DEVOTETH THIS PART OF THIS TREATISE,
IN TESTIMONY OF HIS UNFEIGNED LOVE TO
THEM, WHO WERE THE FIRST TO WHOM HE
WAS SENT (AS FIXED) TO PUBLISH THE
GOSPEL; AND IN THANKFULNESS TO THE
DIVINE MAJESTY, WHO THERE PRIVILEGED
AND PROTECTED HIM.
It has been already stated that the fire, which took place during
the siege of the Castle, entirely destroyed the High Town, and
left it a heap of ruins. A few houses indeed survived the general
destruction.[68] One of these, which is still standing, deserves
a passing notice, as being the birthplace of Dr. Percy, Bishop of
Dromore, the well known author of “The Reliques of Ancient English
Poetry.”[69] It stands at the bottom of the Cartway, adjoining
Underhill Street, and is conspicuous among the dwellings which surround
it, not only from its size, but from its picturesque appearance, being
ornamented with several pointed gables, and being constructed partly
of solid beams of oak, in some places curiously carved, and partly of
masonry. It was built in the latter end of the sixteenth century, as
the following embossed inscription in the entrance hall informs us:—
[68] One could wish, as a mere matter of curiosity, that a remarkable
building, called “Forester’s Folly,” had been amongst those which
escaped the fire; for it was built by Richard Forester, the private
secretary of no less famous a person than Bishop Bonner, and bore the
above appellation most likely on account of the cost of its erection.
William Baxter, the Antiquary, who was a descendant of Forester, has
the following passage in his life referring to the circumstance:—
“Proavus meus Richardus de isto matrimonio susceptus uxorem habuit
Annam Richardi dicti Forestarii filiam: qui quidem Richardus filius
erat natu minor prænobilis familiæ Forestariorum. (olim Regiorum
Vigorniensis saltûs custodum) & famoso Episcopo Bonnero a-Secretis Hic
Suttanum Madoci incolebat, & egregias ædes posuit in urbicula dicta
Brugge, sive ad Pontem vel hodie dictas Forestarii Dementiam.”—_Autoris
Vita._
[69] Appendix N.
“EXCEPT THE LORD BViLD THE OWSE, THE LABOURERS THEREOF EVAIL NOTHING.
ERECTED BY R. FOR [Qy Foster] 1580.”
It was a large and stately mansion, and when the Cartway was the
principal entrance to the town it was well situated, and must have been
regarded as a dwelling of some importance. It is now in a neglected
condition, a large part of the building is untenanted, a part of the
premises is used for an iron foundry, and another part for a huckster’s
shop. But even in its present rude and decayed condition, a certain
degree of interest attaches to it, as being one of the few surviving
relics of our old town; which interest is further enhanced, from its
having been, about an hundred years ago, the birth place of one, whose
literary attainments may be supposed to reflect no little honor on
Bridgnorth.
[Illustration]
It remains for us to consider how the town recovered from the state of
almost total ruin in which it had been left, and was made habitable
again. It appears that in the same year in which it was destroyed,
the Bailiffs and others forwarded a Petition to the House of Commons,
setting forth in strong terms the miserable condition to which the
inhabitants had been reduced, and praying for relief. They state
that the loss sustained by them amounted to £90,000, or thereabouts;
that upwards of three hundred poor families had been “inforced” by
the loss of their goods, their trade, and habitations, “to disperse
into severall parts of the country, for harbour and for subsistence,
many among them crying aloud for bread”: and they humbly beseech the
Parliament to authorize a general collection to be made for them
throughout the country, or in some other way, to afford relief to
their necessities. The Rev. Gilbert Walden, who has been referred to
before, took this petition to London, and by his zeal and diligence
obtained a favorable answer to it; as appears from the following
extract in the Common Hall Order Book:—“Bridgnorth. At a Comon hall
of the said Town of Bridgnorth, the 27th. of January, Aᵒ Dⁿⁱ 1647.
Francis Burne and Richard Synge, Gent., being Bailiffs, &c. * * * * At
this Comon hall, Mr. Gilbert Walden, Minister of this Town, and Publiq
Preacher, returning to the Town from London, 25th. of this January
Instant, came into this comon hall in his own pson, & acquainted the
Town with his great care & paynes in solliciting the Parliament with
a peticion from the Town, for some repaire of their great loss by the
late burning of the High Town of Bridgnorth, when the Church, Colledg,
and Almshouses were burnt with the said Town. All the losses thereby
sustynedd amounting to 90,000£, as by the said Peticion was set forth
and certified: and the said Mr. Walden pducing lres pattents, under
the great seale of England, for a general collecion thorough out all
England, for rebuilding of the said Town, and repayringe the said
losses, and moving for some course to be taken for distributing the
Briefs, and setting them on work in all shires of England and Wales,
with all ye convenient expidicion that might be, and advising a way to
that behalf; and shewing the Town withall that it had cost him in the
acquiring & getting of these Lres pattentes and Briefs, besides the
great troubling of his friends to ayde & assist him therein.”
But these letters patent, under the Great Seal, granted by the
Parliament, seem to have yielded but little fruit to the impoverished
inhabitants of Bridgnorth; and the collections made under its sanction
were so inadequate to their wants, that they were obliged to resort to
other means for obtaining relief. They addressed a circular letter,
(to some merchants in London, as I conclude from the contents of it)
complaining bitterly of the very little sympathy which had been shewn
to them throughout the country, and of the very scant measure of
assistance which they had received, and very earnestly soliciting their
aid. It also appears that another circular was drawn up, to be sent for
the same purpose to persons whom they supposed to be well affected to
Bridgnorth, in the counties of Derby, Worcester, and Gloucester. The
first is as follows:—
“Gentlemen,
In the behalfe of our poore Towne, whereof wee are
now the representative Body, wee heartiely thanke you for
that you have ben pleased to put your helping hands to
raise us up againe out of the Ashes. Our greatest hopes
is in the charity of yourselves and your friends in the
citie. Wee have had sad experience of the countries
chariety, yet what the further result wil be wee daylie
must expect; howsoever, wee shall acknowledge our
engagements unto you above all other, be it less or
more. Wee beseach you continew your care and paynes
for us: and your reward shall be implored from God by
us, and ourselves, both for our minister and our whole
Towne, shall acknowledge your goodness with hartie
thankes and praiere, and wee be unto you
Your ready servants,
& friends to cerve you.
Bridgnorth, 10 may,
1647.”
The state of destitution, in which the inhabitants of this ruined town
were placed, was such, that it is no wonder that they looked in every
direction for relief, from whence they thought it at all likely to
come, and that they were thus urgent in their appeal for it. In one
case they were not disappointed, as appears from the following letter,
addressed, about the same date I suppose, to Mr. Pully, of Essex: a
name well known, and gratefully remembered by the people of Bridgnorth,
for other benefits besides those referred to here.[70]
[70] This Mr. Pulley, of Hassington, in the county of Essex, gave to
will “to his Wife Wynnefred for her natural life, all this his house
and land, lying in Beauchamp Roothing, in the county of Essex, and
after her dicease, to the inhabitants of the Towne of Bridgnorth, in
the county of Salop, for ever; conditionally, that they should every
year and yearly, for ever, give £16 of the rent of the said land unto
two young men or women, of the said Towne, who should stand in need of
it, whose Tordlinesse might make it likely to do them good, viz, £8
apiece.”
“To Mr. Pully, of Essex.
Wee have cause to blesse God that our miserable
towne affords a native friend so far to besteed us as by
yourself. Wee will studdy some requitall, as God shall
please, to raise us out of our ashes.
Wee entreat you to go on in helping us, as Mr. Bushopp
hath told us you have begun. The Lord reward you,
wee and all ours shall pray for you; and if ever wee
shall be happy to see you, wee shall give some further
testimony of our thankfullness.
Who speake in the behalf of ourselves, our minister,
and whole towne.”
The want of a Town Hall seems to have been much felt by the Burgesses
of Bridgnorth—the former one, which stood outside the North Gate,
having been pulled down during the Civil Wars; but the erection of
a new one, with new materials, was more than they could possibly
accomplish, in the impoverished state in which they had been left. They
therefore applied to Lady Bartue of Wenlock, and petitioned that she
would grant them the materials of an old barn which were about to be
sold, for the sum of £40 or £50; by means of which they might be able
to rebuild the Hall.[71] The petition was granted; but whether the old
materials were bestowed as a free gift, or sold for the sum specified,
does not appear. The building was in consequence erected; and partly,
at least, through the earnest advice of Mr. Gilbert Walden, in a letter
addressed by him to the Bailiffs, was placed, not in the situation
of the former Hall, but in the middle of the High Street. It was not
completed, however, till four years after the date of his letter (April
24th., 1648); as appears from the following entry in the Common Hall
Order Book:—
[71] Appendix O.
“The New Hall set up in the Market Place of the High Street of
Bridgnorth was begun, and the stone arches thereof made, when Mr.
Francis Preen and Mr. Symon Beauchamp were Bayliffs in summer, 1650.
And the Timber work, and building upon the same stone arches, was set
up when Mr. Thomas Burne and Mr. Roger Taylor were Bayliffs of the said
Town of Bridgnorth, in July and August, 1652.”
[Illustration: _The Town Hall._]
But notwithstanding these applications for assistance from
various quarters, and the earnest efforts made by the inhabitants
themselves, the town appears to have continued during the period of
the Commonwealth, almost in the same state of ruin in which it was
left after the siege—the Church, College, and Almshouses,[72] still
roofless and dilapidated—and nothing effectual was done for their
restoration, and the rebuilding of the town, till the reign of Charles
II. Shortly after he was restored to the throne, a very earnest
Petition was forwarded to him from the Bailiffs and Burgesses of
the Borough, and other inhabitants of the town, praying for relief;
and this Petition was accompanied by a certificate, under the hands
and seals of Sir William Whitmore, Sir Thomas Wolrich, Sir Walter
Acton, Sir John Weld, Sir Richard Ottley, and others, attesting the
damage which had been done to the town, and the amount of the loss of
property sustained by the inhabitants in consequence. This petition,
backed by this certificate, drew from the King a proclamation,[73]
addressed to all his subjects in behalf of Bridgnorth. It is very
long and elaborate—very carefully worded—and not only sets forth
very fully the wants of the petitioners, but pleads their cause with
a warmth and earnestness which one would not expect to find in an
official document. It authorizes a general collection to be made
throughout the kingdom; “in all and every the Cities, Towns Corporate,
Priviledged Places, Parishes, Hamlets, Villages, and all other places
whatsoever,” in order to assist the destitute people of Bridgnorth
in rebuilding their shattered town; and it directs both Ministers
and Churchwardens to do what in them lies to further this object in
their different localities. It would be interesting to know the exact
amount which this royal proclamation, and another which followed it
in about ten years, produced. There is no doubt that it was something
considerable—sufficient to give an impulse to the industry of the
inhabitants—to enable them to restore their ruined Church, College, and
Almshouses—to efface in a great measure the damages of war, and to make
Bridgnorth again a habitable town.
[72] Appendix P.
[73] Appendix Q.
Thus, from the happy restoration of the monarchy in England, and the
re-establishment of its church, we may date the restoration of our town
from the state of ruin, in which it had been left; and its restoration
being coeval with these important and felicitous events, many would
be disposed to regard as no bad omen of its welfare. The motto in the
arms of a neighbouring city may well express our wish for its future
prosperity; for though the terms are hardly suitable to a town of so
small a circumference as ours, yet it merits well the character it has
maintained, in almost every era of its history—_Floreat semper fidelis
civitas_.
* * * * *
My subject was “The Antiquities of Bridgnorth.” I have already
far passed the boundaries which confined me to such a subject, by
referring to matters which occurred so late as the reign of Charles
II. I would, however, venture one step farther, and refer to an event
which took place in the reign of his successor, James II, for I find
that it was taken particular notice of in Bridgnorth at the time of
its occurrence; and it is one which, from the great interest and
importance that attaches to it, seems to claim attention from us
whenever it happens to be brought before us.
The event referred to occurred in the memorable year of 1688. In the
“Blakeway Papers,” in the Bodleian Library, which contain matters
concerning Bridgnorth, the following entry is made respecting it:—“When
the Bishops were quit, there were 16 bonefires in this town, and the
ringing of bells night and day. Mr. Cornes and Mr. Bailey, the two
Ministers, refused to sign the Declaration.” This notice alludes to the
well known Declaration issued by King James, and the acquittal of the
seven Bishops who had been imprisoned for venturing to oppose it. James
the Second was as zealous a member of the Church of Rome, perhaps,
as any of his subjects, lay or ecclesiastical; and the great object
of his life seemed to be, to regain for his Church the same usurped
authority over the civil and religious liberties of our country, which
she possessed before the Reformation. Among other means for furthering
this object, he published this famous “Declaration.” It was a very
singular document. On the plea of establishing liberty of conscience,
it abrogated, on the King’s sole authority, all the penal laws which
were in force on the subject of religion, the King thus assuming to
himself, as one of his royal prerogatives, the power of dispensing with
exiting statutes, without the consent of Parliament. The real intention
of the King in all this was, to open the door to Roman Catholics to
places of power and authority, which the laws then in force strictly
forbade, as being incompatible with the freedom and safety of the
state. To give publicity, as well as sanction, to this Declaration,
the King issued a command that it should be read by the Clergy during
Divine Service, in every church in the kingdom. The whole proceeding
was perfectly arbitrary and despotic; and if it had been allowed to
go on unchecked, it would, as it has been well observed, have given a
death blow to the Constitution, and have laid the nation’s liberties at
the feet of the sovereign. Where then were the champions of freedom in
this great crisis of danger? Where were to be found the men, who had
courage enough to resist this portentous encroachment on the liberties
of England? Where the assertors of the nation’s rights against these
unlawful inroads of the royal prerogative? Not in a band of youthful
and ardent enthusiasts in the cause of freedom—not in a knot of
ruthless republicans, whose tempers were impatient of monarchial
rule, and who hated the very name of King—not in a set of restless
innovators, who loved innovation for the excitement it produced, or
for the spoil which it might yield to them—not in a rude soldiery,
who were ambitious of enterprise, and longed to signalize themselves
again by deeds of daring—but in the persons of seven aged Bishops of
the Church, some of whom were not only oppressed by the burden of age,
but weighed down by sickness and infirmity; and all of them, both from
temper and principle, averse to anything that seemed like resistance
to kingly authority. Yet it was these who stood forward at this time
of danger, as the defenders of the nation’s liberties. Their names
were well known to our townsmen at the time, for Bridgnorth, as well
as other places, rang with unusual joy at the news of their acquittal;
and it is well that their names should be known to our townspeople
now, as the names of men who have laid the nation under a deep debt of
gratitude. They were Sancroft, Archbishop of Canterbury; Lloyd, Bishop
of St. Asaph; White, Bishop of Peterborough; Turner, Bishop of Ely;
Lake, Bishop of Chichester; Trelawney, Bishop of Bristol; and Ken,
the pious Bishop of Bath and Wells,[74] a saint indeed, formed on the
primitive model, whose devout aspirations in his Morning and Evening
Hymn have served to kindle the devotion of the members of the English
Church for nearly two centuries. These seven Prelates met together at
Lambeth in this critical juncture, and drew up a petition to James, in
which they set forth in plain but respectful language the illegality
of his Declaration, and humbly prayed him not to insist on their
publishing it. In consequence of this they were committed to the Tower.
The King, notwithstanding their dutiful remonstrance, was resolved on
enforcing on the clergy throughout the kingdom the publication of this
unlawful document, and sent his commands to that effect: but of the
many thousands to whom this mandate was sent, not two hundred complied
with it; and among those who had the courage to refuse, we are glad to
find the names of the two Ministers of Bridgnorth, Mr. Cornes, and Mr.
Bailey.
[74] Appendix R.
The Bishops after a short term of imprisonment were admitted to bail,
and at the ensuing Sessions were impeached at Westminster Hall on a
charge of publishing a seditious libel. Every circumstance which took
place on this memorable occasion is full of interest, and historians
have thought the most minute details not unworthy of record. On their
way to the scene of trial, the Bishops, it is mentioned, received
every possible expression of reverence and sympathy from the populace,
who formed a lane for their passage, through which as they moved, many
kissed their hands and their garments, and many fell on their knees and
earnestly asked their blessing. Westminster Hall never witnessed such a
scene as their trial presented. As it proceeded, the interest felt by
the spectators was intense; and when at length the verdict was given
by the foreman of the Jury, “Not Guilty,” the profound silence which
had reigned throughout the court was broken by the most tumultuous
acclamations. The multitudes assembled there raised, in spite of the
menace of the Solicitor General, such a shout as shook the old fabric
of Westminster Hall, and conveyed, quicker than the speediest messenger
could do, the tidings to the city. The Bishops on leaving the court
immediately repaired to Whitehall Chapel, to return thanks to God for
their deliverance, and other churches were thronged by multitudes who
assembled in them for the same purpose. “The bells rung from every
tower, every house was illuminated, and bonfires were kindled in
every street.” The joy was not confined to London, it was propagated
throughout the kingdom, and felt in the remotest villages. Bridgnorth,
as we have seen, fully shared in it. Our streets on the occasion echoed
with loud shouts of triumph—the river Severn reflected on its stream
the blaze of many a bonfire—and the tuneful bells of St. Leonard’s and
St. Mary’s rang incessantly night and day to celebrate the event.
* * * * *
I have thus brought before the reader the few historical notices which
I have been able to collect, respecting Bridgnorth, from the time of
Alfred the Great to the close of the reign of James II. I am aware how
much more interest would attach to these if they had been skilfully
handled, inasmuch as they touch on some very important events, and
memorable epochs of our national history. Those indeed who feel the
force of local attachment may read them with interest, whatever defects
may be apparent in the mode of bringing them together, and it is for
such readers that they have been collected. I am aware also, that I
have dwelt much longer on certain facts in our history than many would
think at all necessary, or than was exactly pertinent to my subject.
My reason is, that some would read these things here, who would not be
likely to read them elsewhere; and I thought it advisable, on account
of their importance, that they should be known in detail. Besides, I
was anxious to make this little work more useful in its character,
than it would have been if I had confined myself to a statement of the
facts relating to our town, without connecting them with the general
history of England. As it is, the review which we have taken, ought not
to be without its moral influence. Many generations of men have thus
passed rapidly before us: having acted their parts in quick succession,
they have disappeared from the stage of life. They had “their exits
and their entrances,” and now are seen no more. It is natural for
us to reflect, how utterly unimportant to them it now is in what
capacity they appeared—whether as kings or subjects—whether as masters
or as slaves—whether they were honoured or dishonoured—illustrious
or obscure—prosperous or unfortunate. It matters not to them now,
whether their projects succeeded or failed—whether the enterprises they
so keenly entered on issued in triumph or disaster. Their restless
activities have been put a stop to. The hand of death has arrested
them. The same destiny awaits ourselves. We too shall soon make our
exit; and the interests which now so deeply engage us—the circumstances
which now press on us in all their vivid reality—the scenes which are
now before our eyes, and the busy part we take in them—will ere long be
reckoned among the things that have been; and nothing will be left us,
but the character which we have acquired in passing through them—our
fitness or unfitness for a better state: and this reflection I desire
to leave on the mind of the reader.
It would seem, however, scarcely natural for me to close these pages,
without expressing a wish for the future welfare of a place, the
scattered notices of whose past history I have here collected. I have
been too long, and too intimately connected with it, not to feel the
wish. In Bridgnorth I have passed more than twenty years. I reckon them
the happiest of my life. I have good reason for doing so. Many domestic
blessings—many social pleasures—many natural enjoyments—have here been
allotted to me. Here “the lines have fallen to me in pleasant places,”
and in the fair scenes of nature which surround us, there has been open
to me a source of “unreproved pleasures,” of which it is my own fault
if I have not largely partaken. Here too I have formed acquaintances,
which have ripened into friendships—friendships which have yielded me
something more than mere enjoyment—and which I have reason to hope
will last as long as life itself. But still closer ties bind me to
this place. Here I have been entrusted with the care of souls, and
have been called to minister in the Church of God. This consideration
necessarily outweighs every other, and prompts me with the most earnest
wishes for the welfare of a place, between many of the inhabitants
of which and myself there is so strict and sacred a fellowship. And
not from these alone, but from those also with whom I am not thus
officially connected—from the inhabitants of St. Mary’s parish, as well
as from those of St. Leonard’s, I have received such proofs of kindness
and regard during my ministry here, as make me feel an interest in
everything that can concern their well-being. May they prosper in every
way—as a community, and as individuals—in their civil and commercial
interests—in their social, moral, and religious condition. May they
secure to themselves that which has “the promise of the life that now
is, and of that which is to come:” that when things temporal shall give
place to things eternal—when the changes and chances of this mortal
life shall cease—and all the vicissitudes which so painfully diversify
the history of this world have passed away—they may have their lot and
part in that kingdom which cannot be moved, and “of whose government
and peace there shall be no end.”
_Finis._
[Illustration: A COPY of an OLD MAP of the BOROUGH OF BRIDGENORTH IN
POSSESSION OF THE CORPORATION.]