_Additional account of Marshland—Parkin—Bishop of Ely’s manor_, _in
Terrington—Queen Henrietta—Admiral Bentinck—Cross Keys—Demolishers of the
banks prosecuted and suppressed—High Tides—Destructive
Inundations—Principal divisions of Marshland_.
Being here to quit Wisbeach, we shall now recross the ditch, {112} and
take another turn in Marshland. In this remarkable District, as has been
already intimated, scarce any edifices are to be seen, either of ancient
or modern date, that are worthy of very particular attention, except the
parish churches; and of them it does not seem necessary to give here any
further description: but it may be just hinted, that next to Walpole
St-Peter’s, already described, the two Terringtons, one of the Tilneys,
West-Walton, and Walsoken, are deemed the most considerable and
remarkable. Some account of them may be found in Parkin’s History of
Freebridge Hundred and half.
In the same work may also be found a pretty distinct and circumstantial
account of the different manors in this district, one of which belonged
formerly to the Crown, as a royal desmesne, and was repeatedly settled on
some of our queen’s consorts, as part of their jointures.—It lies in
Terrington, and is called the bishop of Ely’s manor, having once belonged
to his great lordship of West-Walton, Wisbeach, &c. It remained in the
See of Ely till the death of bishop _Cox_, in 1581, when it came to the
Crown by an Act of Parliament passed in the 4th of Elizabeth. James I.
granted it with all its appurtenances to his eldest son Henry, and after
his decease, to his other son Charles prince of Wales, on whose marriage
it was settled on his queen, as a part of her jointure; from which,
however, it has been thought not very likely that she ever derived much
benefit. {113} In the reign of Charles II. it was again settled on
Catherine of Lisbon, his consort, as part of her dower or jointure, and
was farmed by Sir James Chapman Fuller, bart. In 1696, William Bentinck,
earl of Portland, had a grant of it from king William. Admiral Bentinck,
a descendant of that family, is the present possessor of it, and of the
greatest part of Terrington.—Somewhere upon this estate of his, is said
to be one of the best spots in the whole country for forming a Decoy.—The
Admiral, within these few years, has added to his possessions here a
large extent of salt marshes, which he has rescued from the sea, and
secured by strong and capital embankments. No part of his valuable
territory here exceeds this newly recovered tract, in point of fertility:
nor is it exceeded, if equalled, by any other part of Marshland: and yet
it has been thought, from the high terms on which he lets it, that he
himself has overrated its value. This point, however, must be left for
him and his tenants to settle as they can.
In Terrington is that Wash, or passage into Lincolnshire, commonly called
the _Cross Keys_. “Here (says Parkin) is a guide always attending, to
conduct passengers over, bearing a wand or rod in his hand, probably in
imitation of Moses, who had a rod when he conducted the Israelites
through the Red Sea.” {114} A guide certainly does attend; and it seems
he bears a wand; but that he does so in imitation of Moses, was, perhaps,
never supposed by any one before Mr. Parkin.—These guides might very
probably use a wand, or long rod, for the purpose of sounding the depth
of the water, or to discover any unevenness, dangerous holes, or sloughs
at the bottom.
The Banks erected by the Romans to secure this country, appear to have
been well constructed (as was generally the case with the great works of
that people) and they served probably for ages as effectual bulwarks
against the encroachment of the ocean. In a long course of time,
however, they would naturally fall into decay; and the Saxons, who
succeeded the Romans, being never very remarkable for their attention to
such matters, or their skill in the management of them, it is not to be
wondered that we often hear in aftertimes of breaches in the banks; and
of high tides, or great inland floods deluging and desolating the
country.
As long ago as the reign of Edward I. we read of certain lawless people
making breaches in the banks, and resisting those who would have stopt
them; upon which the king is said to have appointed certain persons to
inquire into those misdemeanours, and punish the offenders. Afterward,
in the same reign, mischievous persons are said to have thrown down the
bank at _Little-lode_; when a new commission was issued to search after
the offenders and bring them to justice. Another commission was issued
some few years after, when Robert Russel, bailiff to the Abbot of Ramsey,
John Mayner, Walter Halleman and others, were found out as offenders,
having by force of arms, broke down the Dam at _Smalelode_, and Richard
Curteys the other at _Wadynstowe_; and the Sheriff was ordered to
apprehend them. All this seems very plainly to indicate, that, even in
the reign of our boasted _English Justinian_, the state of things in this
country was very different from what it was in that of the immortal
_Alfred_. {116} In the 22, of Henry VIII. an act passed, making it
felony to demolish the sea banks, which seems to have put an effectual
stop to those flagitious proceedings.
Among the shocking inundations, from which this low country greatly
suffered in former times, the following seem to be the most
remarkable.—In the year 1236, on the morrow after Martinmas-day, and the
eight following days, the sea, by the violence of the wind, was raised to
such a height, that the banks, yielding to the force of the water, were
broken so, that “of small craft, cattle, and men,” great multitudes were
destroyed. A similar calamity happened about nineteen years afterward.
Also in 1437, by a breach in the bank of Wisbeach Fen, 4,400 acres of
land were overflowed. Another of those disastrous events happened on
Monday and Tuesday, the second and third of October, 1570, by which all
Marshland together with the town of Wigenhale, were overflowed with salt
water; so that from Old Lynn to Magdalen-bridge there were not left ten
roods of the bank whole and firm, to the very great damage of the whole
country. How or when that damage was repaired, or the banks restored to
their former state, does not appear; but in the 39th of the same reign
(that of Elizabeth) complaint was made at a Session of Sewers, that
through neglect of keeping the water in at Rightforth Lode within the
crests of the same, the grounds on the north side of the said Lode were,
in time of great inundations, overflown, which occasioned the tenants,
for avoiding the water, to cut the old Powdike, and issue the said water
into Marshland Fen, to the great loss of the inhabitants and commoners
there. It was therefore ordained and decreed, by the commissioners, that
whoever should so transgress in future, should be fined 20_l._ for every
such default.
After this, on the 1st of April 1607 (5. Jac.) there happened a mighty
tide, which broke Catt’s bank, and drowned Clenchwarton. About 1610,
provision was made for draining the waters of Oldfield, Outwell, &c.
without issuing them through Broken Dike into Marshland, and also for a
general repair of all the banks. How far these measures were carried on,
or effected, cannot now be said; but they proved entirely ineffectual to
secure the country from that dreadful inundation of the sea, which
happened on November 1, 1613 (11 Jac.) and which laid all Marshland and
parts adjacent under water, and proved exceedingly calamitous to the
whole country. In commemoration of this most disastrous event, the
following rather quaint Inscription was set up on the East Wall of the
south aisle in Wisbeach Church—
“To the immortal praise of God Almighty, that saveth his people in
all adversities, be it kept in perpetual memory, That on the
Feast-Day of _All saints_, being the first of November in the year of
our Lord 1613, late in the night, the sea broke in through the
violence of a North East wind, meeting with a Spring Tide, and
overflowed all _Marshland_, with the town of _Wisbeche_, both on the
north side and on the south; and almost the whole Hundred round
about; to the great danger of men’s lives, and the losse of some;
besides the exceeding great lossc which these counties sustained
through the breach of the banks, and spoil of corn, cattle, and
housing, which could not be estimated.”
Dugdale in his History of Embanking has preserved—
“An Abstract of the losses in general (sustained on the above
occasion) as they were presented by the Jurors of several Hundreds at
the Session of Sewers held at Lynn, December 9, 1613.—_Within_ the
Ring of Marshland the statement of the said losses is as
follows—_Terrington_, 10,416_l_; _Walpole_, 3,000_l_; _West-Walton_,
850_l_; _Walsoken_, 1,328_l_; _Emneth_, 150_l_; _Wigenhale_ and
_South Lynn_, 6,000_l_; _Tilney_ and _Islington_, 4,380_l_;
_Clenchwarton_, 6,000_l_; _West_ and _North Lynn_, 4,000_l_—in all
35,834_l_.—_Without_ the Ring of Marshland, the damage was far less
considerable, and is given as follows, _Gaywood_, 205_l_; _South
Wotton_, 313_l_; _North Wotton_, 810_l_; _Watlington_, 500_l_;
_Totnel_ cum _Wormegay_, 60_l_; _Holm_ cum _Thorpland_, 40_l_; _Stow
Bardolf_, 100_l_: in all 2,028_l_; which added to the former account
will amount to no less a sum than 37,862_l_.”—A sum equal, perhaps,
to near half a million of our money.
The damages at or about Wisbeach, and _out of Norfolk_, are not included
in the above abstract; though they must, doubtless, have been very
considerable, and probably not much less than the former: the whole
together must, of course, have been enormous, and equal to many hundred
thousand pounds of our money.
In the months of January and February, and particularly on the 23rd of
March in the ensuing year (1614,) the country sustained much additional
damage from the snows that had fallen, and which had occasioned vast
floods from the upland countries upon their going off. A great part of
Marshland, from the bank called the Edge, between the towns and Emneth,
to the New Podike, was overflowed with fresh water, by divers breaches,
between Salter’s Lode and Downham Bridge. The country to the south of
Wisbeach also suffered greatly on the occasion; as did likewise the
greater part of the land within South Eaubrink in Holland, which was so
overflowed and damaged, from Spalding to Tydd St. Giles, as to be almost
entirely lost for that year.—From these premises it evidently appears,
that the boasted fertility, and numerous advantages of Marshland and the
adjacent parts have often been woefully counterbalanced by disadvantages
and evils of a most serious and distressing nature; so as to leave the
inhabitants but very little room to exult over their less wealthy
countrymen, whose lot is fallen in the more sterile and rugged parts of
the kingdom.
Before we finish this Section, it may be proper to say something of the
principal divisions of Marshland, and its extent, which we often find
differently represented. In its fullest extent, or _within its ring_, as
it is sometimes expressed, Marshland comprehends the following parishes,
(with the exception of part of that of St. German’s, which lies on the
eastern side of the river Ouse.)—1. Emneth. 2. Walsoken. 3. West
Walton. 4. Walpole St Andrew’s. 5. Walpole St Peter’s. 6. Terrington
St Clement’s. 7. Terrington St John’s. 8. Clenchwarton. 9. North Lynn.
10. West Lynn. 11. Tilney All Saints. 12. Tilney St. Lawrence. 13.
Islington cum Tilney. 14. Wigenhale St. Mary’s. 15. Wigenhale St.
German’s. 16. Wigenhale St. Mary Magdalen.—In another view, as a
privileged district, and, particularly, as interested in the _Smeeth_,
Marshland has been considered as much less extensive, comprehending only
eleven parishes, or rather confined to _seven towns_, or townships: and
then N. and W. Lynn, with the three Wigenhales are excluded. These
townships; or the seven towns of Marshland, as they are usually called,
are thus enumerated—1. Emneth. 2. Walsoken. 3. West Walton. 4. The two
Walpoles, both under one. 5. The two Terringtons, both under one. 6.
Clenchwarton. 7. The two Tilneys and Islington, all under one, or
constituting one township.—At what time this division of the district
into seven townships took place, does not appear. It was, probably, at a
remote period, and before the formation of the eleven parishes, which
these townships now contain. It may, perhaps not unreasonably be
presumed to have originated under the East-Anglian government, at an
early period of the Heptarchy:—if not, indeed, even before either the
Heptarchy, or yet the East-Anglian government had ever sprung into
existence.