
now, the Burgesses wishing for larger church accommodation, on account
perhaps of the increase of population, or for some other cause which
made it desirable, laid their petition before the King, that he would
grant them the use of his royal chapel. Whether or not they succeeded
in their object does not appear.[36]
[36] Dukes’ Antiquities of Shropshire, Appendix XXXVI.
About twenty years after this, in the same reign, the population was
fearfully diminished by a pestilence, which twice swept over England,
as well as the rest of Europe, and which was so destructive in its
ravages, that it is computed that a third part of the inhabitants of
every county was taken off by it. Shropshire suffered very severely.
We have no record of its progress in Bridgnorth; if we had, it would
doubtless afford us as many narratives of an interesting, though
painful, character, as the visitation of the cholera did a few years
since. This fact the historian Walsingham relates, that eighteen
out of every twenty in the Friaries and Abbeys fell victims to the
disease.[37] This may be in part accounted for by so many living
together in the same house, among whom a contagious disease would be
likely to spread with fatal rapidity. Others attribute the remarkable
amount of mortality among the ecclesiastics at this time[38] to their
frequent visitations of the sick—their constant intercourse with the
diseased and dying. If this be a true account of the matter we may
infer that the members of the religious houses in Bridgnorth—who, like
their brethren elsewhere, perished in numbers—were thus charitably
employed during this visitation, and sacrificed their lives to this
ministry of mercy, imparting as far as they were able to do so, the
consolations of the Gospel of Christ to the sufferers around them.
[37] Hume, Vol. 2, p. 423
[38] The Diocesan Registers of Lichfield and Hereford shew a very high
average of mortality among the Clergy of Shropshire at this period, and
these were not exposed to the danger of contagion from the circumstance
above referred to.
On the death of Edward III., the reins of government were committed
into the feeble hands of Richard II., who, after a disastrous reign
of twenty-two years, (during which I find no historical notice of our
town worth mentioning) was deposed by his cousin Henry Bolingbroke,
Duke of Lancaster. Henry, who assumed the sovereignty, under the
title of Henry IV, was frequently in Shropshire, on account of the
insurrectionary movements which took place among the Welsh, during the
early part of his reign. Under the leadership of the hot-headed and
enterprising _Owen Glendwyr_, they ravaged the border counties to a
considerable extent; and, in consequence of this, the Council issued an
order, that all the Castles on the borders—and Bridgnorth Castle was
one of them—should be strengthened and put in a state of defence, to
resist the incursions of the rebels. But previously to this, an act of
Parliament had been passed, which had special reference to Bridgnorth,
with other towns in our County, forbidding them to allow any one
born in Wales, and descended from Welsh parents, to become a member
of their corporations, or even to purchase land within the Borough.
These restrictions, however severe they may appear, were considered
necessary, on account of the spirit of disaffection, which so generally
prevailed in the Principality.
But, notwithstanding these civil enactments and military preparations,
the cause of the Welsh chieftain continued to gain ground, till it
suddenly received unexpected support, from the accession to his party
of the Duke of Northumberland, and his valiant son Harry Hotspur,
who at the head of a formidable army of English and Scotch, marched
towards the borders. He, as quickly as possible, united his forces to
those of Glendwyr, and the combined rebel army encountering the royal
forces, led on by the King in person, and Henry Prince of Wales, fought
a great battle, well known to the readers of English History as the
famous _Battle of Shrewsbury_; for it was fought under the walls of
our county town. If we may rely on Shakespeare in this matter, who
indeed is often, even in minute circumstances, an excellent historical
authority, we may conclude that Bridgnorth was the place appointed
by King Henry for the rendezvous of his army on the eve of this
great battle. In the first part of the Play of Henry IV, the king is
represented as addressing the chief leaders of his army, and giving
instructions as to the mustering of his forces, in these words:—
“The Earl of Westmorland set forth to-day;
With him, my son, lord John of Lancaster;
On Wednesday next, Harry, thou shalt set forward;
On Thursday, we ourselves will march:
Our meeting is Bridgnorth: and, Harry, you
Shall march through Glostershire; by which account
Our business valued, some twelve days hence
Our general forces at Bridgnorth shall meet.”
If our dramatist had any warrant for this representation, of which
I have no doubt, the town of Bridgnorth must have witnessed on this
occasion a fine military muster, and have had the privilege of
receiving into its Castle one who has been ranked among the greatest
of England’s heroes—Henry, Prince of Wales. He was just at that time
beginning to emerge from the state of wild and thoughtless profligacy
in which he had wasted his early years, and was about to exhibit those
qualities, which have since made his name so illustrious in English
History. The battle of Shrewsbury, at which he did some service, was
very decisive; and the confederate army of the rebels, under Glendwyr,
Hotspur, and Douglas, was completely routed. Nevertheless our county
continued for years after to be ravaged by the Welsh insurgents, nor
was it till the reign of Henry V., when the death of Glendwyr took
place, that there was any security for life and property in the Borders.
In the succeeding reign of Henry VI. commenced that most destructive
series of Civil Wars, known by the name of the Wars of the Roses,
between the rival houses of York and Lancaster, which laid waste for
many years the fairest provinces of the land. “It was not finished in
less than a course of thirty years: was signalized by twelve pitched
battles: opened a scene of extraordinary violence: is computed to have
cost the lives of eighty Princes of the blood, and to have almost
entirely annihilated the ancient nobility of England.”—_History of
Shrewsbury, Vol. 1, p. 166._
Shropshire was necessarily embroiled in these contests, and I have
lighted upon one fact, which shows, I think, that Bridgnorth, as well
as the neighbouring town of Shrewsbury, assumed the badge of the _White
Rose_, espousing the cause of the house of York. The fact referred to,
though a trifling one in itself, seems to me to connect Bridgnorth with
the great leader of that party—Richard Plantagenet, Duke of York. This
nobleman, who had doubtless a clearer title to the crown of England
than the reigning monarch, held the Castle of Ludlow, and was naturally
very anxious to associate the people of Shrewsbury with his party, and
to make them his adherents. He therefore entered into communication
with them; and on one occasion, when a matter of some consequence was
to be considered, the Bailiffs of Shrewsbury appointed a gentleman of
Bridgnorth, the representative of this Borough, in company with others,
to treat with the Duke at his castle of Ludlow. The following extract
from the accounts of the Bailiffs of Shrewsbury, A.D. 1457, refers to
this fact:—“Paid for a breakfast to Thomas Acton and Thomas Hoord, for
their good council, touching the return of a precept to the Duke of
York, directed to the Bailiffs for surety of the peace.” Again. “Money
paid for the expenses of Thomas Hoord, and William Lyster, riding to
the Lord Duke of York at Ludlow, to get the said precept dissolved.”
(_History of Shrewsbury, Vol. 1, p._ 224.) This Thomas Acton was of
Aldenham, and ancestor to the present baronet of that name; and Thomas
Hoord was of _Hoord Park_, now called Park Farm, adjacent to our town,
a gentleman of ancient lineage. He was member of Parliament for our
Borough, and therefore it is not likely that he would have engaged
himself to treat with the Duke of York, if he had not been aware that
his constituents at Bridgnorth were well affected to his party, which
was now growing formidable.
I have not had access to any records which shew whether our town took
any very active part, or in what measure they suffered in consequence,
in this fatal and disastrous strife; but it is scarcely possible that
such great battles should have been fought in this and the adjoining
counties, as _Mortimer’s Cross_, _Tewksbury_, and _Ludlow_, without
Bridgnorth being more or less affected by them. I have little doubt
that the state of decay and ruin, in which parts of the town were found
some years afterwards, is to be traced to these civil contests. This is
noticed in an Act of Parliament, passed in the year 1535. It recites
that “many houses, messuages, and tenements of habitation, in the town
of Bridgnorth, now are, and have of a long time been, in great ruin and
decay, and specially in the principal and chief streets there being;
in the which chief streets in time passed have been beautiful dwelling
houses there, well inhabited, which at this day much part thereof is
desolate and void grounds, with pits, cellars, and vaults lying open
and uncovered, very perilous for people to go by in the night, without
jeopardy of life, which things are to the great impoverishing and
hindrance of the said town.” (_History of Shrewsbury, Vol. 1, p. 318._)
These wars between the houses of York and Lancaster, which spread such
ruin over the land, did not cease till after the battle of Bosworth
Field, and the accession of the house of Tudor to the throne, in the
person of Henry VII; and with this latter event, a very important one
in English history, Bridgnorth was accidentally connected.
The Duke of Buckingham was the chief instrument of raising the Earl of
Richmond, afterwards Henry VII, to the throne of England, and this was
occasioned, the historian Hall relates,[39] by a casual circumstance
which occurred in the neighbourhood of our town. This Duke had large
estates in Shropshire, in consequence of his being the representative
of the ancient family of Corbet, and among these he had certain
tenements in Bridgnorth. (_Dukes’ Antiquities of Shropshire, p. 31._)
His possession of this property was perhaps the cause of his visiting
our town, in the summer of 1483. It was just at this time that he was
plotting the overthrow of the government of Richard III, but feeling
uncertain as to the person whom he should endeavour to make sovereign
in his stead, when riding one day between Bridgnorth and Kidderminster,
he accidentally met the Countess of Richmond, better known by the
name of _the Lady Margaret_. This casual interview suggested to his
mind the young and enterprising Earl of Richmond, as the fittest heir
to the English throne; and he immediately set himself to raise an
insurrection in these, and other parts of the kingdom, in his favour.
The insurrection succeeded, though Buckingham himself perished in
the enterprise; and the Earl of Richmond, became Henry VII, king of
England. On so accidental a circumstance depended the accession of
the house of Tudor to the English throne, and the consequences, which
followed it, so important to the interests of this great empire.
[39] The Duke of Buckingham, in his communication with the Bishop of
Ely, is represented by Hall, (an historian of the 16th century) as
thus expressing himself in reference to this matter:—“But whether God
so ordeyned, or by fortune it so chanced, while I was in a mase, other
to conclude sodaynlye on thys litte, and to sette it open amongeste
the common people, or to kepe it secrete awhile, so the chaunce was I
rode between Worcester and Bridgenorth, I encountered wyth the Ladye
Margaret, Contesse of Richmond, now wyfe to the Lorde Stanley, whych
is the very daughter and sole heyre to Lorde John, Duke of Somersett,
my grandfather’s elder brother: whych was a cleare out of my mynde
as though I had never seen her; so that she and her sonne the Earle
of Richmonde be both bulwarke and portcolies, and the gate to enter
into the majestie royall, and gettynge the crowne. And when we had
commoned a little concernynge her sonne, as I shall shewe after,
and were departed, she to our Ladye of Worcester, and I towards
Shrewsburie, I then changed, and in a manner began to dispute wyth
myself.”—_Chronicle, 2nd yeare of Ric._ III, _fol._ xj.
It was during the sovereignty of the house of Tudor that one of the
most important events in the history of our country took place, viz.,
_the Reformation_, commencing in the reign of Henry VIII., and being
completed in that of Elizabeth. I greatly regret not having been able
to collect any information respecting our town during this eventful
and interesting period. One would like to know how it was affected
by the great movement which was then taking place, and whether
the pulpits of St. Mary’s and St. Leonard’s were late or early in
announcing those glorious truths, which at that time began to stir
the depths of people’s minds, and caused such a mighty revolution in
the land—whether here, as well as elsewhere, there were men who stood
up as fearless defenders of the truth, ready to seal their advocacy
of it with their blood. We have no details on the subject; but we
learn that the spirit of reformation was awakened in Shropshire as far
back as the fourteenth century. A very remarkable Poem of that date,
entitled “_The Visions of Piers the Ploughman_,” whose uncouth rhymes
seem to have produced a wonderful effect on the popular mind, was
written by an inhabitant of the neighbouring town of Cleobury Mortimer.
(_History of Salop, p. 202, note 1._) We also know that our county town
had a courageous advocate of the cause in the reign of Henry IV in
William Thorpe; who ascending the pulpit of Saint Chad’s, vehemently
denounced the errors of the Church of Rome, and in consequence suffered
imprisonment. It is not likely that such things should have gone on in
the neighbourhood of Bridgnorth without our townspeople being more or
less affected by them; but we have no particulars—none, I mean, that
my very limited search could discover—respecting the progress which the
Reformation made among them.
There is one document, however, which shews that the accession of
Queen Mary was received by the inhabitants of Bridgnorth and its
neighbourhood with great demonstrations of joy; but it is of course
doubtful whether this resulted from their loyalty to the person of
one whom they rightly regarded as the heir to the throne, or from
attachment to those religious opinions of which she was known to be a
patron. The document I refer to is an extract from the Register of Sir
Thomas Boteler, Vicar of Much Wenlock, beginning November 26th, 1538,
ending September 20th, 1562. “1553 Memorandum. That as some say King
Edward VI, by the grace of God, &c., died the 6th day of this instant
month of July, in the year of our Lord God as it is above written, and
as some say he died on the 4th of May last proceeding in the same year
of our Lord; and upon Mary Magdalene’s day, which is the 22nd day of
this instant month, at Bridgnorth in the fair there was proclaimed
Lady Mary, Queen of England, &c., after which proclamation finished,
the people made great joy, casting up their caps and hats, lauding,
thanking, and praising God Almighty, with ringing of bells, and making
of bonfires in every street. And so was she proclaimed Queen on the
same day, and at the Battle field in the same evening, with the like
joy of the people, and triumphal solemnity made in Shrewsbury, and also
in this Borough of Much Wenlock.”
The Act for the dissolution of Monasteries and other Religious Houses
took effect here of course, and consequently the _Friary_ and the
Hospitals of _St. John_ and _St. James_ were all suppressed, and their
property confiscated. The Brethren of Grey Friars seem at that time to
have been in very reduced circumstances, so that the spoils obtained
from them were hardly worth the seizure. The King’s Commissioners came
here on the 5th of August, 1538, and the following note, which was
signed by the Bailiffs of the town, shows the indigent condition in
which this religious establishment was found—a plain proof of what
little hold at that time the orders of monks and friars had upon the
affections of the people. “Memorandum. This V daye of Auguste, in ye
XXX yeare of Kynge Henry the VIIJth, that Rycharde bysehope of Dovor,
and vesytor under the Lorde Prevy Seale for ye Kynge’s grace, was in
Bryggenorthe, wher that the warden and heys Bredren in the presens
of Master Thomas Hall, and Master Randolphe Rodes, Balys of the sayd
towne gave the howse, with all the purtenans into the vesytores handdes
to the Kynge’s use; for sayd warden and brethren sayd that they war
not abull to live, for the charyte off the pepulle was so small, that
in IIJ yeares they had not receyvyd in almes in redy mony to the sum
of Xs. by yere, but only leve by a serves that they had in the town
in a chapell[40] on the bryge. Thus the sayd vesytor receyveyd the
sayd howse, with the purtenans to the kynge’s use, and by indentures
delyveryd yt to us the sayd Balys to kepe to the kynge’s use, till the
kynges plesur was further known. Thys wyttenes we the sayd balys with
other.
per me Thomam Halle.
per me Randull Rowdes.”
(_Wright’s History of Ludlow, p. 342._)
[40] This was a Chapel, built on the piers of the Bridge, dedicated
to St Osyth, wife of the king of East Anglia, afterwards Abbess of
a Monastic Church in Essex. According to tradition she suffered
martyrdom, A.D. 870.—_See Butler, Vol. 2, p. 661._
An incidental proof of the state of penury to which these poor Friars
of Bridgnorth were reduced, may be gathered from a note kept among the
records of the town of Shrewsbury, of the expenses which were incurred
by Roger Thomas, their senior Bailiff, and Thomas Bromley, afterwards
Lord Chancellor, in a journey which they made from Shrewsbury to
Bewdley on important business. On their return they stopped at
Bridgnorth, and had their dinner at the principal inn, and this is the
note of their expenses:—“Dener at Bruggenorth 3s. 4d.; to Shepay the
frere 1d.” This Shepay was no doubt a member of the Grey Friars, who
waited upon the travellers at their inn, to beg alms for his house.
(_History of Shrewsbury, p. 302._)
It might have been expected that when Queen Mary came to the throne
she would have restored all the religious houses in England to their
original use; but on the contrary, pressed by strong political motives,
she confirmed by her own acts the confiscation, which had been made in
the reign of Henry VIII., of the property belonging to them; and thus
under a Popish sovereign it became irrecoverably alienated from the
Church.[41]
[41] Appendix E.
The Hospital of St. James, Bridgnorth, affords a striking example of
this. In the year 1566, the Queen, in conjunction with her husband
Philip, made over to Sir J. Parrott, in consideration of £184 15s.,
and for his faithful services, all the property belonging to this
Hospital.[42] In the year following, Sir J. Parrott transferred the
same to Mr. R. Smith of Morville. In the following reign of Elizabeth,
it was transferred to William Tupper and Robert Dawes; and the
property, after passing through the various families of Smith, Dovy,
Kinnersly, Nevitt, Tyner, and Bach, came into the family of _Stanier_,
and now, by another turn in the wheel of time, the name of _Smith_ is
again connected with the property. There was an order in Council at one
time, that this estate should pay to Bridgnorth Church a yearly sum of
twenty nobles—equal to £6 13s. 4d. This order was lost out of the town
chest, and afterwards recovered; but in one of the wars it was burnt,
after which the property rendered nothing but a pound of frankincense
every Easter, to be burnt in the Church of the High Town: but this last
customary payment has long been discontinued.
[42] Dukes’ Antiquities, Appendix IX.
What may have been the value of this pound of frankincense I do not
know, but whatever it may have been, it is certain that the Incumbents
of Bridgnorth receive from the present owners of St. James’s, in their
liberal support of the religious institutions of the town, something
far more valuable than this former impost upon their property.
We now enter on the era of Elizabeth. There is perhaps no period in
the history of our country to which Englishmen are accustomed to look
back with more satisfaction. Whatever may have been her faults and
foibles as a woman, she was undoubtedly a great Queen, and swayed the
sceptre of this realm with such a steady and vigorous hand, as made her
revered by her subjects, and dreaded by her enemies. She contributed
more perhaps than any sovereign that preceded her, to raise the
character of our country, and place it high in the scale of European
nations. Besides, she was under God, the great means of strengthening
the cause of the reformed faith, and resisting the colossal power of
the Church of Rome.
It would have been very gratifying to find any record which would have
connected the history of our town with the public events which took
place in the reign of this great princess; but I have not been able to
find any, none at least but what are of a very trivial nature. I find,
for instance, that in the singular proclamation which she issued, for
the purpose of compelling every one in her realm to wear _woollen
caps_, except the nobility, she mentions Bridgnorth, as a place where
the company of cappers used to flourish;[43] which seems to indicate
that the people now enjoyed a considerable share of quietness, and
were acquiring wealth by their trade and industry. Again I find that
when her great favorite, the Earl of Leicester, visited Shrewsbury,
and where preparations were made to receive him with an honour, little
short of that which would have been offered to the Queen herself, one
of the three who were appointed to address him on the occasion, was
a Bridgnorth youth, Richard Hoord, son of John Hoord, of Hoord Park;
no slight distinction, considering the almost royal dignity which was
attached to the person of the Earl of Leicester. But it is only in
circumstances of this nature, and not in matters of weightier import,
that I can find any reference to Bridgnorth in this reign. I ought
not however to be disappointed at this, for one who had far better
opportunity for making researches of this kind, than I have, and far
greater aptitude for the task, has stated that “from the 27th year of
Henry VIII till the year 1629, he could discover no historical notice
of the Town or Castle of Bridgnorth.”[44]
[43] Appendix F.
[44] The late Mr. Hardwick.
This latter date brings us to a very remarkable period in the history
of our town. In that year, viz, the 4th of King Charles I., and on the
2nd day of October, the King made a grant of the Castle, to Gilbert
North, Esq., one of the Gentlemen of the Privy Bed Chamber. It had been
a royal castle from the time that it was taken by Henry I. from Robert
de Belesme—a period of more than five hundred years. But now, perhaps
on account of the cost of keeping it in repair, it was transferred to
the possession of a gentleman belonging to the King’s household, who
by a subsequent deed of the same year, transferred it to Sir William
Whitmore, Knight, in whose family it has continued ever since.[45] It
is indeed greatly to be regretted that its present possessor should
have so small a remnant of it to call his own, and that the leaning
tower on Castle Hill, as it is popularly called, should be all that is
left of this once noble fortress of the middle ages. But how it came
to be thus reduced to utter ruin, is the subject which must now occupy
our attention; and it is one which is intimately connected with the
stirring events of that period.
[45] Apley MSS.
At the time in which Bridgnorth Castle was transferred to the Whitmore
family, the nation was in a great state of political disquietude. The
King was disposed to carry his royal prerogative beyond the limit
which the law had assigned to it; and many members of the Houses of
Parliament in resisting the encroachment, were tempted to invade the
rights of legitimate authority, and became in the struggle fierce and
unrelenting enemies to the Crown. This contest of prerogative on the
one hand, and the spirit of liberty on the other, brought about the
Great Rebellion; and this fair land was once more destined to be the
scene of civil strife, in which was shed the best and noblest blood
of England. Of the two parties into which our countrymen were then
divided, the Royalists and Roundheads, it is not my province to say
much; I know to which of the two, had I lived at the time, my feelings
and principles would have attached me; yet I feel bound to acknowledge,
that while I regard some of the opinions and some of the acts of the
insurgent party with a feeling nothing short of abhorrence, there were
among them, both among their soldiers and their divines, men of the
highest character, and whose minds were cast in the finest mould; nor
am I unwilling to allow that England is in a great measure indebted to
this party for the present freedom of her institutions.[46] Respecting,
however, the great leader of the party, Oliver Cromwell, I cannot agree
with some late writers, who have endeavoured to canonize his memory,
and who try to represent him as a pure and unselfish patriot. He was
indeed a man of great qualities, of fearless fortitude, and untiring
energy; and perhaps at the commencement of his public course he was
upright and single hearted in his intentions: but there can be no
question of it, that he became ambitious of earthly power; and the
religious phraseology, which was once perhaps the sincere expression of
his feelings, he afterwards employed as a crafty instrument to further
his designs, and to conceal their evil character.[47] Nor must we, if
we would form a just estimate of him, lose sight of the fact that while
he was a subject he was an enthusiast on the side of liberty, but when
he himself was placed on the seat of power, no Stuart or Plantagenet
was ever more despotic in his rule.
[46] See the whole subject treated very ably by Professor Smyth, of
Cambridge, in his Lectures on Modern History, Vol. 1, Lect. XIV.
[47] The Cambridge Professor of History, though a strong advocate
of the cause of liberty in opposition to prerogative, thus writes
of Cromwell:—“Cromwell had to subdue not only the Royalists, but
the Presbyterians; and this not merely by force, but by the most
extraordinary performance of cant and hypocrisy that human nature ever
exhibited.”—_Vol. 1, Lect._ XVII.
(See Vide Appendix G.)
In this great intestine struggle, the inhabitants of Bridgnorth, as
was natural from their hereditary loyalty, espoused heartily the cause
of Charles I., as that of their legitimate sovereign; and suffered
severely for their allegiance. In the year 1642, preparations were
made throughout the country for the commencement of hostilities; and
in consequence, the authorities here thought it necessary to put the
town, as far as possible, in a state of defence: and the Corporation
have still in their possession some interesting records, containing the
Common Hall orders which were made on this occasion. The first is as
follows:—Bridgnorth. At a Comon Hall in the said towne, the XXVI day of
August, Aᵒ. R. Caroli Angl, &c., XVIIIº Aᵒ Dⁿⁱ 1642, John Harryson and
Robert Richards, Gents, being Bailiffs.
“_Concerninge the makinge of a draw Bridge upon the
Bridg over Severn in Bridgnorth aforesaid, and other
things for the defence of the said towne, upon a
warrant from John Weld, Esq., High Sheriff of this
county of Salop, in respect of the extreame danger
which is now come neare unto us._
It is agreed, That the makinge of a draw Bridge shall
be respited untill further consideration; and that for
the present necessity, Posts and Chaines shall be made
at the two ends of the Low Towne, viz., At the farther
end of the Mill Strette, and at the farther end of St.
John’s Streete, and at other needfule places in the
said Towne; and also that the Gates of the said Towne
shall be repayred, and made stronge with chaynes and
otherwise, as shall be convenient for strength and
defence of the said Towne.”
But very early in the year, the Bailiffs had projected another means of
defence. They had petitioned Thomas Corbett, Esq., of Longnor, in this
county, to exercise the young men of the town, and of the immediate
neighbourhood, in the practice of arms and military tactics, that so
they might be ready to repel any attack which might be suddenly made
by the rebel forces. The following is the letter which Mr. Corbett
addressed to Sir Francis Ottley, Governor of Shrewsbury, on this
occasion:—
“1642. Noble Sir,
The Bayliffs of Bridgnorth, in behalf of the town,
having been importunate with me to take upon me the
exercising of the young men in this town, and others
in the country neare adjoining, for the defence of the
towne upon any needfull design, I have been persuaded
by them to take the same upon me; and they having shewn
me a letter which they intend to present unto the high
Sheriff, for a warrant unto me in that behalf, I pray
be pleased to consider thereto, and impart your advice
unto me, and further Mr. Sheriff’s directions therein,
as you in your wisdom shall think most convenient, and
you will oblige
Your respective kinsman,
and friend who truly
Honoureth you,
THOS. CORBETT.
Bridgnorth, 5 Feb., 1642.
To my noble friend and kinsman Sir Francis Ottly,
Knight, at Shrewsbury House.”
(_Blakeway Papers, Bodleian Lib._)
No time indeed was to be lost, for four days before the date of
the order above referred to, the King had set up his standard at
Nottingham, and the parliamentary forces were in the field, under the
command of the Earl of Essex. On the 20th of the following month, the
King removed into this county, and Clarendon states, that “a more
general and passionate expression of affection cannot be imagined,
than he received by the people of Shropshire, or a better reception
than he met at Shrewsbury.” (_History of the Rebellion, Vol. 2, p.
18._) But on his march thither he heard of the rebel army advancing
towards Worcester, and in order to watch their motions, and if possible
to check their progress, he dispatched his nephew Prince Rupert with
all his horse across the Severn; and it was most likely on his return
from this expedition, that the Prince passed through our town, and
took up his residence for the night at _Cann Hall_. He had conducted
the expedition with that intrepid gallantry which characterized all
his military movements; he had with a handful of men attacked a large
body of the enemy as they were defiling out of a narrow lane near the
city of Worcester, and completely routed them in the first onset,
slaying several of their number, and taking the commanding officer
prisoner; (_History of the Rebellion, Vol. 2, p. 25_) so that he came
to Bridgnorth, flushed with the first victory which was gained in
these civil wars. While he was here he addressed a letter to the Jury
appointed to choose a Bailiff, dated September, 21st, 1642. It is as
follows:—
You Gentlemen of the Jury, who are to have voices in
this election, these are to entreat you, out of a tender
care both of his Majesty’s service and your own happiness
and welfare, that in the present election you make choice
of such men for your Bailiffs as you are sure are well
affected for his Majesty’s service. By which you will
oblige me to remain,
Your Loving Friend,
RUPERT.
The Bailiffs chosen were Thomas Dudley and John Farr, ancestors most
likely of some of our townsmen who now bear these names; and there is
no doubt, from the choice made of them at this critical time, that
they possessed those qualifications for being Chief Magistrates of the
Borough which Prince Rupert described.
On the 12th of October the King left Shrewsbury, and quartered for
the night at Bridgnorth, where, Clarendon observes, “there was a
rendezvous of the whole army, which appeared very cheerful.” [_Vol. 2,
p. 42._] Here the king stayed three days; and I am one of those who
feel, that our town and Castle were never so honoured by a royal visit
as on this occasion. Many of the Monarchs of England have been here;
many crowned heads have entered the portals of our Castle, and rested
within its walls—Normans, Plantagenets, and Lancastrians—but to none
of them, in my mind, attaches the same deep interest, and to none is
due the same tribute of veneration, as to this unhappy monarch of the
House of Stuart. Not only was he by far the most accomplished Prince
that ever sat on the English throne, and endowed with considerable
intellectual powers,[48] as his successful controversy with Henderson,
the Presbyterian Minister, clearly proved; but he was distinguished
in all the relations of private life by the highest moral principle:
by a purity, fidelity, and love, which are rarely seen in king’s
courts, and have seldom been equalled in retired domestic circles; and
these virtues in him were combined with a deep-seated reverence for
religion. He was not blameless in his public conduct; far from it.
There was a weakness and want of stability in him, which justly exposed
him to the charge of inconstancy, if not of insincerity. He was subtle
and evasive, and it may be at times, under the pressure of very trying
circumstances, disingenuous in his transactions with his opponents, so
that they complained that they could not depend upon him. But he was
refined in the furnace of affliction. “Sweet” to him, as they have been
to others, were “the uses of adversity”; so that when his end drew
nigh,[49] there appeared in him, as his enemies allow, a calm heroic
fortitude—saintly magnanimity—a firmness, combined with a gentleness
and forgiving love—which we do not often find surpassed even in the
early Martyrologies. No memorial then connected with our Castle, is to
me of equal interest to that of its having been occasionally, during
his declining fortunes, the residence of Charles I.
[48] In proof of the intellectual power of Charles, additional to
that of his successful controversy with Henderson, the following
statement may be given in the words of Mr Tytler:—“In the two months’
negotiations which followed, Charles, unassisted, carried on a contest
of argument on arduous political topics with these fifteen of the
ablest senators of the day; and the commissioners were not more
struck with the ravages which persecution and suffering had wrought
in his appearance, (his hair had become entirely grey) than with the
clearness of intellect, the readiness of elocution, and the dignity of
deportment, which he displayed at these important conferences.”—_Trials
of Charles I., p. 8._
[49] The conduct and demeanour of Charles, at his trial, and on the
scaffold, have drawn even from the pen of Mr. Macaulay a passage
expressive of his admiration, and a passage so eloquent as to shine
even in his brilliant pages. But it is not more just, perhaps not more
eloquent, than the following description which is given of Charles in
the hour of adversity, by Professor Smyth:—“With what sentiment do we
now behold him?... it is the monarch unsubdued by adversity—it is the
hero unappalled by death—it is the Christian sublimed by piety and
hope—it is these that occupy our imagination and our memory. It is the
tribunal of violence—it is the scaffold of blood—that banish from our
minds all indignation but against his destroyers—all terrors but of
the licentiousness of the people: that render all regular estimation
of his character odious and impossible; and that leave nothing in the
heart of the generous and humane, but compassion for his misfortunes,
and reverence for his virtues.”—_Lectures on Modern History, Vol. 1, p.
441._
It was on one of these visits that he passed that eulogium, so well
known, and, in the opinion of many, so well deserved, on our Castle
Walk; namely, that it was the finest walk in his dominions. We can
easily picture him to our minds, (for there is no King with whose
lineaments we seem to be so familiar, in consequence of the many
inimitable paintings of him by Vandyke) we can easily picture him, with
measured step and pensive aspect, taking his walk along this terrace,
and his face for a moment lighted up with pleasure at the fair scene
which burst upon him; each step as he advanced bringing into view some
new and striking object—the bold front of the High Rock—the wooded
declivities of Apley—the graceful winding of the Severn, with its
“margent green,” and the sloping uplands on either side of it. But
he could not give free indulgence to such pleasurable emotions, for
a heavy burden of care lay upon his mind, which did not admit of his
thoughts being long diverted to anything else.
He left Bridgnorth on the 15th of October, and eight days after was
fought the famous Battle of Edge Hill,[50] in Warwickshire, where, if
it had not been for the fiery impetuosity of Prince Rupert, such a
signal victory might have been gained by the King over the forces of
the rebels, as to decide the fate of the campaign in his favour. Then
followed the taking of Banbury Castle, the march of the King’s army
to Oxford and Reading, and the capture of the town of Marlborough.
These military operations in different parts of the country convinced
the authorities of Bridgnorth of the necessity of making further
preparations for the defence of the town, and we find a Common Hall
order was passed for this purpose, dated November 29th, 1642:—“Watch
and ward shall be duly set day and night in all convenient places of
the towne where the Bayliffs shall think fit, and the open places
within the said towne to be made up as the Bailiffs shall find
expedient; and such as are minded for their own safety, and the safety
of the towne, to bear arms, they are desired with all convenient
expedition to provide arms at the general charge of the towne.”
[50] It appears that the King was exposed to great personal hazard
in this battle, and owed his deliverance to the prompt and intrepid
conduct of Adam Hill, Esq., of Spaldwick. When Prince Rupert, by his
rash pursuit of the enemy’s cavalry, had thrown the royal army into a
state of disorder, the King was at one time in danger of being taken
prisoner, when this brave officer, by rallying a troop of horse, of
which he was in command, checked the advance of the enemy, and thus
averted the King’s danger. Charles shewed his sense of this gallant
feat of arms, and his gratitude for this service, by investing him on
the field of battle with his own royal scarf. This gorgeous scarf,
the material and workmanship of which is peculiarly beautiful, having
descended as an heirloom to Peter Denny, a grandson of Adam Hill’s by
his daughter Cordelia, is now in the possession of Sir Edward Denny,
Bart, of Tralee.—_“Royal Presents to the Denny’s” by Rev. A. B. Rowan,
p. 3._
But in the beginning of the next year they deemed it necessary to
introduce a few horse soldiers into the town, as appears from a Common
Hall order, dated January 25th, 1643; by which it was agreed that nine
dragoons should be maintained at the general charge of the said town.
Towards the charge of the said nine dragoons, it is stated that Mr.
Thomas Corbett undertook to lend a horse and provide a rider, so that
the town should bear the charge of the horse and rider. Thomas Glover
undertook to provide two horses, saddles, and bridles, at 1s. per day
for the hire of each horse. Several other persons furnished a horse
and sword, and a bandolier each. Captains of the watch and ward were
appointed, with orders that the said watch and ward be from Six o’clock
in the morning until Six o’clock in the evening, and from Six o’clock
in the evening until Six o’clock in the morning; and it was appointed
that eight men should watch in the night, and six men in the day.
In the beginning of this year, the King had made Lord Capel, Lieutenant
Governour of our county, than whom there is not one in either
party during those troubled times that bore a more honoured name—a
loyal-hearted servant of the crown—a dutiful and devout member of the
Church of England—one of the firmest, as well as noblest, champions
that the royal cause could boast of.[51] While exercising his function
as Lieutenant Governor of Shropshire, he was not unmindful of so
important a post as Bridgnorth, but adopted means for its security,
as we find by an order of the Common Hall, of May 23rd, 1643:—“The
Right Honorable the Lord Capel, Lieutenant General to the Prince
his Highness, of his Majesty’s forces in the countyes of Worcester,
Salop, and Chester, and the six northern countyes of Wales, hath
appointed Sir Thomas Wolrich, Knight and Bart., to draw his forces of
the trayned band of this county which are under his command, to this
towne and neighbourhood hereabouts of Bridgnorth; it is agreed that
fortifications be made in all fords and places about this towne, and
the liberties thereof, where the said Thomas Wolrich shall think good
to appoint, and that all the men of this towne shall come themselves,
or send labourers to this work, with all speed; unto which work Edward
Cressett, Esq., and Edward Acton, Esq., justices of peace of the said
county, being present, do promise to send labourers and workmen out of
the country. Secondly, whosoever has volunteered will bear arms for
the defence of this towne, and the neighbourhood hereabouts, shall
be listed, and attend the service of training weekly, upon every
Tuesday, to be exercised therein, whose teaching and training for that
service Lieutenant Billingsley (at the towne’s entreaty) is pleased to
undertake.”
[51] Clarendon, who has given a sketch of the character of this
cavalier, and an affecting account of his execution, and of the
christian courage with which he submitted to it, thus sums up his
description of him:—“In a word, he was a man, that whoever shall after
him deserve best of the English nation, he can never think himself
undervalued when he shall hear that his courage, virtue, and fidelity
is laid in the balance with, and compared to that of Lord Capel.” ...
_Vol._ III, _p. 273_.
The year 1644 was a disastrous one to the royal cause, in consequence
of the signal victory, which Cromwell gained over Prince Rupert at
Marston Moor, July 2nd; and the following year opened very gloomily on
the fortunes of the king; but the people of Bridgnorth did not desert
the cause of their sovereign, though recent events had proved it to be
a failing one, but they made further preparations for resisting the
insurgents, and for holding out against them.
It appears that a Committee had been formed for the purpose of
hastening forward the works, and for putting the town in as good a
posture of defence as the circumstances would allow. The following is a
copy of another order made by them, dated May 21st, 1645:—
“Commissioners present,
Sir Lewis Kirke, Governor.
Sir Edward Acton, Bart.
Edward Cressett, Esq.
Francis Billingsley, Lieutenant Colonel.
Thomas Wynde, Lieutenant Colonel.
John Bromley, Esq.
Arthur Weaver.
Edward Latham.
It is ordered that with all convenient speed Colonel Billingsley shall
place soldiers and arms in the North Gate, in Whitburn and in the
Hungry Gates, and that the barns without the works be pulled down,
and that the prisoners who are there be taken thence and disposed of
elsewhere, by Mr. Bailiffs, and that the Towne Walls on both sides
North Gate, and the works about the towne, be presently made up, and
the Towne Hall and New House pulled down, and for the making of the
said wall the treasurer to lay out money not exceeding £10 for workmen,
to be repaid out of the first money raised out of the delinquents’
Estates. _Copia vera._”
[Illustration: _The West (or Hungry) Gate._