or _Hermits of St. Augustin_, we are told that they had for their
founder, pope _Alexander IV._ who, observing that the _Hermits_ were
divided into several societies, some of which followed the maxims of the
famous _William_, others the rule of _St. Augustin_, while others again
were distinguished by different denominations, formed the project of
uniting them all into one religious order, and subjecting them to the
same rule of discipline, even that which bears the name of _St.
Augustin_. This project, we are told, was put in execution in 1256:
{517} so that this order is somewhat younger, or of later origin than any
of the other orders of mendicants; though not much later than the two
preceding ones, for all the three sprung up within the same century.—What
good or benefit the former inhabitants of Lynn might derive from the
erection of this convent in their town, or from the exertions of the
Austin Friars among them, is a question which the present writer is not
fully prepared to answer. The reader, as in the former cases, is left to
think and judge for himself, as he has an undoubted right to do. But
whatever good or ill, advantage or disadvantage, benefit or detriment
might accrue to the inhabitants from the residence of the said four
orders of friars among them, their convents, unquestionably, must have
contributed not a little to give additional grandeur and respectability
to the appearance of the town. Four large and stately monasteries, with
their lofty towers, ranged along the whole town from south to north, must
have given Lynn an appearance, especially from the country, very
different, and far superior to what it can boast of at present. In
short, we may safely say, that it must have appeared before the
reformation, from the circumstances just alluded to, as a place of at
least double the size and double the consequence that it has done since
that period. After all, it is not meant here to disparage the
reformation, or to suggest that it did not prove beneficial to Lynn, as
well as to the kingdom at large.—It is only meant to assert, that this
town, from the great size and number of its monasteries and other
religious houses, must have made a very different, and far more splendid
appearance before the reformation, than it has done since. But we will
here drop the subject, and conclude the present section.
SECTION VI.
_Of the Friars de Penitentia_, _or brothers of repentance_, _and their
Convent—also the College of Priests—with the Hospital and Church of St.
John in this town_.
It seems remarkable that out of 1148 monasteries and religious houses,
seized upon by the sovereign and suppressed at the general dissolution,
no less than 79 were in Norfolk, and 10 of them in this town alone; which
must be a large proportion of those of the county, and still larger of
those of the whole kingdom. Norfolk was also distinguished, and is so
still, for its number of parishes, exceeding that of any other county,
even of Yorkshire, though four times its size. This superabundance of
parishes and convents, &c. seems to indicate that its inhabitants were
formerly of an uncommonly devout and religious, or at least superstitious
and sanctimonious cast: which character may be supposed to have belonged
to the people of Lynn as much as to any of the rest. At present a very
large proportion of the inhabitants of Norfolk, especially in country
places, are exceedingly ignorant, boorish and heathenish. Nor do the
generality of the established clergy appear to give themselves the least
concern about this, or express any serious desire to promote the
conversion and civilization of their poor neighbours. The dissenters,
and particularly those of them called Methodists, have done already far
more in this way than the whole body of the national or parochial
priesthood: and they are continually enlarging their scale of operation,
and extending their labours, with great effect, to the most retired and
obscure places, where the divine power of the Gospel and the happy
influence of its moral precepts were hardly ever before felt or
experienced.
Of the ten houses suppressed in this town at the general dissolution, one
is said to belong to _the friars de Penitentia_. This religious order
appears to have sprang up in the same century with the proceeding ones;
for we are told that it was instituted in 1221, by the famous _St.
Anthony of Padua_, who was born at Lisbon, in 1195, and whose original
name was _Ferrand_. After going through his studies with reputation, he
entered into a monastery of canons regular, of the order of St. Austin,
where he continued two years; when, for the sake of greater solitude, he
retired with the leave of his superior to Coimbra, where he distinguished
himself by his exposition of the scriptures. At this time St. Francis
was living, and some of his order having suffered martyrdom, in
consequence of undertaking to preach to the Mahometans in Africa, they
were so much celebrated on that account, that it excited in Ferrand, as
well as many others, an ardent desire to follow their example, though
they should share the same fate. With the leave of his superior, he
therefore joined this new society; and entering one of their monasteries,
called that of _St. Anthony_, he took their habit and assumed their name.
Presently after this, his zeal actually carried him to Africa; but he was
obliged to return, in consequence of a disease with which he was seized
upon the coast; but was driven by a tempest to Sicily, where hearing of a
general chapter of his order being to be held at Assisi in Italy, he
repaired to it. Tho’ he was then little known, the provincial of his
order was so much pleased with his appearance, that he took him with him,
and placed him in a convent called _the mount of St. Paul_. After some
months, his superiors procured him holy orders, and sent him, together
with some other priests, to Forli, where he distinguished himself by his
preaching. Being greatly concerned at the progress of heresy then in the
northern parts of Italy, in order the better to prepare himself for
encountering the heretics, he went through a course of theology at
Vercelli, under a famous doctor there; but he soon surpassed him in
knowledge, and was thought equal to any undertaking.
Being sent by his superiors to undertake the office of guardian to
Limiges in France, in order to the conversion of the heretics in that
place, it happened at one time, that his business as a preacher required
him to be in one place, and his office of guardian in another: and this
was the occasion of the first of the many miracles that his historian
ascribes to him, and it was of a very singular kind: for it is asserted
that he was actually in both places at the same time. After an earnest
prayer for this purpose, he without leaving the pulpit in which he was
preaching on a Good Friday, appeared in the choir, and sung the lesson
which was his part of the service there. At Montpellier also, he once
preached in the dome at the same time that he was singing hallelujah in
the choir of the church. After this his whole life seems to have
consisted of little more than a series of miracles, and many of them of
quite an original and extraordinary kind; so that it must have required
much ingenuity to devise them. {522}—Some of them may be here inserted by
way of sample, and to enable the reader to judge of the probable effect
or consequence of the settlement of Anthony’s disciples, _the friars de
Penitentia_, in this town.
When Anthony was at one time preaching in a temporary building,
constructed of wood, he apprised his audience that the devil was about to
terrify and hurt them, but that no harm would eventually happen to any of
them. Accordingly while he was preaching, the devil untied the ropes by
which the boards were held together, so that the whole erection came
down. But when it might have been expected that many of the persons
assembled would have been crushed to death, or at least maimed, not one
of them was found to have received the smallest hurt!—Another time a
pious woman, much attached to Anthony, who had a son of a reprobate
character, when she was attending one of his sermons the devil came in
the form of a courier, and delivering a letter informed her that her son
was dead. This news threw her, and the audience in general, into such
disorder, that the congregation was breaking up; when Anthony cried out
that the news was not true, that it was the devil that had brought it,
and that the young man was alive, as they would soon be convinced;
accordingly, while he was speaking he entered the place, and the devil
absconded.
Something more extraordinary than any of the preceding miracles, was
exhibited at Rome. For being required by the pope to preach to a
congregation, consisting of people of very different countries, assembled
for a crusade, they all heard him speak in their different languages,
though he spoke in Italian only.—But the astonishing miracle exhibited at
Rimini, contributed more to the fame of Anthony than all his other
miracles. Preaching in that city, which abounded with heretics, and the
people refusing to hear him, he went to the sea side, followed by a great
crowd; when, the sea being remarkably calm, he addressed himself to the
fishes; saying, “Since men will not hear me, come you and hearken to what
God will tell you by me.” Immediately on this the sea was covered with
the heads of fishes, which with open mouths fixed their eyes on him; and
notwithstanding their hostility to each other, they mildly and humbly (as
it is said) without moving their fins, or making the least motion in the
water, attended to him. After a discourse of some length, he exhorted
them to praise God; and since they could not do it in words shew some
visible signs of reverence. On this they all bowed their heads, moving
them very gently, and with gestures expressive of humility and devotion,
acknowledged their obligation to God, and signified their apt probation
of what had been addressed to them. The spectators greatly amazed (and
well they might: for who could avoid it?) looked sometimes on the fishes,
and sometimes on the preacher; and being reproved by him for their
infidelity, thus upbraided by the mute fishes, they fell on their knees,
asking his pardon, and promising to live and die in the catholic faith.
He then pronounced a blessing, both on the men and the fishes, and they
departed with great joy. {524}
Such were some of the numerous miracles which Anthony is said to have
worked in his lifetime, exclusive of others said to have been wrought
afterwards at his grave, and which were perhaps no fewer. Of those who
have heard of these mighty and wonderful works of Anthony, the far
greater part in all ages, even to the present day, have believed the
report, and admitted the reality of the miracles: which, however, will
not establish the fact, that they were actually performed, any more than
the faith of the mahometans in the alleged miracles of their pretended
prophet will establish that fact, or prove that the miracles ascribed to
him did really take place. In each case we have a sad specimen of that
easy and miserable credulity by which poor human nature has often most
wretchedly disgraced herself, and unintentionally aided the cause and
triumphs of imposture. Nor will it follow from the abundance of false
miracles that have been heard of, or because the world has been so often
imposed upon by them, that there never have been any real ones; on the
contrary, all counterfeits seem invariably to imply the existence of what
is real and genuine; and that, it is presumed, may be proved to be the
case here. But this is not a place to enter largely upon this subject.
Anthony had been some years among the Franciscans before he instituted
the order _de Penitantia_, which was in 1221, when he also fixed at
Padua, where he sometimes preached in the open air to 30,000 persons, who
came to hear him from all the neighbouring towns. His discourses, it is
said, had a wonderful effect in converting prostitutes, delivering
prisoners, reconciling enemies, procuring restitution of usury, remission
of debts, &c. He was indefatigable, and preached every day. Many
persons expressing a desire to embrace the order, he was unwilling to
dissolve so many regular marriages, and dispeople the country: he
therefore gave them a rule, according to which they might serve God in a
similar manner in their houses, living in some measure like monks, but
without austerity.—This is the substance of what we have learnt about
this order. He died in the year above mentioned at the age of 36, and
was canonized the next year. We are told that he was ten years among the
Franciscans, if indeed it can be said that he afterwards properly quitted
them for the friars _de Penitentia_ are accounted a 3rd order of
Franciscans. {525a} We are told that they settled at Lynn before the 5th
of Edward I. and that their house here was dissolved by Henry VIII.
{525b} but where it stood cannot now be ascertained. Parkin seemed
inclined to indentify it with the well known convent of the Grey Friars,
but that idea or supposition seems not at all admissible, as our
apparently most accurate accounts of the religious houses dissolved here
represent that of the friars of this order as quite distinct from the
said convent, and this seems corroborated by Parkin’s own assertion, that
“in 1307, Roger Flegg was vicar general of the order of friars de
Penitentia in England at Lenne.” {526a} From the peculiar constitution
of this order it seems rather probable that its houses or convents might
be neither so large nor yet so numerous as those of most of the other
orders. As that at Lynn might be but small, there may not be much reason
to wonder that its site is not now discoverable; that being also the case
with some others of our smaller religious houses.—With all its profound
and extravagant reverence for its founder, St. Anthony, and its unlimited
credulity, or faith in his pretended miracles, this does not appear to be
the worst of the popish orders, but rather one of the better sort of
them, as it seemed earnestly to set its face against many of the
prevailing vices of the times, which must have somewhat checked the
progress of immorality and licentiousness.—These friars might therefore
be of some use here: but if they were so, and did some good, in partially
checking the progress of vice and immorality, is it not also to be
feared, on the other hand, that they did no less, or rather much more
harm, in checking likewise the progress of virtue and true religion, and
promoting to the utmost of their power an intolerant, persecuting, and
antichristian spirit? {526b} That such was really the fact seems
unquestionable; so that these friars had little room to boast of their
good doings. But we will now quit them, and proceed to
_The_ COLLEGE. This edifice stands near the Town Hall, and is now
inhabited by Mr. _Toosey_, a respectable merchant. It is by far the most
entire, and best preserved of all the religious houses that were here
dissolved; and were popery again to become predominant among us, this
fabrick might be very easily converted or restored to its original
use.—Parkin gives of it a very odd and confused account, as if it had
been a part of the Priory, though somewhat detached from it—“The cell, or
college of priests (says he) was near the Guildhall, and the prior’s
house was somewhat remote from it, by St. Margaret’s Church.” It does
not seem, however, that it had in fact any connection with the said
priory: and it is certainly a place of much later erection; probably by
no less than 3 or 400 years.—Mackerell also takes some slight notice of
it, and says, “Not far from the church was a certain college, founded by
Mr. _Thomas Thorisby_, as by the inscription carved upon the door still
remain . . . _Magistri_ Thome Thorisby, _Fundatoris hujus loci_.” This
Thomas Thorisby, the munificent founder of this college, was one of the
great men of Lynn in the latter part of the 15th century, and for
sometime after, as appears from our lists of Mayors, among whom his name
occurs three different times; 1st in 1477, again in 1482, and lastly in
1502. That he was a magistrate of a serious and religious character,
seems to admit of no doubt; but how many of his successors, including
those of the present day, have thought the better of him for that, is a
question that appears involved in no small uncertainty. The College is
said to have been founded about the year 1500, and it was dissolved about
30 years after, so that it was not long appropriated to the use for which
it was designed by the founder. It does not appear to whom it went at
the dissolution, nor do we know through how many hands, or how many
different families it has passed, from that to the present time.
Latterly, and for many years, it has been the residence successively of
some of our principal mercantile families, without any material change in
its external appearance. Of its original constitution we have not
obtained any particular information, and the above being the substance of
what we have learnt concerning it, our account of it must be here closed.
Another House, suppressed here at the general dissolution, was St. John’s
Hospital: of which the information we have been able to obtain is very
imperfect and scanty. Its very site, like that of the friars de
Penitentia, seems no longer discoverable; and yet it was evidently, in
its day, a place of some note and consequence here, and had a chapel, or
church, as it is usually called, attached to it. _Fox_, the
martyrologist, mentions St. John’s church, or the church of the Hospital
of St. John, in this town, as one of the places where the memorable _Sir
William Sautre_, parish priest of St. Margaret’s, when taken up for
heresy in the reign of Henry IV. was obliged to read his recantation.
_Parkin_ takes very little notice of it, except quoting what Fox had
said: and the same is the case with _Mackerell_, with this slight
difference, that he in one place hazards a conjecture, that the site of
this church was the same with that of the old grammar school, which was
taken down some years ago. But if the church stood there, the hospital
itself must also, in all probability, have stood close by, if not
contiguous; and that seems not very likely, in so confined a situation.
We know of no existing record that any way corroborates this conjecture,
unless it be a hint in our tables of memorable events, “That in the year
1506, St. Margaret’s church was suspended, and the christenings were
performed in the charnel belonging to St. John’s chapel:” but it seems
too vague and obscure to establish the point. It is indeed very clear
and certain that there did exist here formerly the Hospital and church of
St. John, and that they were suppressed at the general dissolution, but
as we know no more about them, we must here dismiss the subject.
SECTION VII.
_Account of St. Mary Magdalen’s Hospital_, _the Lazar Houses_, _St.
Lawrence’s Hospital_, _&c._
The Hospital of St. Mary Magdalen was one of the most ancient of those
religious houses that were suppressed here by Henry VIII. It is said to
have been founded by Petrus Capellanus, in the reign of King Stephen, in
honour of St. Mary Magdalen. It consisted of a prior and twelve brethren
and sisters; of whom ten, including the prior were sound, and three
unsound, or leprous; some ecclesiastical, and some secular; who were
bound to perform rites and prayers for the souls of certain men who had
departed this life, _viz._ for the soul of Petrus Capellanus their
founder, the souls of popes, bishops, abbots, priors, kings, queens, and
others, their benefactors; as appears by their ancient book of _obiits_
and _Orisons_, and by the ancient instrument of articles, which the
brethren and sisters were bound to observe: and all, or most of the lands
given to the said hospital were for the maintaining of prayers for the
dead, as appears by divers deeds and charters, without date, of the first
donations of those lands. {531}
In Mr. Kings MS. Volume there is a larger account of this ancient
hospital than has been given by Mackerell and Parkin. We have there the
ancient instrument of articles, or the fundamental rules of the
fraternity, in Latin, under XVIII heads: annexed to which is the
following account—
“This Instrument of Articles was made in the year that Petrus
Capellanus died [A.D. 1174.] and himself consented, with the two
archbishops, for ordaining the same.”—Then follows what has been
given by Mackerell, that “this ancient hospital continued in a
prosperous state from its first foundation about 400 years. But
after the statute of 1st Edward VI. was made, for dissolving all
colleges, chauntries fraternities, &c. this, with the lands &c. came
to, and were invested in the crown, by the said statute. The
fraternity, however, was not then broke up or dispersed, and might,
perhaps, have been still continued, but for the breaking out of what
is called Kett’s rebellion. A party of the rebels were encamped at
Rising: and they attacked Lynn, in hopes of surprising it, but being
repulsed and disappointed, they, on their return, fell upon this
hospital, which they violently entered, and not only robbed the poor
people there, and expelled them out of the house, but took away all
their common stock, and rased their chapel and most part of the
buildings there down to the ground: by means of which barbarous
usage, the said hospital was so impoverished, wasted, and spoiled,
that from thence forward it was quite destitute of brethren and
sisters, and utterly relinquished, saving that the mayor and
burgesses of Lynn maintained some poor people there, and endeavoured
to uphold the said ancient hospital, out of their charitable
disposition, for the purposes aforesaid.” {532}
“Nevertheless (says the author of the MS. account) some covetous
persons, taking advantage of the depressed state of the said
hospital, procured divers letters patents of concealment, from the
crown; some of the site of the same, and some of other parcels of the
lands and possessions belonging to the said hospital, intending to
convert them to their own private lucre. But the said mayor and
burgesses, (still having a great care that the said lands and
possessions should be preserved for charitable uses) did purchase of
some of the concealers the site of the said hospital, and a great
part of the lands thereunto belonging, and at their great costs and
charges supported and defended the same against all other concealers
and their agents, purposing always to erect anew the said hospital,
and employ the revenues thereof for the sustentation of poor people.
“But finding both by the advice of the king’s councill [counsel] and
their own, that all the said patents of concealment were defective
and utterly void in law, through many imperfections therein, and that
(notwithstanding the said patents) the scite of the said hospital and
the lands and possessions thereof still remained in the
crown—therefore they made humble suit to the king’s majesty [James
I.] for a grant thereof, and, of his Highness’ gracious favour and
pious inclination to works of charity, they obtained Letters Patents
of grant unto the mayor and aldermen, as well of the scite of the
said hospital, as also of the lands, &c. thereunto belonging, who by
the same are created governors thereof, and made a body corporate for
the defence and maintenance of the said hospital new founded by his
majestie.”
[An abridgement of those Letters Patents, transcribed from the Latin
copy, is here subjoined, and is as follows.
“JAMES by the grace of God king of England, &c. to all to whom these
Letters shall come, greeting, &c.—Whereas a certain ancient Hospital
or Almshouse was founded and erected in Gaywood, called the House or
Hospital of St. Mary Magdalen—And whereas divers lands, tenements,
and hereditaments, were given and granted for the maintenance and
relief of divers poor and needy men and women therein for ever—And we
being informed, that certain evil minded men, covetously pursuing
their own private lucre, have endeavoured utterly to demolish the
state of the said Hospital, pretending some defect in the foundation
thereof, or that the same have been dissolved—We favouring the
sustentation of the poor, and such like charitable deeds, do of our
special grace, for us, our heirs and successors, grant all that
right, title, &c. which we have or might have in the premises, fully
and graciously to be conferred and extended towards the establishment
of the said Hospital, for poor and infirm men and women to dwell
therein: and for the causes aforesaid the same shall for ever
hereafter be called by the name of The Hospital of St. Mary Magdalen,
of the foundation of king James, consisting of a Master and Warden
and 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, or 5 poor needy men and women, who shall likewise
be called, The Brethren and Sisters of the said Hospital, from
henceforth for ever.—And for the more effectual performance of this
our grant on our part, We have chosen nominated and appointed our
well beloved Peter Tudman to be the first and present warden, or
master of the said hospital, and to continue in the said office for
and during his natural life, unless for some default, trespass,
misdemeanor, &c. omitted or committed by him, contrary to the
constitutions or ordinances hereafter to be made and ordained, he
shall be from thence removed.—And moreover out of our own especial
grace, certain knowledge, and mere motion, We have also chosen,
nominated, &c. our well beloved John Tilney and Avis his wife, Isabel
wife of the said Peter Tudman, John Pillow, Alice Briggs, and William
Mason, to be the first and present brethren and sisters of the said
hospital, there to be relieved and maintained during their natural
lives, unless for some fault or misdemeanor they shall from thence be
removed.
“And that this our pious and charitable intention may take the better
effect, and that the lands, tenements, goods and chattels, and
hereditaments, towards the maintenance of the said hospital and the
warden or master, and the poor brethren and sisters &c. may the more
effectually be given, granted, enjoyed, possessed and disposed, We
will, and by these Letters Patents for us our heirs and successors of
our like special grace &c. do grant ordain and constitute that the
Mayor of our Burgh of King’s Lynn that now is, or hereafter shall be,
and all the aldermen that now are or hereafter shall be, shall, from
henceforth forever be our Body corporate and politique, in deed,
fact, and name, by the title of The Governors of the lands,
tenements, revenues, possessions, and hereditaments of the Hospital
of St. Mary Magdalen upon the Cawsey between Lynn regis and Gaywood,
of the foundation of James king of England, &c.—And by the said name
of Governors, &c. to be always hereafter so called, termed, and
nominated, for ever: and by the same to have perpetual succession,
and to be both able and capable in law to obtain, receive, have, and
possess the manors, lands, tenements, meadows, pastures, feedings,
rents, reversions, remainders, and all other hereditaments
whatsoever, to them and their successors for ever, as well from us
our heirs, &c. as from any person or persons whatsoever; as also all
goods and chattels for the maintenance and relief of the said
hospital, the warden or master, and the poor brethren and sisters
which shall, from time to time, live and be sustained therein.—And we
do likewise by these presents for us and our heirs &c. grant unto
them and their successors to have a common seal for all matters and
businesses concerning the said hospital &c.—And that they by the name
aforesaid may answer and be answered in any of his majesty’s courts
or elsewhere within this kingdom of England.
“And we will that whensoever it shall happen, that the said master or
any of the said 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, or 5 of the brethren shall die or be
removed, it shall and may be lawful for the said governors (whereof
the mayor to be always one) within 20 days after, to choose another
in their room—And we will and grant that the said Warden or Master
and his successors shall take his corporal oath on the evangelists
for the due performance of his office, before the mayor for the time
being, in the Guildhall of the said Burgh—And we will and grant that
the said governors, or the greatest part of them (whereof the mayor
to be always one) and their successors with the assent and consent of
the bishop of Norwich for the time being, may make and constitute
such and so many good and wholesome statutes, laws, &c. in writing,
as well concerning the celebration of divine service every day in the
said hospital to the honour of God, as for the government, election,
expulsion, punishment and direction of the said master and poor
there, and also concerning their stipends, salaries, liveries,
habits, and all other necessaries whatsoever, as also concerning the
ordinary, preservation, and disposing of all the lands, tenements
&c.—And also may give and grant to the master and poor there, such
useful things as they shall think fit: and may revoke, change,
determine, augment, alter, and make new the same as they think most
convenient; which said statutes, laws, and ordinances, to be made and
constituted as aforesaid we straitly charge and command to be kept
inviolable, from time to time for ever, yet so as the same be not
contrary to the laws and statutes of this kingdom of England.
“And further for the continual relief and sustentation of the said
hospital we have given and granted, and by these presents do give and
grant to the said governors all the lordships, manors, messuages,
lands, meadows, pastures, feeding-grounds, liberties, franchises and
hereditaments whatsoever, lying in Gaywood, East Lexham, Dunham,
Narford, West Lexham, Westwinch, and Holkham, in our said county of
Norfolk, or any where elsewhere, which formerly were any part of the
possessions of the said hospital, however before this time called or
reputed, and which had not indeed though not by the law alienated,
bargained and sold by the prior, brethren and sisters of the said
hospital, and of which his Highness from the beginning of his reign
had not taken any yearly profits, revenues, or rents.—And further we
do give and grant unto the said governors, &c. To have, hold, and
enjoy all the aforesaid premisses, together with court-leet,
frank-pledge, liberties, franchises, goods and chattels waved of
felons as well as felo de se, as of all other felons, fugitives,
out-lawries, and taken in exigent, or in any other lawful way, right
or title, they shall be convicted, condemned, extrahur deodands and
all rights, jurisdiction, franchises, liberties, privileges,
commodities, advantages, possessions, emoluments and hereditaments
whatsoever, as fully, freely, and absolutely as any prior, brethren
and sisters, as well sound as sick, ever had, held, or enjoyed
heretofore, &c.—To have, hold, and enjoy all the privileges aforesaid
to the only use and behoof of them the said governors, &c., in free,
pure, and perpetual alms, for all rents, services, claims, and
demands whatsoever, to be rendered, paid, or done to us our heirs &c.
And we do likewise give and grant unto them all and singular, issues,
fines, rents, revenues, annual profits whatsoever, of all and
singular the premises aforesaid, whatsoever due before the grant of
these Letters Patent, or within 60 years last past without giving any
account of the same. And further we, our heirs, &c. will for ever
acquit, exonerate, and keep indemnified to the said governors, &c.
all and singular the premises aforesaid, against us our heirs &c. of
and from coridies, rents, fees, annual pensions, portions and sums of
money whatsoever, &c.
“And we will and straitly charge our Treasurer, Chancellor, and
Barons of our Exchequer, their heirs and successors, and all other
our Receivers, Auditors, Officers and Ministers whatsoever, upon
producing these our Letters Patents, or the enrollment thereof
without any other Breve or Warrant from us, that they make or cause
to be made to the said governors &c. a full and plenary discharge of
all the corodies, fees &c. whatever, for which these our Letters
Patents shall be to them a sufficient warrant and discharge.—And we
will and grant that these our Letters Patents and the enrollment
thereof shall be in all things as firm, strong and good, sufficient
and effectual in law against us, our heirs &c. in all our courts and
elsewhere within out kingdom of England, without any further
confirmation, licence, or toleration from us or our successors to be
procured or obtained.—Notwithstanding the misnaming, misreciting, or
not reciting the aforesaid premisses by these Letters Patents, Or the
not finding only the office or inquisition of the premisses or any
parcel thereof whereby our title ought to be found before the making
of these our Letters Patents, Or the misreciting or misnaming, or not
reciting or not naming any demise or grant of the premisses or any
part thereof, on record or not on record, or any way whatsoever
before this grant:—Or the misnaming or not naming any village,
hamlet, parish, race, or county, in which the premisses or any part
thereof be:—Or the full, true, and certain mention of the names of
the tenements, farmers, occupiers of the premisses or any part
thereof:—Or any defect in the certainty, account, or declaration of
the true yearly value of the same as aforesaid:—or any other defects
in not naming aright any one tenement, farmer, or occupier &c. or the
statute made in parliament in the first year of the late king Edward
VI. our predecessor, or the statute made in parliament in the 18th
year of the late king Henry VIII. our progenitor.
“And further we will, straitly charge and command the aforesaid
governors &c. that they expend, convert, and apply all and every the
premisses aforesaid towards the relief and maintenance of the master
and poor of the said hospital, and for the repairition and defence of
all and singular the premisses aforesaid, and to no other use and
purpose whatsoever.—Yet so that express mention be made of the true
yearly value, or certainly of the premisses or any part of them, or
any gifts or grants made before this time by us or any of our
predecessors to the governors aforesaid and their successors, or any
statutes, acts, ordinance, provision or restriction to the contrary
before this had made published or ordained in any thing cause or
matter whatsoever notwithstanding.—In Testimony whereof we have
caused these our Letters to be made Patents. Witness ourself at
Westminster this 22d. day of April in the year of our reign of
England, France, and Ireland the 9th and of Scotland the 44th.
_Per Breve de privato sigillo_.
“After the grant aforesaid, the mayor and aldermen endeavoured by all
fair means, to prevail with the concealers and usurpers of the many
lands, &c. to yield and deliver up the quiet possession thereof to
them, the said governors, without suit in law; but not able to
succeed therein, they thereupon exhibited a bill of complaints into
[in] the High Court of Chancery, against those who withheld the same,
and had likewise gotten into their hands sundry Deeds, Evidences,
Writings, Charters, Copies of Court Rolls, and Muniments, concerning
the said Hospital, for about thirty years before the king’s majesty’s
Letters Patents: whose names are as follow, viz. Sir Philip
Woodhouse; Thomas Thoresbie Esq.; Henry Bastard, Gent.; Henry Baker,
Gent.; Thomas Baxter; Robert Anderson; Richard Cross; Jefferie Pell;
Robert Large; Robert Trollop; William Simpson, clerk; Robert Say,
junr; Robert Spence, Gent.; Robert Webster; William Collis, als
Glover:—Who having given in their several answers to the said bill,
an order was made by the court, that the complainants should set down
in writing, the particular lands and fold courses by them claimed,
together with the evidences for proof thereof, that the same belonged
to the said hospital, and how much the defendants have of those lands
in their several possessions, &c. which they did as followeth”—
[The lands, &c. in question, are then particularly specified and
described, being chiefly in East and West Lexham, and Dunham and Gaywood.
They are denominated “_Lands of the Lepers_, or Spittle lands, pertaining
to the brethren and sisters of the House, _called_ THE SPITTLE, upon the
cawsey between Lynn and Gaywood”—the whole amounting to 305 acres—The
complainants having thus specified their claims, the suit went on.]
“After divers hearings on both sides, in the high court of Chancery,
for about four years together, the plaintiffs being prepared to move
the lord chancellor with all speed for a decree, and for their costs
and damages, Sir Philip Woodhouse defendant, (who had most of the
lands, &c. in his hands,) solicited and intreated Sir H. Hobart, knt.
and bart. Lord chief justice of the Common Pleas, to hear and
determine the cause between them, which being consented to by the
plaintiffs, his lordship gave his opinion, that the plaintiffs had
right to all the lands and foldcourses, in the boundary before
mentioned, in such manner as they have been claimed by them,
excepting the messuage Warm, and 5 acres thereunto adjoining. And
therefore to prevent further suit and expences on both sides, his
lordship advised Sir Ph. Woodhouse to suffer that which he could not
contradict, viz. that a decree should pass of all the lands and
foldcourses (except as before excepted) for the plaintiffs, as in law
and equity it ought to be: but withal mediated and intreated the
counsel of the plaintiffs, in behalf of the said Sir Ph. that in
regard so much of the lands and fold courses as were in the
possession of Sir Philip, did lye so intermixed with his lands, it
would be a great annoyance to him, and little profit to the
plaintiffs, if the same were severed, that therefore it would please
the plaintiff’s counsel to consent that the plaintiffs, after the
decree passed, should make a lease to him of the premises aforesaid
for 99 years, at the yearly rent of 16_l._ viz. their foldcourses at
East Lexham, being in his possession for 10_l._ per annum, and all
their grounds in West Lexham and great Dunham, also in his possession
at 2_s._ 6_d._ for every acre per annum, and that the said Sir Philip
Woodhouse should be discharged of all the rents, issues, and profits
of the said lands and fold courses, for the time past; whereof the
plaintiff’s counsel agreed, and promised to procure the same, which
conclusion on both sides being made known the next day to the lord
Chancellor, by the plaintiff’s counsel, his lordship upon their
motion, ordered and decreed their possession of the said lands and
foldcourses, unto the plaintiff’s, not having any relation to the
said agreement made before the Lord chief justice, as aforesaid,
saving in the exception before excepted, and in the omitting of
damages and costs, which was promised in the last order.
“Afterwards, that it, upon the feast day of the decollation of St.
John Baptist, next following, Sir Philip Woodhouse came to Lynn, and
in the presence of John Spence, then Mayor, Thomas Oxburgh Esq.
recorder, the aldermen and the rest of the Society then assembled in
the common council house, the said Sir Philip did bring the draught
of a Lease, (perused by the Lord Chief Justice Hobart), of the
Spittle fold course of East Lexham, and of the lands which, by the
mediation of the said lord chief justice, were to be demised by the
mayor and aldermen to the said Sir Philip, a copy of which being
formally delivered to the said mayor, &c. they caused the same to be
engrossed on a pair of Indentures to that purpose, bearing date 17
May, 1615, then last past, (upon which day the last order for the
decree was made) which Indentures were openly read, sealed, and
delivered interchangeably in the said council house the said day of
the decollation, being the election day for the succeeding mayor.
The said Sir Ph. sent a fat buck, and gave his honourable promise,
that he and his heirs should every year after, during the time of his
Lease, give a like fat buck to every mayor for the time being towards
their festival upon the said day; which was, for sometime, faithfully
performed.—About a year after a Lease was granted by the mayor, &c.
of all those their fold courses, foldage, and sheep pasture in the
town of great Dunham for 250 sheep, to be goeing, fed, and depastured
in and upon all the common, and common pasture fields and amble
grounds there, as well demesnes as otherwise, anciently accustomed,
to Sir Thomas Hogan, Henry Bastard, Henry Barker, Thomas Baxter,
Thomas Burton, for 21 years, from Lady day 1616, for 10_l._ per
annum, free and clear from all manner of quit rents and charges
whatsoever. Both which sheep walks, with the lands thus demised,
were anciently in Lease to the lords of the manor of East Lexham,
from the old hospital, under the yearly rent of 20_s._ 4_d._ as
appears by two ancient rentals, [copies of which are preserved in Mr.
King’s MS. and are here given in the note below. {544}]—The flocks of
the lords of Dunham went and were depastured in and upon the common
of Dunham—as more appeareth by an ancient survey upon oath, both of
the freehold and copyhold tenants, made in the 4th Edward 2. which is
in the hands of Henry Bastard, Gent. now [i.e. about 1724] Lord of
the manor of Great Dunham.”
[A true copy of which subjoined: it is in Latin, and too long to be
inserted here, as it fills near four folio pages.]
After some recapitulation, by way of summary, of the above account, the
writer proceeds to treat of the then present state of the hospital (i.e.
now near a 100 years ago) and he observes again,
“that the house was first granted by the founder for the society of a
prior and 12 men and women, called _brethren and sisters_, by which
last style and title it was again newfounded by the aforesaid Letters
Patents of K. James I. as appears by the 6th paragraph thereof. But
this mixture or medley of sexes being not afterwards well and rightly
approved of, it have been since thought necessary to alter and change
the same {546a} and instead thereof to establish a _sisterhood only_,
consisting of a master and eleven poor widows, {546b} who have
formerly lived well and creditably in the world; but are not usually
admitted under the age of sixty.” {546c}
The above account was probably taken from the _MS. vellum book_, which
Parkin mentions, {546d} and is supposed still to exist among the town
archives. It appears to have been written in 1617, under the sanction of
the then mayor, recorder, and aldermen, and bears date on St. John’s day
that year, when _John Wallis_ was mayor, _Richard Stonham_, mayor elect,
_Thomas Oxburgh_, recorder, and the following made up the remainder of
the then magistrates, or aldermen, viz. _Thomas Baker_, _Thomas Gibson_,
_John Spence_, _Matthew Clerk_, _John Atkyn_, _Thomas Soame_, _John
Wormell_, _Thomas Leighton_, _William Doughty_, _William Atkyn_, and
_Thomas Gurlyn_.—As these seem to be the persons who had been so active,
a few years before, in recovering the lands belonging to our Magdalen
Hospital, and in promoting the reestablishment and perpetuation of that
charity, their names are worthy of being kept in remembrance; for they
certainly deserved well of their country, and especially of the town of
Lynn. The above law-suit, which they so successfully carried on, appears
to have been one of the most justifiable and commendable of any that this
corporation has ever been engaged or concerned in. Some of our
corporation law-suits in more modern times were, it seems, of a different
character.
For more than thirty years after the date of king James’ Letters Patents,
and till sometime after the commencement of the civil wars, things went
on well with our Magdalen Hospital, or Gaywood Almshouse. Its subsequent
history, down to some part of the last century, is given by Mackerell, as
follows—{547}
In the year 1643 this hospital suffered another dissolution, being
purposely burnt down, when the Earl of Manchester came with the
parliament forces to besiege the town of Lynn, at that time
fortified, and standing out for the king, whereby it was then become
utterly dissolved for some time.—But in the year 1649 the corporation
being obliged to build it anew, which is very commodiously done, as
it now appears, with two courts, {548} a chapel, and convenient
apartments for the master, brethren, and sisters to dwell in, it was
thought fit to put up the two following Inscriptions in proper
places, to denote the occasion of this last disaster. The first is
over the arch, upon a square free stone, as you enter into the second
court, [and reads thus.]
THIS HOSPITAL WAS BURNT DOWN
AT LYNN SIEGE, AND REBUILT
1649, NATH. MAXEY MAYOR, AND
EDW. ROBINSON Alderman and Treasurer.
[The other] inscription, with the arms of the corporation in a shield
over it, is engraven on a marble stone, which is affixed over the
portal next the road, [and is as follows.]
THOMAS RIVET, MAYOR,
ANNO 1650. E. R.
Thus after divers revolutions we now see it again erected,
established, and committed to the care and management of two of the
elder aldermen of the corporation, chosen and appointed annually from
among the rest of their brethren, the governors, for that purpose,
who with their joint advice and consent, ordain rules and orders for
the better guidance and direction of the society; as may be seen
fairly written in a Table hanging constantly up in the chapel,
whereby every one of the members is obliged to be present to hear
divine service daily read by the Master, after the tolling of the
bell, and not to neglect their duty in attending, (unless upon just
cause to be given to the master) under the penalty, or mulct
prescribed in the said order.—The improvement of the lands and
revenues of the hospital have been so far advanced of late [1724] by
the provident and prudent management of the two last worthy
gentlemen, the two deputed governors thereof, that the poor have now
an addition to their former salaries, of twelve pence per week to the
master, and sixpence to each of the women, or sisters; and it is to
be hoped they may in a little time be yet further advanced. {549}—The
parish church which they are appointed to resort to on Sundays, is
that of Gaywood, in which [parish] this hospital is situated, where
they have a convenient pew, purposely provided for them to sit in:
but they may go to any other church or chapel at Lynn, or elsewhere,
when and as often as they please.—So much shall suffice to have been
spoken of this ancient hospital, being without the walls and limits
of the borough of king’s Lynn, though wholly depending on the
corporation there. {550}
From the date of the above account (which seems to be brought down to
1737, when Mackerell’s work was published) to the present time, our
information concerning the said hospital is not so correct, particular,
or ample as we could wish.—It appears however, that divers changes have
taken place from time to time since king James’s grant was obtained:
first from a mixed society of brethren and sisters to that of _sisters
only_: at first, it seems, these sisters were to be _all widows_, but
latterly there is said to have been a departure from that plan, and _old
maids_ have been admitted, in some instances, as well as widows; which
seems not at all objectionable. Changes also, of course, there have been
in the weekly allowances of the respective pensioners; but not (at least
during the present reign) in proportion to the changes in the price of
the necessaries of life. Half a Crown a week, which was the allowance a
hundred years ago, was to the full as good as ten or twelve shillings a
week now: and yet the poor women during any part of this long jubilee
reign (when the _shilling_ has sunk in value to _three-pence_, or a
_groat_, at most) never had above five shillings a week, till the
commencement of the present year: Nor had they been long in the receipt
of even so much as five shillings, or more than _four and sixpence_ a
week, which was their stated allowance for sometime till within these
very few years. They must have been, therefore, till this present year,
and during most part of this long reign of boasted prosperity and glory,
in a very unenviable, miserable, ragged, and half starving condition,
although the acting governor was generally a man of fortune: and a late
one immensely so; but they never fared worse than under his inspection,
for his humanity or charity did not appear to be commensurate with his
wealth. In short it is well for these poor pensioners that the acting
government of their house is at present in the hands of a gentleman that
seems determined to do them justice, and promote their comfort and
happiness to the utmost of his power.
As to the _four Lazar Houses_, or Lepers Hospitals, paid to have been
suppressed here at the general dissolution, it is likely that one of them
was attached to, or connected with our Magdalen Hospital, for it appears
to have been _partly_ founded for unsound or leprous persons. This
therefore may be supposed to have been one of those four suppressed
houses. Of the other three, one was probably at _West Lynn_, one at
_Cowgate_, and the other at _Hardwick_. The disease, for the relief of
those afflicted with which these houses were founded, is said to have
been introduced, or brought from the East into this country, and to
Europe, by the madbrained crusaders, who became many ways a terrible
grievance and pest to their respective countries and nations. It was a
proof, certainly, of the humanity of our countrymen, in those times, that
houses were erected and endowed for the reception and relief of persons
afflicted with so grievous and incurable a disorder. So little do we
know about the order, or economy, or laws of these Lazar Houses, that we
must here necessarily dismiss the subject.
Of the _Hospital of St. Lawrence_ very little is known, except that it
was one of the four Lazar houses and stood at Hardwick, or _Herdwyk Dam_,
as Parkin calls it. He says
“that in the 11th of Edward III. Matthew Herlewine conveyed by fine
and trust to Thomas Duraunt, parson of Clenchwarton; William Duraunt
of South Lynn, and John Kervyle of Wygenhale (along with other
possessions) the advowson of the hospital of St. Lawrence at Herdwyk
Dam, together with the rents, homages, services, &c. of the master of
the said hospital, of the prior of Wirmegey, the prior of Westacre,
and of John de Lenn.”
He also says, that—
“John Duraunt Esq. granted to Robert Synkclere and Agnes his wife the
hospital, or house of lepars, with the chapel of St. Lawrence situate
on the cawsey of Hardwyke, by Lenne, with the appertenances for their
lives, from the feast of St. Michael in 27 Henry VI. paying to him,
his heirs and assigns, for every brother and sister entering into the
said hospital, and made by the said Robert and Agnes, 20_d._ and it
shall not be lawful for the said John, his heirs &c. to put in or
out, any brother or sister during the lives of the aforesaid Robert
and Agnes.”
He further informs us, that—
“in 17 Edward, IV. Edmund Bedingfeld, lord of the manor of Hall
Place, (in the hamlet of Seche Parva, in South Lynn) and in a court
held of the said manor, grants to _John Norris_, {553a} vicar of
South Lynn, the scite of the Hospital of St. Lawrence (which was then
burnt) till it was rebuilt.” {553b}
SECTION VIII.
_Of the Red Mount_, _and our Lady’s Chapel there—also her Chapel by the
Bridge which still bears her name—St. Ann’s Chapel_, _with those of St.
Catherine_, _St. Laurence_, _&c._
From the particular situation of the Red Mount, (on the _out-side_ of the
town-walls, and within the wet foss which flanked those walls,) there can
be little doubt of its being once a small fortress, or fortified and
castellated place; so that it might without much impropriety be
denominated _a castle_. What will further corroborate this opinion is a
fact noticed among our remarkable or memorable occurrences, that in 1469
king Edward IV. came to Lynn with a great retinue, and was lodged in this
place; from which it may be very naturally inferred and concluded, that
it was then well fortified; for the king in his then situation,
(retreating before Warwick,) would hardly have been lodged without the
walls in an unfortified place. From the same premises it may be likewise
fairly inferred, that it was also a _large_ and _sumptuous_
structure—Edward’s numerous retinue requiring it to be of the former
description, and his royal dignity of the latter: had it been _small_ it
could not have accommodated so large a company, and had it been _mean_,
the _king_ would not have been lodged there—{554} But however strong,
large, or sumptuous the edifice on the Red Mount then was, most of it has
long ago disappeared, and the little that now remains is chiefly the
chapel, which was once of considerable celebrity, but is now in a
dilapidated state. Of this curious piece of antiquity, one of the most
remarkable that Lynn can boast of, the following description has lately
appeared in a popular and respectable work, which we have often before
referred to—
“At the eastern extremity of the town is a curious ancient building,
called THE LADY’S CHAPEL, or _The Red Mount_. It has been
erroneously named a _castle_, but is evidently an ecclesiastical
structure. {555a} It consists of an octagonal wall of red brick and
is constructed on a very singular plan, of which, perhaps, not a
similar example is to be found in the kingdom. Within the exterior
wall is a handsome cruciform chapel, measuring from east to west
seventeen feet seven inches, by fourteen from north to south, and
thirteen in height. The roof is formed of stone, with numerous
groins, &c. and exactly resembles the much admired ceiling of King’s
College Chapel, Cambridge. This curious building is in a dilapidated
state, and it is much feared will soon fall a victim to neglect and
wantonness. Such a singular edifice should be carefully preserved,
and as the expence to effect this would be trivial, it is hoped the
corporation, to whom it belongs, will not neglect it, and thereby
entail on themselves the perpetual reproaches of history, and the
lasting censures of antiquarian record.” {555b}
[Picture: Our Lady’s Chapel on the Red Mount]
At what time this notable fabrick was erected, does not appear; but we
may pretty safely conclude that it was at a period subsequent to the
conquest, and perhaps not before the 12th or 13th century. It appears to
have been dissolved, or laid by, at the reformation, and it was defaced,
as Parkin says, before the 3rd of Elizabeth. As there has been little or
no attention bestowed upon it ever since that time, it is no wonder that
it should be now in so ruinous a state. It has been often said that this
place was, in its day, the receptable of the pilgrims, in their way to,
and from Walsingham. If so, it amounts to a pretty good proof, that it
was very capacious, and well endowed, or furnished with ample revenues;
for the pilgrims to Walsingham, like those to Loretto, swarmed on all the
roads that led thither; but on no road more, or perhaps so much as that
through Lynn, as all the devout people from the northern and north
western parts of the kingdom must have passed this way, perhaps by
hundreds at a time. That house must have been both large and wealthy,
that could lodge and entertain such hosts of travellers.—Another reason
for pilgrims frequenting our chapel on the Mount might be, because there
was there also an image of the Virgin, which had attained to some
celebrity; not indeed like that at Walsingham, {556} but evidently beyond
any thing of the kind at Lynn. We may therefore be very sure that the
holy travellers to Walsingham would pay a greater regard to the chapel of
our Lady on the Mount than to any other religions place in this town. It
has been observed before, that the offerings to this image of the Virgin
on the Mount exceeded sometimes the offerings to all our other images and
in all our other religious houses here, numerous as they were. In short,
we may venture to affirm, that in former days no one place in Lynn was of
greater note or celebrity than the Red Mount, and especially our Lady’s
Chapel and Image there.
Of the _Chapel of our Lady on the Bridge_, we know much less than of that
on the Mount, though our knowledge of the latter also is but very
imperfect. When the former was erected, whether before or after the
other, or why there should be two chapels in this town dedicated to the
Virgin, are questions which we are unable to resolve. They were both
probably more ancient than some of our other religious houses: but they
were dissolved, or laid by at the same time with most of the rest. They
were probably demolished not long after, and this on the bridge much more
entirely than the other. Parkin says, that this chapel was defaced
before the reign of Elizabeth, as appears by an inquisition taken in her
third year. Our Lady’s Gild in Lynn had seemingly some connection with
this chapel, as well as with that on the Mount; but we know too little of
the constitution and circumstances of that ancient fraternity to
pronounce any thing positively on this head. {558} Some small remains of
this chapel, converted into a little dwelling, stood, till very lately,
on the eastern side of the bridge; but when the said bridge was widened,
by order of the paving-act commissioners, those remains were entirely
removed, and there is no longer one stone upon another of that
consecrated and venerated fabrick, or the least sign or indication,
except in the name of the bridge, that such an edifice ever stood
there.—The modern substitutes for this and the other ancient chapels,
here suppressed and demolished, are _four_ very decent and commodious
dissenting meeting houses; one in New Conduit Street, one in Clough Lane,
and two in Broad Street; all, or most of them, at present pretty well
attended. Of each of which a particular account shall be given in the
course of this work.
Of St. _Ann’s Chapel_ very little is at present known. That it stood
somewhere near St. _Ann’s Fort_, and that the latter took its name from
it, can scarcely be doubted. The stones that are still to be seen in
some of the adjacent walls did once, in all probability, belong to this
ancient consecrated structure. {559} We have, however, no reason to
suppose that it was a very large edifice, but rather one of our smaller
size chapels, like that of _our Lady on the Bridge_, and some others. It
probably stood contiguous to other houses, without any yard, or
burying-ground adjoining; which may be one, and, perhaps, the chief
reason, why its site has so entirely disappeared, so as to baffle, or
render fruitless every attempt to discover the exact spot on which it
stood. All that can now be fairly concluded is, that it must have been
somewhere near the Fort.
The site of _St. Catherine’s Chapel_ seems to be involved in still
greater uncertainty than even that of St. Ann. By something that the
present writer has somewhere met with, he has been led to think, that
this chapel stood without the East Gates, and at no great distance; but
as he cannot now recollect upon what he founded that opinion, he will not
take upon him here to defend it, or assert that the chapel actually stood
there. Parkin owns that he did not know where it stood, but says that it
was defaced before the 3rd of Elizabeth, as appears by an inquisition
then taken. He also says that it is “mentioned in 1497, and the charity
Gyld of the town of Lenn,” which, as he supposes, may allude to our
houses of lepers. But those houses were probably not under the direction
of any one of the gilds, but rather of a particular religious order,
called _the order of St. Lazarus of Jerusalem_; of which, however, we
know not enough to give here a particular account of it. But as to the
chapel in question, Parkin further informs us that “in 5 Richard II.
Henry le Despencer, bishop of Norwich, wrote a letter to Roger Paxman,
mayor, and to the burgesses of Lynn, wherein he desires that they would,
for the love they bore for the bishop, grant part of the _house of St.
Catherine_ to one John Consolif, late servant to his brother, the lord le
Despencer, there to live a solitary life, upon the alms of the good
people; the other part of the house belonging to the archdeacon of
Norwich, being before granted to the said John Consolyf.” {560} This
shews that there was here formerly a House or Hospital, as well as a
Chapel, dedicated to St. Catherine; to which house or hospital, in all
probability, the said chapel belonged: but whether they pertained to our
Lazarettos, or were founded for some other purposes, it is very difficult
now to determine. Beside this chapel of St. Catherine, there was here
another chapel dedicated to her, in the church of the friars preachers,
or Dominicans: {561a} but this was nothing very remarkable, as we had
here also more than one chapel dedicated to the Trinity, as well as to
the blessed virgin, if not likewise to some others.
The _Chapel of St. Lawrence_, (like those of St. Catherine and St. John)
appears to have belonged to the _Hospital_ of the same name, and
therefore must have stood at Hardwick, contiguous, probably, or very near
to the said hospital. That house being one of our Lazarettos, its use,
or designation is sufficiently obvious. We learn from Parkin,
“that John Duraunt Esq. in the 27 Henry VI. granted to Robert
Synkclere and Agnes his wife the hospital, or house of lepars, with
the _chapel of St. Lawrence_ situate on the cawsey of Hardwyke, by
Lynn—Also that William Walton, Esq. and Catherine, his wife, daughter
and heiress of the said John Duraunt Esq. conveyed by fine, in
Hillary term, 36th year of the same reign, to Sir Thomas Tudenham,
knight, the _advouson of the chapel of St. Lawrence_, with the manor
of Hall Place, and divers other possessions. {561b} This chapel
seems therefore to have been an endowed place, whose advouson was
deemed an object of no trivial consideration. The hospital to which
it belonged, as well as the rest of our Lazar houses, may be supposed
to have been in some sort of subjection to the master of the order of
St. Lazarus, whose chief residence, or station, appears to have been
at Burton Lazars, in Leicestershire. Parkin mentions a remarkable
deed which he had seen, whereby brother Richard de Sulegrave, knight,
master of the whole order of St. Lazarus of Jerusalem, and all the
brethren of the said order, dwelling at Burton, by common assent and
council of the whole chapter, grant to Alan de Kele, burgess of Lenn,
his heirs and assigns, a certain piece of land, called Lazar Hill,
lying by the common wall of the said village, containing 7 perches
and 7 feet in breadth, on the north side; and 10 perches and 14 feet,
on the south side; 5 perches and half broad, on the east side; 6
perches broad in the middle, and 7 on the west side, &c. {562} This
seems, by the names of the witnesses, to have been as early as the
reign of king John. “This piece of land,” (our author adds) “I find
afterwards in the hands of Rd. Spany and John de Teryngton, in the
reign of Richard II.”
But the present writer is not able to point out this remarkable spot, or
yet to describe the nature and extent of that jurisdiction which the
master and chapter of the order of St. Lazarus had over the Lynn
Lazarettos.
Most if not all the rest of the smaller chapels were attached to, or
connected with our different churches and convents, of which several
belonged to St. Margaret’s church: we will therefore give here no
separate account of them. Such little chapels and chauntries were pretty
numerous here, and mark the character of the inhabitants, and
particularly the most devout part of them, in those times. There was
here also in former ages, at least one {563a} _hermitage_, or retreat of
an anchoret, and that was at the Crouch, or _Crutch_, as it is now
commonly called. Of this remarkable place, and its adjacent cross,
Parkin gives the following account—
“The mayor and commonalty petition William (Bateman) bishop of
Norwich, begging his favour towards John Puttock, to admit him as a
hermit, who had, in the bishop’s marsh by Lenn, on the sea shore, in
a certain place, called Lenn Crouch, made a cave there, till he could
build himself a proper mansion; purposing, as he declares, to spend
all his time, by your permission and license, in the service of God
there: and the said John Puttock has there erected a certain
remarkable cross, of great service for all shipping coming that way,
of the height of 110 feet, at his own great cost and charge.” {563b}
This occurred as long ago as 1349. To our thinking the Crutch must be a
most improper and strange place for a hermitage, where people are
continually passing and repassing, and those, at least many of them, some
of the rudest and most lawless of the whole population. How the hermits
did there in popish times we know not, but we are apt to think that they
would not fare very comfortably there in this protestant age.
SECTION IX.
_Account of St. James’s Chapel_ (now the Workhouse) _from its first
erection_, _in the twelfth century_, _to the present time_.
The founder of this chapel, as well as that of St. Nicholas, according to
our best accounts, was WILLIAM TURB, or _Turbus_, alias _De Turba Villa_,
or _Turbeville_, the third bishop of Norwich, who was promoted to that
see in 1146, {564a} in the reign of king Stephen. It was probably built
before the end of that reign, as Parkin refers to a certain charter of
that bishop, which proves that it was in being at the commencement of the
next reign. {564b} Both this of St. James and that of St. Nicholas were
chapels of ease to the church of St. Margaret. These three churches had
in those times abundance of officiating priests, or chaplains. The great
fraternity, called _Trinity Gild_, alone, maintained no less than
_thirteen_; six for St. Margaret’s, _four_ for St. Nicholas’s, and
_three_ for St. James’s. {564c} How many they had besides, does not
appear; but they had, no doubt, several more. This chapel is said to
contain in length five score feet, and in breadth 24 feet; exclusive of
the cross aisle, and a chapel attached to it, dedicated to the Trinity.
The altar of St. Lawrence stood somewhere in this chapel, and, at the
east end of it, an image of our Saviour, to which devout folks were wont
to bring their offerings. A particular division of the town appears to
have been at one time consigned or appropriated to the officiating
services of the chaplains or clergy of this chapel, comprehending,
probably, all on the sides next to it of Damgate, Broadstreet,
Blackboystreet and Codlin lane. St Nicholas’s clergy appear also to have
had appropriated to them another division of the town: hence we find,
that—
“on Friday before the feast of St. Tiburtius and Valerian, in the
35th of Edward III. it was ordered by the commonalty, assembled in
the Guild hall, that the clerks of St. James’s in Lynn, for the
future, shall carry the _holy water_ from the East Gate of Lynn,
through all the south part of Damgate, and through the whole street
called Webster’s row; and that the clergy or clerks of St. Nicholas’
shall likewise carry from the aforesaid gate through all the north
part of the aforesaid street of Damgate.” {565a}
[Picture: The work-house formerly the Chapel of St. James]
At the general dissolution this chapel was, it seems, laid by, and shut
up, which appears an odd and unaccountable circumstance, as it had not
any connection with the convents, being merely a parochial place of
worship. We are told that it was pulled down, all but the cross aisle,
in 1549, (by order of the mayor and corporation, it is supposed,) when it
had four bells, which were worth, with the bell of the charnel-house,
CC_l._ We are further told, “that there did also, in the mean time,
belong to the said chapel and charnel-house, stone, iron, and glass, to
the value of one hundred marks: also timber and lead to the value of
300_l._ also plate, jewels, and stock, to the value of 200_l._ also
certain lands and tenements in Lynn, to the yearly value of 5_l._” {565b}
All this property appears to have come into the hands of the mayor and
corporation; not very fairly and honourably, it seems; for we find that
it rather belonged to the Dean and Chapter of Norwich, who, about
seventeen years after, on what occasion does not appear, relinquished
their right and claim to it, by a formal deed to that purpose, a copy of
which is given below. {566a} This was about the year 1566. {566b} From
that period it lay, probably, in ruins till 1581, when it was, at the
expense of the corporation, prepared and made a place for the manufacture
of bays, &c.—How long it was occupied for that purpose is not said; but
we learn that the undertaking did not succeed.—About a century after, in
the year 1682, it was repaired and fitted up, by the liberal benefactions
of the corporation and principal inhabitants, and converted into a
hospital, or workhouse for fitly decayed old men, women, and poor
children; a good endowment and provision being made for their work,
instructions, and maintenance, and for putting the children out to
trades.—On that occasion were made and adopted the following
“_Rules_, _Ordinances_ and _Statutes_ made and established by the
mayor and burgesses of the burgh of King’s Lynn in the county of
Norfolk, for the good government of the Hospital or Workhouse of St.
James, there erected and founded, and of the children’s being, and to
be placed therein.—_Imprimis_, That the children be instructed in
their duty towards God, and in good manners.—That the master for the
time being shall cause the children every Lord’s day, both in the
forenoon and afternoon, constantly to repair to the parish church of
St. Margaret, diligently to attend divine service and sermons
there.—That some fit person, to be elected by the mayor and
burgesses, shall daily read the prayers and collects appointed for
that purpose in the chapel of the said house, every morning by eight
of the clock, and every evening by four of the clock precisely, all
the children there attending with becoming reverence.—That such
person, after prayers so read at the times aforesaid, shall teach the
children to read for the space of one hour and an half, twice in the
day, by calling together four at a time, and no more, whilst the rest
are at work.—That such person every Sunday, after divine service in
the afternoon, calling all the said children into the chapel, shall
instruct them in the church Catechism appointed for children, for the
space of one hour, concluding with the prayers and collects.
“ITEM, _For their Recreation and Correction_. That the children be
kept at work between our _Lady_ and _Michaelmas_ from Six of the
clock in the morning till Twelve at noon; and between _Michaelmas_
and _our Lady_ from Eight till twelve, and in all afternoons from One
to Seven: the time for prayers, reading, and refreshment, excepted.
That on festivals and holy-days observed by the church, and every
Thursday after three in the afternoon, they be allowed reasonable
recreation. That for offences committed, gentle and moderate
chastisement be given; and such as will not thereby be reformed, be
sent to the house of correction, to be there punished.
“ITEM, _For their Diet_, _Cloaths_, _Firing_, and _necessary
Provisions_. That three days in the week they have once in the day
competent allowance of flesh meat hot, and three other days like
allowance of other hot provision, to be ready at twelve at noon; and
on the other day fit provision; as also a reasonable breakfast and
supper every day of the week. That all sorts of provision, bread,
beer, and meat, and all other victuals, be good, fresh, and
wholesome. That once every year, a month before Christmas, they be
allowed new suits of cloaths of the usual colours, and new shifting,
shoes, and stockings, so often as it shall be necessary and
convenient, and washing allowed them. That out of six chaldron of
coals to be allowed to the master, a convenient fire be kept in the
working-room all the cold season of the year. That such children as
shall appear to be sick, be removed into a room for that purpose; and
if any be infirm, or taken with contagious distempers (such as are
catching) that special care be taken to lodge them apart from the
others.
“ITEM, _For the Visitation_, _Overseeing_, _Defraying necessary
charges_, and _Regulation of Abuses_. That on the usual day of
electing the corporation officers in every year, the mayor, aldermen,
and common-council, or the major part of them, shall elect and choose
_three_ discreet and fitting persons to be _governors_ of the same
Hospital, or Workhouse, for the year from _Michaelmas_ thence next
ensuing, whose care shall be to inspect and oversee the same, and the
children therein, from time to time; and to order and direct all
expences, charges, payments, and disbursements concerning the same;
and to see and cause all the rules, ordinances, and statutes thereof
to be put in due execution.—That all gifts, benevolences,
contributions, payments, and sums of money whatsoever, now or
hereafter to be made and given to the same Hospital or Workhouse, or
the poor children therein, shall from time to time be paid into the
hands of such governors; and a true account thereof, and of all
expences, charges, payments and disbursements concerning the same,
shall yearly be made and audited on the usual day appointed for
auditing the accompts of the mayor and burgesses.—That a book be
kept, wherein all gifts and benevolences, that have been or shall
hereafter be given to, or bestowed on the said Hospital or Workhouse,
or the poor children therein, shall be fairly registered, to be kept
in the said chapel.—That one other book be kept, wherein the names or
times of placing or removing of all masters and poor children of the
same Hospital or Workhouse shall be entered and recorded.—That a
sufficient chest or box be provided, with two locks, for the reposing
and safe keeping therein the _Deeds of Foundation_, _Endowment_, and
other writings, that do or shall belong thereunto, as also the
_common seal_ of the said Hospital, or Workhouse; one key whereof to
remain with the mayor of this burgh for the time being, the other
with the senior governor thereof.—That the mayor, aldermen, and
common-councilmen, or so many as shall think fit, by appointment of
the mayor for the time being, shall four times in every year, or
oftener if need require, visit the said hospital or workhouse, for
the better encouragement thereof, and discovering abuses that may be
committed contrary to these rules and ordinances.” {570}
“The first Collection among the inhabitants towards this charitable
design, and preparing this chapel, amounted to the sum of 406_l._
1_s._ 6_d._—The Corporation also made an order among themselves, That
every Alderman new elected should pay at his admittance 10_l._ and
every common-council-man 20 nobles, which, to the year ending at Lady
day 1724, amounted to 726_l._ 13_s._ 4_d._ The legacies of persons
deceased (besides other benefactions) given to the same” [up to the
above specified time] “amounted to 90_l._ 0_s._ 0_d._—In all 1222_l._
14_s._ 10_d._—They also endowed it with 20_l._ _per annum_.” {571a}
For some reason, to us unknown, the above order of things did not long
continue. In the course of a few years another revolution took place:
most, if not all the above regulations were repealed, or laid aside, and
the house, by an act of parliament, was consigned to the superintendence
and management of the _Guardians of the Poor_. {571b} That act passed in
1701, the 12th of William III. _For erecting Hospitals and Workhouses in
King’s Lynn_. It contains, as Mackerell observes, the following clause—
“_The Workhouse_, _founded by the mayor and burgesses_, _called_ St.
James’s Workhouse, _and all lands_, _tenements_, _rents_, _revenues_,
_goods_, _and chattels_, _belonging to the same_, _are by this act
vested and settled in the_ guardians of the poor, and their
successors.” {571c}
We are further told, that by another clause in this act, it was to
continue in force _only so long as the rates did not exceed what had been
paid towards the __maintenance of the poor_, _for any one of the then
three last years_. {572} That excess, no doubt, took place pretty soon,
though we have not learnt the exact year when it so happened: and yet the
guardians, it seems, long after, and even till very lately, acted under
that same obsolete law; a conduct which may be thought not altogether
justifiable or defensible. But as the proverb says, that “half a loaf is
better than no bread,” so they might judge that an obsolete law was
better than no law. However that was, one would think that they must
cease to be guardians, when the law that constituted them such lost its
authority, or ceased to be in force.
From the period when the superintendence and management of St. James’s
Hospital were committed to the guardians, it appears to have become the
proper poor house of St. Margaret’s parish, and general workhouse of the
town.—Of the exact state and regular variations of the poor rates in Lynn
during the first sixty years, and more, after the above act had passed,
we have but little knowledge; but _for the last forty years_ our
information is much more extensive and authentic. During this period our
poor-rates, or what we have raised for the support of the poor, have
increased _tenfold_, and the number of paupers _four_ or _five fold_.—In
1770 these rates amounted to only 976_l._—In 1796 they amounted to
7713_l._—and in 1809 to about, or near 9000_l._ and the whole
expenditure, up to the end of January in the present year, (1810) to the
enormous sum of 10,243_l._ 10_s._ 3_d._—for, after the manner of our
superiors, who sit above at the helm, we manage and contrive that our
outgoings should exceed our income.—The following statements of our
out-door expenditure in two different years, (the first and the last of
the above period,) extracted from Mr. Grisenthwaite’s Remarks, p. 19 and
20, may throw some further light upon this subject.
Abstract of _Out-door Expenditure_ in 1770, as published by order of the
Court of Guardians.
No. of families Wards. No. of Cash paid to each
in each ward. persons. ward weekly.
_l._ _s._ _d._
30. 1. North End 78 2. 14. 0.
Ward
6. 2. Kettlewell 9 0. 7. 6.
ditto
5. 3. Trinity 16 0. 9. 6.
Hall ditto
5. 4. Jews’ Lane 10 0. 11. 6.
ditto
13. 5. Paradise 34 l. 6. 0.
ditto
26. 6. Sedgeford 41 1. 18. 6.
Lane ditto
19. 7. Stonegate 34 1. 13. 0.
ditto
20. 8. Chequer 41 1. 6. 6.
ditto
8. 9. New Conduit 17 0. 11. 6.
ditto
In St. James’s 0. 2. 6.
Workhouse
131. Total as 280. 10. 19. 6. {573}
establishment
account.
Abstract of Out-door Expenditure in 1809, as published by order of the
Court (or corporation) of Guardians.
No. of families Wards. No. of Cash paid to each
in each ward persons. ward weekly.
_l._ _s._ _d._
85. North End 172. 9. 19. 9.
Ward
44. Kettlewell 78. 5. 16. 0.
ditto
58. Paradise 141. 8. 18. 6.
ditto
36. Jews’ Lane 99. 5. 10. 6.
ditto
44. New Conduit 91. 6. 12. 0.
ditto
58. Chequer 120. 9. 2. 6.
ditto
33. Trinity Hall 64. 5. 2. 6.
ditto
76. Sedgeford 158. 10. 9. 6.
Lane ditto
80. Stonegate 150. 12. 0. 0.
ditto
514. Weekly 1050. 75. 11. 3.
Allowance
Sick poor 60. 8. 17. 0.
Illegitimate 39. 3. 13. 9.
_Total_. 1149. 88. 1. 9. {574}
The difference between the latter and the former of the above Statements,
in so short a period, comprehending only a part of the present prosperous
reign, and what some seem to deem the most blessed and glorious part of
if, must be exceedingly remarkable and wonderful. In 1770 the rates of
the town were only 4_s._ in the pound on the rent, raising an annual
revenue of 976_l_; of which 579_l._ were appropriated for the use of the
out door poor, leaving only 397_l._ for the maintenance of the Workhouse
and all other contingent expences. Thus the total expenditure of the
House was then only 397_l_; now it is 3496_l._ 3_s._ 5_d._—Then the total
annual expenditure for both the in-door and out-door poor was only
976_l_; now it is above 10,000_l._ {575a} Of course, the charge for the
maintenance of the poor is now become a very serious matter, and even a
heavy and grievous burden to many of the inhabitants.
Our poor rates have arrived at their present unexampled height under the
_new_ heaven-born _poor-law_, which was to be the prolific parent of so
many inestimable blessings to the town; not one of which, alas! has yet
been, or is ever likely to be realized. This memorable law, and its
worthy twin-sister, the _paving law_, have been already productive of
incalculable mischief. The vast additional burden which they have
brought upon the inhabitants has lessened the value of houses 15 or 20
per cent, and multiplied the number of untenanted dwellings to five or
six score, at least. {575b} Nor is it possible at present to calculate
how far the evil will or may extend. For such a town as this to contain
a large and increasing number of empty houses must certainly have a very
dark and unpropitious appearance, and is utterly repugnant to every idea
of our being at present in a flourishing or prosperous condition. {576a}
When it was made to appear that the poor rates of Lynn amounted to
nearly, if not quite, as much as those of _Hull_ and _Exeter_, places
three times its population, it was impossible to avoid suspecting the
existence of some sad mismanagement, if not also of most foul and
criminal misdoings. The same suspicion was not likely to be lessened,
but rather to issue in full conviction, when it was discovered, that the
maintenance of each pauper in this workhouse, or hospital, costs even
more than that of each pensioner in _Greenwich Hospital_, {576b} and
twice or thrice as much as that of each pauper in some, if not all, of
the most noted and respectable workhouses, or poorhouses in the kingdom.
That the report of these circumstances, with the increasing pressure of
the rates, should excite a spirit of mistrust, inquiry, and investigation
in the town, was no more than what might naturally be expected. It
accordingly did so happen: and the result proved that the previous
suspicious were not groundless.
In the course of the investigation, _Butcher’s Meat_ appeared to be here
consumed in such unusual quantities {577a} as are utterly irreconcilable
with any and every idea of economy and good management: and in the
article of _Cheese_ the consumption appeared to be still more palpably
disproportionate, unexampled, and excessive; so as to set the wisdom and
competency of our managers in a very unfavourable and unseemly point of
view.—This the reader will easily perceive, when he is told, that it
costs in this house, for cheese alone, between 4 and 5_l._ a week, or
that there is consumed here weekly no less than 1 Cwt. of that article.
That this is out of all proportion to what is usual in other Poor-houses,
will appear from the following statement, extracted from Mr.
Grisenthwaite late publication. {577b}
At the _Norwich_ Poor-houses, among 1343 persons, during one of the late
years of scarcity, the annual expence for _cheese_ was 135_l._ 2_s._
5_d._—At _Shrewsbury_, among 274 persons, (in 1801, if we are not
mistaken,) the annual expence for the same article was 56_l._ 2_s._
4_d._—At _Hull_, in 1808, (number of persons not mentioned, but
doubtless, not fewer than those in our Poor-house,) the annual expence
for the said article was 29_l._ 16_s._—At _Lynn_, the same year, among
200 persons, for that article, 226_l._ 8_s._—At the same town, among
about the same number of persons, for the last year, (1809,) the annual
expence for that very article amounted to the still more enormous sum of
259_l._ 15_s._ 11_d._ {578a}—If we go on at this rate, we shall soon have
3 or 400_l._ a year to pay _for cheese only_, for the use of our
Workhouse; a sum equal to what the whole of that establishment cost
_forty years ago_. {578b}
The statement here following will shew the respective and total amount of
the expence of the other articles consumed in this house within the last
year, with the proportion they bore to the single article above
specified.—The _Butter_ used in this house for the whole year cost 30_l._
11_s._ l_d._—The _Milk_ 33_l._ 14_s._ 2_d._—_Potatoes_ 37_l._
2_s._—_Oatmeal_ and _Peas_ 56_l._ 6_s._ [Total 157_l._ 13_s._ 3_d._]
That the sum total of the expence for the above four, or rather _five_
articles, should fall short above 100_l._ of what it cost for cheese
only, must surely be very strange: and yet it appears not to be more
strange than true. The whole year’s expence for _Grocery_ was 158_l._
1_s._ 7_d._—And for _Beer_, 157_l._ 7_s._—Here also it may be thought not
a little remarkable, that the _Grocery_ and even the _Beverage_ used here
should so much fall short of the _Cheese_ as each of them not to amount
to very much above half the expence of that article. Of the two most
important articles, _Flour_ and _Meat_, (the only two which exceeded the
expence of _cheese_!) the former, including _Bread_, cost 1001_l._ 10_s._
9_d._ {579a}—and the latter, (_Meat_,) cost 1110_l._—_Coals_ cost 134_l._
5_s._ 10_d._—_Turf_ 9_l._ 3_s._—_Oil_ 8_l._ 4_s._—The total expenditure
of the house for the whole year, including sundry other articles, with
repairs, &c. 3496_l._ 3_s._ 5_d._ {579b}—and with the disbursements to
the out-door pensioners, the entire expenditure, up to the end of last
January, as was before observed, appeared to amount to 10,243_l._ 10_s._
3_d._: {579c} an enormous sum, surely, for a town that does not contain
11,000 inhabitants, or any manufacture, or even any trade _now_, of much
consequence, except the _coal trade_. Under these circumstances, such a
rapid and vast increase of poor, and of the poor rates, must amount to an
irrefragable proof, that we are now in a state of actual and fast
declension, whatever some people may insinuate, or pretend to the
contrary. But the more evident this declension is, the more incumbent it
must be on those who have the management of our affairs to observe the
utmost economy, and spare as much as possible the industrious and lower
orders of the community, who can so ill bear the burden of additional
charges. Whether they have hitherto ever thought of this, or not, it
seems to be now high time that it should occupy its full share of their
attention. {580a}
It has also been thought, or rather suspected, that our distributers of
parochial relief do not always distribute or administer that relief with
judgment and discrimination, or even with a scrupulous or due regard to
justice and impartiality: and such statements as the following might be
supposed to afford some colour or countenance to such suspicions—
“_Weekly allowances_—To a man and wife and 5 children, 2_s._ 6_d._
To a young woman, aged 24, and one child 2_s._—To a man and wife near
70 years of age, 1_s._ To a single woman, aged 19, 2_s._ 6_d._—To a
widow, aged 76, 2_s._ To a single woman, aged 31, 2_s._ 6_d._—To a
widow, aged 78, 2_s._ To a single woman, aged 22, 1_s._ 6_d._—To an
aged woman, 102 years old, 2_s._ 6_d._ To a widow, aged 48, 3_s._
6_d._—To a widow, aged 38, with 3 children, 3_s._ To a single woman,
aged 36, 2_s._ 6_d._” {580b}
Such a Statement, which may be taken as a sample, or specimen of our
out-door distributions, has something like partiality, or
inconsiderateness, marked on its very forehead.—“Kisses,” according to
the old adage, “go by favour;” and so, it is to be feared, do our
out-door parochial allowances, in too many instances. But upon this
topic we will not now enlarge, as we may have occasion hereafter to
resume the subject, in the latter part of the work. {581a}
At this time (July 1810) a revolution, or new arrangement is said to be
actually taking place among our indoor-pensioners, or in the management
of St. James’s Hospital, from which very important benefits are expected
soon to result: and it is much to be wished that the event may correspond
with the present expectations. The household expences have been already,
it seems much reduced, {581b} without the least detriment to the poor
inmates; and we hear, that the plan is to be followed up with the
strictest attention to sound and rigid economy. The present state of the
town certainly requires it, and those who have come forward on this
occasion seem to be very much in earnest; but it remains to be seen how
far our present hopes and expectations will be realized, or whether,
after all, we are not destined to be, in this case, as we have been in
many others, the miserable victims of delusion and disappointment. {581c}
With very little propriety, especially of late years, has our St. James’s
Hospital been called a _Work_-house: it might full as well, and even
better, have been called a _play_-house; for it is certain that there is
more _play_ than _work_ going on there. Among its 200 pensioners, one
half, at least, may be supposed capable of doing some, and even a great
deal of work: and yet all their earnings during all the last year
amounted to no more than 170_l._ 1_s._ 5_d._ which was at the rate of
_little more than a penny a day_. The work, therefore, done by the
numerous residents in this house is scarcely worth mentioning, except for
the purpose of exhibiting the palpable neglect and mismanagement of the
conductors, and their utter incompetency for the charge which they have
undertaken. As things have stood hitherto, this house has been little
better than a nest of sloth, or an asylum for idleness; where young and
strong paupers are so treated as if it were actually wished and intended
to unfit them, as much as possible, for any future use or employment in
society, or as if their admission here had been meant for their ruin, and
not for their relief and benefit—Care, certainly, ought to be taken, that
the children, and youth, and hale people, in our poor-houses, be inured
to habits of industry, as well as provided with food and raiment;
otherwise, the succour afforded will be most materially defective.
The foregoing narration, it is presumed, will enable the reader to form a
pretty accurate and adequate idea, of the history of this notable house,
from its first erection, or foundation, in the reign of king Stephen, or
that of his successor, to the present time. At first, as has been shewn,
it was a chapel, or place of worship, of no small consideration in the
town, being little inferior to St. Nicholas’ chapel, or even St.
Margaret’s church, and continued to be so till the reformation, when it
was unaccountably desecrated, and most of it pulled down. After which,
it was appropriated successively to different uses, till it became the
poor-house of St. Margaret’s parish, and the general work-house of the
town, with the annexation, of late years, of extensive new buildings.
This is its state at present: but how long it may so continue, it is
impossible to say, as we can see but little into futurity. How far the
recent change and expected reform will realize or disappoint our hopes,
must be left at present among the mysteries. Time is the only revealer
of such secrets. We will now take our leave of St. James’s Chapel and
Hospital, and proceed to other matters, somewhat less connected with the
affairs of the present generation.
CHAP. VII.
Brief biographical notices of the most remarkable or distinguished
personages that appeared among the inhabitants of Lynn, in the
intervening period between the Conquest and the Reformation.
During the period now under consideration, it is not known that many
eminently distinguished, or very memorable characters appeared among the
inhabitants of this town, full as it was, in the mean time, of
ecclesiastics or priests, and monks or friars of different orders, among
whom was usually confined all the little knowledge and learning that did
then exist in the nation. But though the population of Lynn, during the
said period, did not abound in characters of the above description, yet
it does not appear to have been altogether destitute of them. The names
of several have been preserved, who seem to have made in their day no
mean figure among their most enlightened contemporaries; of whom the
following were, perhaps, the most estimable and worthy of remembrance.
1. NICHOLAS DE LENNA, or _Nicholas of Lynn_. He was a native of this
town, and flourished in the reign of Edward III. He was educated at
Oxford, where his literary proficiency may be supposed to have been very
considerable, as he afterwards appeared to exceed most of his fellows,
especially in some rare studies and distinguishing departments. To him
is supposed chiefly to apply that observation of _Voltaire_, in his Essay
on Universal History, (vol. 3. pp. 182, 183.) “That the first [in
Europe] who certainly made use of the _compass_ were the English, in the
reign of Edward III.” {586a} _Hackluyt_, in his Voyages, makes
particular and honourable mention of him, observing, that Nicholas de
Lenna, an excellent musician, mathematician, and astrologer, bred at
Oxford, after having applied his studies chiefly to astronomy, by the
help of his Astrolabe, {586b} made six voyages to the North seas, of
which he published an account, in a book entitled “_Inventio Fortunata_
(_aliter Fortunæ_,) _qui liber incipit a gradu_ 54 _usq_; _ad polum_.”
In the first (which seems to have taken place as early as 1330) he sailed
from Lynn to Iceland, with Company, whom he left on the sea-coast, while
he himself travelled up into the island in search of discoveries. He
presented his charts of the northern seas, at his return, (from his last
voyage, we may suppose) to Edward III, in 1360; and they were afterwards
made use of in the reign of Henry VI, and probably much later. He died
in 1369, and was buried at Lynn. We are told that he was much esteemed
by his celebrated contemporary _Chaucer_, who styled him ‘Frere Nicholas
Linn, a reverend clerke.’
Like the great _Roger Bacon_, who lived about half a century before him,
Nicholas belonged to the religious order of _Grey Friars_, or
Franciscans, otherwise called Cordeliers, and minor brethren. {587} One
is apt to forget or overlook, in some measure, the extravagances of the
order, in the contemplation of its being capable of producing, and that
it actually did produce such men as these. As Nicholas is supposed to
have spent the most part of his time at Lynn, among the brethren of his
order, it may very naturally and reasonably be concluded, or supposed,
that the _Grey Friars’ tower_, which is still standing, was often used by
him, as an _observatory_, in the course of his astronomical studies here;
which may suggest no despicable reason for preserving that ancient ruin
from the ravages of time, and keeping it up as long as possible. The
repair which it lately underwent must be creditable to the feelings of
those by whom it was promoted. It may seem somewhat odd and remarkable
that it has stood so long, and still exists, the last and only remain of
our numerous monasteries and conventual towers; (though, perhaps, from
the slightness of its structure, the most unlikely of any of them to
survive;) as if time, or providence had favoured its preservation, by way
of approval of the useful purposes to which it had been once
appropriated, or in honour of the memory of him who so laudably occupied
it, and was so eminent a benefactor to his country. Much stress,
however, is not meant to be laid on these ideas: yet we cannot help
thinking that this supposed, or presumed and probable observatory of our
ancient astronomer and navigator is entitled to some real and lasting
respect from the enlightened part of our population.
It has been already observed that our worthy and respectable townsman,
the subject of this brief memoir, died in 1369, and was buried here, [in
the church, or dormitory of the Grey Friars, in all probability;] but at
what age, does not appear: yet if his first voyage took place in 1330, as
it is said, he must have lived to be pretty far advanced in years; it
being not probable that he was less than thirty when he set out on that
voyage. Between the first and sixth, or last of his voyages there seem
to have been nearly if not quite thirty years. They were all apparently
voyages of discovery and experiment, and for improvement in the art and
knowledge of navigation, and proved, no doubt, of no small advantage and
benefit to his countrymen. It is much to be wished that a particular
account of them had been preserved, which could not fail of being very
interesting; but as such an account is not known to exist, our wishing
for it must be all vain and useless. Any records which our worthy
voyager might leave behind him have probably perished long ago; but we
have from other sources sufficient proofs that he must have been in his
day an extraordinary man, greatly distinguished as a mathematician and
astronomer, and especially as a navigator. He and the person whose name
next follows may pretty safely be deemed the two most eminent characters
that appeared among our townsmen, during the long period of which we are
now treating, or, perhaps, during any other period.
2. WILLIAM SAWTRE, or _Salter_, otherwise _Sawtry_, _Chawtrey_ and
_Chatris_, and commonly called _Sir_ William Sawtre, &c. it being usual
in those days, and long after, to prefix that title to the names of a
certain description of ecclesiastics. He is rendered peculiarly
memorable as the English _proto-martyr_; it being generally agreed that
he was the first Englishman that was burnt for his religion. We have no
authority to say of Sautre, as we did of Nicholas, that he was born here.
The place of his birth, as far as we know, has been no where mentioned.
It appears that he took up his residence and settled here, as parish
priest of St. Margaret’s, in the time of bishop _Spencer_, of fighting,
crusading, and persecuting memory; and that he was afterwards suspected
and found to be a _Lollard_ or _Wickliffite_, {590} which meant pretty
much the same with what we call being a _protestant_, but was then
deemed, by the rulers, in church and state, a very grievous offence, and
even a most shocking, pestilent, damnable, and insufferable heresy. The
defection of Sawtre, from the established or national faith, roused his
ecclesiastical superiors, and he was cited to appear before his haughty
and furious diocesan, at his palace of south Helingham; which accordingly
he did, on the last day of April, and the first of May 1399. In the mean
time he appears to have undergone a long and strict examination, in the
chapel belonging to the said episcopal palace, before the bishop, the
archdeacon of Norwich, and divers others, consisting of doctors, divines,
and notaries. It also appears that he was then so far from being ashamed
of the opinions he had espoused, or intimidated by the danger to which
they might expose him, that he did not at all scruple or hesitate to avow
and defend them. This we may be sure, did not please and conciliate his
examiners, or promote and facilitate his acquittal and liberation.
We are not particularly informed how he was disposed of immediately after
this examination: but it seems pretty certain, that he then became a
close prisoner in some place of confinement within the precincts of the
said episcopal palace. A prison, for reputed heretics and other
delinquents, was formerly considered among the necessary appendages to a
prelatical mansion or residence: and it cannot be supposed, considering
the character of bishop Spencer, but that a very complete one was then to
be found at South Helingham. In a complete episcopal prison there was
usually, it seems, a cell, called _Little-Ease_; which was a small hole,
so constructed, that the person there immured could neither stand
upright, lie straight, sit comfortably, or enjoy any degree of ease: in
short, it was designed as a place of torment, where the sufferer was to
be continually tortured, and deprived, as much as possible, of every
thing that could render his situation in any degree tolerable or
supportable. This diabolically ingenious contrivance could scarcely fail
of answering the purpose of its inventors, as it seems to have been most
admirably adapted for taming, subduing, and breaking the spirits of
reputed heretics and religious free thinkers: few of whom, it is
presumed, could stand such an ordeal, or terrible test, for any length of
time. The romish hierarchy must have been tremendously formidable, when
its prelates had such prisons in their own houses, and were empowered to
confine there any that dissented from the church, or objected to its
tenets and observances. {592}
That there was such a place of incarceration and torture then attached to
the episcopal palace of South Helingham, seems highly probable; and if
there were, there can be no doubt but that Sawtre was there confined from
the first to the nineteenth day of the month last mentioned.—That he
underwent some very severe treatment, in the meantime, seems morally
certain, as the remarkable change in his conduct, at the close of that
interval, cannot be reasonably or well accounted for on any other ground
or supposition. {593} On the _first_ of May he resolutely avowed and
defended the obnoxious opinions imputed to him, but on the _nineteenth_
of the same month, the next time he was brought before his judges, he
appeared ready to relinquish them all, and pronounce his recantation.
There is no reason to think that his opinions had now undergone any
change, or that he had become really convinced of their falsity or
untenableness; for he appeared, almost immediately after, to be as fully
persuaded as ever of their truth and importance. It was evidently the
state of his mind that had experienced a change: his fears had got the
better of his firmness, and he no longer possessed that fortitude and
boldness which he had at first displayed. Torturing severities have
often made people deny their principles, and deny, or confess, any thing
that their tormentors required. On this ground (and on no other that we
know of) can we account for Sawtre’s change and subsequent recantation.
It was determined, by the bishop and his coadjutors, that Sawtre should
publicly pronounce his recantation at different places—in order, perhaps,
the more effectually to expose and humble him, and so prevent his ever
daring again to broach his recanted tenets in these parts. They probably
suspected his sincerity, and were resolved to render their triumph over
him as complete as possible.—The obnoxious things, or enormities laid to
his charge were chiefly and substantially comprised under the following
heads—That the Cross on which Christ suffered was not a fit object of
worship—That it was more reasonable to worship a temporal prince than
that wooden cross—That the worship of angels is unlawful, even more so
than the worship of holy or truly good men—That going on pilgrimage is
useless, and that vows for that purpose are not binding, and that the
money so expended had better be bestowed in alms to the poor—That priests
are more bound to preach the word of God than to say their mattins, or
observe the canonical hours—and that, after the sacramental words are
pronounced, the bread remaineth the same as before, and so does not cease
to be bread, or undergo a transubstantiation.—It was a sad time when
people held these opinions at the risk of their lives!
On the first two days, as has been already observed, Sawtre openly avowed
the said articles, and boldly defended them; but at his next appearance,
after eighteen days of close confinement and severe sufferings, as we may
reasonably presume, he seemed quite an altered man, ready to retract all
he had before affirmed and maintained: which may be easily accounted for
on the ground before suggested. How many times, or at how many places
the bishop now required and obliged him to publish, or pronounce his
recantation, it is not very easy to discover. We find it to have been
done at South Helingham, and we are assured that it was also done in the
parish churches of _Lynn_ and _Tilney_, and in other places.—_Fox_ has
preserved a curious document relating to this affair, being the bishop’s
account of the whole process, drawn up by order of archbishop Arundel,
and transmitted to him, when Sawtre was taken up the last time, and tried
before him and his clergy, assembled in convocation, at the Chapter House
of St. Paul’s, in February, 1400, as they reckoned, but 1401, according
to our reckoning.—That account, or document is as follows—
“_Memorandum_, That upon the last day of Aprill, in the yeere of our
Lord 1399, in the 7. indiction, and 10 yeere of the papacie of pope
Boniface the 2. in a certain chamber within the manor-house of the
said bishop of Norwich at South Helingham (where the register of the
said bishop is kept) before the 9. houre, in a certain chapell within
the said manor situate, and the first day of May then next and
immediately insuing, in the foresaid chamber Sir W. Chawtris, parish
priest of the church of S. Margaret in the towne of Lin, appeared
before the bishop of Norwich, in the presence of John de Derlington,
archdeacon of Norwich, doctor of the decrees, frier Walter Disse, and
John Rickinghall, professors in divinity, William Carlton, doctor of
both lawes, and William Friseby, with Hugh Bridham, publike notaries,
and there publikely affirmed and held the conclusions, as before is
specified.—All and singular the premisses the forsaid William
affirmeth upon mature deliberation. And afterwards, to wit, the 19.
day of May in the yeere, indiction, and papacie aforesaid, in the
chappell within the manor-house of the said Henry bishop of Norwich,
situate at South Helingham, the foresaid Sir William revoked and
renounced all and singular the foresaid his conclusions; abjuring and
correcting all such heresies and errors, taking his oath upon a book
before the said Henry, the bishop of Norwich, that from that time
forward he would never preach, affirm, nor hold privily nor apertly,
the foresaid conclusions; and that he would pronounce, according to
the appointment of the said bishop, the foresaid conclusions to be
erroneous and heresies, in the parish churches of Lin and Tilney, and
in other places at the assignment of the said bishop; and further
sware, that he would stand to the ordinance of the said bishop
touching the premisses, in the presence of the discreet and
worshipfull men afore-recited, with divers other moe.—As concerning
the first conclusion, that he said he would not worship the cross &c.
he confessed himself to have erred, and that the article was
erroneous, and submitted himselfe. And as touching the second
article, that he said, he would rather worship a king, &c. he
confessed himself to have erred, and the article to be erroneous, and
submitted himselfe, and soforth of all the rest.—Then next after
this, upon the 25. day of May, in the yeere of our Lord aforesaid, in
the _Church yard of the Chappell of St. James_, within the towne of
Lin, the foresaid William, in the presence of the foresaid bishop and
clergy, and the people of the said towne of Lin standing round about,
publikely declared in the English tongue, the foresaid conclusions to
be erroneous and heresies, as was contained in a certain scrole.
{597} And after this, the 26. day of May, in the yeere above said in
the _Church of the Hospital of S. John’s_, in the towne of Lin, the
said Sir William, before the said bishop sitting as judge, sware and
took his oath upon the holy Evangelists, that he would never after
that time preach openly and publikely the foresaid conclusions, nor
would heare the confessions of any of his subjects of his diocesse of
Norwich without the speciall license of the said bishop, &c. In the
presence of frier John Smermen, M. John Rickinghall doctor of
divinity, W. Carlton doctor of both lawes, and Thomas Bulton officer
of the liberty of Lin aforesaid, with divers others.” {598}
Such was the account, or statement of his former process against Sawtre,
which bishop Spencer delivered to his metropolitan, Arundel. Not the
least hint is here given, how the reputed heretic had been treated, or
was disposed of, during the interval between his first and last
examination. Had his renunciation of his obnoxious tenets been brought
about by mere argument, or rational persuasion, it would, doubtless, have
been mentioned by way of triumph, or boasting: but having been the effect
of extreme severity or cruel treatment (as was above suggested) it was
very natural to pass it over in silence, for it was not capable of
yielding any manner of credit to the parties concerned, or give them a
plausible pretence to make a merit of it. This silence therefore
evidently and strongly corroborates, if it do not also satisfactorily
establish, what was before advanced or suggested on this head.
After Sawtre had gone quite through this irksome and humiliating process
of recantation, it might be expected that he would not think of tarrying
much longer in these parts: he, accordingly, appears to have quitted Lynn
shortly after, and obtained the situation of parish-priest, or minister
of _St. Osith_, in London. {599} This would seem to indicate, that his
character was still deemed respectable, and had not suffered so much by
the late event as some might expect. He had also, probably, some good
and powerful friends, who now interested themselves very warmly and
effectually in his behalf. However that was, he really did, as far as we
can discover, obtain the said situation without opposition or difficulty.
But he soon appeared to be so far from having abandoned his former
principles, that he was still, in fact, as much a Lollard and heretic as
ever: and his late miscarriage seems to have operated so as both to
confirm him in those principles and also to arm him with boldness and
courage to maintain them against all gainsayers, and in the face of every
future danger or opposition.
Like that of the rest of his party, (the Lollards,) Sawtre’s heresy seems
to have been of a twofold nature; partly religious, and partly political;
which must have rendered him doubly odious to the ruling powers: and as
he proved a relapsed, confirmed, and irreclaimable heretic, we need not
wonder that he should be made to feel the whole and overwhelming weight
of their indignation and vengeance. The affairs of this country were
then, as at some subsequent periods, most wretchedly situated. Every
thing, both in church and state, might be said to be lamentably in the
wrong: and Sawtre appears to have been earnestly desirous of having them
thoroughly reformed and rectified. He may therefore be considered, if
not as the Sir _William Jones_, {600} the _Sir Francis Burdett_, or the
_Major Cartwright_, yet, at least, or rather, as the _Christopher Wyvill_
of that time. Men of that sort, though ever so honest, virtuous,
enlightened, or respectable, are always viewed with an evil eye, and
deemed to be dangerous characters by the interested and unprincipled
agents and abettors of ecclesiastical and political corruption. It is no
wonder, therefore, that a most horrible outcry was raised against this
man throughout the whole camp and borders of those philistines.
Sawtre had formed an important plan for the benefit of his oppressed
country, and intended to lay it immediately before parliament. The
design got wind, and the high priests, in particular, with archbishop
_Arundel_ at their head, were instantly alarmed, as the project, had it
succeeded, would have deeply affected them: and in order effectually to
frustrate the reformer’s object, they so managed, that the affair should
not go before parliament, but be referred to the _convocation_, which was
then sitting. From that assembly no good could be expected to result.
Patriots and reformers were there objects of utter aversion; and any one
might see that poor Sawtre had no longer any chance of bringing his
project to a successful issue, or even of escaping with his life. He was
accordingly brought before that ecclesiastical tribunal, and the result
will be seen by the sequel. This was about the middle of February 1401,
or 1400, according to their reckoning; for they placed that month near
the close of the year, which, with them, ended on the 25th of March.
The story of Sawtre is thus introduced by Fox—