“The next yeere after followed a parliament holden at Westminster:”

[i.e. in 1400; for he has also, like his predecessors, assigned

February to the preceding year:] “in which parliament one William

Sautre, a good man and a faithfull priest, inflamed with zeale of

true religion, required he might be heard for the commodity of the

whole realme. But the matter being smelt before by the bishops, they

obtained that the matter should be referred to the convocation; where

the said William Sautre being brought before the bishops and notaries

thereunto appointed, the convocation was deferred to the Saturday

next ensuing. When Saturday was come, that is to say, the twelfth

day of February, Thomas Arundell archbishop of Canterbury, in the

presence of his councell provinciall, being assembled in the said

chapter-house [i.e. that of St. Paul’s] against one Sir William

Sautre, otherwise called Chatris chaplaine, personally then and there

appearing by the commandment of the aforesaid archbishop of

Canterbury, objected; that the said William before the bishop of

Norwich had once renounced and abjured divers and sundry conclusions

hereticall and erroneous; and that after such abjuration made, he

publicly and privily held, taught, and preached th same conclusions,

or else such like, disagreeing to the catholic faith, and to the

great perill and pernicious example of others. And after this he

caused such like conclusions holden and preached, as is said, by the

said Sir William without renunciation, then and thereto be read unto

the said archbishop, by master Robert Hall, chancellor unto the said

bishop, in a certain scrole written, in tenor of words as

followeth—“Sir William Chatris, otherwise called Sautre, parish

priest of the church of Saint Scithe [Osith] the virgin in London,

publikely and privily doth hold these conclusions under

written—_Imprimis_, he saith, that he will not worship the crosse on

which Christ suffered, but only Christ that suffered upon the

crosse—2. _Item_, That he would sooner worship a temporall king,

than the foresaid woodden crosse—3. _Item_, That he would rather

worship the bodies of the saints than the very crosse of Christ on

which he hung, if it were before him.—4. _Item_, That he would

rather worship a man truly contrite, than the crosse of Christ.—5.

_Item_, That he is bound rather to worship a man that is

predestinate, than an angell of God.—6. _Item_, That if any man

would visit the monuments of Peter and Paul, or go on pilgrimage to

the Tombe of Saint Thomas, or else any whither else, for the

obtaining of any temporall benefit; he a not bound to keep his vow,

but he may distribute the expences of his vow upon the almes of the

poore.—7. _Item_, That every priest and deacon is more bound preach

the word of God, than to say the canonicall houres—8. _Item_, That

alter the pronouncing of the sacramentall words of the body of

Christ, the bread remaineth of the same nature that it was before,

neither doth it cease to be bread.” {603}

These articles or charges being publicly read and exhibited, the

archbishop then called upon Sawtre to answer to them; but he desired that

he might first have a copy of them, and that sufficient time might be

allowed him to prepare his answer and defence. A Copy was accordingly

delivered to him, and the next Thursday was then fixed upon for him again

to appear before his judges. But on that day, owing, it seems, to the

archbishop’s being then necessarily engaged in the parliament-house, the

business was adjourned till the next morning at eight o’clock. The

convocation, or rather its upper house, being then assembled, Sawtre

appeared again before them, and produced a written defence, and answer to

those articles, which were then publicly read by Robert Hall, before

mentioned. He no longer thought of retracting, as he had done near two

years before, at Lynn and other places. On the contrary, he now openly

avowed his principles, and appeared neither afraid nor ashamed to defend

them. It is therefore, not to be wondered that the writing, or answer,

which he laid before them, and which was now publicly read in their

hearing, proved no way satisfactory or conciliating.

After the said Robert Hall had read that paper, or answer, aloud, in the

audience of the Convocation, the archbishop, being dissatisfied with the

contents, proceeded to question Sawtre on what he deemed the most

material points, which chiefly related to the doctrine of

transubstantiation. Among his questions were the following—{604}

“Whether in the Sacrament of the altar, after the pronouncing of the

Sacramentall words, remaineth very materiall bread, or not?—Whether

in the sacrament after the sacramentall words, rightly pronounced of

the priest, the same bread remaineth, which did before the words

pronounced, or not?—Whether the same materiall bread before

consecration, by the sacramentall words of the priest rightly

pronounced, be transubstantiated from the nature of bread into the

very body of Christ, or not?”

To none of these interrogatories did the prisoner return an orthodox or

satisfactory answer. His answers being therefore deemed insufficient,

and the day, probably, too far gone to finish the examination at that

time, it was thought proper to adjourn the business till the next day.

Of what then occurred Fox gives the following account.

“Then the said archbishop assigned unto the said Sir William time to

deliberate, and more fully to make his answer till the next day; and

continued this convocation then and there till the morrow. Which

morrow, to wit, the 19th day of February, being come, the foresaid

archbishop of Canterbury, in the said chapter house of St. Paul in

London, before his councell provinciall then and there assembled,

specially asked and examined the same Sir W. Sautre, there personally

present, upon the sacrament of the altar, as before. And the same

Sir William again, in like manner as before, answered. After this

amongst other things the said bishop demanded of the same William, if

the same materiall bread being upon the altar, after the sacramentall

words being of the priest rightly pronounced, is transubstantiated

into the very body of Christ, or not? And the said Sir William said,

he understood not what he meant. Then the said archbishop demanded,

whether that materiall bread being round and white, prepared and

disposed for the sacrament of the body of Christ upon the altar,

wanting nothing that is meet and requisite thereunto, by the virtue

of the sacramentall words being of the priest rightly pronounced, be

altered and changed into the very body of Christ, and ceaseth any

more to be materiall and very bread, or not? Then the said Sir

William, deridingly {605} answering, said he could not tell.”

“Then consequently the said archbishop demanded, whether he would

stand to the determination of the holy church, or not, which

affirmeth that in the sacrament of the altar, after the words of

consecration being rightly pronounced of the priest, the same bread,

which before in nature was bread, ceaseth any more to be bread? To

this interrogation the said Sir William said, that he would stand to

the determination of the church, where such determination was not

contrary to the will of God. This done, he demanded of him againe,

what his judgement was concerning the sacrament of the altar: who

said and affirmed, that after the words of consecration, by the

priest duly pronounced, there remained very bread, and the same bread

which was before the words spoken.”—This examination commenced at

eight o’clock in the morning, and lasted about three hours: and as

the prisoner would not now retract, or recede from his Lollardism,

and receive what was called _Catholic information_, but chose to

persist, at all events, in his own way of thinking, the archbishop,

as we are told, “by the counsell and assent of his whole covent then

and there present, did promulgate and give sentence by the mouth of

Robert Hall, against the same Sir William, being personally present,

and refusing to revoke his heresies, but constantly defended the

same.” {606}

After passing the said sentence, an adjournment took place, till the week

after, when the prisoner was again brought before them, two or three

different times. On the Wednesday they read to him bishop Spencer’s

statement of his process against him, near two years before. The

archbishop and divers others now reproached him for holding opinions

which he had before abjured; as if it were a mighty crime for a man,

after having been once so weak as to renounce or abjure the truth,

afterwards to repent and embrace it—or, after having once been so

overseen as to resign the right of private judgment, ever any more to

think of resuming it! As all the stratagems and means they could use

proved now too feeble to shake him from his integrity, or induce him to

sacrifice his conscience to their unrighteous and infernal pleasure, they

resolved he should be forthwith degraded: and a sentence of degradation

{607} was accordingly passed upon him that same day. The execution of

this sentence was deferred till the Friday following; and as the

archbishop could not then attend, owing to his detention in parliament,

it was further deferred till the morrow after. They then proceeded to

business in good earnest, and a most curious process it certainly

was—They first deprived him of his _priest’s order_, next of his

_deacon’s order_, next of his _subdeacon’s order_, then of his _acolyte’s

order_, then of his _exorcist_, or _holy-water-clerk’s order_, then of

his _reader’s order_, then of his _sexton’s order_, and finally, of his

_privilege of clergy_: in token of which his tonsure was erased, a

layman’s cap put on his head, and himself so entirely secularized, or

reduced to the state of a lay person, as if he had never been in orders.

All this was certainly absurd enough; {608} but as it was also very

curious, we shall here give it more circumstantially, in the words of the

historian so often referred to in these pages—

Upon Saturday, being the 26th. of February, the said archbishop of

Canterbury sate in the bishop’s seat of the foresaid church of St.

Paul, in London, and solemnly apparelled in his pontificall attire,

sitting with him as his assistants these reverend fathers and

bishops, of London, Lincolne, Hereford, Exeter, _Menevensis &

Roffensis episcopi_, [i.e. the bishops of St. Davids and Rochester]

above mentioned, commanded and caused the said Sir William Sautre,

apparelled in priestly vestments, to be brought and appeare before

him. That done, he declared and expounded in English to all the

clergy and people, there in a great multitude assembled; that all

processe way finished and ended against the said Sir W. Sautre.

Which thing finished, before the pronouncing of the said sentence of

the relapse against the said Sir William, as is premised, he often

then and there recited and read. And for that he saw the said

William in that behalf _nothing abashed_; he proceeded to his

degradation and actual deposition in forme as followeth.

_In the Name of the Father_, _and of the Son_, _and of the Holy

Ghost_. {610} We Thomas by God’s permission archbishop of

Canterbury, primate of all England, and Legate of the apostolike Sea,

do denounce thee William Sautre, otherwise called Chautris,

_chaplaine fained_, in the habite and apparell of a priest, as an

heretike, and one refallen into heresie, by this our sentence

definitive by councell, assent, and authority to be condemned, and by

conclusion of all our fellow brethren, fellow bishops, prelates

councell provinciall, and of the whole clergy, do degrade and

_deprive thee of thy priestly order_. And in sign of degradation and

actual deposition from thy priestly dignity, for thine

incorrigibility and want of amendment, we take from thee the _patent_

and _chalice_, and doe deprive thee of all power and authority of

celebrating the masse, and also we pull from thy backe the _casule_,

and take from thee the _vestment_, and deprive thee of all manner of

priestly honour.

Also, We Thomas, the aforesaid archbishop, by authority, counsell,

and assent, which upon the foresaid William we have, being _deacon

pretensed_, in the habit and apparell of a deacon, having the _New

Testament_ in thy hands, being an heretike, and twice fallen,

condemned by sentence as is aforesaid, do _degrade and put thee from

the order of a deacon_. And in token of this thy degradation and

actuall deposition, we take from thee the book of the _New

Testament_, and the _stole_, and do deprive thee of all authority in

reading of the gospel, and of all and all manner of dignity of a

deacon.

Also, we Thomas archbishop aforesaid, by authority counsell, and

assent, which over thee the foresaid William we have, being a

_subdeacon pretensed_, in the habit and vestment of a subdeacon, an

heretike, and twice fallen, condemned by sentence, as is aforesaid,

do _degrade and put thee from the order of subdeacon_; and in token

of this thy degradation and actuall deposition, we take from thee the

_albe_ and _maniple_, and do deprive thee of all and all manner of

subdiaconicall dignity.

Also, We Thomas archbishop aforesaid, by counsell, assent and

authority which we have over thee the foresaid William, an _Acolyte

pretensed_, wearing the habit of an acolyte, and heretike, twice

fallen, by our sentence, as is aforesaid, condemned, doe degrade and

put from thee all order of an acolyte; and in signe and token of this

thy degradation and actuall deposition, we take from thee the

_candlestick_ and _taper_, and also the _urceolum_, and do deprive

thee of all and all manner of dignity of an Acolyte.—Also, We Thomas

archbishop aforesaid, by assent, council, and authority, which upon

thee the foresaid William we have, an _Exorcist __pretensed_, in the

habite of an exorcist or holy water clerke, being an heretike, twice

fallen, and by our sentence, as is aforesaid, condemned, do _degrade

and depose thee from the order of an Exorcist_; and in token of this

thy degradation and actual deposition, we take from thee the _book of

conjurations_, and do deprive thee of all and singular dignity of an

exorcist.

Also, We Thomas archbishop aforesaid, by assent, counsell, and

authority, as is abovesaid, do degrade and depose thee the foresaid

William, _reader pretensed_, clothed in the habit of a reader, an

herctick, twice fallen, and by our sentence, as aforesaid, condemned,

from the order of a reader: and, in token of this thy degradation and

actual deposition, we take from thee the _book of the divine

lections_ (that is, the book of the church legend) and do deprive

thee of all and singular manner of dignity of such a reader.—Also, We

Thomas archbishop aforesaid, by authority, counsell, and assent, the

which we have, as is aforesaid, doe degrade, and put thee the

foresaid William Sawtre, _Sexton pretensed_, in the habit of a

sexton, and wearing a surplice, being an heretike, twice fallen, by

our sentence definitive condemned, as aforesaid, from the order of a

sexton: and, in token of this thy degradation and actual deposition,

for the causes aforesaid, we take from thee the _keyes of the church

doore_, and thy _surplice_, and do deprive thee of all and singular

manner of commodities of a doore-keeper.

Also, by the authority of omnipotent God, the Father, Son, and Holy

Ghost, and by our authority, counsell, and assent of our whole

councel provinciall above written, we do degrade thee, and depose

thee, being here personally present before us, from orders,

benefices, priviledges, and habit in the church; and for thy

pertinacy incorrigible we doe degrade thee _before the secular court

of the high constable and marshall of England_, being personally

present; and do depose thee from all and singular _clerkely honours

and dignities whatsoever_, by these writings. Also in token of thy

degradation and deposition, here actually we have _caused thy crowne

and ecclesiasticall tonsure in our presence to be rased away_, and

utterly to be abolished, like unto the form of a secular layman; and

here we do put upon the head of thee, the aforesaid William, the cap

of a lay secular person; beseeching the court aforesaid that they

will receive _favourably_ {613} the said William unto them thus

recommitted.

Having thus performed their part of this diabolical work, and delivered

the prisoner into the hands of the civil magistrate, “the bishops, not

yet contented, cease not, (says our historian) to call upon the king to

cause him to be brought forth to speedy execution. Whereupon the king,

ready enough, and too much, to gratifie the clergy, and to retaine their

favours, directeth out a terrible decree against the said William Sawtre,

and sent it to the maior and sheriffes of London to be put in execution.”

This terrible decree, or royal warrant for the prisoner’s execution, was

obtained, it seems, on the very day of his degradation, when the

convocation passed their final sentence and gave him up to the civil

power: so that there was here no time lost; and the closing scene, no

doubt, soon ensued. The royal decree, or warrant was as follows:

“_The decree of our sovereigne Lord the King and his Councell in

parliament_, _against a certain new sprung up heretick_. _To the

maior and sherifs of London_, &c. Whereas the reverend father,

Thomas archbishop of Canterbury, primate of all England and legat of

the apostolike sea, by the assent, consent, and councill of other

bishops, and his brethren suffragans, and also of all the whole

clergy within his province or dioces, gathered together in his

provinciall councell, the due order of the law being observed in all

points in this behalfe, has pronounced and declared, by his

definitive sentence, William Sawtre sometime chaplaine, fallen again

into his most damnable heresie, the which before time the said

William had abjured, thereupon to be a most manifest heretick, and

therefore hath decreed that he should be degraded, and hath for the

same cause really degraded him from all prerogative and privilege of

the clergy, decreeing to leave him unto the secular power; and hath

really so left him, according to the laws and canonicall sanctions

set forth in his behalfe, and also that our holy mother the church

hath no further to do in the premisses: We therefore being zealous in

religion, {615a} and reverent lovers of the catholike faith, willing

and minding to maintaine and defend the holy church, and the lawes

and liberties of the same, to root all such errors and heresies out

of our kingdome of England, and with condigne punishment to correct

and punish all heretikes, or such as be convict; provided always that

both according to the law of God and man, and the canonicall

institutions in this behalfe accustomed, such heretikes convict and

condemned in forme aforesaid ought to be burned with fire: We command

you as straitly as we may, or can, firmely enjoyning you that you

cause the said William, being in your custody, in some publike or

open place within the liberties of your city aforesaid (the cause

aforesaid being published unto the people) to be put into the fire,

and there in the same fire really to be burned, to the great horrour

of his offence, and the manifest example of other christians. Fail

not in the execution hereof upon the perill that will fall

thereupon.” {615b}

This memorable warrant (dated 26th. of February) was, no doubt, speedily

executed: perhaps the very day on which it was issued. The death which

it orders or appoints for the alleged crime of heresy, or to which it

devotes the reputed offender, is supposed to distinguish it from all

other warrants that had ever been issued before by our English monarchs:

at least, there is not known to have been here, previously to this reign,

any law dooming adjudged heretics to the flames. Henry IV. therefore,

stands preeminent among our sovereigns as a promoter of the burning of

those whom the priests pronounced or denominated heretics. It is

remarkable enough that the poor lollards found such an enemy in him, who,

as well as his father, had long affected to be their great patron. But

it was all, probably, nothing but policy: neither father nor son can be

supposed ever to have been real lovers of either liberty or justice.

Henry’s accession to the throne (to which he had no right) disclosed his

true character; and he has been known ever since, as one of the worst of

our princes. Arundel and his brethren helped him to obtain and usurp the

crown, in hopes that he, in return, would help them in such affairs as

this of Sawtre: nor were they disappointed. They favoured his baseness

on that, and he favoured theirs, to the utmost extent of their wishes, on

this and on all similar occasions.

The execution of Sawtre was the first fruit of the new law for burning

heretics; and it was soon followed by an abundant harvest. The number of

those who were burnt for their religion in England whilst this execrable

law was in force, which was near 300 years, was enormously great. As

Sawtre stands at the head of those memorable confessors, it was thought

requisite to be somewhat particular and circumstantial in our account of

him. The sons of freedom will venerate his memory, while they detest and

execrate that of his crowned and mitred persecutors. Of our crowned

demons none could well exceed _Henry IV._ and of our mitred ones scarce

any ever did or could go beyond _Arundel and Spencer_. For Sawtre to

fall into such hands must truly have been a most sad and pitiable case.

It was like falling among thieves, or into a den of hungry lions.

It is pretty remarkable that the prisoner’s plan of reform, or intended

application to parliament was not allowed to come at all under the

discussion of the convocation; although they had pretended to take it

under their serious consideration, instead of its going before

parliament. But they knew better than to have done so, and took a much

shorter and surer course to gain their point and effect the reformer’s

ruin, by proceeding simply on a religious ground, and having him tried as

a relapsed heretic. So well did they know their business, and how to

avail themselves of all the advantages belonging to their exalted

situation.—We shall now take our leave of them, and also of William

Sawtre, whose memory we have here endeavoured to rescue from oblivion.

His being so distinguished a character among the then inhabitants of

Lynn, and, especially, his being the English porto-martyr, will, it is

presumed, sufficiently justify and apologize for the unusual length of

this article—and as it exhibits religious bigotry and intolerance in

their native deformity and hatefulness, it may be of use to those

individuals among us, of every denomination, who have not yet made any,

or much progress in the christian virtues of forbearance, candour, and

liberality.

3. ALAN, _Aleyne_, or _Allen of Lynn_, was, it seems a native of this

town, and contemporary with Sawtre, but a younger man, and long his

survivor, and so represented as flourishing about twenty years later. He

was evidently of a very different cast from him, and never gave himself

the least concern, as far as we know, about the politics of the time, or

the _reform_ of civil or ecclesiastical abuses. Perfectly regardless of

the oppressions of the rulers and the grievances of the people, he

employed his time in poring over the huge volumes of the Fathers and

Schoolmen, and writing indexes to them. We are told he made _indexes_ to

no less than 33 of those authors, among which were Augustin, Anselm, and

Aquinas. Such an employment, though of no real use or benefit to the

community, procured him the honour of being classed among the eminent

men, or literati of that age; and his name has been handed to posterity

as one of the distinguished characters which Lynn has produced. His

skill and industry in making those indexes might, no doubt, deserve

commendation, but can hardly be said to entitle him to any degree of

literary celebrity. He may be said therefore to have acquired more fame

than was fairly his due. But so it has often happened: while the merits

of some have been greatly underrated, those of others, on the contrary,

have been magnified beyond all reason and justice. Alan received his

education at Cambridge, where he obtained the degree of Doctor in

Divinity. He was of the order of Carmelites, or White Friars, and

therefore his residence here must have been at their great house, or

convent in South Lynn. How long he resided there cannot now be said. We

are told that he died about the year 1428, and was buried at Lynn. The

place of his burial, no doubt, was the dormitory of his own convent,

situated on that spot in South Lynn now called the _Friars_.

4. WILLIAM WALLYS. He was cotemporary with the last, and like him one

of our Lynn friars, but of the augustinian order. He was not, like the

former a mere reader, and maker of indexes, but a real author, and is

said to have written many books; but their titles and contents are no

longer remembered or known. They might be on interesting subjects, and

those subjects might there be handled in a judicious and masterly manner;

or they might not. However that was, and whatever they were, it seems

they have long ago perished, like innumerable other works, no less

valuable and worthy of preservation; and, perhaps, much more so. But his

name, has been preserved, as one of the eminent Lynn men of former times.

How long he resided here, we are not informed; but we are told that he

died in 1421; and we may presume that he was buried in the convent or

dormitory of the Austin friars, which stood behind the house now

inhabited by Mr. Rishton. He must have been eminent in his day,

especially among those of his fraternity, for we are told that he became

_general_ of that order.

5. JOHN BARET, of _Barret_. He too was a friar, of the same order with

Alan; that of the _Carmelites_. He was a native of this town, and

educated at Cambridge, “when learning (as _Fuller_ says) ran low and

degrees high in that University; so that a Scholar could scarcely be seen

for Doctors; till the university, sensible of the mischief thereof,

appointed Dr. Cranmer (afterwards abp. of Canterbury) to be the examiner

of all candidates in Divinity. Amongst others, he stopt Baret, for his

insufficiency, who then went back to Lynn, and applied himself to

learning with such success, that in a short time he became an admirable

scholar; and commencing doctor, with due applause, lived many years a

painful preacher at Norwich; always making mention of Cranmer as the

means of his happiness.” But we find that he had something of the Vicar

of Bray about him; for it seems he was at first a papist; afterwards, in

the latter part of Henry the eighth’s reign, and that of Edward, a

protestant; again, in that of Mary, a zealous papist; and lastly, in that

of Elizabeth, a staunch protestant. It seems, however, that he died soon

after the commencement of the latter reign: and one would hope that he

died in the true faith.—As to his veering or changing with the times,

where is the impropriety of that? Ought not the ministers of a national

or state religion to be submissive to, or directed by the state, from

which they derive their creed, their revenue, their power, and their

every thing?

The subjects of the foregoing biographical articles being all

_ecclesiastics_, and all the ecclesiastics of any note that distinguished

Lynn, as far as we know, during the long period of which we have been

treating, it might be expected that we should in the next place give a

list of the eminent _laymen_ that sprung up here in the course of the

same period. But, alas! we look and search for them in vain: hardly can

one be found whose name deserves to be recorded, or remembered by

posterity. William de Bittering, John de Wentworth, Bartholomy Petipas,

and Thomas Miller, four of our ancient aldermen, were perhaps the most

memorable, or notable that can now be discovered. Of two of them

somewhat has been said already, and a sort of promise was made to bring

them again under review; but, upon second thought, they did not appear to

deserve so much further notice as was then intended.—As to

6. WILLIAM DE BITTERING, we learn that he flourished in the reign of

Edward III. and was chosen mayor of the town four or five different

times; so that he must have been here, in his day, a person of no small

note and influence. The first year of his mayoralty, it seems, was 1351.

He was again chosen, and served the office the ensuing year; so that he

was then mayor two years successively. He is said to have been again

chosen in 1355, but begged to be excused, on the plea that it was

wearisome to be so often in office, and, especially, that he was then

under a vow, to go on pilgrimage to a certain saint: from which it would

seem that he was, in his way, a very religious character. His

resignation was accepted, and _John de Coultshall_, who had served the

year before, was chosen again, and had 20_l_, given him by the commonalty

to take upon him the office for that year. Bittering was again chosen

and served the office in 1358, and again in 1365. The time of his death

does not appear. He was buried in St. Nicholas’ chapel, where his grave

is known by a flat stone of uncommon dimensions, being above ten feet

long and above six broad, and is supposed to be the oldest sepulchral

monument now existing in this town. (Mackerell, 134.)

7. 8. JOHN DE WENTWORTH and BARTHOLOMY PETIPAS. They are not here

coupled or joined together because they were friends for no two men could

well be further from that, but rather because they were foes, and the

heads of two hostile factions, by which the town was kept in a state of

constant distraction for a great length of time. It seems impossible now

to ascertain the ground, or cause of that deadly animosity which those

two factions, or these two men entertained against each other.

Lollardism, we know, did then much agitate the kingdom, but we cannot say

that it was the occasion of this discord at Lynn. Nor can we say that it

was a mere political broil, or, contest between the partizans of the

episcopal feudal prerogatives and their opponents, though this may seem

more probable, as it appears from pages 365 and 559 of this volume, that

Petipas was on good, and Wentworth on bad terms with the bishop. However

this was, it is pretty evident that these two were mighty men and men of

renown here in those days.

9. THOMAS MILLER, or _Milner_. He was the leading man among our

ancestors in the reign of Henry VIII. being _governor_ of the town, and

mayor also one time for four successive years; and he served that office

afterwards twice, if not more; so that he was mayor of Lynn six or seven

times, which is not known to have been the case with any other. But what

made him the most memorable was his successful contest, or law-suit with

the bishop, during the former part of his mayoralty, about their

respective claims to have the _Sword_ carried before them. This legal

decision established the mayor’s independence upon the bishop.

Having now paid our tribute of respect to the memory of our eminent men

of those times, we shall here close this chapter, which brings us down to

the era of the reformation.

* * * * *

_End of Part_ III.

SUPPLEMENT

TO THE HISTORY OF THE ROYAL TOUCH.

See page 326.

Since the section on the royal touch has been printed off, a paper has

appeared in the _Monthly Magazine_, under the signature of _I.

Bannantine_, which casts some further light upon that subject. As it is

presumed it will not be unacceptable to the reader, we take the liberty

of inserting here the substance of it.—

“It does not appear (says that writer) that any of the House of

Brunswick have asserted this royal function; at least, it has not

been publicly announced, as was formerly the practice: but were his

present majesty to resume it, such faith is yet put in the assertion

of a king, that all the courtiers and the great body of the ignorant

multitude would not hesitate to believe its infallibility. The last

sovereign who appears to have exercised this miraculous gift was

queen _Anne_. In the royal gazette of Mar. 12. 1712. appears the

following public notice: “It being her Majesiy’s royal intention to

touch publicly for the Evil the 17th. of this instant March, and so

to continue for sometime, it is her Majesty’s Command, that tickets

be delivered the day before at Whitehall, and that all persons bring

a certificate, signed by the minister and church-wardens of their

respective parishes, that they _never received the royal touch_.”

He further adds, that _Wiseman_, Sergeant Surgeon to Chas. 2nd, in a

treatise on the Evil, speaks of the _royal touch_ in the following terms:

“I have myself been frequent eye witness of many hundreds of cures

performed by his majesty’s touch alone, without the assistance of

chirurgery, and those many of them such as had tired out the

endeavours of able chirurgeons before they came thither. It were

endless to relate what I myself have seen, and what I have received

acknowledgement of by Letters, not only from the several parts of the

nation, but also from Ireland, Scotland, Jersey, and Germany.”

It was the office of Wiseman, as Sergeant Surgeon, to select such

afflicted objects as were proper to be presented for the royal touch.—Is

it possible (I. Bunnantine here exclaims) to desire a more satisfactory

testimony of these miraculous cures, than that of a man of science and

respectability, under whose immediate inspection they were performed, and

who had “himself been a frequent eye-witness of many hundreds of cures

performed by his majesty’s touch alone!”—The late judge Barrington (he

further observes) relates what he heard from an old man, a witness in a

cause, with regard to this miraculous power of healing.

“He had by his evidence fixed the time of a fact, by queen Anne’s

having been at Oxford, and touched him, whilst a child, for the Evil.

When he had finished his evidence, I had an opportunity of asking

him, whether he really was cured? Upon which he observed, with a

significant smile, that he believed himself never to have had a

complaint that deserved to be considered as the Evil; but that his

parents were poor, and _had no objection to the bit of Gold_.”

It seems to me (adds the judge) this piece of Gold, that was given to

those who were touched, accounts for the great resort on this occasion,

and the supposed afterwards miraculous cures.—_Gimelli_, the famous

traveller, gives an account of 1600 persons offering themselves to be

cured of the Evil by Lewis xiv. on Easter Sunday, 1686. Gimelli himself

was present at the ceremony: every Frenchman received 15 Souce, and every

foreigner 30. This power of healing assumed by the kings of France

occasioned great resort to Francis I. while prisoner at Madrid, by the

Spaniards, who had not such faith in their own king’s touch. It appears

by a proclamation of Jas. I. Mar. 25, 1617, that the kings of England

would not permit any resort to them for these miraculous cures in the

summer-time. By another proclamation of June 18, 1626 it is ordered that

no one shall apply for this purpose, who does not bring a proper

certificate, that he has never been touched before: the same, it has been

already seen, were the terms on which _queen Anne_ granted her royal

touch.—In a prayer-book printed in 1703, is a form of the Church-service

for the occasion of the royal touch. After the Lord’s Prayer it is

stated, “Then shall the infirm persons, one by one, be presented to the

queen; while the queen is laying her hands upon them and is putting the

Gold about their necks, the chaplain that officiates turning himself to

her majesty shall say these words following: “God give a blessing to this

work and grant that these sick persons on whom the queen lays her bands

may recover through Jesus Christ our Lord!”—After some other prayers, the

chaplain, standing with his face towards those come to be healed, shall

say: “The Almighty God, who is a most strong tower to all them that put

their trust in him, to whom all things in heaven, in earth, and under the

earth, do bow and obey, be evermore your defence; and make you know and

feel that there is no other name under heaven given to man, and through

whom you may receives health and salvation, but only in the name of our

Lord Jesus Christ! Amen!”—Mo. Mag. Mar. 1810.

* * * * *

_END OF VOLUME 1_.

ERRATA. {626}

Page 2, line 3, for _mumerous_ read _numerous_.—p. 9, l. 19, for _its_ r.

_their_.—p 19. last line but two, dele comma after _least_.—p. 31, l. 3.

for _drgree_ r. _degree_—p. 32, for _Section_ II, r. _Section_ I.—p. 79,

l. 13, for _seperated_ r. _separated_—p. 83, l. 9, for _decerned_ r.

_discerned_—p. 85, l. 1, for _sagacions_ r. _sagacious_—p. 106, l. 5, for

_cansideration_ r. consideration—p. 107. l. 28, and 29, for acdingly r.

_accordingly_—p. 134, Note, 1. 3, before _side_ r. _east_—p. 148, l. 14,

for _numbers_ r. _members_—p. 192, l. 3, for _compositions_ r.

_composition_—p. 96, last line for _heterdoxy_ r. _heterodoxy_—p. 200, l.

17, for _vareigata_ r. _variegata_—p. 210. l. 9, after Britain _a period_

instead of a _comma_—p. 222, l. 4, delete _s_ in _collections_—p. 237, l.

10, for _supremary_ r. _supremacy_—p. 312, last line but one, for _way_

r. _may_—p. 317, l. 14, for _loose_ r. _lose_—Same p. l. 18, for

_miricles_ r. _miracles_—p. 325, l. 7, for _Susanna_ r. _Joanna_—p. 347

l. 11, after _Silthestow_ a _comma_—and the next line, for _sincc_ r.

_since_—p. 353, l. 3, for _Fountian_ r. _Fountain_—p. 374. l. 3, for

_pregressive_ r. _progressive_—p. 395, l. 6, from the bottom, after

_some_ r. _of_—p. 400, l. 2, and 14, for _arbitary_ r. _arbitrary_—p.

402, l. 26, for _directiom_ r. _direction_—p. 403, l. 2, for _appelation_

r. _appellation_—p. 507. l. 3, for _now_ r. _new_—p. 511, note, dele

_them_ in l. 16—same page l. 35 of the note, for _they were_ r. _it

was_—p. 515, l. 12. for _da_ r. _de_—p. 517, l. 3, from bottom, for 1526,

r. 1256—p. 592, note l. 3., _member of_. r. _members and_.

* * * * *

_Whittingham_, _Printer_, _Lynn_.

FOOTNOTES.

{1} The exact situation of Lynn, as to its Latitude and Longitude, has

been ascertained with the utmost accuracy by Mr. Walker. He informs the

author, that the Latitude of St. Nicholas’ Chapel, in this town, deduced

from observations with a mural circle made by Mr. Troughton, is 52d. 45m.

25s to North; and its Longitude, by Chronometers, 1m. 35s. in time, East

of Greenwich.

{2} The original, or British name may pretty safely be concluded to have

been _Wysg_, or _Gwysg_.

{7} Except, perhaps, about Castlacre.

{8} Something of the same kind is related of the rivers Thames and

Medway in the reign of Henry I. See Stow, 138.

{9} His last years were spent at East Dereham in Norfolk, where he

finished his course in 1800. In the north transept of that parish

church, where his remains have been deposited, is a neat monument of

white marble, with the following inscription:—

In Memory of

WILLIAM COWPER, ESQUIRE,

Born in Hertfordshire, 1732:

Buried in this Church, 1800.

Ye who with warmth the public triumph feel

Of talents dignified by sacred zeal,

Here, to Devotion’s Bard devoutly just,

Pay your fond Tribute due to COWPER’s dust.

England, exulting in his spotless fame,

Ranks with her dearest sons’ his fav’rite name.

Sense, fancy, wit, suffice not all to raise

So clear a title to affection’s praise:

His highest honours to the heart belong:

His virtues form’d the magic of his Song.

{10} The _Cam_ and the _Larke_ also passed then along with the Ouse by

Wisbeach.

{11} See _Vancouver’s_ Map, and his _Appendix_, p. 10, where the

original track or course of these rivers appears to have been divided by

a kind of ridge or higher ground from that of the lesser Ouse and Wessey

or the river of Stoke, (sometimes also called Winson and Storke) which

together with the Lenne or Nare seem to have been the only original Lynn

rivers.

{12} The haven and river of Wisbeach while the Ouse passed that way went

by the name _Wellstream_ and the _Water of Well_, while those of Lynn

went by the name of _Wigenhale Ea_, and the _Water of Wiggenhale_. Vide

MS. late Mr. Partridge’s.

{16a} Hist. Embank. chap. 37.

{16b} By an arm of the sea he meant, probably, something similar to what

Lynn Haven is now.

{16c} A Commission is said to have been issued 21 Edward I. for sending

the _Waters of Well_ by Wisbeach, their ancient outfall; which further

corroborates the idea that _Wellstream_ or _Waters of Well_, was formerly

a name of the Ouse about Wisbeach.

{18} Elstobb speaks of several efforts having been made to turn the Nene

down to its ancient outfall at Wisbeach; and particularly that—

“about the year 1490 John Morton, bishop of Ely, and Lord Chancellor

of England, [afterward Archbishop of Canterbury and a Roman Cardinal]

for the better obtaining that end, and for the more effectual

recovery of the outfall at Wisbeach, cut a new river, or drain 14

miles in length, 14 feet wide, and about 4 feet deep, beginning at

the high grounds, within a mile of Peterborough, and continuing it

down to Guyhorn, an hamlet in Wisbeach parish; and setting down a

sluice across the old river Nene at Standground, turned the waters of

that river down this new cut. This (he adds) with some other works,

said to have been done by him, did for a time make some improvement

in the fens about Wisbeach, so as to make them good sheep pasture,

&c. But this (he further adds) continued not long, being cut too

shallow, and not sufficiently embanked, or kept clear and free from

impediments and obstructions.”

Elstobb’s Observations, p. 25, 26.

{19} Bishop Morton was in his time one of the most distinguished

characters in this country. He was a person of deep penetration,

singular address, and sound judgment; and possessed, in the highest

degree, those rare talents that constitute the profound politician and

consummate statesman. He was a warm and determined partisan of the House

of Lancaster. Richard III. rightly considering him as too dangerous a

person to be left at liberty, took care betimes to have him secured. He

was accordingly imprisoned in the castle of _Bracknock_, where he was

committed to the custody of the Duke of Buckingham, then the said king’s

most powerful and confidential adherent. Somehow he managed to seduce

the Duke from his allegiance to Richard, and engage in his scheme in

favour of the Earl of Richmond. The Duke’s ruin soon followed; but

Morton escaped to the continent, where he afterward joined Richmond, and

with him returned to England. After his victory at Bosworth, and

elevation to the throne, Morton became his most confidential servant and

counsellor. He was preferred to be Lord High Chancellor of England,

archbishop of Canterbury, and at last, a Cardinal. He may be presumed to

have been an adviser and promoter of the most important measures of that

reign; of which the depression of the nobles, and elevation of the

commons, were not the least memorable or salutary. He died, before

Empson and Dudley came into employ; so that he had no share in their

malpractices.

{21a} Kinderley’s Ancient and Present State, 2nd Edit. p. 68.

{21b} Kinderley, p. 77.

{22} Badeslade p. 98.—Here it ought not to be forgotten that the said

large accession of fresh waters to the Lynn river, while it widened and

deepened the harbour, seems to have proved eventually fatal to a great

part of West or Old Lynn, which (including one of its churches and church

yard) was in time swallowed up by the waters. This, it must be allowed,

was a disastrous event. It is, however, an ill wind (as the proverb

says) that blows nobody good: though the church is gone, the income

remains, which the incumbent still duly receives, for nothing; for it is

a sinecure, and not a very poor one.

{24a} The Nene, of late years, has been gradually choking up, till it is

at length become, it seems, a mere shallow ditch, filled with mud, and

hardly navigable at any time. Its navigation is become, of course,

inconsiderable and unproductive; to the no small loss and injury of those

unfortunate people, who, in an evil hour, had entrusted their property in

that ill fated concern. Most inexcusable mismanagement is said to have

occasioned this; and much of the blame has been confidently, if not truly

imputed to the abominable inattention and neglect of certain Lynn

Merchants.

{24b} In p. 4.

{26a} Badeslade p. 12.

{26b} In 1645, five or six years before Denver Sluice was erected, Lynn

Haven was in a very good condition. It had two channels, one called the

_East_, the other the _West Channel_, in which the biggest ships, drawing

13 or 14 feet water, sailed up and down on the neap as on the spring

tides. One John Attleson, aged 80, deposed that for 60 years and

upwards, he had known the river Ouse, and all the rivers falling into the

same; and that before the erection of the sluices near Salter’s Lode, all

the rivers were free and open, and received such quantities of water by

the flood from sea, that large barges with from 26 to 30 chalders did

constantly pass with great ease up to Cambridge town.—See Budeslade: also

Elstobb’s Observations, p. 23, 24.

{30a} Armstrong, it seems, ascribed the silting of Lynn Haven, and of

the river above, to the hundredfoot drain.—See Kinderley p. 29.

{30b} Hence we hear of manufacturers of Bays, Dyers, Dyehouses,

Falling-mills, Button-makers, and worsted-weavers at Lynn, with some

thousands employed in knitting stockings, &c.—In behalf of the latter, a

petition against the worsted-weavers was presented to parliament in

1689.—See Town Book, No. 10.—Mackerell, about 70 years ago, makes the

population of Lynn to amount to upwards of 20,000—if his estimate was

right, even within 5 or 6,000, (and he published it under the auspices of

the Corporation) the town must have been far more populous than it is at

present. See Mackerell, p. 93.—From the great, and increasing number of

empty houses now in the town, it may be concluded, that its population is

at this time decreasing. The rapid decay of trade, the prospect of an

endless war, and the daily increase of the public burdens, are doubtless

among the causes of this depopulation. Neither the _paving_, nor yet the

_new poor’s rate laws_, are likely to realize the vast benefits promised

or held out by the promoters of them, and fondly expected by many of the

inhabitants. On the contrary, those very Acts are said to be severely

felt by a large portion of the householders, many of whom, it seems, have

already broken up housekeeping, and many more are expected to take the

same course. Upon the whole, it does not seem to appear, either from the

Registers of Births and Burials, or from any other known circumstances or

sources of information, that the population of Lynn, within the last

twenty or thirty years (as generally supposed) has exceeded that of

former periods. This subject, however, shall be reserved for future

consideration.

{35a} They are still called, _The Roman Banks_.

{35b} See Badeslade, p. 15.

{36} See Carte’s History of England, vol. 1, p. 115, 119, 122.

{49} Philosophical Transactions, No. 481—also Beauties of England,

volume XI, p. 94.

{53a} Vita Agricola.

{53b} Compare Dugdale’s maps of this tract in its morassy and improved

states p. 375, 416.

{54} History of Embanking.

{60} No, surely, not sufficient proofs that the surface was lower; but

rather, or only, that the country was once dry and woody, and long

remained so: for upon the reasonable supposition of an _Earthquake_, as

was before repeatedly suggested, the probability would be, that the

surface was anciently as high at least, if not higher than at present,

but was considerably lowered by that convulsive event, which would make

way for the violent bursting in of the sea.

{66} Of this undertaking _Elstobb_ gives the following account—

“That it was entered into by the Earl, at the earnest request and

importunities of the country in general, who at a numerous sessions

of sewers held at Lynn, January 13, 1630, became humble suitors to

him to undertake the business, which he condescended to comply with,

and accordingly contracted with the commissioners and the country,

and engaged that he would use his best endeavours to _drain_ the said

_marsh_, _fenny_, _waste_ and surrounded _grounds_, in such a manner

as that they should be fit for _meadow_, _pasture_, or _arable_; and

the work to be completed within the compass of _six years_. To the

end the Earl might the more confidently undertake and effect the said

work, and be assured of enjoying the 95,000 acres, as the fruit and

recompence of his labours and charge; and that the country might be

more assured of obtaining a benefit proportionable to the very great

quantity of land they were to part with, it was agreed that 12,000

acres, part of the 95,000, should be presented to the king, in lieu

of all and every benefit he might claim by a certain law of sewers,

made in the 19th year of king _James_, or by any other law or decree

of sewers, and for his royal _approbation_ and _confirmation_ of the

contract, &c.”—Having described the work in its commencement and

progress, he adds, that having expended about £100,000 these lands

were so benefited that, in about seven years time, from the first

undertaking, viz. in 1637, at a session of sewers held at

Peterborough, October 12, the Level was adjudged to be drained, and

the 95,000 acres were, by six or more commissioners set out for the

Earl, his heirs and assigns.—But it being soon after discovered that

these lands, though benefited, were not perfectly recovered, but in

winter were still subject to inundations, the very next year, 1638,

at a sessions of sewers held at Huntingdon, April 12, the Earl’s

undertaking was adjudged _defective_. The _King_ then taking the

business into his princely consideration, and understanding by an

estimate made by Sir C. Vermuiden, that if this Level of near 400,000

acres were made _winter-lands_, it would be of extraordinary

advantage, viz. of about £600,000 to the common wealth, his Majesty

determined to become himself the undertaker; and accordingly on July

18, the same year, he was actually declared undertaker; and was to

have, not only those 95,000 acres, which had been set out for the

Earl of Bedford, but also 57,000 acres more, from the country, it

being his Majesty’s design to make the land good _winter-ground_.

The Earl, in consideration of the costs he had been at, was to have

40,000 acres out of the 95,000 before granted him.—The King to

manifest his real and earnest purpose of speedily effecting the

business, caused the following works to be done: a bank on the south

side of Morton’s Leam, and another begun on the north side: a

navigable sass at Standground: a new river cut between the stone

sluice, at the Horse-Shoe, and the sea below Wisbeach, sixty feet

broad, and two miles long, with banks on both sides: also a sluice in

the marshes below Tydd, upon the outfall of the _Shire Drain_. But

the King being embroiled in a civil war, the Level lay neglected; and

the country complaining that they had received no benefit by the

draining, they entered upon the 93,000 acres again, which had been

taken from them.”

Elstobb’s Observations, p. 9 to 12.

{69} _Estobb_, speaking of the above act, says, that the Governor,

Bailiffs, and Conservators were made _Commissioners of Seven_, for

preservation of the Level, by convenient outfalls to the sea; and they or

any five of them, whereof the governor or any of the bailiffs be two, to

act as commissioners of sewers within the said great level, and of the

works made, or to be made without the said level for conveying the waters

by convenient outfalls to the sea. No other commissioners to meddle. A

governor or bailiff to have 400 acres out of the said 95,000; the

conservater 200; and the commonalty electors 100 acres, to enable them to

vote. Elstobb’s Observations, p. 14.

{70} See Beauties of England, vol. 2.

{71} This fund was at first usefully applied, and the channel and

navigation of the Nene considerably improved. The interest of the money

borrowed on the occasion, was also for some years regularly and

punctually paid; so that the river Nene securities, as they were called,

were generally reckoned very good. Of late years, however, the state of

things has greatly altered for the worse: the river has been neglected,

and suffered to be filled up with silt and mud; the navigation impeded;

the interest of the money borrowed between fifteen and twenty years in

arrears, and the creditors gravely told, that there is no money in hand

for them. Their case therefore seems to be without remedy and without

hope; there being, it is to be feared, no prospect of another chance to

restore or improve the said river. What is become of the said fund?

{73a} See Agricultural Survey of Cambridgeshire.

{73b} Beauties of England, 2, 18.

{74} See Beauties of England, 2, 18, 19.

{79a} In consequence of the late improvements of the Smeeth and adjacent

parts, the reeds are said to have become much more scarce than they used

to be.

{79b} The small feathers are plucked five times a year, (about Lady day,

Midsummer, Lammas, Michaelmas, and Martinmas,) and the larger feathers

and quills twice. Goslings are not spared; for it is thought that early

plucking tends to increase their succeeding feathers. Some proprietors

are said to have had a stock of a thousand, and even fifteen hundred, or

more, beside the young ones.

{80a} It has been said, indeed, that mere plucking hurts the fowl but

little, as the owners are careful not to pull until the feathers are

_ripe_; that is, until they are just ready to fall; because if forced

from the skin before, which is known by blood appearing at the roots,

they are of very inferior value. Those plucked after the geese are dead,

are also said not to be so good—see Beauties of England, vol. IX. p.

553.

{80b} Gough’s Camden.—Also Beauties of England.

{81} “All this tract (of Marshland) and adjoining fens being little

higher than the level of the sea, or that of the rivers that pass through

the country, was once so exposed to inundations from floods and high

tides, that till dikes and drains were made, it was all one large morass;

and even now, after so much labour and expence, the country is still

liable to be overflowed by extraordinary high tides or floods, or other

casual events. By the evaporation of this water, and especially by that

of the water of the numerous ditches, in which various plants and insects

die and rot, the atmosphere during the latter part of summer and autumn

is filled with moisture, and with putrid and insalutary vapours.—Another

cause of the insalubrity of the atmosphere is an _imperfect ventilation_.

As there are no hills here to direct the winds in streams upon the lower

grounds, the air is apt to stagnate and become unwholesome. An

additional cause of the unhealthiness of this flat and marshy country,

may be the impurity of the water in common use; for this being either

collected from rains, and preserved in cisterns, or drawn from shallow

wells, is, in hot and dry-seasons soon corrupted. This being the case,

the general tendency to putrefaction must be increased by the use of such

water, as well as by the meats, which in a close, hot, and moist air, are

quickly tainted. Several circumstances therefore in this country concur

in summer, not only to relax the solids, but to dispose the humours to

putrefaction; and as the combination of heat and impure moisture is the

great cause of the speedy corruption of animal substances, so it is

observed in every place to produce remitting and intermitting fever.”—See

Pringle’s Observations on Diseases of the army, pp. 2, 3, 4.

{91} Brief view of the Sufferings and living Testimonies of the Martyrs,

p. 392.

{93} Milner’s Letters to a Prebendary, No. 4.

{94a} Challoner’s memoirs of missionary Priests, I. 392, 436.

{94b} This bishop, whose christian name, as it is called, was

_Lancelot_, seems to have been in his day one of the better sort of the

men of that order, as appears by the following anecdote, related of him

after he had been translated from Ely to Winchester.—Waller, the poet,

being one day at court, while James I. was dining, overheard the

following conversation between his _sacred_ majesty and two of his

bishops, of whom one was Andrews of Winchester, and the other Neale of

Durham. These two prelates, standing behind the king’s chair, were asked

by him, “If he might not take his subjects’ money when he wanted it,

without all the usual formality in parliament?” To which his lordship of

Durham readily answered, “God forbid, sir, but you should; you are the

breath of our nostrils.” The other being silent, James addressed himself

to him, “Well, my lord of Winchester, and what say you?” Andrews

replied, that he was “not competent to judge in parliamentary cases.”

Upon which the king exclaimed, “No evasions, my lord, I expect an

immediate and direct answer to my question!” “Then, sir,” said he, “I

think it lawful for you to take my brother Neale’s money, for he offers

it.”—It is easy to see that there was some difference between these two

bishops, and that the latter was the better man of the two, being by no

means so lost to all shame and decency, or so abject a flatterer of

majesty as the other. Which of them the majority of their successors

have resembled most, may be a point not very easy to determine: nor would

it be, perhaps, of very material consequence.

{99} History of the Boroughs, Volume 8.

{100} Hutchesson’s Account—also Beauties of England.

{101} According to Hutchesson they used to dine at a groat a head: but a

groat then was equal perhaps to two or three shillings of our money.

{102} In all the adjacent villages the title of _Town-Bailiff_ is given

to the treasurer or manager of their respective charitable

establishments.—Beauties of England.

{104} Beauties of England, volume 2.

{105} Hutchesson’s Account of Wisbeach—and Beaut. of Engl. as before.

{106} The text is footnoted but there is no footnote for it in the

book.—DP.

{109} See Blackstone’s Commentaries—also Hutchesson’s Account—and the

Beauties of England, as before.

{110} Beauties of England, as before.

{112} It is really a ditch or dyke that separates Wisbeach from

Marshland.

{113} Queen Henrietta, by her numerous indiscretions, contributed

largely to the alienation of the affections of his subjects from the king

her husband; and she suffered very severely in consequence of it. After

her retirement into France, that court, at the head of which was her

nephew Lewis XIV, is said to have been very remiss in administering to

her relief, so as to leave her often in want even of the necessaries of

life. It has been reported that she was in such distress at Paris, in

1643, that she and her infant daughter were obliged to lie in bed, in

their room at the palace of the Louvre, for want of wood to make their

fire with. One time during the Protectorate, as Granger reports, she was

so reduced, that she actually applied to Cromwell for relief, as queen

dowager of England. In 1660, after an absence of many years, she

returned to London, where she seems not to have been treated with much

kindness by her son Charles. In 1665, at the breaking out of the plague,

she again retired to France. From Sir John Reresby’s memoirs it appears,

that she was secretly married (probably about that time) to Henry Jermyn,

earl of St. Albans, who had for many years attended her as chamberlain of

her household, or some such character, and who afterward treated her in a

most unkind and brutal manner. She died in 1669, in her 60th year.

{114} History of Freebridge, p, 258.

{116} A single jail, in Alfred’s golden reign,

Could half the nation’s criminals contain.

Fair Justice then, without constraint ador’d,

Held high the steady scale, but deep’d the Sword:

No spies were paid, no special Juries known;

Blest age! but ah! how different from our own!

_Johnson’s London_.

{123} See Hughes’s Letters; also Petit. Andr. History of England. 1.

233.

{126} Particularly as an Hebrician, according to the learned Hugh

Broughton.

{128a} One Brook, now a dashing orator at or about Burnham, and who also

holds forth sometimes at Lynn, is said to have used the same experiment,

and boasted of it,—and also of having doomed and consigned a certain

neighbouring minister to _eternal torment_, for presuming, forsooth, to

differ from his creed. Master B. is classed among the evangelicals, and

seems to be very much in their spirit.

{128b} How well he used them upon the poor popish prisoners in the

Tower, whom he there most unmercifully flogged, or rather racked and

tortured, we have seen above (p. 93) from the testimony of Dr. Milner.

Some of the numerous puritan sufferers of that time might, probably,

share from him the same fate; which may account for what Fuller calls his

being _foully belibelled_ by them, in return. After such treatment it

would be very natural for them to think that they had some right as well

as reason to complain: and it might also be natural for him, as well as

for Fuller, to give those complaints the name of _libels_.

{131} Parkin, 308.

{132} See Parkin, and Norfolk Tour, 131.

{134} Walter Coney, Alderman, and four-times mayor of Lynn, in the

fifteenth century, who is supposed to have lived in the corner house at

the bottom of High Street, on the east, fronting the Church.—Further

accounts of the above three families may be found in Blomefield and

Parkin’s History of Norfolk.—☞ To what was before said of _Terrington_

(Section XIII) it may be here added, that the impropriation of the great

tithes was given by James I. as an augmentation to Lady Margaret’s

professorship of divinity at Cambridge; and that this revenue, or income

has so much increased of late years, as to render that chair the most

lucrative piece of preferment now in the gift of the University.—Here it

may be also noted, in addition to what was before said of _Walpole_

(Section XI.) that in the year 1727, a person digging there in his garden

found, about three feet beneath the surface, numerous roman bricks, and

an aqueduct formed of earthen pipes, which were twenty inches long, three

inches and three quarters in the bore, and half an inch thick; the one

end diminishing, so as to be inserted in the wider end of the other.

Twenty-six were taken up whole, and distributed among several

antiquaries.—See Beauties of England, v. 11, 289.

{137} See Beauties of England, vol. XI, and Kent’s View of Agriculture

of Norfolk, p. 40, 41.

{139} Kent’s General View—and Beauties of England, as before.

{140a} Kent’s General View—Beauties of England, as before.

{140b} Ibid.

{146} Brancaster was one of those forts erected by the Romans along the

Icenian coast, to guard the country against the incursions of the

piratical Saxons, who used to infest this coast long before they obtained

any footing in the country, and while it formed a part of the Roman

Empire. From their frequent hostile visits, this coast was called _the

Saxon shore_. The forts along the coast (the chief of which was

Brancaster,—to which Rising might be a kind of appendage,) were

garrisoned by a strong body of cavalry, called the _Dalmatian horse_,

whose superior, or commander in chief, was denominated the _Count of the

Saxon store_; and sometimes _Branodunensis_, from _Branodunum_, the Roman

or Latin name of Brancaster.—Brancaster is now an obscure village,

exhibiting no vestige of its ancient dignity, except some entrenchments,

or earthworks, the remains of a Roman Camp, including, as Camden says,

some eight acres; which the neighbours call Caster—all whose dimensions,

according to his annotator, agree with the Roman models, in Cesar’s

Commentaries.—See Gibson’s Camden, 391, 398.

{148} See Norfolk Tour, and Parkin.

{149} Beauties of England. 7, 505.

{158} Otherwise _Titherington Hall_.

{168} See Beauties of England, volume Xl.

{169} Norfolk Tour.

{171} Beauties of England as before.

{177a} The following lines of his, quoted by Lord Teignmouth in his Life

of Sir William Jones, is supposed to be expressive of the manner in which

he distributed, or employed his time.

“Six hours in sleep, in Law’s grave study Six,

Four spend in prayer, the rest on nature fix.”

For which Sir William Jones is said to have substituted the following,

“Six hours to law, to soothing slumber seven,

Ten to the world allot, and _all_ to heaven.”

{177b} The worshipful kindred of _John Reeves_, and _John Bowles_; alias

the pretended _Antijacobins_, who have been of late years such monstrous

benefactors to this country, and to the world.

{178} A curious circumstance that attended Sir E. Coke’s second marriage

ought not to pass here unnoticed.—That marriage was solemnized in a

private house, without banns or licence, in consequence of which the

married couple and the officiating clergyman, together with Lord

Burleigh, who was one of the company, were prosecuted in the archbishop’s

Court; but upon their submission, they escaped excommunication, and the

consequent penalties, because, says the record, “they had offended not

out of contumacy, but _through ignorance of the Law in that point_.”—So

then the Lord Chief Justice of England, even Sir Edward Coke,

transgressed the law _through ignorance_.

{179} Which must have been about as reasonable as the old woman’s advice

to leave off thinking, _for fear of thinking wrong_.

{189} For the sympathies of his nature and qualities of his heart, see

his Letter to Simon Taylor, in Flower’s Pol. Rev. Mar. 1807, p. xxxvi.

{192} See the Memoirs of Dr. Priestly, Vol. 1. and also the London

Magazine, for November, 1783.

{196} The late Mr. Carr, a merchant of Lynn, used to say, that his

father once killed six Bustards at one shot.—They were probably much more

numerous then, than they are now.—A respectable gentleman of Lynn,

however, assures this writer that not many years ago, he saw no less than

eight or ten of them together, in the neighbourhood of Stanhoe.

{199} The fen-fowlers, with their long guns, make terrible havock among

them, killing sometimes between 20 and 30 at one shot; and of _Coots_

twice that number; which however, is nothing like the number of

_Starlings_ which they have sometimes slaughtered:—a person of veracity,

who has lived long in the fens, assures this writer, that he knew, an

instance, near Coningsby, in Lincolnshire, of 36 dozens of Starlings

being killed at a single shot, by one _Thomas Hall_.

{200} Just after their arrival in October, the Woodcocks are said to be

sometimes exceedingly abundant here.

{201} So called, probably, from the river on whose banks it stands, and

which, it seems, was formerly called _Ey_: so that Sechey may signify,

Sech on the Ey, or on the banks of the river so called.—See _Parkin_.

{203} Anciently it was called _Downham-hithe_, i.e. Downham-port.

Gibson’s Camden.

{204} See Norfolk Tour, last Edition, p. 365. Also Description of

England and Wades, volume 6, p. 251.

{207a} For a further account of Swaffham, see Norfolk Tour: also

Beauties of England, volume, xi.

{207b} Beauties of England as before.

{209} Ten single threads of cotton to each of those 18 lamps, make in

all 180: now a street lamp in London, is said to contain 28 single

threads, and if we divide 180 by 28, we shall have 6 3/7: hence the oil

consumed in the Hunston Light-house, is less than that consumed by 7

London street lamps.—The advantages derived from Mr. Walker’s plan, are,

1. The strength of light may be proportioned to the distance at which it

may be necessary to be seen. 2. It may be maintained at a less expence

than where the light is equally diffused all round the compass. 3. It

requires little attendance. 4. It always appears of the same

magnitude—provided, as was above hinted, the glass be kept clean, and the

lamps in a proper trim—circumstances that must be attended to, and not

neglected.—Here it may be further observed that the improvement of

light-houses is not the only subject that has undergone Mr. W.’s close

and successful investigation. Many papers written by him, have appeared

in Nicholson’s Philosophical Journal, and Tilloch’s Philosophical

Magazine, giving an account of divers useful inventions of his, and new

discoveries is physics, chiefly under the following heads.—1. On a method

of using candles, so as to produce no smoke, nor require snuffing.—2. A

method of obviating the effects of thick wires in transit telescopes. 3.

On the Plumb line and Spirit level. 4. On the vibrations of pendulums in

vacuo. 5. On a standard of light, by which we may compare the strength

of any other light. 6. Description of an apparatus for conducting sound,

and holding conversations at a distance. 7. Description of a new

reflecting quadrant. 8 On the best method of ascertaining the dip of the

horizon at sea. 9. On the methods of observing the longitude at sea.

10. On the phenomenon of the horizontal moon. 11. Description of a new

cometarium. 12. On transit instruments. 13. On vision. 14. Description

of a new optical instrument called a Phantasmascope. 15. Observations on

vision, when objects are seen through a mist. 16. On the power of the

eye, by which it is adjusted to see objects distinctly at different

distances. 17. On the apparent magnitudes of the same object seen under

different circumstances. 18. On deal pendulum rods. 19. On the human

eye: in which many errors of former writers on vision are pointed out,

and the true theory explained.

{211} It was not till after the erection of these, that the Corporation

of the Trinity House had some Light-houses constructed on similar

principles, which are now in use, and well approved.

{215} _Catus Dicianus_, as was observed before, was the Roman Procurator

over the province of the _Iceni_ in the reign of Claudius, and perhaps in

that of Nero; and seems to have been, not only the chief cause of

Boadicea’s revolt, by his brutal treatment of her and her daughters, but

also the principal director of the canals, embankments and other works

and improvements then carried on in and about the fens.—See above, Part

I. Chap. 2. Section 1.

{217a} “The _Triads of the Isle of Britain_, are some of the most

curious and valuable fragments preserved in the Welsh language. They

relate to persons and events, from the earliest times to the beginning of

the seventh century.”—Owen’s preface to the Works of _Llywarch Hen_.

{217b} Supposed to be the _Aristobulus_ of the New Testament.

{217c} See British Archæology, lately published: also Owen’s Cambrian

Biography.

{218} Annal. I. 13. C. 22.

{219} Before the introduction of Christianity, the prevailing and

established religion of Britain and of Gaul, was Bardism, or Druidism, as

it is more commonly called, of which very different accounts have been

given by different authors. According to our best informed antiquaries

and most competent judges, it was of very remote if not of patriarchal

origin, and exhibited for no short period a most strikingly rational and

venerable appearance. It taught the existence, unity, spirituality, and

benevolence of the Supreme Being; also the doctrine of a future state, of

providence, and the immortality of the soul: but it taught withal the

transmigration of the soul, and even the final salvation of the whole

human race, with other tenets equally grating to an orthodox ear. Its

fundamental object and principle were a diligent search after truth, and

a rigid adherence to justice and peace. The religious Functionaries

never bore arms, nor engaged in any party disputes. They were employed

as heralds in war, and so sacred were their persons considered, in the

office of mediators, that they passed unmolested through hostile

countries, and even appeared in the midst of battle, to arrest the arm of

slaughter, while they executed their missions. So far they appear

singularly dignified and respectable; but this did not always

continue—like the priests of other professions, they, in time, departed

from their original principles, and introduced various degrading changes,

especially among the Gauls. In Britain the system was preserved in

greater purity: hence the first families of Gaul sent their children

hither for education, as Cesar testifies.

We have often heard Druidism represented as a monstrous and shocking

system: but if it was so, it must have been in its corrupt, and not in

its original state. Even christianity itself, in a corrupt state,

becomes an object equally monstrous and shocking; but that can furnish no

argument against genuine christianity, or the religion of the New

Testament. As to the _human victims_ which the Druids are said to have

offered, they were, it seems, chiefly _malefactors_: in that view we may

be said to have our human victims too, and that in far greater numbers

probably, than those of the Druids. Our executions are very frequent,

and the victims we thus offer up are more numerous than in any other

country we know of. These victims we offer up to law and justice, but

they are very few compared with the myriads upon myriads we have offered

on the altar of injustice, persecution, ambition, and folly.

{220} Badeslade, §. 3. page 15.—Colonizing was an essential branch of

the Roman policy in conquered countries, and it is likely that such an

important undertaking as that of recovering and improving these fertile

parts, would be by them committed to colonists, such as they might

introduce from Belgium, who must from their habits and employment at

home, be peculiarly rated for the task.—Circumstances also lead us to

think, that the work was begun here, which being nighest the inhabited

parts, seems to have been the right end, where common sense would dictate

that it should commence.

{221} Salen. Village au bord d’un Marais. Sal, bord; Len, marais.

_Mullet_, _Memoires Sur la langue Celtique_. Tom. 1. p. 136.

{222a} _Ey_, is also said to have been another of its names.

{222b} See Gough’s Edition of Camden’s Britannia.

{225} Henry of Huntingdon, William of Malmsbury, Dugdale, &c.

{229} The Saxons, as before hinted, were long distinguished from other

nations for their piratical propensities, and predatory adventures, as

well as for the success that generally attended their favourite

operations. It was no wonder, therefore, if their neighbours would by

degrees become attached to similar pursuits: and that it did so happen is

undeniable. “In the ninth century (says a respectable historian) it was

an established custom in the North, that all the _sons of kings_ except

the eldest, should be furnished with ships properly equipped, in order to

carry on the dangerous, but not dishonourable profession of piracy.”—So

reputable was the pursuit, that parents were even anxious to compel their

children into that desperate and detestable occupation. By an

extraordinary enthusiasm for which, they would not suffer their children

to inherit the wealth which they had gained by it. It was their practice

to command their gold, silver, and other property to be buried with them,

[see Turner’s History of the Anglo Saxons, and Edinburgh Review No. 6. p.

368]—Here it may not be improper to observe, that what determined the

Saxons to piratical enterprises was a most daring, singular, and

memorable achievement of a numerous body of their neighbours and allies

the Francs, whom the emperor Probus had transported from their own

country, on the borders of the Rhine, to the distant shores of the

Euxine, with a view of weakening the strength of that warlike nation,

which was so very formidable to the neighbouring Roman provinces. These

exiles, though removed to a country not inferior to their own, could not

bear the idea of seeing their native land no more. There is what may be

called a law of nature, which attaches us to the region where we first

drew our breath, or spent our childish and youthful days, and which makes

it often most painful to think of being for ever separated from it. So

it seems to have been with those exiled Francs. Unable to bear the

thought of a perpetual separation from their kindred and native country,

they seized the earliest opportunity of abandoning their appointed

settlement, and regaining what appeared to them the sweetest blessings of

life. “They possessed themselves of many ships, and formed the

astonishing plan of sailing back to the Rhine. Who were their pilots, or

how they conceived, on their untutored minds, the possibility of a

project so intricate, and, for such barbarians, so sublime, has not been

revealed to us. Its novelty and magnanimity ensured it success. They

ravaged Asia and Greece; not for safety merely, but revenge and plunder

were also their objects. Landing in Sicily, they attacked and ravaged

Syracuse with great slaughter. They carried their triumphant hostility

to several districts of Africa, and sailing adventurously to Europe, they

concluded their insulting and prosperous voyage by reaching in safety

their native shores.”—This amazing enterprise discovered to them and

their neighbours, that from the Roman colonies a rich harvest of spoil

might be gleaned by those who would seek for it at sea. They had

desolated every province almost with impunity; they had plunder to

display, which must have fired the avarice of every needy spectator; they

had acquired skill, which they who joined them might soon inherit; and

perhaps the same adventurers, embarking again with new followers, evinced

by fresh booty the practicability of similar attempts.—The Saxons, then

inhabiting the parts about the Elbe and Heiligoland, are supposed to be

among the first to emulate the exploits of the returned exiles.—Thus

originated that system of piracy by which the northern nations were so

long distinguished, and for which the Saxons were for many ages

deservedly infamous. They became by degrees so powerful and formidable

by sea, like the modern English, that some of the competitors for the

Roman imperial dignity actually formed alliances with them, in order to

insure their own success.—Like ourselves, and perhaps with equal justice,

they seemed to aim at the sovereignty of the ocean: but among all their

deeds of infamy, it is doubtful if any one of them ever exceeded in

baseness and atrocity our own late memorable expedition to Copenhagen,

though conducted by such as made pretension even to piety and evangelism,

which indeed but rendered it the more detestable.—In vain we look to

Algiers and Tunis for more flagitious or fouler deeds. [See _Hellfried’s

Outlines of a Political survey of the English Attack on Denmark_—and for

an account of the expedition of the Francs, and the Saxon and northern

piracies, see _Turner_, as before.]

{231} Gildas Epistle. § xxiii.

{232} Henry the Lion, the prime actor in these brutal proceedings, was

another time affronted by the inhabitants of _Bardewic_, one of the

largest cities of Germany, for which he stormed it, and, except nine

churches, left not one stone on another. No wonder that he is said to

have been universally dreaded. He afterward quarrelled with the emperor

Frederic Barbarossa, but there he was overmatched, and expelled from

Germany. He then took refuge with his wife Matilda, at the court of our

Henry II, his father-in-law. He was afterward restored to his hereditary

domains only, Brunswick and Lunenburgh, to which august and illustrious

house he belonged. [Nugent—Petit Andrews.]

{233} See Nugent’s Hist. of Vandalia: also Monthly Review 35. 174.

{234a} Gildas, as before, xxiv, xxv.

{234b} They are mentioned in Domesday, and by many of our topographical

writers, without attempting to account for their origin. Their condition

seemed as abject as that of our modern West India Negroes. We seldom

hear of them after the bloody contest between the rival houses of York

and Lancaster, which proved to them, it seems, a most beneficial contest,

as it occasioned their emancipation, in order the more easily to recruit

the contending armies. As the lust of Henry VIII. proved favourable to

the success of the reformation, so the ambition of those rival houses,

proved, it seems, no less so to the manumission of these poor slaves.

{236} That this country, in the time of the Romans, contained many

populous, flourishing, and well-built towns, is allowed on all hands; and

that they were mostly overthrown and destroyed by the invading Saxons, is

confirmed by the testimony of Gildas; it may therefore very naturally be

concluded, that the original Lynn was involved in the common fate of its

neighbours.—See Gildas, No. xxiv.

{238a} Parkin, pp. 69. 115.

{238b} William of Newburgh.—Gibson’s Camden—Parkin 116.

{239a} Parkin, 237.

{239b} Ibid. 69.

{240} Of those Salt-works the present writer regrets his inability to

give the reader a more particular and satisfactory account; but as he has

hitherto met with nothing that gives him any further light upon the

subject, it must be here dismissed: but it shall be again resumed, in

case any new discovery should be made before the work is completed. Our

topographical writers, as well as our old records, only allege the

existence of numerous salt-works in these parts, without attempting a

description of them, or of the process therein pursued, or even so much

as giving any hints, or intimations, to assist and direct our inquiries.

{242} Beauties of England, 2. 149.

{244} _Canute_, one of the greatest and wisest of our kings, next to

_Alfred_, had a mighty veneration for relics, and even employed agents in

foreign countries to purchase and collect them for him. One of these, an

archbishop of Canterbury, called _Agelnoth_, being at Rome, in 1021,

purchased, of the Pope, an arm of St. Austin, bishop of Hippo, for an

hundred talents, or 6000 pound weight of silver, and one talent, or sixty

pound weight of gold. A prodigious sum! greater (says _Granger_) than

the finest statue of antiquity would then have sold for. It may enable

us, as another historian observes, to form some idea of the

unconscionable knavery of the sellers, and the astonishing folly and

superstition of the purchasers of those commodities. Enormous sums were

then expended in the purchase of relics, and the roads between England

and Rome were so crowded with pilgrims, that the very tolls which they

paid were objects of importance to the princes through whose territories

they passed: few Englishmen, as _Henry_ expresses it, imagined they could

get to heaven without paying this compliment to St. Peter, who kept the

keys of the celestial regions.—Such was the wisdom, and such the piety

and christianity of the people of this country in former times, and for

many ages.—Even Alfred, according to _Rapin_, was much attached to

relics, and received, with no small satisfaction and gratitude, those

sent him as presents from the Pope, and from Abel Patriarch of Jerusalem.

His foibles, however, were greatly overbalanced by his great qualities,

good deeds, and shining virtues.

{246} Or rather Abingdon, in Berks, according to bishop Gibson.

{247a} Even nowadays, many of our gentry and wealthy people, are very

strict in requiring their domestics and dependents regularly to attend at

some place of worship, while they themselves live in the entire neglect

of it! so that they too may be said to perform religious exercises _by

proxy_.

{247b} Petit Andrews.

{249} We regret that the _abolition_ of slavery was _not_ among them.

{250} The reign of Alfred, however, was certainly distinguished by

numerous and important national benefits: war and internal disorder were

made entirely to cease; learning, and the useful arts, revived and

flourished; wholesome and important regulations were adopted and

introduced, whose salutary effects are still felt; trade and commerce

were much encouraged and extended: in all which, and especially the

latter, Lynn, as may be presumed; must have been greatly interested.

Alfred employed skilful and adventurous mariners, to explore the most

distant northern regions, and (by means of _Ofthere_, supposed to be a

banished Norwegian chief,) actually gained intelligence of the _Dwina_,

on whose banks _Archangel_ stands; a river not again spoken of in

England, till 1553, when _Richard Chanceller_ found his way to the White

Sea. What follows is still more surprising: by means of a correspondence

which Alfred engaged in with Abel, patriarch of Jerusalem, he heard of a

sect of christians who lived in penury on the south eastern coast of

Asia, the present Coromandel; and he chose a spirited priest, named

_Sighelm_, to go and relieve those his oppressed brethren. By what track

or route this gallant adventurer proceeded, any further than Rome, we

know not. It is certain that he reached the end of his journey,

delivered the royal presents, and brought back from India many curious

jewels, some of which were to be seen in the days of William of

Malmsbury, at Sherborne Cathedral, of which see Alfred had made the

fortunate and intrepid Sighelm bishop, after his return. Others of these

jewels are believed still to exist in an old crown, kept in the tower of

London.—After such enterprizes, to celebrate this great prince as the

_inventor of horn-lanthorns_, may be deemed ridiculous; yet nothing can

less merit ridicule: there were then no Clocks in England; Alfred

contrived wax tapers of a proper length, to last one, two, or more hours;

and to prevent the winds from deranging his plans, he defended the taper,

with thin, clear, _horn_. Such were the improved English _time keepers_

of the 9th century: the merit of which improvement, is due to Alfred; a

merit not inferior, probably, to that of the _Harrisons_ and _Arnolds_ of

modern times.—See Petit Andrews Hist. Gr. Britain.

{252} It is curious and ludicrous enough to think of the difficulties

that puzzled our celebrated missionary, after his arrival here, and of

which he wrote to Rome for the solution. Of what sort they were, the

reader will be able to judge from the following _queues_ and _answers_;

the former by the said missionary, _saint_ Austin, and the latter by his

infallible holy master, _saint_ Gregory:

“_Query_. 1. Are cousin germans allowed to marry? _Answer_. This

indulgence was formerly granted by the Roman law; but experience

having shewn that no posterity can come from such marriages, they are

prohibited. _Query_. 2. Is it lawful to baptize a woman with child?

_Answer_. No inconvenience can arise from the practice. _Query_. 3.

How soon after the birth may a child be baptized? _Answer_.

Immediately if necessary. _Query_. 4. How soon may the husband

return to the wife after her delivery? _Answer_. Not till after the

child is weaned. _Query_. 5. How soon after sexual intercourse, is

it lawful for a husband to enter the church? _Answer_. Not till he

has purged himself by prayer and ablution.”

These nice and delicate queries, with more of the same sort, were

accompanied by others concerning episcopal duties.—With the solution of

these problems, the pope sent Austin the _pall_, (a piece of white

woollen cloth, to be thrown over the shoulders, as a badge of

archiepiscopal dignity;) sundry other ecclesiastical vestments and

utensils, and instructions to erect twelve sees within his province, and

particularly to appoint one at _York_, which, if the country should

become christian, he was to convert into a province, with its suffragan

bishops.—Thus did Austin become the first archbishop of Canterbury, and

thus originated our ecclesiastical establishment, the renowned Church of

England. [Aikin’s Biogr. vol. 1.]—Among other counsels which Austin

received from the pontiff on the above occasion, was an exhortation “not

to be elated with vanity on account of the _miracles_ which he had been

enabled to perform in confirmation of his ministry, but to remember that

this power was given, not for his own sake, but for the sake of those

whose salvation he was appointed to procure.”—Thus we have it from very

high authority, that _the first archbishop of Canterbury was a worker of

miracles_.

{253} The other orders were the middle and inferior thanes: the former

are said to be the lesser barons, or lords of manors; and the latter made

up the lowest degree of freeholders. Dyde Hist. Tewksbury. 141.—All

others in the Anglo-Saxon community below these thanes, who were the

nobles of those times, are sometimes comprized under the heads of

untitled freemen, and slaves—the latter, constituting the great mass of

the inhabitants, were the property of their lords, like the present

Russian or Bohemian peasantry.

{254a} Petit Andrews, 1. 83.

{254b} Henry, and Petit Andrews.

{257a} Dyde’s History of Tewksbury, 139, 40, 41.

{257b} See Parkin.

{257c} “Directly opposite the Irish coast, (says _William of Malmsbury_)

there is a seaport town, called _Bristol_, the inhabitants of which

frequently sail into Ireland, to sell there people whom they had bought

up throughout all England. They expose to sale maidens in a state of

pregnancy, with whom they had made a sort of mock-marriages. There you

might see with grief, fastened together by ropes, whole rows of wretched

beings, of both sexes, of elegant forms, and in the very bloom of youth,

(a sight sufficient to excite pity, even in barbarians,) daily offered

for sale to the first purchaser. Accursed deed! Infamous disgrace! that

men, acting in a manner which brutal instinct alone would have forbidden,

should sell into slavery their relations, nay even their

offspring!”—_Life of Wolstan_, _bishop of Worcester_, B. ii, C. 20.—[see

Edinburgh Review, July, 1808.]

{259} Petit Andrews Hist. of Great Britain, 1. 84. Another historian

informs us, that the great lords and abbots, among the Anglo-Saxons,

possessed a criminal jurisdiction within their territories, and could

punish or protect without appeal. This power, he says, was in some

measure restrained by the established administration of justice, by the

courts of decennary, the hundred, and the county. In the Anglo-Saxon

courts, the accused was allowed to clear himself by his own oath, and the

concurring oaths of his friends. These were called compurgators, and

sometimes amounted to 300. The practices also of single combat, and the

ordeal, were allowed in doubtful cases; and absurd as they may appear,

the result was deemed complete evidence, for or against the accused, or

suspected person.—The punishment of crimes was not less singular than the

general proofs of guilt. A fine was the customary mode of commuting the

punishment of the blackest offences; and as fines were a source of

revenue, they were fixed with the nicest care, on a graduated scale,

corresponding to the magnitude of the crime. Thus a wound of an inch

long, under the hair, was compounded for with one shilling; a wound of

the like size in the face, with two shillings; and thirty shillings was

the compensation for the loss of an ear; and so on in proportion.—Mavor,

1. 77.

{260} See Andrews.

{263} Dr. Henry, and Petit Andrews.

{268a} Dr. Henry—Petit Andrews.—Another modern historian informs us that

the Saxon pound, as likewise that which was coined for some centuries

after the conquest, was near three times the weight of our present money.

There was (as he says) forty eight shillings in the pound, and a Saxon

shilling was nearly a fifth heavier than ours. Dr. Mayor’s Hist. Engl.

1. 78.

{268b} The princess _Githa_, daughter, or near relation to king Canute,

and wife of Earl Goodwin, is said to have made a vast fortune by dealing

in slaves; a traffic which then shockingly disgraced this country, as

indeed it has done in our own time. _Bristol_ was then, what _Liverpool_

has recently been, the chief port to cherish and carry on this detestable

commerce. This northern coast also, from Scotland to the Humber, was

distinguished on the same account. We are told, by William of Malmsbury,

that the Northumbrians used to sell their nearest relations for their own

advantage; and Dr. Henry says, that English Slaves were then, like

cattle, exposed to sale in all the markets of Europe. Many of the

Slave-merchants of that period were _Jews_, who found a good market for

their _English and christian Slaves_ among the Saracens in Spa in and

_Africa_. At Rome also, we read of English slaves being exposed for

sale, as early as the 7th century. It is, moreover, highly probable that

Lynn, and other neighbouring ports were long concerned in the same odious

employment. Even as late as the reign of king _John_, the Irish used to

import many slaves from Bristol. To add to the brutality of this vile

proceeding, the Sellers always took care that the females should be in a

condition which might enable them to demand a higher price from the

purchasers. What put an end, at last, to this horrid traffick, is said

to have been, not the virtue of the English, but the compunction of the

Irish, who were shocked at it, under the idea that certain national

misfortunes which had befallen them were divine judgments, for having

been concerned in so iniquitous a business.—Our unfeeling advocates for

the slave trade, who have so long dishonoured this nation, and are still

in no small numbers among us, are little aware, that time was, when their

own ancestors were in a similar situation with the present inhabitants of

Africa; being liable, like them, to be bought and sold into slavery; and

that other nations actually traded here for Slaves, as we have so long

done in modern times to the coast of _Guinea_.—If they cannot put

themselves in the place of the poor negroes, and feel for them, they

ought, at least, to do so in regard to their own ancestors, and so learn

some degree of justice and humanity, if nothing else can teach them.

{269} He might have said, _somewhat less_ than a shilling an acre, if,

as some have asserted, the hide comprehended 120 acres.

{270} Henry iv. 237, 8, 9.

{274} Henry iv. 234.

{275} As a proof of the salubrity of Croyland, and the temperance of its

monks in those days, it has been remarked, that when Turketul, who had

been chancellor of England, and one of the greatest warriors and

statesmen of his time, retired from the world, and became abbot of

Croyland, he found five aged monks there, to whom he paid particular

attention. The eldest of them died in 973, in his 169th year: the second

died within the same year, at the age of 142: the third died the neat

year, aged 115; the other two are thought to have been about the same age

as the last. Their names were _Clarenbald_, _Swarling_, _Turgar_,

_Brune_, and _Ajo_.—Croyland is not now remarkable for its salubrity, or

the longevity of its inhabitants.

{276} Andrews—Mavor—Henry.

{278} Henry iv. 313.

{279} I. Walingford, apud Gale, t. 1. p. 536: quoted by Henry. 4. 324.

{282} Henry, iv. 299.

{283} Henry, iv. 329.

{285} _Seven_, however, was not invariably their number, they were

sometimes more and sometimes less.

{288a} Some, indeed, have seemed rather to doubt if its origin here was

as early as the days of Edward, as Ingulphus, a contemporary writer,

makes no mention of it. Malmsbury, however, who lived not long after,

affirms it; and the Confessor seems as likely as any to have taken the

lead in such a business and become our first practitioner.

{288b} Owing partly, as it is supposed, to the aguishness of the air,

and partly to other causes, not peculiar to these parts.

{289} He was also Duke of Wessex, and Earl or Governor of Sussex,

Surrey, Kent, and Essex.

{290} Carto 1. 416.

{296} Flower’s Political Review, vol. 1. 299.

{297} We are apt to deem it a grievous hardship upon the good people of

England, under the Norman princes, to be deprived of the administration

of justice in their own mother tongue, or to have their legal proceedings

all transacted in a strange language, without considering, that the

Welsh, the Irish, and the Scotch Highlanders, are to this day used by our

own government in the same manner; in which nevertheless, we seem to

perceive no great or very material harm, hardship, or impropriety:—so

loth do we often appear to place ourselves in the situation of our

neighbours, and to use them as we would wish to be used by them.—England

must have made a queerish appearance when _law_ was administered in

_French_, and _religion_ in _Latin_, and the people knew no language but

English.

{299a} “_Ailred_ as well as _Malmsbury_ observe, that the Confessor

cured a young married woman, reduced by the Evil to a deplorable

condition, by stroking the place affected with his hand; upon which she

grew sensibly better, the humour dispersed, the scar wore off, and in a

week’s time the cure was perfected!!”—Carte 1. 357.

{299b} That Francis touched for the evil is said to be averred by

Servetus, in his 1st edition of Ptolemy’s Geography. Of its success,

indeed, we are told that he appeared far from being a believer, but it

was not the only instance of his unbelief or incredulity. He often

disbelieved what others firmly credited; for which the bloody reformer

Calvin made him pay very dearly, at last, without the gates of Geneva.

{300a} Nor does it appear that it belonged exclusively to certain

_christian_ potentates; for, long before there were any such, it had been

ascribed to the pagan emperors Vespasian and Hadrian, who are said, by

their touch, to have restored sight to the blind; and the fact seems as

well established as any of the accounts of cures effected by the touch of

our christian and English monarchs.

{300b} _See Occasional Thoughts on the Power of curing the King’s Evil_,

_ascribed to the Kings of England_—superadded to Werenfel’s Dissertation

upon superstition in natural things. Lond. 1748.

{301a} Carte, 1. 357.

{301b} Carte adds, that archbp. _Bradwardine_, Lord Chancellor

_Fortescue_, and other grave authors, give the like testimony in behalf

of the cure, as well as the practice, by that prince’s

successors:—[Richard I, John, Henry III, and the three Edwards, we may

suppose.] Carte, as before.

{302a} Occasional Thoughts, as before, 58.

{302b} Ibid.

{303} Though some, perhaps, would choose to ascribe that gift, virtue,

or power, rather to the _throne_, as the _infallibility of the pope_ has,

by one of our old satirists, been ascribed to the _papal chair_, in some

such lines as the following,

If the devil himself should get there,

Although he be full of all evil,

Yet such is the virtue in Peter’s old chair,

He would be an infallible devil.

{304} Occasional Thoughts, as before, p. 60—also New. An. Reg. 13,

[180]—It does not appear, who among Henry’s bishops, or ecclesiastics

drew up this new office for his use: but we find that it went in the

manner and form following—_First_, _the king_, _kneeling_, _shall say_,

“In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

Amen.” _And as soon as he hath said that_, _he shall say_, Give the

blessing. _The chaplain kneeling before the king_, _and having a stole

about his neck_, _shall answer and say_, “The Lord be in your heart, and

in your lips, to confess all your sins. In the name of the Father, and

of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.” _Or else he shall say_,

“Christ hear us. In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the

Holy Ghost. Amen.” _Then by and by the king shall say_, “I confess to

God, to the blessed virgin _Mary_, to all the saints, and to you, that I

have sinned in thought, word, and deed, through my fault: I pray holy

_Mary_ and all the saints of God to pray for me.” _The chaplain shall

answer and say_, “Almighty God have mercy on you, and pardon you all your

sins, deliver you from all evil, and confirm you in good, and bring you

to everlasting life. Amen. The almighty and merciful Lord grant you

absolution and remission of all your sins, time for repentance and

amendment of life, with the grace and comfort of his holy spirit. Amen.”

_This done the chaplain shall say_, The Lord be with you. _The king

shell answer_, And with thy spirit. _The chaplain_, Part of the Gospel

according to St. Mark. _The king shall answer_, Glory to thee O Lord.

_The chaplain reads the gospel_, “Last he appeared to those eleven as

they sat at the table: and he exprobated their incredulity and hardness

of heart, because they did not believe them that had seen him risen

again. And he said to them: going into the whole world, preach the

Gospel to all creatures. He that believeth and is baptized, shall be

saved: but he that believeth not shall be condemned. And them that

believe these signs shall follow: in my name, shall they cast out devils,

they shall speak with new tongues. Serpents shall they take up, and if

they drink any deadly thing it shall not hurt them; they shall impose

hands upon the sick and they shall be whole.” _Which last clause_, (They

shall impose _&c._) _the chaplain repeats as long as the king is handling

the sick person_. _And in the time of repeating the aforesaid words_

(they shall impose &c.) _the clerk of the closet shall kneel before the

king_, _having the sick person on the right hand_, _and the sick persons

shall also kneel before the king_; _and the king shall lay his hand upon

the sore of the sick person_. _This done the chaplain shall make an end

of the Gospel_. “And so our Lord Jesus, after he spake unto them, was

assumpted into heaven, and sate on the right hand of God. But they going

forth preached every where; our Lord working withal, and confirming the

word with signs which followed.” _Whilst this is reading_, _the

chirurgeon shall lead away the sick person from the king_. _And after

the Gospel the chaplain shall say_, The Lord be with you. _The king

shall answer_, And with thy spirit. _The chaplain_, The beginning of the

Gospel according to St. John. _The king_, Glory to thee O Lord. _The

chaplain then shall say the Gospel following_, [i.e. _the first words of

John’s Gospel_, _ending at verse 9th._] It was the true light which

lightneth every man that cometh into this world. _Which last clause_,

(It was the true light, &c.) _shall be restated so long as the king shall

be crossing the sort of the sick person_, _with an angel of gold noble_,

_and the sick person to have the same angel hang’d about his neck_, _and

to wear it until he be full whole_. _This done_, _the chirurgion shall

lead away the sick person as he did before_, _and then the chaplain shall

make an end of the gospel_ [i.e. read on from verse the 9th, where he

left off before, to the end of verse 14.] _Then the chaplain shall say_,

The Lords name be praised. _The King shall answer_, Now and for ever.

_Then shall the chaplain say this collect following_, _praying for the

sick person or persons_: O Lord hear my prayer. _The king shall answer_.

And let my cry come unto thee. _The chaplain_, Let us pray. “Almighty

and everlasting God, the eternal health of them that believe; graciously

hear us for thy servants for whom we implore the aid of thy mercy, that

their health being restored to them, they may give thee thanks in thy

church, through Christ our Lord. Amen.”