Social Regulations.

"I, Francis Stafford, one of the sextons of the Cathedral Church of Christ and the blessed Mary the Virgin of Worcester, do hereby give you and each of you, and all others whom it may concern, notice that I shall appeal to the next general Quarter Sessions of the Peace, to be holden at the Guildhall of the city of Worcester, against the nomination and appointment made by you under your hands and seals, and bearing date July, 1804, whereby you nominated and appointed me by the name and description of 'Francis Stafford, a substantial householder of the vill and hamlet of the precincts of the Cathedral Church of Christ and the blessed Mary the Virgin of Worcester, in the county of Worcester, to be overseer of the said vill and hamlet;' and be pleased to take notice, thatthe grounds of my appeal are—that the said precincts are not nor never were reputed to be a vill and hamlet, nor a place for which an appointment of overseer is directed by law. And further, that the said precincts are not, nor were, nor at any time have been reputed to be, a vill, village, hamlet, or township, nor a place for which an appointment of overseer is directed by law."Witness my hand, &c.,"FRANCIS STAFFORD."T. Dowdeswell, Esq., and"Henry Salmon, clerk."

"Witness my hand, &c.,

"FRANCIS STAFFORD.

"T. Dowdeswell, Esq., and"Henry Salmon, clerk."

The order for the appointment was quashed at the October Sessions of the same year. Exemption from the interruption of the civil powers was what all the great monastic establishments sooner or later obtained, but that of Worcester had a long struggle with the hereditary sheriffs of the county before its immunity from their officers could be obtained. The Reformation introduced great changes, and the precincts of the Cathedral became part of the outer county, but still they remain independent of the city or county interior, being a separate district under the superintendence of the Dean and Chapter.

Inno one particular does the contrast between the present times and those of which we are treating appear more marked, or the progress of society more decided, than in the interference of the ruling powers of olden times with various descriptions of trades and occupations. There were the assizes or ordinances regulating the price of bread, ale, fuel, and other common necessaries of life; they clipped or expanded servants' andworkmen's wages; prohibited or encouraged by bounties the growth of various articles of consumption; adjusted carriers' charges and the numbers of horses they might use up certain hills; permitted the sale of many things only by license; and otherwise sadly dammed up the current of human progression within their own narrow channel. As regards servants' wages, it would appear that the scale allowed early in the seventeenth century was far from illiberal, for in the year 1613 the authorities of Broadway petitioned "that servants' wages be rated according to the statute in that case, for we find it a great grievance in this county the unreasonableness of servants' wages, so that they have grown proud and idle." The rates for wages for servants and labourers fixed in 1663 were as follows:

In 1731 it was ordered "that printed advertisements be publicly sett upp in all publick places that the wages and rates of servants and labourers be the same as last year, except masons, who are allowed 14d. a day."

The corn trade was an object of special attention. An instance of the great want of agricultural statistics occurs in the year 1631, when the subjoined imperious missive was received by the Worcestershire magistrates from the government officials at Whitehall. This document will probably be considered confirmatory of the experience derived from history—namely, that whether a state undertakes to buy for the people what they may want for their consumption, or regulates the trade by interfering with the supply, it is immaterial as to the result. In either case the people may expect to be starved whenever corn is scarce:

"We cannot but very greatly merveile (marvel) that notwithstanding his Majesty's proclamation and book of orders and the diverse earnest letters of this Board, the price of corne and other graine is risen so high, and the same sold at such excessive rates in many places; neyther can wee conceave how this can be if the directions sent from hence had been duly executed; you are therfore to take notice that wee expect a more careful performance thereof and a more particular account then hath hitherto been given us, and accordingly wee do hereby, in his Majesty's name, expressly charge you to cause presently a diligent and exact survey to be made through all that county, what provisions of graine there is, and to returne to this Board a certificate thereof with all expedition, and likewise to see the markets well served according to the orders, and not forestalled by greedy engrossers, to the intollerable wrong and prejudice of those that are to buy, especially of the poorer sort. You are likewise to use your best care and endeavour that during the continuance of this present dearth themaltsters be not permitted to make any greater quantities of malt than may be sufficient for necessary use; that soe there may be more plenty of barley for the reliefe of the poore; and soe wee bid you hartily farewell.(Signed by)"LONDON."H. MANCHESTER."DORCHESTER."DANLEY."EXETER."E. NEWBURGH."LINDSEY."J. FALKLAND."THO. COVENTRY."T. COKE."

In 1715 it was ordered "that Richard Carwardine, of Castle Morton, have a licence to be a comon badger of corne for one year;" and in 1732, "that Thomas Wadley, of Hanley Castle, have a licence granted him to be a common badger, buyer, seller, and carrier, of all sorts of corn and grain in any fair or market within this kingdom of England, so that the same continue in force but for one year from the date hereof and no longer." These badgers of corn were persons who bought corn to sell again. By the statute 5th Elizabeth, chap. 12, they were compelled to take out an annual licence from the Quarter Sessions. At the present time, persons who go round to the farms and cottages in the neighbourhood of Monmouth to buy poultry and bring it for sale to the market at Monmouth are called "badgers."

In pursuance of an act passed in 1769, weekly returns of the prices of wheat, rye, barley, oats, and beans, were ordered from Bewdley, Kidderminster, Stourbridge, Dudley, and Bromsgrove; and the following persons were instructed to furnish such returns: Timothy Clare, stationer, Bewdley; John Fawcett, weaver, Kidderminster; Robert West, stationer, Stourbridge; Oliver Dixon, mercer, Dudley; and George Wall, skinner, Bromsgrove.

Towards the close of the same century many convictions took place "for selling loaves of bread without imprinting on them the letter W in Roman capital, the said loaves notbeing rasped either before or after the bespeaking or purchasing thereof, against the form of the statute." Ordered (in 1710) "that Wm. Dimock, of Bishampton, have a licence for a comon higler, lader, kedder, carrier, buyer, and seller, of hens, chickens, capons, eggs, butter, cheese, ffish, and all other dead vittualls, except pheasants, hares, and partridges." The Clerk of the Peace was instructed in 1730 "to give notice by public advertisement in the Worcester newspaper for all carriers in the said county to attend this Court at the adjourned Sessions, in order to settle the price of carriages, according to the form of the statute in that case made and provided." It was likewise ordered "that no common waggoner or carrier shall take for carrying any goods to or from Bewdley to London the sum of more than 7s. per cwt. till further order." And in 1752, "that every waggon or other carriage drawn up from the signe of the White Hart, Broadway, to the top of the hill, so far as in the county of Worcester, may be drawn with ten horses if the owner shall think proper." Ditto, up the Malvern Hill, with seven. Tolerably suggestive this of queer roads and stiff gradients. The rates of carriage to be charged by carriers were fixed by the Quarter Sessions under the statute 3rd William and Mary, chap. 12, sec. 24, and the number of horses by which carts and waggons were to be drawn was regulated by the statute 5th George I, chap. 12.

Large quantities of salt were from time to time lost in the Severn, as the vessels laden with that commodity were making their way down the river from Worcester, owing to strong tides and violent winds; and the rolls record frequent applications to the Court "for certificates to entitle them (the owners) to such allowance as the act of Parliament permits." These allowances were no doubt the return of a part or the whole of the very heavy duty then levied on salt.

By the 21st George III, chap. 58, and 26th George III, chap. 43, certain bounties were offered for the cultivation of hemp and flax. Nevertheless, England has never grown a sufficient quantity for its own consumption, farmers not regarding it with favour, owing to the supposed exhaustive nature of the crop. In Worcestershire, for 1782 and some following years, claims were made (and allowed by Quarter Sessions) for these bounties, by—

From 1787 to 1792 the Worcestershire claims for flax bounty amounted to £79. 8s. 10d., and these were allowed.

Tobacco also was an article of which the Court of Quarter Sessions took cognisance, and some interesting particulars relative to the growth and suppression of "the weed" in Worcestershire will be found in another part of this work.

In the year 1670 the grand jury presented Henry Sandalls, bailiff of Bewdley, "who hath toll of the market, for upholding unjust measures;" Elias Arch, bailiff of Kidderminster, ditto; Thomas Foley, Esq., "who receives the benefit of the toll of Stourbridge, for not providing a brass measure according to act of Parliament, and for not making the measures of the town according to the same; and that the justices do take into consideration the great abuse that the people of this county which resort to this city of Worcester to market do receive by unjustness of the measures, and by the jogging and shaking of the same;" and suggesting various rewards for the capture of several known offenders.

About the year 1747 a terrible distemper broke out amongst horned cattle, which all the vigilance of the authorities could not prevent from spreading. The Worcestershire Bench first ordered "that 4s. per week be allowed to the several turnpikes where it shall be thought necessary in order to have a man sitt up every night to watch the sayd turnpikes, that no horned cattle be permitted to goe through the sayd turnpikes without propper certificates be first showne, and surveyors of the severall turnpikes to appoint propper persons to watch at the said turnpikes, the expense to be paid by the county."Next year it was ordered "that Grey Devy, of Kingswinford, be appointed inspector for the hundred of Halfshire in relation to infected cattle, to take care that no infected cattle be brought into any parish of the said hundred, and persue the order of counsel made for preventing the spreading the infection amongst the horned cattle; and to be allowed 7s. a week till further order." In 1750 the distemper still raged, especially in the adjoining county of Salop, and the magistrates licensed "Edmund Lechmere, of Hanley Castle, Esq., to buy and sell cattle at any fair, market, or place, where the buying or selling of cattle is not prohibited, and to drive, sell, or dispose of them, at any other fair, market, or place, as aforesaid, tho' he shall not have obtained the certificate directed by the said court, the said Edmund Lechmere having entered into a recognizance with two suretys, according to the directions of the said act" (of the previous Session). Many other similar licenses were afterwards granted, and the constables were ordered to prevent all persons not having such licenses from driving cattle to fairs, nor was any person allowed to bring cattle into the county without a certificate of their freedom from disease. The Clerk of the Peace was also ordered to procure 600 copies of an abstract of a certain treatise on the distemper, with a prescribed method of cure, by an eminent physician in Worcester, and distribute them to the chief constables and inspectors in this and the adjoining counties of Salop and Warwick. Thecordon sanitairewas relaxed in 1751, but the following year the distemper broke out in this county with great severity, and vigilance was again renewed. A meeting having been advertised for buying and selling cattle at Beoley, the Sessions ordered that the meeting be prohibited, the distemper being at Kingsnorton, and that it be advertised in the Worcester and Birmingham journals, and notice given in Beoley church. It was not till July,1756, that the distemper entirely abated, and all orders were rescinded.

"Three strangers blaze amidst the bonfire's revel:The Pope, and the Pretender, and the Devil.Three strangers hate our faith and faith's defender:The Devil, and the Pope, and the Pretender.The strangers will be strangers long, we hope:The Devil, and the Pretender, and the Pope.Thus in three rhymes three strangers dance the hay,And he that chooses to dance after them may."

Wenow come to a class of items chiefly connected with ecclesiastical control over matters both secular and religious—instances of the exercise of power by the Church for the punishment of offenders against her discipline. Every reader of history is acquainted with the force and effect of excommunication in the middle ages. By a sentence of excommunication, both greater and less, the victims were excluded from the right of Christian burial, from bringing or maintaining actions, from becoming attorneys or jurymen, and were rendered incapable of becoming witnesses in any cause. Long before the Reformation the frequency and abuse of this ecclesiastical weapon proved both a scandal and a disadvantage to the Church, by bringing the practice in some degree into contempt; and in the thirteenth century many applications were made to the king complaining of the resistance of excommunicated offenders who defied the utmost that the Church could do to reduce them to submission. In 1289, John, vicar of Feckenham, was excommunicated by Godfrey, Bishop of Worcester, who appealed in thesame manner for secular aid. When the nation reformed its religion, the power of excommunication was still retained by the Church, and is in force even to the present day, although modified by the 53rd of George III, chap. 127, which restricts the maximum term of imprisonment in all such cases to six months. (See more on this subject under the head of St. Nicholas' parish.) Obstinately refusing to attend divine service in the parish church, incontinency, contumacy in not appearing when cited in the Consistory Court, brawling, and scolding—these were the principal offences for the punishment of which the Church most frequently put forth her power, as also on Quakers and Popish recusants.

I am sorry to be compelled to state that the first example occurring in these rolls is that of a female scold. In 1614, Margaret, wife of John Bache, of Chaddesley, was presented to the Sessions as "a comon skould and a sower of strife and disorder amongste her neyghboures, and hath bynn presented for a skoulde at the leete houlden for the manour of Chadsley, and for misbehavyng her tonge towards her mother-in-law at a vysytacon (visitation) at Bromsgrove, April 29, 1603, and was excommunicated therefore." In 1617, one Elinor Nichols was presented "as a great scold and mischief maker, who is said to have been excommunicated and had never applied to make her peace with the Church." The usual mode of punishing this class of offenders was, however, by the cucking-stool. A valued correspondent, in commenting upon the details of the gum-stool, or cucking-stool, and other punishments mentioned at pages 110 and 111 of "Worcester in Olden Times" (in which an engraving is given of a curious instrument of torture still hanging on the wall of Worcester Guildhall), says—

"The gum-stool is evidently the cucking-stool, though it never occurred to me that Cooking Street was really Cucking Street, andhad had its name spelt Cucken in old maps, as you state. The term cuckold-stool is inaccurate, as this punishment is for scolding to the common nuisance of the neighbourhood, and has no reference to conjugal infidelity. The cucking-stool is the legal punishment of the criminal offence of scolding; and if a woman had been indicted and convicted of this offence at the last Assizes, the learned judge must have sentenced her to the cucking-stool. The common scold (Communis Rixatrix)—for the law confines it to the feminine gender—is a public nuisance to her neighbourhood, and may be indicted for the offence, and upon conviction punished by being placed on a certain engine of correction called the trebucket, or cucking-stool; and she may be convicted without setting forth the particulars in the indictment, though the offence must be set forth in technical words and with convenient certainty; and the indictment must conclude not only against the peace but to the common nuisance of her majesty's liege subjects. It is not necessary to give in evidence the particular expressions used: it is sufficient to prove generally that the defendant is always scolding. The skimmington is a mock procession got up in derision of a woman who has beaten her husband. You will find it in Hudibras. When a boy, I saw a skimmington, and in it a man dressed in woman's clothes, who rode on horseback behind a stuffed figure of a man, carrying a ladle, with which the supposed woman kept beating the stuffed figure about the head. This, too, has no reference to conjugal infidelity. But in Wilts and Berks there is a mock procession that does relate to conjugal infidelity; but this is called a 'Woosset,' which is pronounced 'Oosset'. It is a rough band followed by a person bearing a long pole, with a cross-bar across it, on which is placed a shirt, and at the top of the pole is a horse's skull with a pair of bull's horns attached to it. This I have also seen. I have omitted to mention that cucking-stools were of two kinds—the one fixed, the other moveable. That mentioned in 'Worcester in the Olden Times' (p. 110), must have been of the latter kind. A lithograph of each is in No. 1 of the Magazine of the Wilts Archæological Society. The bridle for scolds still exists in several places; there is one in the Ashmolœan Museum at Oxford; another was in the magistrates' room at Shrewsbury, but has been stolen within the last few years; one is figured in one of the volumes of the Penny Magazine, under the title 'Obsolete Punishments,' and another in Plott's 'Staffordshire;' but it is very remarkable that though so commonly seen, these bridles, called 'Branks,' are nowhere mentioned in our law books, though cucking-stools always are whenever the offence of scolding is treated of or referred to."

But to return to ecclesiastical matters. In the year 1620, Robert Lucy, of Droitwich, was ordered to appear before the Sessions Court "for killinge of fleshe this Lent." By the statutes 2nd and 3rd Edward VI, chap. 19, and 5th Elizabeth, chap. 5 (an act for maintenance of the navy), the eating of flesh in Lent is prohibited under penalties; but I know of no statute which inflicts any penalty on butchers for killing in Lent.

The Sessions rolls contain some sad pictures of clerical misbehaviour in the seventeenth century—a period when the clergy, as a body, had become a plebeian class, when (as Macaulay assures us) "for one who made the figure of a gentleman, ten were mere menial servants," many of the ejected ministers during the domination of the Puritans obtaining bread and shelter only by attaching themselves to the households of royalist gentlemen. The truth of the observation (see Blount's "Reformation"), that "an indigent church makes a corrupt and canting clergy," is apparent from the history of those times. In 1628, articles were exhibited against the Rev. Henry Hunt, of Defford, "that he is a malicious and contentious person and useth scandalous speeches without regard to time or place, but even in the church, sometimes before and sometimes after divine service, hath been known to break out into violent swearing before he came forth of the pulpit, taunting and reviling Rd. Damanne, and throwing stones at him in the field to provoke him to strike him, and threatening to make him so poor with suits that he should be glad to sell his mortuary for 2d.;" also that he swore falsely at Worcester Assizes."His mortuary" here evidently means the amount of property that he would die worth. In some parishes a sum of 10s. is still payable to the rectors or vicars on the death of each householder in the parish who dies worth £40. This is called "a mortuary." The Rev. William Hollington, of Alvechurch, was in 1641 reported as "a frequenter of alehouses, where he spendeth much time both day and night, as well upon the Saboth as other week dayes in idle and riotous company, in excessive drinking, and is a causer of much drunkenness by procuring and persuading and enforcing others to the drinking of whole cupes. He hath often drawn idle company to his own house, where they have sent for much ale, and there abusefully have spent in drunkness, quarrelling, and fighting. He is greatly defamed of incontinensie with his neighbours' wives, and one of them hath confest he did attempt her chastity, affirminge him to be as bad as Bankes his predecessor, who to prevent punishment for his unchast and incestuous living run away. That he dayley frequenteth houses much suspected of lewdnes, often accompanied with a dangerous armed Papist of idle behaviour, and assisted by him hath in the open street given out rayling and threatning words against his neighbours, calling them knaves and partisans, and hath affirmed they were not Papists that rebelled in Ireland, and that Papists were noe rebbles but honester men than Protestants. He hath been a hindrance of the taking of the protestation, and doth omit the words in the reading of the remonstrance 'and have cutt all theire throates,' to the end to obscure from the people the greatness of the danger the House of Commons was in as it is conceived in favour of the other side. A constable coming to him in execution of his office to deliver the protestations of such as were then and there present to take it, he gave him many reproachful wordes, calling him knave, blockhead, loggerhead.He is a curser and swearer, a nefarious pintious lyer, and a contentious person. He stirred up and mayntained many shutes (suits) and much trouble in the neighbourhood, hath sided and counselled with the old churchwarden to the detayning of goods and money due to the church, and threatned aney that durst question it. He hath laboured to hinder justice and to countenance delinquents, is a quarreller and fighter. He advised and aided in stealing away a widdowes daughter, the only child of his neer neighbour, not above fourteen years old, and marying her to John Price, a rude boy of idle behaviour, and noe good cloths to his back, though the friends of the girl could have made her portion £200, and hath never been heard to put up one prayer either for the Parliament or for distressed Protestants in the kingdom of Irelande except on particular times, and then it was with the limitation 'if soe that they be of the same religion as wee are on.'"

It is difficult adequately to estimate the injurious effects to society of such examples set on the part of the clergy. The judicious Hooker observes that "the examples of clergy and great men are important, as being seen afar off, like cities set on the tops of hills; but mean men's actions are not greatly inquired into except by those who live at the next door."

During the Commonwealth and the reign of Charles II, as may be expected, the religious disputes and ill-feeling existing between the Established Church and the various sects that snarled and whined and canted in the racy language of the time, are fully exhibited in these records, of which I shall give some instances. In 1654, Edward Sheldon and Nicholas Hill deposed "that upon the 20th day of August the deponents were objecting against one Mr. Spilsbury, who desired to be minister of Bromsgrove, that he had a low voyce; one Humphrey Potter then answered that if he had a low voicehe had atruevoice; unto which Mr. Joseph Amige, now minister of Bromsgrove (as these deponents conceiveth) answered and sayd, 'Soe have I;' unto whom the said Potter replied, 'Noe, for you have tould lies in the pulpit,' or words to that effect." Here is another curious specimen of the times: In 1656 the jury presented that Thomas Goslinge, late of Bredon, yeoman, on the 11th November, 1656, at Bredon, of purpose to defame, disgrace, and provoke one Richard Beeston, a pious and godly minister and preacher of the word of God, and to disturb the peace, certain false, seditious, scandalous, and provoking English words did put into meeter or verse, and the same as a libell did openly, maliciously, and of purpose to provoke and disgrace the said Richard Beeston, in the presence and hearing of divers honeste people of the commonwealth of Englande, with a loud voice did saye and singe—that is to saye:

"Here comes Mr. Beeston,The man wee nere wiston,As high as the pulpitt topp;And to his disgrace,With his impudent face,To reape another man's cropp."

Roger of Wendover tells of a party, who profanely interrupted divine service, being made to dance in the churchyard for twelve months, without the power of stopping their limbs. But it seems that the fear of supernatural punishment did not deter the brawlers of the seventeenth century. When Dr. Thomas (afterwards Bishop of Worcester) was vicar of Loughern, about the year 1644, a party of Parliament horse went to that place, and inquired whether that popish priest, Mr. Thomas, was still there, and whether he continued reading the liturgy and praying for the Queen; one of them adding, that he would go to church next Sunday, and if Mr. Thomaspersevered in praying for that drab of the w—— of Babylon he would certainly pistol him. That good man, however, was not to be intimidated: he performed the usual service, and while praying for the Queen, one of the soldiers, who sat in the next pew to him, snatched the book out of his hand and threw it at his head. The preacher bore it with composure, but the soldier, it is said, was instantly seized with such compunction that his comrades were forced to carry him away. At the Midsummer Sessions of 1660 a deposition was made, that "on the 17th of June, being ye last Saboth daye, Jeremiah Hewes, servant of Mr. Bishops of Lindridge, spoke of Mr. Giles base lascivious words, for he said yt he preached in ye church nothing but lyes, and furthermore he called him ould munkke (monk) and he said ye ould monkke preached in ye forenoon, and his sunn, ye yonge munkker, did endeavour to mend it in ye afternoone; and he said he would never heere him preach again, for if he were in ye church he would goe forthe. Mr. Gyles gave a tuch concerning maypoles—what rudnes is ust (used) to be abought such games, and he wisht he had his beard to make him a flaye (?) yt he might be one of ye fore leaders; and furthermore, my brother Edward tould him yt these words did deserve ye good behaviour (recognizance to keep the peace); and he said again he did not care for never a justice's warrant in ye countie, for he saith they are all turncootes." In 1665, Edward Mutchett, of Norton-juxta-Bredon, informed against Richard Hunt, that he heard him say in his prayers "Downe with this King of Babylon, this Poperye, and this idolatrous wayes as is now sett upp, and that they may not touch Thy anointed."

The Quakers of the seventeenth century, it is pretty well known, were not the mild and gentle beings who compose the ranks of the Friends in the nineteenth. They could rail and brawl in public, would persist in following their trades on aSunday, and their resistance to the "powers that be" was of a much more active character than that which induces a modern Friend to allow a rate-collector to seize on his tables and chairs. The Quakers met with severer treatment during the Commonwealth than any other sect of Christians. We trace them obscurely under the denomination of "Seekers," their distinguishing principle being the doctrine of an inward light. George Fox, their founder, having bade some of the justices who committed him to jail totrembleat the word of the Lord, gave rise to the term "Quakers." In this city and county they were apparently pursued with great severity after the restoration of "Church and King," which undoubtedly had the usual effect of considerably sharpening their asperity towards the established faith. In the city, they were prevented entering their meeting-house (in Friar Street), and accordingly preached in the open air, while soldiers were paid for watching them. George Fox himself was confined in Worcester jail. In an ancient library at Kingsnorton School, there are treatises against the then recently propounded notions of the Quakers. The subjoined extract will show that maypoles and long hair were not the only troubles the poor vicar of that parish had to contend against. It is taken from "Besse's Sufferings of the Quakers," vol. ii, chap. iii, p. 60, under date 1657. "Jane Hicks, of Chadwitch, was sent to prison at Worcester for some offence which the priest of King's Norton took at her speaking to him." The same writer also states that at another time she was sent to Worcester for disturbing at Bromsgrove church, and that she was placed four times in the stocks—once for a whole night and part of two days. The woman would thus seem to have been a notorious disturber; and doubtless her "speaking" to the "priest" was in the church at the time of worship—a very common custom with the Friends of that day. Viewedin this light the vicar's conduct was proper, and was a necessary precaution against unseemly interruptions. The books of the above-named library, thus viewed, become interesting to us. They are evidence in the great Quaker battle, and no doubt poor Jane Hicks was stirred up with wrath by hearing some of the arguments out of this storehouse hurled at her then noisy sect. When John Bissell, also in 1657, refused to pay the "priest" ten shillings tithe, and had "goods taken from him worth £1. 5s.," no doubt these identical volumes were at hand ready to pour forth their artillery against the poor Quaker.[3]In the County Rolls for 1662 is "A calendar of the prisoners called Quakers: Rd. Payton, convictedde premunire; Edwd. Hall, convicted for words spoken in open court, fined £5, and committed till payed; Henry Gibbs, Wm. Collins, Wm. Webb, Robert Baylis, Rd. WalkeraliasWeaver, Jos. Walker, Rd. Bennet, Wm. Eades, Stephen Pitway, committed the 2nd of January, 1662, for having lately assembled themselves under the pretence of joyning in a religious worship, to the great endangering of the publique peace and safetye, and to the terrour of the people in severall places of this county." In 1666 the following Quakers were "taken at a conventicle and committed by Thomas Wilde, Esq.:" Wm. Pitt, Richard Fydo, Abra. Roberts, Rich. Lewis, Edward Lewis, Edward Staunton, John Wright, Alexander Berdslye, Tho. Fitrale, and John Hoskins. Next year (1667) the gaoler's list of prisoners then in gaol included the following:

[3]This notice of Kingsnorton Library is taken from an article in "Aris's Birmingham Gazette."

"Thomas Payton, late of Dudley, taylor, a p'fessed Quaker, taken at a conventicle of Quakers in the said towne of Dudley, a place much infested with Quakers and disorderlie p'sons, and comitted to ye gaole 10th July, xiiii Caroli, and being a stubborn and incorigible p'son, was at ye next Sessions following tendred the oathe of allegiance, which he refused to take, was indicted, and convicted of premunire. Thomas Feckenham, another leader of the same sect, was likewise apprehended about three years since, and tendred ye oathe of allegiance, and beinge still obstinate and p'verse, hath been continued a prisoner, but with some liberty now and then extended towards him, which kindness hath not as yet wrought any conformitie or submission in him. John Jenkins and William Bardoe, Quakers, excommunicated in ye consistory of Hereford, and taken by a writ De Excom. Capiend. about a year since. John Roberts, of Droitwich, p'fessed Quaker, for using his trade and calling on ye Sunday or Lord's Day, was likewise presented and excommunicated a year ago. John Tombs, of Droitwich, for the like offence, and for refusing to permit the sacred ordinance of Baptism to be administered to his children, likewise excommunicated, and taken up by the like writ. Job Allibone and William Hodges, for the same offence and refusing to come to church. All which persons soe committed are, by the overmuch indulgence of the late sheriff, under-sheriff, and gaoler, permitted to goe at liberty about their occasions, which we consider doth encourage them to persist in their contemptuous and incorrigible behaviour; and they are not to be found in prison unless for about an houre or a night once in six or eight weeks time."

This report of the state of Quakerism, it seems, was occasioned by a request from the Government that the magistrates should inquire into the subject, and furnish the names of the Quakers then in prison, and whether they were ringleaders or had been seduced into the commission of offence by others. In the chapter on the records of St. Helen's church, Worcester, in the earlier part of this work, it will be observed that the penalties paid by Quakers were converted into a charitable fund for the poor.

The William Pardoe, mentioned above, was probably the individual who was said to have been the pastor of a Baptist congregation at Worcester, where he continued in jail nearly seven years, and died in this city in 1692. A MS. account of his labours, travellings, and writings, was said to have been at Leominster not many years ago. Is it still inexistence? Mr. Pardoe was excommunicated, and was buried in a garden at Lowesmoor, near Worcester, where his body, with that of his wife, was discovered some forty or fifty years ago while digging for the purpose of building. The bodies were not disturbed, and a stone was erected to their memory. I am not aware that this still remains.

We now arrive at something more stirring, and may have an interesting peep at a conventicle of "Fifth Monarchy Men" at Oldbury. This sect of religionists had for their distinguishing tenet a belief in the establishment of a fifth universal monarchy, of which Christ was to be the head; while the "saints," under his personal sovereignty, should possess the earth. They appeared in England towards the close of the Protectorate; and in 1660, a few months after the Restoration, they broke out into a serious tumult in London under their leader Venner; many of them lost their lives, some killed by the military, and others executed. In the country the sect continued for some years later. At the concluding Worcestershire Sessions of 1667, one William Cardale deposed that on the 1st of September in that year he took his wife to Oldbury to see her sister, Edward Nightingale's wife, who was lying-in; and after dinner, he being inclined to fall asleep, his brother-in-law asked him to go for a walk; they accordingly went to Oldbury chapel, which they found full of people. After a psalm had been led, the preacher, who was a stranger to him, "made a very strange prayer, praying neither for king, queen, royal familie, nor clergie," and a still stranger sermon followed, from the text "Thy kingdom come," "his doctrine beinge, that Christ hath a kingdome of rewarde for his sufferinge and workinge servants, which in his good time he would possess them, and we ought to pray for;" and he attempted to prove, from the Revelations, Daniel, and other mystical writings, that the aforesaidkingdom was to be on earth. "On the preacher proposing to showwhenthis kingdom was to come, an alarm of soldiers was given, a horse was soon got ready for him, and throwing off his gown and perriwig, he appeared in a grey coat, and speedily worked his way through the crowd and made off." A soldier, named William Perrott, deposed that by command of his officer, Major Wilde, he with others was sent to apprehend this preacher, whose name was Steele,aliasFraser, a Nonconformist; and on arriving at Oldbury chapel they found about 2000 persons there. When the preacher had disappeared, Perrott with two others secured the doors of the chapel; shortly after which some of the congregation "looked out of the windows to see whether any more soldiers appeared, and observing none, they presently swore that three or four were not able to keepe so manye prisoners. Forthwith thereupon they broke open the doors upon us, and layd hold upon my haire, my pistolls, and cloake, and gave me severall blowes upon my head and bodye, and likewise of those soldiers that were present with me. They alsoe forced one of my pistolls out of my hande, and alsoe broake Mr. Hambden's man's pistoll about our heads. After the rest of our partye of horse appeared, most of them runn from us. Some few were took. Alsoe I observed a great many of benches as I supposed newly set upp about ye chapel to receive ye company." What became of the unfortunate prophesier of the coming kingdom doth not appear.

In the year 1669, Thomas Willmot, vicar of Bromsgrove, laid an information at the Sessions to the effect that, "being ready to attend his duty at the funeral of Jane, the wife of John Eckols, was by a tumult of Anabaptists affronted and disturbed whilst I was reading the service. They no sooner came to the grave but irreverently threw the corps thereinto, and having their hats on their heads, immediately, contraryto the orders of the Church, without the least respect to the service of the same, and without either clerk or sexton, with their feete caste in the mold and covered the corps. Amongst which tumult there was one Henry Waldron, who entring into the belman's house without his leave, took away his spade, wherewith John Price, contrary to all civility and decency, notwithstanding he was checked by the minister, with his head covered, persisted to throwe the mold in the aforesaid grave."

The last instance of open disaffection to the church service which is worth a place in this record occurs in 1692, when an information was laid against Michael Bisset, of Feckenham. It appeared that Richard Bond and one Foster having publicly praised a sermon delivered in Feckenham church by a parson named Millard, Bissett swore by God's wounds (a common oath in those days) "That there was never a true word in the same sermon, and that it was all nought and false, and that it would have been a good deede to have sett him downe out of the pulpit with a bowe and bolte (meaning the said preacher), and that he could go down in the meadows and hear as good a sermon under a hedge." Bolt is a short arrow shot from a cross-bow. Hence the saying, "A fool's bolt is soon shot." There are several specimens of these bows and bolts at Goodrich Castle.

The Toleration Act of William III gave immunity to all Protestant Dissenters, except those who denied the Trinity, from the penal laws to which they had been subjected. In the Sessions' order book, date 1696, is a "Mem. That the persons under-named in open Court of Sessions did take the oaths mentioned and appointed to be taken in and by an Act madeAnno primo Willi et Marie, entitled 'An Act for abrogating of the oaths of allegiance and supremacy, and appointing other oaths;' and also made and subscribed thedeclaration appointed to be made and subscribed in and by an Act madeAnno 25 Caroli Secundi, entitled 'An Act for preventing dangers which may happen from Popish recusants,' according to an Act madeAnnis 7 et Willi tertii Regis, entitled 'An Act requiring the practicers of the law to take the oaths and subscribe the declarations therein mentioned.'" The following are the names of the subscribers in this county:

An explanation is necessary with regard to "signing the association," as stated above. In Harris's Life of William III, p. 143, under the date of 1688, it is stated that after the arrival of the gentlemen of Somerset and Dorsetshire, at Exeter, "Sir Edward Seymour asked Dr. Burnet 'Why they had not got anassociation, without which they were only a rope of sand, and none would think themselves bound to stick to them.' The Doctor told him 'It was for want of a man of his authority and credit to support such an advice.'" He then proposed it to the Prince, who, with the Earl of Shrewsbury and all present, approved the motion. Accordingly the Doctor did urge an association, containing "a solemn engagement firmly to adhere together in pursuance of the ends of the Prince's declaration, and in defence thereof, and never to depart from it till the religion, laws, and liberties of the people should be secured by a free Parliament; and if any attempt should be made on the person of the Prince, that it should be revenged on all by whom any such attempt should be made." This association was speedily signed there and in other places, particularly by many in the University of Oxford. Lord Herbert of Cherbury, and the principal gentlemen of Worcestershire and Herefordshire, met at Worcester, and declared for the Prince of Orange, when Sir Walter Blount and the Sheriff of Worcestershire were sent prisoners to Ludlow Castle. The declaration, I presume, continued to be signed for several subsequent years.

In the Summer Sessions of the same year "the persons under-named did take the oaths and made and subscribed the declaration of 30 Car. II:"

The persons next following did take the oaths and subscribe the declaration of 25 Car. II:

The persons under-named did sign the Association:

And divers others put the roll.

The only remaining noticeable item affecting Nonconformity is an order made in or about the year 1716, "that an indenture of apprenticeship made between John Cookes and his master, Samuel Gill, be discharged and set aside, it appearing to this court that the master gave his said apprentice imoderate correccon and alsoe employing him in another trade, viz., plateing of gunn barrells andobligeing him to goe to the Presbyterianmeeting." It may be stated, in concluding this chapter, that the law enforcing attendance at the parish church on Sunday was not abolished till 1846. Other notes on Nonconformity will be found in this volume.

Back to Index Next