Eminent Citizens of the Nineteenth Century.
_Professor Taylor_.
PROFESSOR TAYLOR claims the first place in our notices of the eminent
citizens of this period, as a politician, a musician, and a public man.
After his death a memoir of him appeared in the _Norfolk News_ of March
28th, and April 4th, 1863, and from it we derive the following details:—
“Mr. Edward Taylor was the great grandson of the celebrated Dr. John
Taylor, a man not less beloved for the kindliness of his disposition,
than he was venerated for his vast learning. Dr. Taylor was born at
Lancaster in the year 1694, and came to Norwich (according to Mr.
Edward Taylor’s account) in 1733. Here he remained till 1757, and
here it was that he produced many of his works, amongst others his
famous Hebrew Concordance, which was published in two large volumes,
folio, and was the labour of fourteen years. Many copies of the
frontispiece (a fine portrait engraved by Houbraken) are still extant
in this city. Dr. Taylor must have been fond of music, and must also
have made it a personal study. This we infer, less from his having
published ‘A Collection of Tunes in Various Airs’ for the use of his
Norwich congregation, than from his having been able to Prefix
thereto ‘Instructions in the Art of Psalmody.’ The airs themselves
have no other accompaniment added than an unfigured bass, but the
collection contains many of the finest melodies which are now in use.
The instructions were intended to enable a student to sing at sight.
“When Dr. Taylor quitted Norwich, his only surviving son, Richard,
remained, and carried on the business of a manufacturer in St. George
Colegate. Mr. John Taylor, father of the subject of this memoir, was
born the 30th July, 1750. In 1773, he entered into the business of a
yarn maker, in partnership with his brother, in the parish where
their father had lived. If not a musical composer, John had the
reputation of being at least a tolerable poet, and he was peculiarly
happy in writing words for music.
“In April, 1777, Mr. John Taylor married Susannah, the youngest
daughter of Mr. John Cook of Norwich. Mr. Edward Taylor was born on
the 22nd of January, 1784, in the parish of St. George Colegate.
“In his boyish days, Edward Taylor was made to imbibe the usual
quantity of Greek and Latin, and the cask ever after retained the
flavour of the wine. But music even then was his chief delight.
When arrived at manhood he was tall and well formed; he had a fair,
though by no means a pallid complexion, a penetrating eye, and a
majestic voice, which sounded in conversation like the roll of a bass
drum. In whatever part of the world he had been met, it would have
been said at a glance, ‘That’s an Englishman.’ He had that
unmistakeable stamp of bluntness and sturdy independence which seems
to be an Englishman’s birthright. He was proud, not altogether
without reason, of his ancestors, whose religious and political
opinions he inherited. Hence, he was a Dissenter of the Unitarian
School, and what was then called a Radical Reformer. Deeming himself
to be in the right, he of course considered all those who differed
from him to be in the wrong. But being himself consistent, he knew
how to respect consistency in others. His hostility was confined to
men’s doctrines and measures; it was never extended to their persons.
In a word, he was generous, manly, and sincere, and he therefore
enjoyed the friendship of good and true men, whatever might be their
party or creed. Mr. Taylor married, in 1808, Deborah, daughter of
Mr. William Newson, of Stump Cross, in this city, a man of upright
and honourable character, and a successful tradesman.”
The memoir contains a sketch of Mr. Taylor’s political doings, which we
shall give in another part of this work, and it then proceeds:—
“On the 19th January, 1824, he had the honour of dining with the Duke
of Sussex, at Kensington Palace. The next year, 1825, terminated Mr.
Taylor’s residence in his native city, though to the end of his life
he continued to take a warm interest in whatever concerned its
welfare. On the 21st of May, having already made arrangements for
giving up his business in Norwich, he went up to London to prepare
for making it his future abode. On the 5th of August, he served on
the Norwich grand jury for the last time, and the next day took his
final departure. On the 15th, he joined his brother Philip and his
cousin John Martineau in their business, as civil engineers, having
hired a house for that purpose in York Place, City Road.
“On the 3rd of January, 1826, the year after Mr. Taylor finally left
the city for London, he came down to a dinner which was given at the
Rampant Horse Hotel in his honour. The original intention had been
to place his portrait in St. Andrew’s Hall, and Sir James Smith had
actually written some lines to be placed under it, beginning—
‘Avaunt, ye base, approach ye wise and good,
Thus in this hall once Edward Taylor stood.’
But that idea was abandoned, and a presentation of a service of plate
was determined upon by his fellow-citizens. The proposition
originated with the strongest of his political antagonists in the
Corporation. The plate was given at this dinner at the Rampant
Horse, the chairman being Henry Francis, Esq., against whom Mr.
Taylor had entered the lists in the severest contest ever known in
the Mancroft Ward. This rendered the compliment greater.
“Mr. Edward Taylor’s first music master was the Rev. Charles Smyth, a
man who was equally remarkable for his eccentricity and musical
learning. Mr. Taylor always spoke with great respect of Mr. Smyth’s
musical knowledge. How long the lessons continued we have no means
of ascertaining, but we afterwards find Taylor gaining instruction
with the Cathedral boys under Dr. Beckwith at the music room in the
Cathedral. He also had lessons in the vestry room of the Octagon
Chapel; and he acquired some skill upon the flute and oboe from Mr.
Fish. But we believe that his musical education was throughout
gratuitously bestowed, out of respect to himself and his family.
Doubtless he was greatly indebted for his extensive knowledge of the
art, as well as of the German and Italian languages, to his own
perseverance in solitary study.”
The author of the memoir, after giving a sketch of the “Hall Concert”,
notices Mr. Taylor’s labours on behalf of the Musical Festivals in this
city, as already related in our brief account of those celebrations. Mr.
Taylor was one of their chief promoters, and he worked hard to make them
successful. In reference to Mr. Taylor’s career in London, the author of
the memoir says,—
“It has been before stated that on the 15th August, 1825, Mr. Taylor
entered upon a new course of life, in London, in connection with his
brother Philip and Mr. John Martineau, who were civil engineers. Had
the business proved lucrative, there is no reason to suppose that Mr.
Taylor would have left it. It is certain that when he went to live
in London, nothing was further from his thoughts than that he would
ever embrace music as a profession.
“Mr. Taylor began anew the battle of life by taking private pupils.
From the first moment of his entering the musical profession, his
classical attainments, his skill as a translator, his superior mental
powers, and his extensive musical research, were honestly and fully
recognized. On the 29th March, 1827, Mr. Taylor made his first
appearance before a London audience as a public singer. His debût
was at Covent Garden, at the Oratorios under the management of Sir H.
R. Bishop. The song he chose was ‘The Battle of Hohenlinden,’
composed by C. Smith, and the reception he received from a very
crowded audience was exceedingly favourable.”
After quoting some very eulogistic notices of Mr. Taylor’s subsequent
performances, the writer of the memoir continues:—
“In this year (1828) was published ‘Airs of the Rhine,’
accompaniments by William Horsley, Mus. Bac., Oxon, the poetry
translated by Edward Taylor. Of Mr. Taylor’s brief sketch of German
music prefixed to this collection, the _Quarterly Musical Review_
(conducted by Mr. R. M. Bacon) says, ‘It is so agreeably written, and
contains so many authentic and interesting particulars, that we must
do him the justice to give it a place at length. It will speak more
for the publication than anything we can say to interest the reader.’
“In 1837, Mr. Taylor was elected Gresham Professor of Music. The
place had been for 200 years a mere sinecure, generally held by
persons totally ignorant of music, but he did much to render it
useful to the art. In 1838 he published his ‘Three Inaugural
Lectures,’ which he dedicated to the Trustees of Gresham College. He
was not content with reading his lectures, however good. He
illustrated them by having some compositions of the master who might
be under discussion, well sung in parts by a competent choir.
Amateurs of distinction and professional men lent their aid, and this
attracted large audiences to the theatre.
“In 1843, Professor Taylor, who had been musical critic for the
_Spectator_ for fourteen years, retired from that department, and he
received a very complimentary letter from Mr. Rintoul the editor, who
said, ‘I can bear my willing testimony to the high aims, the great
ability, the persevering zeal, and undeviating punctuality with which
you have upheld the cause of good music in my journal for the long
period of fourteen years. I believe that a selection from your
writings in the _Spectator_ would comprise a body of the soundest and
best musical criticism in the language; and when you retire, I know
not that any second man in England is qualified to sustain the
elevated standard that you have raised, &c.’ High praise indeed, but
well deserved.
“In the year 1845, Professor Taylor published, in the _British and
Foreign Review_, an article headed ‘The English Cathedral Service;
its Glory, its Decline, and its Designed Extinction.’ This was
subsequently published by permission of the proprietor in the form of
a thin octavo volume. It was a masterly defence of the musical
services of our Cathedrals, and of the choirs, against the spoliation
of the deans and chapters, which had been silently and surely going
on ever since the time of Queen Elizabeth. It made a strong
sensation at the time, and even now, whoever would strike a blow for
the cause of Cathedral music, (which in Professor Taylor’s opinion is
the salt which can alone save the musical taste of the people from
corruption) will find the best weapons ready to his hand contained in
this little volume.
“Professor Taylor, who had been long a widower, died (March 12th,
1863,) with the utmost tranquillity, at his house at Brentwood. He
had three children, all of whom survive him; a son, Mr. John Edward
Taylor, who was with him in his last moments, and two daughters, one
of whom is married and lives in Germany, her sister living with her.
“We believe that Mr. Taylor left injunctions that his manuscripts
should not be published, which is surely to be regretted. If his
rare and valuable musical library, the acquisition of which was the
labour of a life, should be sold, we trust that it will not go
piecemeal to the hoards of individual collectors, but be bought for
the use of Gresham College and its future musical professors.”
The compiler of this history had some long interviews with Professor
Taylor when he last visited Norwich in 1857, and he then stated that he
had large collections of music, and a large number of lectures on the
music of every period. He delivered a very splendid lecture on the music
of the Elizabethan age, in aid of the funds of the Free Library, before a
large audience, in the Lecture Hall, St. Andrew’s.
_The Rev. Mark Wilks_.
The Rev. Mark Wilks, who lived in the last, and in the early part of the
present century, was a very remarkable character as a politician and a
preacher. From his biography, written by his daughter and published in
1821, we derive the following particulars. He was the son of a
subordinate officer in the army, and was born at Gibraltar on February
5th, 1748. When his father and family returned to England they lived at
Birmingham, where young Mark was brought up to a trade, and where he
became an itinerant Baptist preacher, without any chapel. The Countess
of Huntingdon heard of his exertions, and invited him to her college at
Trevecca, to which he removed in 1775, and studied there for a year. In
1776 the Countess appointed him to be minister of the Tabernacle in
Norwich, which became the scene of his most continued and concentrated
exertions. The first sermon he preached here was on a Sunday evening to
a crowded congregation, and he made a great impression. He preached in
the same pulpit that Whitfield once occupied, and the simplicity of the
new minister’s appearance, and the negligence of his exterior, surpassed
that of the apostle of Calvinism. His long hair fell carelessly over his
shoulders; his meagre person and ruddy countenance gave him at mature age
the aspect of youth. The whole of his demeanour was illuminated by the
fire of affectionate zeal, and by an earnestness of manner, evincing that
he was honest in the sacred cause of truth. From this time he continued
his ministry till 1778, when in the spring of that year he married
Susannah Jackson of Norwich. This was an event which he ever justly
estimated as the happiest of his life, but it severed his connexion with
the patroness of the Tabernacle. Her rule was to dismiss the students of
her college on their marriage. The Countess of Huntingdon regretted the
separation and recommended him to several destitute congregations, none
of which, however, were then suited to his views.
After travelling about for some time in Wiltshire, where he preached in
several chapels, he returned to Norwich, and on January 1st, 1780, his
new meeting place was opened, and he became a pastor under the
denomination of Calvinistic Methodist, without the customary form of
ordination. During the interval which elapsed between his return to
Norwich and his establishment as a Baptist minister, his congregation
rapidly increased, and continued to increase from 1780 till 1788. He
lived in retirement, and performed with satisfaction and marked
punctuality the duties of his ministry. His congregation was formed into
a regular Baptist church in May, 1788, and it remained so all his life.
On this change many of his former supporters left him, so that his income
was reduced. He therefore took a farm in the neighbourhood of Norwich,
and commenced farming on an extensive scale. Employment or poverty was
his only alternative, and he followed the example of the apostle Paul by
supporting himself.
We now approach a period in his life in which he distinguished himself
not only as a pastor, but also as a citizen and patriot; for in the year
1790 commenced those great events in France which laid the foundation of
the long war between this country and that unfortunate empire, a war
disastrous to both. On July 14th, 1791, Mr. Wilks preached two eloquent
discourses to commemorate the leading features of the first French
Revolution, before crowded congregations, composed of the most
influential persons in the city and its neighbourhood. The propriety of
such discourses from the pulpit may be doubted, but they caused great
excitement, as the preacher defended the revolution, which was then
viewed with terror by many people. We shall notice this, however, more
at length in the political part of our narrative, in which we shall have
to speak of the very active part which Mr. Wilks took in political
affairs both in the city and county. That Mr. Wilks was a rather violent
partisan, and more of a Radical than a Whig, will appear by an extract
from his biography, respecting a county election.
“When the Honourable William Wyndham first offered himself as a
candidate for the county of Norfolk, he came in the character of a
Whig, and a professed friend of civil and religious liberty. Mr.
Wilks then warmly supported him, and to his exertions Mr. Wyndham
attributed his success. But the revolution in France effected a
strange change in the principles of Mr. Wyndham; and on his second
appearance as candidate for Norfolk, he presented himself in the
character of a ‘war minister,’ and the enthusiastic abettor of the
most disgraceful and perilous measures ever pursued by weak and
wicked men. Instead, therefore, of receiving support, he met with
the most determined opposition from those who had been before his
active friends. As Mr. Wilks on his former election had supported
him by the most vigorous exertions, he now appeared foremost in the
ranks of his opponents; and Mr. Wyndham regarded him with fear and
jealousy. The following anecdote will show with what gratitude he
returned the former services of him whom he had called his friend.
One morning, as a very intimate friend of Mr. Wilks was passing by
the house of a poor man, he was unexpectedly invited in, and was
informed by the man that his wife had just found an open letter, the
contents of which were of the greatest importance to Mr. Wilks. It
indeed proved so. It was a letter from Mr. Wyndham to one of his
friends at Norwich, desiring him to be most vigilant in watching the
movements and expressions of Mr. Wilks; and if at any time he uttered
anything which might be made to appear treasonable, to make him
acquainted with it, assuring him that he would take the most prompt
and severe means for his conviction. No sooner had Mr. Wilks read
this letter than he hastened with it to the printer’s, and in a few
hours the perfidy of Mr. Wyndham was publicly known in every part of
the city, and the original letter returned to its proprietor, to his
inexpressible dismay and confusion. The family and friends of Mr.
Wilks regarded this circumstance as an interposition of a watchful
Providence. But for this circumstance a few days might have seen him
the inmate of a dungeon, and his life devoted, through the
incautiousness of a sentence, to the treachery of an enemy. This
supposition may appear less improbable when it is known, that at that
time some who had been less active and less violent than himself, had
been snatched from their families during the stillness of the
midnight hour, and had been conveyed to prison without any form or
reason assigned to them. This attempt upon the liberty, and perhaps
the life, of Mr. Wilks had the beneficial effect of making him more
vigilant over his words, and more cautious, although not less bold
and decisive in all his proceedings. Yet his wife and friends
entertained so great an anxiety for his safety, that they strongly
importuned him to seek an asylum under the calmer skies of America,
but he resisted their importunities.
“It must be mentioned, as an instance of the generosity of Mr. Wilks’
disposition, as well as a proof that his political conduct originated
in genuine principles of patriotism, that when Mr. Wyndham again
returned as a candidate for Norfolk as conjoint supporter of the Whig
interest in union with Mr. Coke, Mr. Wilks never suffered the
recollection of his private wrongs to interfere with the principles
that Mr. Wyndham had come forward to maintain, but supported him with
the same firmness and ardour as he had ever done.
“But it is necessary to return to those incidents of his life, the
order of which has been neglected in pursuing the chain of his
political character, and which he considered of far greater
importance than any other. In the year 1792, the Baptist Missionary
Society was established by Carey, Fuller, Pearce, and Ryland. Those
incomparable men, in a small room at Kettering, planted the germ of
that tree which has since spread its branches into the remotest
corners of the earth. The Indian Banyan is famed for its fertility;
it is planted, it grows, and its branches descending, strike root,
and reproduce another tree; its branches again descend, and produce
another tree; trees succeed in endless multiplication, till a far and
wide-spreading beauteous forest is formed from the vast trunk of what
was once a single plant. In India flourishes a moral Banyan; it has
been planted by the hand of a Carey, a Fuller, a Pearce, a Ryland,
and a Wilks; watered and cultivated by their labours and their
prayers, its roots have taken a deeper and deeper root, and the day
is approaching when the sultry clime of India shall be covered by its
shadows, cheered by its verdant foliage, and refreshed by its
heavenly fruits.
“It is well known that Mr. Wilks’ devotion to the missionary cause
was early and invincible. Whether he was present at its
establishment is rather doubtful; but from its commencement he
regarded it as the dawn of happiness to the world, and put into
action all his powers and his influence in promoting so benevolent an
end. But it was not in the mission alone that he evinced his
benevolence and his disinterestedness. Nine years had elapsed since
he first commenced farming, and during that time and the succeeding
year he preached regularly, and fulfilled all the duties incumbent on
his station, without receiving for his services the smallest
remuneration. Whether in this instance he acted in all respects with
prudence has frequently been doubted by himself as well as his
friends. His conduct originated in feelings of the purest
benevolence, although perhaps it lost its excellence in losing its
justice.”
In the year 1797 Mr. Wilks was obliged to quit his farm, the lease of
which had expired. He immediately engaged another at Aldborough, a
village near Harleston in Suffolk, and went there to reside with his
family in March, 1797. The distance of that place was seventeen miles
from Norwich; yet although he was necessarily obliged to omit the
week-day preaching, he never once neglected the regular performance of
his pastoral duties on Sunday. In every kind of weather he constantly
travelled thirty-four miles every Sunday to preach to a congregation from
whom he received no remuneration. This course of exertion, however,
could not be long continued. With the engagements of his farm, which
were at this time very considerable, and the care attendant on a large
family of twelve children, he found it was necessary either to give up
his church or to leave his farm. Though his farm was a very profitable
one, he did not hesitate which course to pursue; and he took another farm
at Cossey, near Norwich, where he continued for some time, and where he
often preached to the people in the village.
In March, 1802, he purchased a farm at the village of Sprowston, only two
miles from Norwich. Here he enjoyed the society of his friends in the
city, and in every respect his own comfort and that of his family were
improved by this removal. His congregation increased, and the chapel in
which he preached became too small for all who wished to attend his
ministry. His friends were therefore desirous of erecting a more
commodious one, and purchased a piece of ground for its erection. In
September, 1812, he laid the first stone, and Mr. Andrew Fuller preached
on the occasion.
In 1814, he went on a begging tour for his meeting house, and travelled
through the counties of Norfolk, Suffolk, Essex, and Cambridgeshire, and
thence to London. In six weeks he collected about £400, but his
exertions brought on a serious illness. After his return his family
scarcely hoped for his recovery. On May 4th, 1814, the new meeting
house, in St. Clement’s, Norwich, was opened by Mr. M. Wilks of London,
and Mr. A. Fuller. The pastor was present, but in a very feeble state of
health. He recovered slowly in a few weeks, and when his health was
sufficiently restored, he made another effort to diminish the debt on the
new chapel. Though he frequently considered himself to be in a dying
state, yet at every interval of ease he pursued his work with unremitting
ardour. It is unnecessary to relate all the details of the few latter
years of his life; the long journeys he took in the years 1815 and 1816,
were a proof of the generosity of his heart. His last two years he spent
in retirement, yet in the performance of his ministerial duties; and ever
ready to advance the interests of his church, of his family, and of
mankind.
He was ill only four days previous to his death, which took place on
February 5th, 1819. When it was publicly known in the city that he was
no more, hundreds of people went to his house to take a last look of him
whom living they had so much loved and respected. And the bitter tears
of his surviving relatives, the deep affliction of his friends, and the
sorrow of mourning multitudes, bore a sad testimony to his worth as a
husband, a father, a friend, a minister, a neighbour, and a christian.
He died on his birthday, when he had attained the age of seventy-one.
His much valued friend, the Rev. W. Hull of Norwich, spoke at his
interment to a large assembly of sincere mourners, and to a great
concourse of spectators. The Rev. Mark Wilks of London, his nephew,
preached a funeral sermon on Sunday, February 14th, before a large
congregation. The deceased was buried under the pulpit where he had
preached the gospel for forty years. Of his family of twelve children,
including his four sons, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, none of them and
none of their descendants now live in Norwich.
_The Rev. John Alexander_.
The Rev. John Alexander was the pastor of the Independent Congregation in
Prince’s Street for a period of fifty years. He was much beloved by all
who knew him for his kindly disposition and genuine piety. Bishop
Stanley often spoke of him in terms of the highest commendation as a
christian minister. He took an active interest in all the philanthropic
and educational movements of the district, and was for some time the
Chairman of the Board of Management of the Norfolk and Norwich Hospital.
After his death, on July 31st, 1868, a short memoir of him appeared in
the _Norfolk News_; and this memoir contained nearly the whole history of
Prince’s Street Chapel in this city. We give the following extracts:—
“Mr. Alexander was born at Lancaster in 1792. Of his father, the
Rev. William Alexander, our deceased friend published an interesting
_Memoir_; and, as showing his own appreciation of the excellencies of
his parents, he placed on the title page these lines of Cowper’s:—
‘My boast is, not that I deduce my birth
From loins enthroned, and rulers of the earth;
But higher far my proud pretensions rise,
The son of parents passed into the skies.’
In the same volume we find him thus writing in reference to his early
days:—‘The reader will, I trust, perceive that our domestic
discipline, union, and affection, together with the sweet influences
of religion, rendered us a happy family. The recollections and the
love of home, too, and our reverence for holy parents, became a
shield of protection to us, and “a way of escape” in the day of
evil.’ With an atmosphere like this surrounding his childhood, we
wonder not that he became in early life the subject of deep religious
convictions. In 1807 he entered a large commercial establishment
connected with a household in which ‘the most beautiful domestic
order was combined with everything that was pure and lovely in
religion.’ This privilege was greatly prized by him, and he ever
cherished a grateful sense of the goodness of God in placing him
there. During this period he attended the ministry of the Rev. P. S.
Charrier of Liverpool, and joined the church under his care. For
some time he had cherished a desire, and entertained a hope, in
reference to the christian ministry, which was now soon to be
realised.
“The celebrated Dr. Edward Williams, one of the tutors at Rotherham
College, happened just then to visit Liverpool, and unexpectedly
spoke to him on the subject, offering him the advantages of the
institution over which he presided. This incident naturally made a
deep impression on his mind, and led him very seriously and
prayerfully to consider the matter. Of course, he lost no time in
communicating his thoughts to his father, who urged on him the
greatest caution, saying, ‘God forbid you should take it up, except
in compliance with the will of God.’ Nothing daunted, however, by
the somewhat discouraging aspect of the ministry set before him in
his father’s letters, he intimated to him, in reply to his inquiries,
that he retained an unalterable ‘determination to give himself to the
work, believing he had been called of God to it;’ and in 1814 he was
admitted as a student into Hoxton College. Here the amiable
qualities which distinguished him all through life soon endeared him
to every fellow-student, and one still surviving speaks of hours
spent with him as ‘the happiest, holiest, and most profitable spent
under the college roof.’
“In his _Thirty Years’ History of the Church and Congregation in
Prince’s Street Chapel_, he gives us an account of his first visit to
and subsequent residence in this city. From that source we learn
that early in the year 1817 he received an invitation to preach for a
few Sabbaths in the Tabernacle, and that on Friday, April 4th, 1817,
(the day on which a fatal steam-packet catastrophe occurred by which
many lives were lost), he entered Norwich. On the following Sunday
evening he preached from the text, ‘Therefore be ye also ready; for
in such an hour as ye think not, the Son of Man cometh.’ The place
was crowded; and, says he, ‘The Lord stood by me and strengthened
me.’ At the expiration of three Sabbaths he returned to London,
promising to visit Norwich again and preach during the whole of the
Midsummer vacation. He resumed his labours with very great
encouragement at the Tabernacle on July 6th; and some legal
difficulty occurring as to the power of appointing the minister, he
consented, with the approbation of his tutors, to continue them till
the disputed point was settled, which was not till the following
December. The legal decision was such as necessitated him to give
notice the very day it arrived, that in the evening he should preach
his last sermon in the Tabernacle. On that occasion he chose as his
text, words which the people believed to have been divinely suggested
to his mind, ‘Weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the
morning.’ That text, it was often afterwards remarked, built the new
chapel. The prospect, however, of the toil connected with the
establishment of a new church and congregation, and the building of a
chapel, was such that he shrank from it, and took his place in the
coach to return to London on his way to Kidderminster, where he had
been requested to supply, with a view to settlement.
“But so deep was the impression his services had produced, and so
warm the interest and affection created, that the people would not
part from him. On the day of his departure, a deputation waited on
him and pressed on him an invitation to become their minister with
such affectionate earnestness, that, says he ‘I felt the appeal to be
irresistible, and I promised to lay the whole matter before my tutor
and friends, and to make it the subject of serious and prayerful
re-consideration.’ The result was that he returned, and for some
time preached in the Lancasterian School-room. At length the site on
which Prince’s Street Chapel now stands was purchased, and the
foundation stone laid on the 16th of March, 1819. It was opened on
December 1st in the same year, and thenceforward, for the space of
about five and forty years, it continued to be the scene of the
living and life-quickening ministry of one whose ‘praise is in all
the churches.’ Of the characteristics of Mr. Alexander’s preaching
this is not the place to speak beyond saying it was truly evangelical
and eminently successful. But he was not the preacher only. He was
the faithful pastor, the unswerving friend, and the cheerful
companion as well. Hence in times of sorrow or of joy he was a
welcome guest, either in the family meeting or at more social
gatherings. He carried summer and sunshine with him into every
circle, and never left any without leaving a longing in every heart,
young and old, for the next visit. When he crossed the threshold,
the young loved to caress and to be caressed by him, whilst to the
others the cares of life seemed lessened, and the burden lightened,
as he spoke to them a few words of loving sympathy or wise counsel,
and left them with his soft tones of benediction treasured in their
hearts and vibrating on their ears.
“Time rolled on, ever finding him at his work, till thirty years had
gone, when his friends gathered round him in St. Andrew’s Hall to
testify their high appreciation of his excellencies, and their deep
and strong affection for him as their pastor and their friend. On
that occasion it was the desire of the people to present a purse to
him as a substantial token of their esteem, but there being at that
time a debt of £400 remaining on the chapel, he, with that
characteristic unselfishness which ever marked him, urgently
requested that they would abandon the purse, but remove the debt.
But it must not be supposed that Mr. Alexander’s energies were
confined to the cause of Christ at Prince’s Street Chapel, or that
the members of his church and congregation were allowed to claim him
as exclusively belonging to them. This was seen when ten years more
of active service had passed, and troops of admirers, from far and
near, flocked again to St. Andrew’s Hall to do him honour. On that
occasion the Mayor (J. G. Johnson, Esq.,) represented the city, and
the Rev. S. Titlow the Church of England, in most eulogistic
speeches. The Baptist Churches of the county presented him with an
address, whilst brethren of his own denomination, and others, lay and
ministerial, seemed to vie with one another in magnifying ‘the grace
of God’ in him. The desire entertained ten years before was now
carried into effect, and a purse, with an elegant skeleton timepiece,
and a memorial engrossed on vellum and framed, were presented to him,
and a gold watch and chain to Mrs. Alexander. The timepiece bore the
following inscription:—
Presented to the Rev. John Alexander, together with a purse of 500
sovereigns, on his commencing the fortieth year of his ministry in
Norwich, by the members of his congregation and numerous other
friends, as a memorial of Christian esteem and love.—Norwich, June
3rd, 1856.
From that time the infirmities of age, and the claims of a large
congregation, led him to desire help, which was secured for him in
the person of an assistant minister. With that help he happily and
zealously worked on in his Master’s service through another decade of
years, when once more the old Gothic hall resounded with his praises
and witnessed another outburst of affectionate congratulation.
Having lived to see the jubilee of his ministry, he now resigned the
pastoral office, and was presented with an annuity of £200 and a
magnificent epergne, on which a suitable inscription was engraved.
With trembling emotion the venerable man read his reply and
acknowledgment, in which, after recording the goodness of God and the
kindness of his friends through the long period of fifty years, he
stated that during his pastorate more than a thousand members had
been added to the church, two chapels had been added to the one in
Prince’s Street, four Sunday Schools had been raised and supplied
with a hundred teachers and with nearly a thousand children, and
eight members of the church had become ministers of the Gospel.
“Seldom is it the lot of the most favoured ministers thus to be
blessed and made a blessing. We shall not attempt to describe what
Mr. Alexander was in the pulpit, on the platform, in the committee
room, or from the press, nor how he discharged his duties as chairman
of ‘The Congregational Union of England and Wales,’ and secretary of
‘The Association for the Spread of the Gospel in the County.’ Much
less shall we venture a word on his private or domestic life. We
hope another and abler pen will pourtray his character more fully,
and hence we content ourselves by adding words written by a friend,
‘His life is his eulogy.’ It was a holy life, a useful life, an
honourable life, a happy life.
“The last sermon Mr. Alexander preached was delivered in Prince’s
Street Chapel on April 22nd, 1866, from 2 _Cor._ ii. 14–17. The last
time that he spoke in St. Andrew’s Hall was a few months before his
death, on the occasion of the mayor’s invitation to the Sunday school
teachers, and the last public religious service he attended was in
the Old Meeting House on Sunday evening, July 19th, 1868, where his
presence was ever as welcome as in his own chapel.
“Of his history since his retirement into private life, little only
can be said. At first the ease and seeming uselessness imposed on
him by the infirmities of age had a depressing influence on his mind,
but latterly this gave place to his wonted calm confidence in God,
and his usual joyousness of heart. Occasionally, to the grief of his
friends, the decline of his mental powers was painfully visible, but
this was often relieved by his still sparkling and felicitous
utterances, and his fervent devotional exercises.
“Some lines written in our album so recently as last November will,
perhaps, best indicate the state of his mind, and the theme on which
it delighted to dwell:—
Amidst the fragrance richly shed,
And beauty blooming in the bowers,
The willow bends its mournful head,
And seems to weep among the flowers.
And so in human life we find,
How bright soever it appears,
That grief is rooted in the mind,
And smiles are mingled with its tears.
But there’s a garden in the sky
Where mourning willows cannot grow,
Where tears are wiped from every eye,
And streams of joy unmingled flow.
“And now the time drew nigh that he must die. For only a few days he
was withdrawn from the outer world. During that time it was very
evident that constant intercourse was being carried on with heaven.
On asking him, two days prior to his death, if the Saviour he had so
long and faithfully preached to others was now near and precious to
himself, he replied, ‘Oh, what should I do without Him!’ The day
before his departure he was much in prayer. His family were all
remembered before God, as were also the servants of the household.
And very touching were the words in which he sought a blessing on the
ministers of the city, and on their work, with whom he had lived in
closest and loving fellowship. And so he passed away, spending his
last hours, as he had spent his life, in blessing others.
“On Tuesday, the 4th of August, he was carried to his grave amid the
lamentations of a vast concourse of his fellow-citizens, and friends
from the country, who had known him and esteemed him very highly in
love for his works’ sake. The funeral service at the grave was
conducted by the Revs. G. Gould, J. Hallett, P. Colborne, and G. S.
Barrett, B.A.; but gathered there were clergymen and ministers of
every denomination, as well as laymen of all classes, from the mayor
to the humblest artisan.
“And so has passed away from our midst, full of days and honours,
one, whom it was a privilege to have known, and an impossibility not
to have loved. His Christian catholicity, his large-hearted charity,
his generous liberality, his untarnished reputation, and his fidelity
to Christian truth, together with other virtues that adorned his long
life, constrain us to thank God for having given him to Norwich, and,
now that He has taken him to Himself, constrain us to say ‘Let me die
the death of the righteous, and let my last end be like his!’”
The funeral sermon was preached by the Rev. John Stoughton, of London,
before a large congregation in St. Andrew’s Hall.
_The Gurney Family_.
The members of the Gurney family, from an early period, have been
distinguished by their station, wealth, and intelligence, both in Norfolk
and Norwich. Memoirs of Joseph John Gurney, with selections from his
journal and correspondence, were edited by Joseph Bevan Braithwaite, and
published by Mr. Fletcher of this city. From these memoirs we derive the
following interesting details respecting the family, and the Society of
Friends in Norwich.
“The family of Gurney or Gournay is said to have sprung from a house
of Norman barons, who followed William the Conqueror into England and
obtained a large estate in this country, chiefly in the county of
Norfolk. From them descended a long line of country gentlemen, who
maintained themselves at Harpley, and West Barsham, in this county,
for many generations, and from a very early period had one of their
residences in this city. The last of these dying without male issue,
about the commencement of the reign of Charles II., the old family
estates at that period became dispersed amongst females. The name of
Gurney was, however, honourably continued through a descendant of one
of the younger sons of an earlier generation, John Gurney, the
ancestor of the present family. He was born in the year 1655, and
notwithstanding his family connections, commenced life in Norwich in
somewhat straitened circumstances. Devoting himself in his youth to
the cause of religion, we find him in the year 1678, at the age of
twenty-three, already connected with the oppressed, persecuted
Quakers.
“The family of John Gurney appear previously to have had some
connexion with the Puritans. Henry Gurney, indeed, of West Barsham,
the representative of the family in the early part of the 17th
century, had a distaste for Puritanism, if, at least, we are to judge
from the insertion in his will (proved in 1623) of a special charge
to his younger son, ‘That none hould any fantisticall or erroneous
opinions, so adjudged by our bishop or civill lawes.’ But Edmund
Gurney, rector of Harpley, one of these younger sons, who was a
person of influence, became known as a zealous Puritan; he declined
wearing the surplice, and was probably among those who took the
covenant in 1643. After him John Gurney successively named two of
his children. Others of his connexions were also inclined to
Puritanism, and some of them, like himself, joined the Society of
Friends. In the case of the early Friends generally, their ultimate
settlement in those gospel principles by which they became
distinguished from others, was preceded by a state of much religious
awakening and earnest seeking after God, in which they ‘searched the
scriptures daily, whether those things were so.’
“Through what course of experience John Gurney arrived at his
conviction, the scanty materials of his history do not inform us.
Let it suffice us to know that what he became convinced of, was
precious to him as the truth, and that for it he was prepared to
suffer. On the 29th of the ninth month (O. S.), 1682, (so the
records of the Friends in Norwich inform us,) ‘Friends being kept out
of their meeting house, met together in the street to wait upon the
Lord,’ and, being there, John Gurney and another Friend, were
violently pulled out from among the rest, as if they had been
malefactors, and carried before a justice of the peace, by whom, as
they declined giving, on such an account, the required bail, they
were committed until the next quarter sessions. In the following
year, 1683, he was again imprisoned, for refusing to take an oath,
and continued in prison, under successive recommitments, nearly three
years. He died in the year 1721, having greatly prospered in his
temporal concerns; and, what is far more important, having, according
to the testimony of those who knew him, taken particular care in the
religious education of all his children, and continued faithful to
the end.
“His two elder sons, John and Joseph, were both men of marked
character. John was gifted with much natural eloquence, and obtained
considerable reputation by the spirit and ability with which he
successfully defended the Norwich trade, before a committee of the
House of Lords, against some apprehended encroachments. He
subsequently received from Sir Robert Walpole the offer of a seat in
parliament, which, however, he declined as inconsistent with his
religious principles in the then state of the law. Religion had
early taken possession of his heart, and about the 22nd year of his
age, in obedience to the call of apprehended duty, he had yielded
himself to the work of the public ministry of the gospel, in which
service he laboured diligently for many years; neither the temptation
of prosperity nor the kindness and esteem of great men of this world,
being, in the simple and forcible language of the memorial respecting
him, ‘permitted to separate him from that truth which the Lord had
eminently convinced him of.’
“Besides numerous other descendants, he was the grandfather of Martha
Birkbeck, whose daughter Jane became the first wife of Joseph John
Gurney. Joseph Gurney, his younger brother, who, towards the close
of his life, fixed his residence at Keswick, near Norwich, also
became a valued minister of the gospel among Friends. His christian
profession was eminently adorned by a life of humility, benevolence,
and moderation. He died in the year 1750, after a suffering illness
which he bore with exemplary resignation, giving a final evidence of
the truth of what he then expressed that it had been ‘the business of
his whole life to be prepared for such a time!’
“His eldest son, John Gurney, was a man of great activity and energy,
and notwithstanding his extensive engagements in business, devoted
much of his time to the interests of his own religious society, to
the principles of which he was warmly attached. In the midst of a
course of remarkable temporal prosperity, it is instructive to
observe the fears which he expresses in one of his private memoranda,
lest his increasing opulence should lead away his children from those
religious habits and associations in which they had been educated.
He left three sons, all of whom married and settled near Norwich.
Richard Gurney the eldest, on his father’s decease, in 1770, became
the occupant of the family residence at Keswick. John Gurney, the
father of J. J. Gurney, had previously to the birth of the latter
settled at Earlham. Joseph Gurney, the youngest, resided at Lakenham
Grove. The three families were naturally much associated, and
exercised an important influence upon each other. At a later period
especially, the consistency with which Joseph Gurney, of The Grove,
was enabled to maintain his position as a Friend, and as a christian
minister, rendered his influence peculiarly valuable.”
John Gurney, of Earlham, is eulogised highly by the editor of these
memoirs as generous, ardent, and warm-hearted, abounding in kindness to
all, uniting very remarkable activity, both in public and private
business, with an acute intellect and extensive information. His wife
was Catherine Bell, a daughter of Daniel Bell of Stamford Hill, near
London, her mother being a granddaughter of Robert Barclay, the
well-known author of the “Apology.” She is described as a woman of very
superior mind as well as personal charms, and as a serious christian and
decided Friend. She died in the autumn of 1792, leaving her sorrowing
husband the widowed parent of eleven children. The following list of the
names may be found useful:—
Catherine died unmarried, 1850.
Rachel died unmarried, 1827.
Elizabeth, married in 1800 to Joseph Fry, of London, became the
celebrated Mrs. Fry, who died in 1845.
John died in 1814.
Richenda married in 1816 to Francis Cunningham, who died in 1855.
Hannah married in 1807 to Thomas Fowell Buxton.
Louisa, married in 1806 to Samuel Hoare, died in 1836.
Priscilla died unmarried, 1821.
Samuel, who died in 1856.
Joseph John, who died in 1847.
Daniel, still living.
_Joseph John Gurney_, _Esq._
Among the eminent citizens of this century, none will take a higher place
than the late J. J. Gurney, Esq., the well-known philanthropist. He was
born at Earlham Hall on August 8th, 1788. That hall was one of the
happiest homes in England. It was also the birth-place of Mrs. Elizabeth
Fry, sister of J. J. Gurney, and almost as celebrated as her brother.
Here they were both trained with religious care, and passed their days of
childhood and youth in happiness and peace. In after life they were
associated together in works of benevolence, and the brother often aided
his sister in many of her schemes for improving prison discipline.
In 1803, soon after he had completed his 15th year, Joseph John was sent
to Oxford with his cousin Gurney Barclay to pursue his studies under the
care of John Rogers, a private tutor. Young J. J. Gurney continued at
Oxford two years, with the exception of the vacations, which he spent
mostly at home. His tutor, though resident at Oxford, was not in that
character connected with the university or with any of the colleges. The
student became an excellent classical and oriental scholar, and
ultimately the author of several valuable religious works, such as
“Essays on Christianity,” “Thoughts on Habit and Discipline.” He was
scarcely seventeen when, in August, 1805, he was removed from the care of
John Rogers. He had become attached to his tutor and to his studies, and
he quitted the place with regret, but there was brightness in the thought
of settling at home. The bank in which his father was a partner had been
established in Norwich in the year 1770. After that time the concern was
considerably extended with branch banks at Lynn, Fakenham, Yarmouth, and
other places. His elder brother, John, had been placed in the
establishment at Lynn, and his brother Samuel had been sent up to London,
where he had become the head of a district concern; so that circumstances
had prepared the way for that which J. J. Gurney himself had desired—a
place in the bank at Norwich. Here in the enjoyment of daily
communication with his father, and a home at Earlham with his sisters,
the ensuing three years of his life passed in peace and joy. In the year
1806, he accompanied his father and a large family party in a tour to the
English lakes and through Scotland. On their return, J. J. Gurney was
regular in his attendance at the bank, but he found time for study at
home, and he carefully read ancient historians in the original languages.
Gradually, however, his attention became unceasingly directed to biblical
literature, which continued for some years to absorb much of his leisure.
His habits of study were eminently methodical, exemplifying his favourite
maxim, which he was afterwards accustomed strongly to inculcate upon his
young friends, “Be a whole man to one thing at a time.” His position and
tastes introduced him to the highly-cultivated society, for which Norwich
was at the time remarkable, at the house of his cousin Hudson Gurney,
where he was accustomed to meet many persons who were eminent for their
parts and learning. He had early become a favourite with Dr. Bathurst,
then Bishop of Norwich, and their intercourse gradually ripened into a
warm friendship, which was maintained unbroken till that prelate’s
decease, in 1837, at the very advanced age of ninety-three. Young J. J.
Gurney was but just twenty-one when, as one of his father’s executors and
representative at Earlham, and as a partner in the bank, very grave
responsibilities devolved upon him. However, he continued to pursue his
studies with ardour, and he made his first essay as an author in an
article published in the _Classical Journal_ on September 9th, 1810,
under the title of “A Critical Notice of Sir William Drummond’s
Dissertations on the Herculanesia.” After this effort his mind became
increasingly drawn towards the principles of the Society of Friends, and
many of his allusions to his feelings, in his autobiography, are
peculiarly interesting and instructive, indicating the spiritual phase of
his mind. The example of his sister, Elizabeth Fry, as well as of his
sister Priscilla, who like her, had become a decided Friend and a
preacher of the gospel, strengthened his convictions; but the influence
of other members of the family who resided at Earlham, as well as of many
other estimable persons, tended in an opposite direction. The editor of
the Memoirs, already referred to, says:—
“Whilst Joseph John Gurney’s religious convictions were thus
gradually drawing him into a narrower path in connection with the
Society of Friends, his heart was becoming increasingly enlarged in
Christian concern for the welfare of others. He had already warmly
interested himself in the formation of a Lancasterian School in
Norwich, an institution which long continued to have his effective
support. The establishment of an auxiliary Bible Society in this
city, was an object into which he now entered with youthful ardour.
The general meeting for its formation was held on the 11th of the 9th
month, 1811.”
The philanthropist was married to Jane Birkbeck on October 10th, 1817, in
his 29th year, and it appears to have been a very happy marriage. The
event took place at Wells Meeting, and, after a short sojourn at
Hunstanton, the newly-married couple travelled to their home at Earlham,
where they received the visits of many friends, who were most hospitably
entertained. After his marriage, J. J. Gurney continued at Earlham; and
the hall, where his father had resided, and in which he himself lived
from his birth, was his settled residence.
“To this place (with its lovely lawn nested among large trees) he was
strongly attached all his life. And they who knew him there can
still picture him in his study among his books, or in his
drawing-room among his friends, his countenance beaming with love and
intelligence, the life of the whole circle; or in his garden amongst
his flowers, with his Greek Testament in his hand, still drawing from
the books ‘of nature and of grace’ that lay open before him, new
motives to raise the heart to the Author of all his blessings.
“Placed by circumstances, though not the elder brother, in the
position which his father had occupied in Norfolk as Master of
Earlham, and a partner in the bank, it was his delight, as far as
possible, to continue Earlham as the family house. Even after his
marriage, his sisters, Catherine, Rachel, and Priscilla, continued to
live with him, occupying their own apartments, and it was the custom
of the other members of the family frequently to meet there as under
a common roof. * * * Up to the period of his brother John’s decease,
and for some time afterwards, it was the habit of his brothers and
himself, with their brothers-in-law, Thomas Fowell Buxton and Samuel
Hoare, to improve these occasions by a mutual impartial examination
of their conduct, in which each with brotherly openness stated what
he conceived to be the brother’s faults. Happy indeed was such an
intercourse between such minds. * * * Besides this, to him,
delightful band of brothers and sisters, his house was, as must have
been already apparent to the reader, freely opened to a large circle.
“Whilst every year strengthened his conviction of the soundness and
importance of the christian principles which he professed, he
rejoiced in that liberty wherewith Christ had made him free to
embrace as brethren all those in whom he thought he could discern
traces of his heavenly image.
“Towards the close of the year (1817) in company with his wife, his
brother Samuel Gurney, his brother and sister Buxton, and Francis and
Richenda Cunningham, he took a short tour upon the continent of
Europe, their principal objects being to establish a branch Bible
Society in Paris, and to procure information as to the systems of
prison discipline adopted in the jails of Antwerp and Ghent. Having
accomplished their objects, they returned home after an absence of
about a month.”
Soon afterwards J. J. Gurney began to preach at meetings of the Friends
in Norwich and elsewhere.
“Early in the year 1818, private business called him to London. His
sister, Elizabeth Fry, had previously entered upon her important
labours for the benefit of the prisoners in Newgate, and for the
improvement of prison discipline generally. Joseph John Gurney
warmly entered into his sister’s views, and accompanied her to the
committee of the House of Commons on the occasion of giving her
evidence, and afterwards to Lord Sidmouth, then Secretary of State
for the Home Department.
“His visit to London and the pamphlet on _Prison Discipline_, soon
afterward published by his brother-in-law, Thomas Fowell Buxton,
tended to deepen in his own mind a sense of the importance of that
subject, and an opportunity soon occurred for endeavouring to
influence the authorities at Norwich to some exertion respecting it.
The mayor and corporation, attended by the sheriffs and other
citizens, whilst perambulating the boundaries of the county of the
city, were by his desire invited to partake of refreshment in passing
by the hall at Earlham. Besides those immediately connected with the
magistracy many others assembled, the whole company consisting of
about 800 persons. On this occasion, Joseph John Gurney, in an
address to the mayor and corporation, urged the erection of a new
jail, and its establishment on better principles, with a view to the
employment of the prisoners, and the improvement of their morals;
enforcing his appeal by a reference to the extraordinary change that
had then recently taken place in Newgate, through the exertions of a
committee of ladies, and concluding by offering a donation of £100
towards the object. The effort was not without fruit, though the
result was not immediately apparent.”
The editor of his Memoirs proceeds:—
“In the 8th and 9th month of this year (1818), in company with his
wife, his sister Elizabeth Fry, and one of her daughters, he took a
journey into Scotland, visiting many of the prisons both there and in
the north of England, besides attending many of the meetings of
Friends. On this occasion, in conformity with the christian order
established in the Society of Friends, he was furnished with a minute
or testimonial expressing the concurrence of his Friends of his own
‘Monthly Meeting’ in his prospects of religious service.”
We have now to view the philanthropist not only in the varied relations
of private life, but also in the very important character of a christian
minister. He gradually became the most distinguished member of the
Society of Friends in all England, and he often delivered exceedingly
impressive discourses in Norwich and other large towns, preaching the
gospel with a peculiar grace of manner which fascinated every audience.
We have often heard him preach before large congregations of educated
people in the Meeting House at Liverpool, and always with great effect.
His journal is full of details of his labours in all parts of England,
Scotland, and Ireland. He became a Home Missionary, working hard at his
own expense; but we must confine this brief sketch to his doings here in
Norwich. The death of his beloved wife at Earlham on October 6th, 1822,
put his religious principle to the severest test, and in his letters he
expresses deep sorrow, but he was of too active a disposition to be long
subdued by grief. During the few months succeeding his loss, he
continued mostly at home in the enjoyment of the society of his sisters,
Catherine and Rachel; his children becoming increasingly the objects of
his tender solicitude. In the mean time, besides attending to the
necessary claims of business, and to the various public objects that had
long shared his interest, he devoted his leisure to study, finding
relief, as he intimates, “Not in the indulgence of sorrow, but in a
diligent attention to the calls of duty.”
After giving many extracts from his journal, Mr. Braithwaite continues in
reference to the anti-slavery agitation:—
“Retiring for a few days to Cromer Hall, he found a large and
interesting circle. Amongst others, the late William Wilberforce and
Zachary Macaulay were there, deliberating with his brother-in-law
Thomas Fowell Buxton on the position and prospects of the
Anti-Slavery question. It was the occasion on which the latter
appears to have arrived at his final decision, to accept the
responsible post of advocate of the cause as successor to
Wilberforce. In this important undertaking, and throughout the
succeeding struggle, Joseph John Gurney gave him his warm and
efficient encouragement and support.”
Mr. J. J. Gurney, Mr. Clarkson, Mr. T. F. Buxton, Mr. Wilberforce, and
others, were earnest advocates for the total abolition of the slave trade
and of slavery; and they attended many public meetings at which they
denounced and exposed the horrid traffic. Ultimately, as we all know,
their efforts were rewarded, by rousing public indignation to such a
pitch as to result in the passing of an act of parliament emancipating
the slaves in the West Indies, at a cost of twenty millions.
The panic in the monetary and commercial world, and the sudden run upon
the banks in London and the country, have rendered the winter of
1825–1826 memorable. As a banker, J. J. Gurney did not escape his share
of anxiety, as appears from his journal, but his firm weathered the
storm. Another circumstance was at this time deeply interesting to his
feelings, namely, his attachment to Mary Fowler, daughter of Rachel
Fowler, a cousin of his late wife. After some correspondence he made
Mary Fowler an offer of marriage, which she accepted. On July 18th,
1827, they were married at Elm Grove. On this interesting occasion, he
remarks in his journal,—
“Bright, hopeful, and happy was our wedding day. We dined on the
lawn, a large united company, and rejoiced together, I trust in the
Lord. Mary and I left the party at Elm Grove, in the afternoon, for
North Devon.”
They arrived at Linton, and thence proceeded to Ilfracombe. There they
spent the honeymoon, and then the happy husband brought his second wife
home to Earlham, where they were received with joy. After this he was
visited by many eminent characters at Earlham, including Dr. Chalmers,
who stayed with him several days.
“None can have attentively perused the foregoing pages” (says the
editor of the memoirs) “without perceiving that one leading feature
of Joseph John Gurneys character was an unweared active benevolence.
Like his sister, Elizabeth Fry, he seemed continually to live under a
deep sense of his responsibility towards others. A cheerful and
bountiful giver, it was not merely by large pecuniary assistance that
he proved his interest in objects connected with the welfare of his
fellow-men: to these objects he was exemplary in devoting no common
share of his time and personal attention. The steady devotion to the
Anti-slavery and Bible Societies is already before the reader. In
addition to these great and often absorbing interests, his exertions
for the distressed labouring population of Norwich were unremitting.
Year after year, during the winter, or on any occasion when their
distress was aggravated by want of employment, he was at his post,
stirring up his fellow-citizens to the necessary measures for the
alleviation of their wants. The District Visiting Society, which was
mainly instrumental in originating the Soup Society and the Coal
Society, found in him a steady and effective supporter. Often would
he say that the painful consciousness of the poverty and suffering of
many thousands around him, almost prevented his enjoyment of the
abundant blessings with which he was himself so richly favoured. On
one occasion he expended a considerable sum in providing the capital
for an attempt to supply the poor weavers and mechanics with
employment during a scarcity of work. But, though like many similar
attempts, it failed to answer the expectation of the promoter, and
was abandoned, it served at least to furnish another proof of the
sincerity and earnestness with which he laboured for their welfare.
“The depressions in trade occasioned by the panic of 1825 will be
long remembered. Norwich did not escape its influence. As a banker,
Joseph John Gurney was more than usually absorbed in his own
immediate cares, but his heart at once turned towards his suffering
fellow-citizens. ‘The dreadful distress,’ he writes to a friend,
‘which prevails in the great mass of our once labouring, now, alas!
idle population, has been such as to call forth my strenuous efforts
on their behalf. In this, success has been mercifully vouchsafed.
We have raised £3300 in five days.’
“One more illustration deserves notice. In the winter of 1829–30,
the manufactures of Norwich were again greatly depressed. The
weavers became unsettled, holding riotous meetings, and using
threatening language against their employers. The state of things
was alarming. J. J. Gurney felt it to be his duty to use his
influence in checking the spirit of discontent that was rapidly
spreading. He attended one of the very large and tumultuous meetings
of the operatives, and endeavoured to persuade them to desist from
their disorderly proceedings, and quietly to resume their work. With
a view of still further winning them by kindness, he invited a
deputation from those assembled to breakfast at Earlham on the
following morning. Between forty and fifty of them came, with Dover,
a notorious Chartist leader, at their head. After the usual family
reading of the Scriptures, they sat down to a plentiful repast which
had been provided for them in the large dining room, of which they
partook heartily; and their host afterwards addressed them in a kind,
conciliatory manner upon the subject of wages, and their duty to
their employers. The men conducted themselves in an orderly manner
and appeared grateful for the attention shown them. The scene was
not soon to be forgotten.”
The editor gives some illustrations of the philanthropist’s benevolent
character, by narrating instances of his visits to prisoners in the Jail,
and to afflicted inmates of the Bethel and the Norfolk and Norwich
Hospital. A volume might be filled by an account of his acts of private
benevolence, but we must pass on to more public matters. He seldom took
an active part in contested elections, but at the election in 1833, after
the passing of the Reform Act, the Whig candidates, one of whom was his
near relative, were defeated, chiefly, as was generally believed, through
the influence of bribery. On this subject J. J. Gurney wrote,—
“As usual, I took little or no interest in the election, but when a
petition was presented to Parliament against the returned members on
the score of bribery, I imagined it to be my place to subscribe to
the object, and wrote a letter in the Norwich newspapers stating the
grounds of my so doing. Those grounds were in no degree personal,
but simply moral and Christian. But the appearance of evil was not
avoided. The measure was construed into an act of political
partizanship; and I entirely lost ground by it in my own true
calling, that of promoting simple Christianity among all classes.”
He had thought of becoming a candidate for the representation of this
city, or some other place, in Parliament. After some long conferences
with his friends he abandoned the idea and devoted himself to his higher
calling. Mr. J. J. Gurney was a well-known Liberal in politics, but he
did not often speak at political meetings in this city. His speeches
were always short and generally pertinent; and showed good sense
accompanied with the seriousness of conviction. On whatever side of any
question he spoke he was listened to very attentively, and all parties
believed that he delivered the unbiassed opinion of an honest man. His
conduct on every occasion gained him the esteem of all friends of civil
and religious liberty.
In 1835, he was once more plunged into deep affliction by the long
illness and death of his wife. Her health had of late years been much
improved, and she had been unremitting in her attentions to his daughter
during her illness from typhus fever, without apparently suffering in
consequence. The disease was, however, lurking in her constitution, and
after some time made its appearance. The fever gradually gained ground,
and she sank under it on Nov. 9th of that year. She died happily, amid
her mourning friends; and her husband knelt down at her bedside and
returned thanks for her deliverance from every trouble!
His journal contains many details of his visits to Manchester and
Liverpool, of his journeys in Derbyshire and North Wales, of his journeys
in Scotland and the north of England, of his voyage to America, of his
journey to Ohio, Indiana, and North Carolina, of his journey from
Richmond to Washington, of interviews with eminent statesmen, of labours
at New York, of a voyage to the West Indies and proceedings there, of a
tour on the continent, and of his return home. But we cannot follow him
in all his wanderings in many lands, where he went about doing good,
promoting benevolent objects and preaching the gospel, his heart being
too large to be confined to his native country, much less to his native
city. On his return from the continent in 1841, he attended a meeting of
the Bible Society, and delivered his last great speech, which occupied
two hours, on the state of religion in Europe. A shorthand writer took
notes of that address, which was so full of information that it was
afterwards published in the Journal of the Bible Society.
Soon after his return home he married Eliza P. Kirkbridge. The event
took place at Darlington, on October 10th, 1841, as noted in his journal.
After the marriage he delivered an address on the “Victory which is of
faith.” The dinner party was cheerful, and concluded with a short
religious service. He and his bride parted from their friends, made a
short tour, and returned to Earlham, which they “reached in health and
great peace, the place comfortable and homeish, and the reception from
his dearest children glowing.”
J. J. Gurney signed the total-abstinence pledge at the house of his
friend, Richard Dykes Alexander, at Ipswich, on April 8th, 1843. He and
his wife attended a great “Teetotal Meeting” held at Norwich, on the
arrival of Father Mathew, on September 9th, that year. The lord bishop,
Dr. Stanley, was present and requested J. J. Gurney to preside. He did
so, and declared himself to be a pledged teetotaller. He spoke fully and
carefully on the subject, and the lord bishop afterwards expressed his
admiration of the apostle of temperance as the instrument of effecting so
much moral good.
As a man of business, Mr. J. J. Gurney was ready, punctual, and
attentive. He was very modest, but of a candid and social disposition.
Though in large or mixed companies he seldom appeared forward, yet in the
society of his friends he was exceedingly agreeable. In private life no
man was more estimable as a husband, a father, a neighbour, and a friend.
In Norwich and in the surrounding district he was universally honoured
and beloved. He was a great reader of the bible, and he was regular and
exact in family worship, but he was a stranger to bigotry, no stickler
for forms, and no friend to mysticism in matters of religion.
The autumn of 1846 was spent by the philanthropist quietly at home, with
the exception of engagements connected with the attendance of meetings of
Friends, and with what proved to be a farewell visit to his beloved
daughter at Darlington, and to his friends in several places on his way
home. He attended a committee of the Norwich District Visiting Society
on December 28th in that year, and on his return to Earlham he complained
of great exhaustion, feverishness, &c. A few simple remedies were
administered, but the uncomfortable symptoms remaining his medical man
was summoned on the following morning. He pronounced it a slight bilious
attack, and seemed to have no anxiety about the recovery. The
philanthropist, however, gradually sank, apparently from exhaustion, and
he died on January 4th, 1847, in the 59th year of his age. The news of
his death spread a gloom over the city, and the universal lamentations of
the citizens proved that they regarded him as a father and a friend, as
indeed he had been to thousands of them. The sensation in Norwich and
its neighbourhood cannot easily be described, and is probably without
precedent in the case of a mere private individual. During the entire
interval of seven days between his decease and the funeral, the
half-closed shops and the darkened windows of the houses gave ample proof
of the feelings of the inhabitants. It furnished the principal topic of
conversation in every family, in every private circle, in every group by
the wayside. People of all ranks vied with each other in their eulogies
of their departed friend. Everyone had his own story to tell of some
public benefit, or of some private kindness which had been shown to
others or to himself.
The funeral, as might have been expected from this unusual public
emotion, was an extraordinary scene. All the shops were closed and all
business was suspended in the city. A number of gentlemen, including the
mayor, the ex-mayor, and the sheriff, went out in carriages as far as
Earlham Hall. The citizens generally formed the funeral procession, and
followed the hearse and plain carriages from the hall to the burial place
at the Gildencroft. There was no pomp or parade, no mockery of woe. A
simplicity in harmony with the character of the departed marked all the
arrangements. As the procession moved on towards the city it was joined
by an increasing number of the inhabitants, who issued forth in a
continuous stream to pay their last tribute to the memory of departed
worth. Silently and sadly many stood while the hearse passed slowly by,
and many a tearful countenance among the crowd bore testimony to their
love for the dead. The procession gradually increased in numbers all the
way to the Gildencroft, and after the thousands of people had gathered
round the grave a profound silence ensued, which was at length broken by
a Friend repeating the verses, “O death, where is thy sting? O grave,
where is thy victory?” &c. Another pause then took place, followed by
another address, and then the body was lowered into its last resting
place. The circle of mourning relatives, including J. H. Gurney and his
wife, the surrounding crowd of spectators—persons of all ranks, of all
ages, of all communions—magistrates and artizans, clergymen and
Nonconformists—representatives, in short, of the whole people of Norwich,
now took their last farewell of Joseph John Gurney, and slowly turned
towards the meeting house, where a meeting for worship was to be held.
The service was deeply impressive, and formed an appropriate conclusion
to the solemn occasion. At the Cathedral, on the following Sunday, the
good Bishop Stanley preached a funeral sermon before a large
congregation. His text was “Watchman, what of the night?” and after
enlarging on it, he alluded in a most pathetic and impressive manner to
the virtues of the deceased, and we never before saw so many people so
deeply moved. The death of the beloved citizen was also publicly
adverted to in most of the places of worship in Norwich.
Mr. J. J. Gurney was the author of various works, the most popular being
one on the _Evidences of Christianity_. It is a production more
calculated to confirm the faith of a believer than to convert a free
thinker who may not admit the possibility of anything supernatural. He
also published a work on “The Vows and Practices of Friends;” “Essays on
Christianity;” “Essays on the Moral Character of Christ,” and “Love to
God;” “The Papal and Hierarchical System compared with the Religion of
the New Testament, &c.” His last and best work is entitled, “Thoughts on
Habit and Discipline,” an excellent moral treatise.
_Bishop Bathurst_.
Henry Bathurst, LL.D., canon of Christchurch, rector of Cirencester, and
prebend of Durham, was installed bishop of Norwich in 1805. He was a
prelate much esteemed and respected. His christian deportment,
conciliatory manners, and general benevolence, endeared him to this city
and diocese. He was eminently distinguished for his liberal sentiments,
and for his attachment to the great principles of civil and religious
liberty. He was often seen walking arm in arm with Dissenters in our
streets. He voted in the House of Peers for the Repeal of the Catholic
Disabilities Bill, and also in favour of the Reform Bill. This
disinterested and noble advocacy of liberal principles is thought to have
stood in the way of his promotion to an archbishopric. He died April
7th, 1837, in the 93rd year of his age, and much lamented. A statue to
his memory was placed in the choir of the Cathedral. This beautiful work
of art was the last work of Sir Francis Chantrey, and is executed in his
masterly style from a block of the purest Carrara marble. It is placed
on a plain pedestal of white marble, and fixed in the recess at the foot
of the altar steps, on the north side of the choir, commonly called Queen
Elizabeth’s seat, because she sat there when she visited Norwich. The
bishop is represented in a sitting posture, clothed in full
ecclesiastical costume, and the artist has admirably succeeded in giving
to his face that expression of benevolence for which he was so well
known.
The following is a translation of the Latin inscription on the pedestal:—
To the Memory of
The Right Reverend Father in Christ,
HENRY BATHURST, Doctor in Civil Law,
Who,
While for more than 30 years he presided over
This Diocese,
By his frankness and purity of heart,
Gentleness of manners, and pleasantness of conversation, attached to
himself the good will of all:
His friends,
In testimony of their regret for one so much beloved,
Have caused this effigy to be erected.
He died 5 Ap. A.D. 1837, in the 93rd year
Of his age.
_Bishop Stanley_.
Dr. Stanley was born January 1st, 1779, and became rector of Alderley, in
Cheshire. After twice declining the office, he was installed bishop of
Norwich, August 17th, 1837. He ruled the diocese for twelve years, and
was highly esteemed by all sects for his unceasing efforts to promote the
spiritual interests of every class of society, and his readiness on every
occasion to co-operate with Dissenters in every good work. He often
attended their meetings to promote religious and benevolent objects. In
one of his sermons he quoted the injunction “The servant of the Lord must
not strive, but be gentle unto all men; in meekness instructing those
that oppose themselves;” &c. His subsequent conduct furnished ample
evidence of the sincerity with which he obeyed this injunction; and
although some of his clergy were somewhat estranged from him by his
frequent expressions of unbounded charity, yet all were obliged to esteem
him for his noble zeal and consistency of character. He was
distinguished for his extensive liberality to the poor and his interest
in their education. He was often seen going about from school to school,
and the kindliness of his heart was so well known to the children that
they sometimes pulled his coat behind to obtain his benignant smile,
which to them was like sunshine after rain. On all occasions he was
earnest in his advocacy of civil and religious liberty, and active in his
exertions on behalf of all benevolent associations, both of the Church
and of Dissenters. He was also a promoter of all literary institutions
in the city and elsewhere, and often attended their anniversaries at
which he delivered animated addresses. He did not lay claim to the
character of a man of science; but astronomy, geology, botany, and
natural history were his favourite studies. He was the author of two
interesting volumes on “The History of Birds,” which were published by
the Society for the Promotion of Christian Knowledge. He was elected
president of the Linnæan Society, and he accepted an appointment as one
of the commissioners chosen to inquire into the state of the British
Museum.
Bishop Stanley was so little of a bigot that he appeared once on the same
platform with Father Mathew, a Roman Catholic, at a temperance meeting in
St. Andrew’s Hall. He then and there eulogised the apostle of
temperance, and advocated the cause with great eloquence. On another
occasion he invited Jenny Lind, now Madame Goldscmidt, to the palace,
when she visited this city. At the palace one evening, she sang before a
large company. When it became known that the lord bishop of the diocese
had actually entertained an operatic singer, great was the indignation of
some of the clergy. This however did not at all distress the good
bishop, who held on the even tenor of his way, doing good whenever he had
an opportunity. By his frequent earnest discourses in many churches in
this diocese, he caused quite a revival of religion among the clergy and
church-going people. He died, much lamented, on September 6th, 1849, in
the 70th year of his age, and he was buried in the middle of the nave of
the Cathedral, in the presence of thousands who had known and loved him.
A short time after his decease, a slab to his memory was laid over his
grave, bearing the following inscription:—
In the love of Christ
Here rests from his labours
EDWARD STANLEY,
Thirty-two years Rector of Alderley,
Twelve years Bishop of Norwich,
Buried amidst the mourning
Of the Diocese which he had animated,
The City which he had served,
The Poor whom he had visited,
The Schools which he had fostered,
The Family which he had loved,
Of all Christian people
With whom, howsoever divided, he had joined
In whatsoever things were true and honest,
And just, and pure, and lovely,
And of good report.
Born January 1st, 1779.
Installed August 17th, 1837.
Died September 6th, 1849, Aged 70.
Buried September 21st, 1849.
_Bishop Hinds_.
Samuel Hinds, D.D., succeeded Bishop Stanley. He was the sixty-seventh
bishop of the diocese, and was installed on January 24th, 1850. He was
the son of Abel and Elizabeth Thornhill Hinds, born Dec. 23rd, 1793, in
Barbadoes; and at the age of twelve he was sent to England, to the school
of Mr. Phillips, at Frenchay, near Bristol. He entered at Baliol
College, Oxford, but for want of rooms removed to Queen’s, graduated in
honours 1815 (second in classics), and in the year following he obtained
the Latin essay. He returned to Barbadoes as a missionary and remained
there five years, the three latter as vice-principal of Codrington
College. After he returned to England he became vice-principal of Alban
Hall, Oxford; and he accompanied Archbishop Whately to Ireland, as his
private chaplain. He was subsequently presented with the living of
Yardley, in Herts., by Dr. Coplestone, bishop of Llandaff. Dr. Hinds
again returned to Ireland, having been preferred to the living of
Castlenock by Archbishop Whateley, and was chosen private chaplain to
Lord Clarendon, lord lieutenant of Ireland. Hence he removed to the
deanery of Carlisle, but was scarcely settled there when he was appointed
to the bishopric of Norwich. He had previously refused the bishoprics of
New Zealand and Cork. He laboured in this diocese for seven years, often
preaching in the churches, attending religious meetings, and delivering
addresses of a high character. He generally preached at the
anniversaries of the Church Associations in this city. He resigned the
see of Norwich in April, 1857, and retired into private life. His health
is said to have been impaired by his arduous labours in conducting the
Oxford commissions which the government had entrusted to him, and which,
added to his duties in the diocese and the office of chaplain to the
house of lords, proved too much for his constitution. Dr. Hinds is
perhaps the most learned of modern bishops. His literary talents are
considerable. He is the author of the “Rise and Progress of
Christianity,” first published in the “Enclyclopædia Metropolitana,” and
considered a standard work, highly esteemed for its comprehensive views
of religious truth. The “Three Temples of the One God;” “Catechists’
Manual;” and “Inspirations of the Scriptures,” are works from his pen,
which testify to his deep learning and great research. He is the author
of many beautiful poems and hymns, some of which are familiar to the
congregation at Norwich Cathedral, from being repeated in the service as
arranged to music. The confirmation hymn is simple and appropriate.
_Mr. William Dalrymple_.
In a brief history of the _Norfolk and Norwich Hospital_, published by
Dr. Copeman, we find the following memoir of the subject of this notice:—
“Mr. Dalrymple was a native of Norwich, his father having removed
thither from Scotland. He was born in 1772, and at an early age was
sent to the Grammar School at Aylsham, in Norfolk, from whence he was
removed to the Free School at Norwich, where he became a favourite
pupil of its then head master, the celebrated Dr. Parr. Here he had
for a schoolfellow Dr. Maltby, and with both, Dr. Parr kept up a
friendly intercourse of visits to the latest period of his life. It
affords a strong proof of Mr. Dalrymple’s early talents and his
industry in cultivating them, that, although in accordance with the
then custom of requiring medical apprenticeship to extend to seven
years, he was obliged to leave school at the age of fourteen, he had
yet attained such a proficiency in classical reading, and so correct
an appreciation of its beauties, that, amidst all the urgent and
various occupations and anxieties of his succeeding life, he found
the greatest relief to his toils in a recurrence to his favourite
authors. His taste was scholarlike as well as scientific; his
conversation embued with classical allusion, and his felicity in
quotation remarkable. {527}
“Mr. Dalrymple was apprenticed in London, and studied at Guy’s and
St. Thomas’ Hospitals under Cline and Sir Astley Cooper. He returned
to Norwich in 1793, and opened a surgery in his father’s house; and
although for several years his progress in establishing a practice
was slow, he at last attained the highest reputation as a surgeon in
his native city, and for many years enjoyed the confidence,
friendship, and patronage of a very large number of patients of every
grade of society and in every district of the county.
“In 1812 Mr. Dalrymple was elected assistant surgeon to the Norfolk
and Norwich Hospital, and two years afterwards succeeded to the full
surgeoncy, a post which he occupied with great credit to himself and
benefit to his profession until 1839, a period of twenty-five years.
He was then in the 67th year of his age, his powers were less
vigorous, and finding himself no longer equal to his hospital
practice, he resigned his position there, receiving a cordial
acknowledgment from the governors, of ‘the able, humane, and
successful exercise of his official duties,’ and being honoured by a
request to accept the appointment of honorary consulting surgeon. In
1844 Mr. Dalrymple finally retired from professional life, and died
in London on the 5th of December, 1848, aged 75 years.
“From the year 1831 to 1835, I had ample opportunities, as house
surgeon of the hospital, of observing, and profiting by, the mode in
which the late Mr. Dalrymple performed his public professional duties
in that institution; and remember with pleasure and satisfaction,
that I was sometimes able to render assistance, and save trouble, to
one so deserving of the gratitude and goodwill of those with whom he
had to do. At the period referred to, Mr. Dalrymple was beginning to
feel the burden of heavy surgical responsibilities more weighty than
his somewhat feeble frame would bear; his naturally acute sensibility
was increased by a measure of debility resulting from overmuch
professional occupation. The sudden call to perform a serious and
difficult operation was accompanied sometimes with a degree of shock
to his nerves, which told upon him injuriously; and the desire he had
to save the life of the sufferer submitted to his charge (always a
predominant feeling in his mind,) would well-nigh overpower him with
emotion. I have often heard him say that he was not able to sleep
the night before he had to perform the operation of lithotomy,
although in such cases his success was great; but he possessed so
much sympathy for his patient, and felt his own responsibility so
strongly, that he failed to secure to his mind that rest which alone
could have enabled him to meet the contingencies of his profession
with composure. This nervous sensibility was due in part to original
constitution, and increased by professional toil. Sometimes it
arises from defective knowledge, or from want of success; but so far
from either being the case with Mr. Dalrymple, his knowledge was
ample, the result of many years’ industrious application of a mind
capable of vast acquirements—sufficient to have given him confidence
in the treatment of any case submitted to his care; his success was
beyond that of many placed in similar circumstances; such, indeed, as
might fairly have been expected from one who had so much sympathy for
suffering humanity, and who devoted the whole energy of his mind to
devise means to relieve it. For a long period no one but himself,
perhaps, was aware of the stress upon his feelings which his
professional duties, so well performed, were wont to occasion; and
when it did become apparent to others, it was delightful to witness
how pleased, how grateful, how kind in expression he was for any
attention, encouragement, or assistance offered him; and how highly
he estimated the friendship of those who watched an opportunity to
perform those little offices of kindness and consideration, which,
although difficult to be defined, can always be appreciated by a
sensitive mind and a feeling heart.
“The experience of a long and active professional life endued Mr.
Dalrymple with the valuable qualification of forming a right judgment
in cases of a complex and difficult nature, which was fully
appreciated and acknowledged. The firmness and decision of his
opinion upon a difficult case, when once formed, could not fail to
impress the practitioner by whom he was consulted with confidence,
and his patient with the assurance that dependence might be placed
upon the result of his deliberations.
“No one who had the privilege of Mr. Dalrymple’s acquaintance can
think of him otherwise than as a kind friend, a highly intelligent
and well-informed man, an amusing and instructive companion, and a
profoundly gifted practitioner of the art and science it was the
business and happiness of his life to pursue.”
_Mr. John Greene Crosse_.
We make the following extracts from a memoir of Mr. Crosse published in
Dr. Copeman’s _History of the Norfolk and Norwich Hospital_.
“John Greene Crosse was the second son of Mr. William Crosse, of
Finborough, in Suffolk, and was born on the 6th of September, 1790.
In order to make known some particulars of his early life and
education, I cannot do better than quote his own journal, which
contains many remarks upon the subject evidently intended to have
formed part of a history of his life. In April, 1819, he penned the
following observations.
“‘I never went to boarding school, which contributed, with many other
occurrences of my subsequent life, to fix me in the unsocial habits
that hitherto never did and never will forsake me. In my early
years, no classical learning, not a line of Latin, was taught at the
proximate market town to which I resorted as a daily pupil; and my
first lessons of reading, arithmetic, and writing were received from
a master of whom I entertained the greatest horror, for the ferocity
of his conduct, the severe discipline by which he drove into us the
simplest rudimental knowledge. His stern brow, raucous voice, and
long cane, are now livelily depicted to my mind: how much I owe to
him, I am even now, with a long life in retrospect, unable to tell;
but I was glad when circumstances arose that released me from his
tutorage.’
“‘Very small matters, and such as we have no control over, and call
accidental because unable to trace the chain of causes giving rise to
them, influence our mortal destinies. I had attained my 12th (?)
year, under such tremendous instruction as is related, when a Welsh
gentleman making some mistake at college (not implicating his good
character, an _informality_ I should call it) found it well to
rusticate; and taking with him his premature wife, sought a living by
opening a classical school in Stowmarket. I became one of his early
pupils; and but for this good, easy man’s settling in the town,
should never have launched into such studies as Latin and Greek; of
which, it is true, I did not learn much, nor very accurately. But he
was, nevertheless, a plodding, working man; an increasing family made
him exert his abilities to the utmost; and I got out of him all the
instruction I ever received as a school-boy in the learned languages.
When about fifteen years of age, returning from my daily school, in a
feat in jumping, I had the accident, I ought not perhaps to say the
misfortune, to break my leg. The respectable village surgeon
attended me: he was one of the old school; of fine, soft, soothing
manners, clean dressed, with powdered head; rode slowly a very
well-looking horse; in short, he was a gentleman, and commanded the
respect of every one when he entered the house; he was also a skilful
and kind surgeon. What wonder that the idea should be awakened in my
mind to be of the medical profession! to be as great a man as he—the
Village Doctor! to whom every one bowed, and who could relieve pain
and cure injuries so quickly and skilfully. I had conceived an
object of ambition, and the idea never deserted me. I was in a month
upon my crutches, and soon recovered; a surgical case fixed my future
destinies.’
“‘I persevered a few years longer at Latin, Greek, French, and
Euclid. My father was successful and able now to place me out well;
wished me to be a lawyer, and I was for a time under the instruction
of a gentleman of that profession—attending bankruptcy meetings, and
feasting at midnight at the expense of the already distracted
creditors. Those were good times for lawyers. A learned chancellor,
whom I met on one such occasion, I well remember complimenting me on
my quickness in counting money; but all would not do, my mind was
prepossessed—I quitted the law to follow my inclination; I made my
own choice; it was a pledge to success. The surgeon who cured my leg
agreed to take me as his first and only pupil, and I was accordingly
articled in due form for five years.’
“On the 27th of September, 1811, Mr. Crosse went to London for the
purpose of studying his profession in that Metropolis, and was the
following day introduced to Mr., afterwards Sir Charles Bell, whose
pupil he became, with whom he contracted a close intimacy, and of
whose merits as a teacher and man of science he always spoke in the
highest terms of respect and gratitude. In the following January, he
entered to Abernethy’s Lectures; and in April, 1812, became a student
at St. George’s Hospital, where his industrious habits and
intelligence attracted the particular attention and marked notice of
the medical officers of that noble institution. In the following
month, he entered as a pupil at the Lock Hospital; and in the course
of the year, officiated as House Surgeon during the temporary absence
of the gentleman who occupied that situation. In the following
winter session, commencing October, 1812, he studied under Brodie,
Bell, Brande, Clarke, Home, and others; and remarks in his journal,
‘very industrious all this winter, sitting up constantly till past
two a.m.’ In March, 1813, he became a dresser to Sir Everard Home at
St. George’s Hospital; attended Midwifery under Dr. Clarke; and on
the 16th of April, passed the College of Surgeons in London. After a
short holiday, he returned to London on the 13th of May, and attended
the Eye Infirmary at Charter-house Square. In June, he resigned his
dressership under Sir E. Home; became acquainted with the late Mr.
Travers, Abernethy, Sir W. Blizard, and Dr. Macartney, whom he agreed
to accompany to Dublin; and much of his spare time during this summer
was devoted to the study of German, a language he ever after
cultivated that he might enjoy the profundity and research of the
professional literature of that country.
“Mr. Crosse left England for Dublin on the 2nd of October, 1813,
arriving there the following day. In December he became Demonstrator
of Anatomy under Dr. Macartney, and remained there until October,
1814, when he returned to London, having received a very handsome
testimonial from the numerous students of the school in which he
taught, as to his ability and energy in the capacity of their
instructor in anatomy.
“On quitting Dublin, Mr. Crosse returned to Suffolk, and was
afterwards introduced to the late Dr. Rigby of Norwich. In December
he went to Paris, where he remained until the end of February, 1815,
during which period he took French Lessons, wrote his Diary in the
French language, and availed himself of every possible opportunity of
increasing his professional knowledge.
“On the 29th of March, 1815, Mr. Crosse came to Norwich; and after
remaining one year in lodgings, took a house in St. Giles’, in which
he resided for many years. He soon after published his “Sketches of
the Medical Schools of Paris,” and showed, both by his writings and
the industrious pursuit of his professional avocation, that he was
destined to arrive at considerable eminence in the locality he had
chosen for the arena of his future life. On the 19th of July, 1823,
he was the successful candidate for the appointment of Assistant
Surgeon to the Norfolk and Norwich Hospital. So great was his desire
to become connected with the Hospital, and so strong the competition
in which he was engaged to obtain this object, that his health gave
way under the exertions he made to succeed; and he was obliged to
absent himself for a time, on which occasion he took a trip to
Holland, visiting Brighton on his return. The result was favourable,
and he returned to Norwich in good health. On the death of Mr. Bond,
in 1826, he was elected full Surgeon to the Hospital, and thus
attained one of the greatest objects of his ambition.
“The rapid rise and progress of Mr. Crosse’s reputation as a
professional man, and the large extent of his private practice, are
too well known to require further notice; but notwithstanding the
unremitting exertions required to fulfil his private engagements, he
never allowed them to interfere with his public duties; and the
devotedness of his service to the Norfolk and Norwich Hospital was
remarkable. It may be truly said that no private patient received
more kindness, skill, and attention at his hands, than did those who
were placed under his care in the wards of the Hospital.
“As an operating surgeon, Mr. Crosse had but few superiors, and not
many equals. He was possessed of considerable manual tact and
dexterity, which, coupled with a sound judgment as to the necessity
for the performance of an operation, stamped him as a surgeon of
first-rate attainments. In his early professional life he studied
anatomy with great assiduity, and his subsequent occupation as
Demonstrator of Anatomy at Dublin so impressed the subject upon his
memory, that the constitution and form of the human body were always
in his mind’s eye; and thus he was rendered equal, at all times and
upon all occasions, to the serious emergencies of surgery. In short,
he obtained and held for a long period the foremost rank in his
profession in this district; and such was the quality of his mind,
that he would probably have been pre-eminent in whatever locality it
might have fallen to his lot to be placed.
“In 1819, Mr. Crosse published _A History of the Variolous Epidemic
of Norwich_, which has been, and is even now, quoted as an excellent
standard work. In 1822 he published _Memoirs of the Life of the late
Dr. Rigby_, prefixed to the valuable Essay which the Doctor had
published some years before _On Uterine Hæmorrhage_.
“In 1835, the Jacksonian Prize was awarded him for his _Essay on the
Formation_, _Constituents_, _and Extraction of the Urinary Calculus_;
and in the same year he received, in consequence of this Essay, the
Diploma of M.D. from the University of Heidelberg.
“From 1822 to the close of his life, Mr. Crosse contributed many
valuable Papers to different medical periodicals, which are of deep
interest to professional men.
“In 1836, Mr. Crosse was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society—a
distinction which marked him for eminence throughout the whole
civilized world. In 1845, the College of St. Andrew conferred the
Degree of M.D. upon him, and there is scarcely a medical or surgical
society in Europe of which he was not a member, as well as being an
honorary member of the most eminent societies in Asia and America.
“During the last year of Mr. Crosse’s life (1850), it became
painfully evident to his friends that he was gradually losing that
vigour of mind and body which had so long characterized him; and at
the urgent solicitation of his medical advisers, he was induced to
leave home for a few weeks, when he took the opportunity of
consulting Sir B. Brodie and Dr. Watson in London, and spent a short
time with the late Dr. Mackness at Hastings, of whose kindness he
afterwards spoke in the highest terms of gratitude. On his return
home, he endeavoured to resume his professional and even his literary
avocations; but although in a degree benefited by his holiday, he
gradually lost power, and it was clear that his race was almost run.”
He died in his 60th year, having been a resident in Norwich 35 years.
_Dr. Hooker_.
Norwich and Norfolk have produced an array of distinguished botanists,
such as Smith, Turner, Lindley, and the elder Hooker. The president of
the British Association for the Advancement of Science, Dr. Joseph D.
Hooker, F.R.S., is the son of Sir William J. Hooker, formerly Director of
the Royal Gardens at Kew, and he succeeded his father in that very
important post on November 12th, 1865. The present director of Kew
sprung from a race of botanists. His paternal grandfather, a citizen of
Norwich, devoted his leisure to the cultivation of curious plants. This
circumstance, doubtless, helped to create that taste for botany which, in
the career of his illustrious father, has borne such ripe fruits. On the
maternal side, the grandfather of Dr. Hooker was Mr. Dawson Turner, of
Yarmouth. The eldest daughter of this gentleman became the wife of Sir
William J. Hooker in 1814. Mr. Turner’s is a well-known name in the
annals of British botany; he is the author of various botanical
publications, and it was at his suggestion that a narrative of a visit
made to Iceland in 1809 by his future son-in-law was given to the world,
a work which brought the name of Sir William J. Hooker prominently before
the scientific world. So descended Dr. Joseph D. Hooker was born at
Halesworth, in Suffolk, on June 30th, 1817. Although thus by birth a
native of Suffolk, he is by descent a Norwich man. He has been a great
botanical traveller in many parts of the world, and he has added greatly
to our knowledge of the plants of Asia and India. On August 19th, 1868,
as President of the British Association, when the meeting took place in
Norwich, he delivered the Inaugural Address in the Drill Hall before a
large audience.
_Mrs. Opie_.
Amelia Opie was the daughter of Dr. Alderson, a physician in Norwich, and
was born here in 1769. The varied circumstances of her early life gave
the bent to her after career. In her girlhood she beguiled the solitude
of her father’s summer house by composing songs and tragedies; on her
visits to London, the superior society into which the graces of her
person and the accomplishments of her mind introduced her, served to
stimulate her aspirations; and after her marriage, in 1798, to the
painter, Mr. John Opie, she was encouraged by her husband to become a
candidate for literary fame. Accordingly, in 1801, she published a
novel, entitled _Father and Daughter_. Although this tale showed no
artistic ability in dealing either with incidents or with characters, yet
it was the production of a lively fancy and a feeling heart, and speedily
brought its author into notice. She was encouraged to publish a volume
of sweet and graceful poems in 1802, and to persist in the kind of novel
writing which she had commenced so successfully. _Adelaide Mowbray_
followed in 1804, and _Simple Tales_ in 1806. The death of her husband
in 1807, and her return to Norwich, did not slacken her industry. She
published _Temper_ in 1812, _Tales of Real Life_ in 1813, _Valentine’s
Eve_ in 1816, _Tales of the Heart_ in 1818, and _Madeline_ in 1822. At
length, in 1825, her assumption of the tenets and garb of the Society of
Friends checked her literary ardour, and changed her mode of life.
Nothing afterwards proceeded from her pen except a volume entitled
_Detraction Displayed_, and some contributions in prose and verse to
various periodicals. A good deal of her life was spent in travelling and
in the exercise of Christian benevolence. When in this city she was
often seen in the assize court, sitting near the judge. She seemed to
take a great deal of interest in criminal cases. She died here in 1853.
A life of Mrs. Opie, by Miss C. L. Brightwell, was published in 1854.
_Dr. William Crotch_.
The celebrated musician, William Crotch, was born in the parish of St.
George at Colegate in this city, July 5th, 1775. His genius for music
may be supposed to have commenced with his existence, as his parents did
not remember any period in which he did not shew a great predilection for
an organ, to which instrument he seemed to have a special attachment.
Indeed he had a _penchant_ for every musical instrument at an early age.
As soon as he could walk alone, which was at the beginning of his second
year, he would frequently quit his mother’s breast to hear a tune on the
organ, and when he wanted any particular tune, he would put his finger
upon that key on which the tune began; and as it sometimes happened that
more than one tune began on the same key, he would strike two or three of
the first or leading notes of the tune he chose to have played. Before
he was two years and a quarter old, he played “God save the King” with
both hands. At two years and a half he had played to several ladies and
gentlemen, and was soon afterwards noticed in the public journals. At
two and three quarters he could distinguish any note, and call it by its
proper name, though he did not see it struck. His memory was so
retentive, that a gentleman only playing to him the Minuet in _Rodelinda_
two or three times in the evening, was astonished to hear him perform it
next morning, as soon as he went to the organ. Before he was three years
old, he played at Beccles, Ipswich, and other places. Afterwards he was
taken to Lynn, Bury, &c., and in October, 1778, to Cambridge. In
November, he was nominated to a degree of Bachelor of Arts, with a small
annuity annexed to it. In December he went to London, and after
performing before the foreign ambassadors, maids of honour, &c., in 1779,
he was introduced to the sovereign, to whom he gave the greatest
satisfaction, as he had done to the nobility and gentry in general, but
more particularly to the greatest musicians. At the early age of 22 he
was appointed professor of music in the University of Oxford, and there,
in 1799, took his degree of doctor in that art. In 1800 and the four
following years, he read lectures on music at Oxford. Next he was
appointed lecturer on music at the Royal Institution; and subsequently,
in 1823, principal of the Royal Academy of Music. He published a number
of vocal and instrumental compositions, of which the best is his oratorio
of “Palestine.” In 1831 appeared an octavo volume, containing the
substance of his lectures on music, delivered at Oxford and in London.
He also published “Elements of Musical Composition and Thorough Bass.”
He arranged for the piano-forte a number of Handel’s oratorios and
operas, besides symphonies and quartetts of Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven.
He performed all his public duties laboriously, zealously, and
honourably, and in private life he was much beloved. He died on December
29th, 1847, in the house of his son, at Taunton.