In fact, the licentiousness which appears to have resulted from the reformation is seemingly to be ascribed to the three following causes—1. The real, apparent, or supposed loose tendency of certain leading doctrines of the reformers, as was observed before.—2. The suppression of the religious houses, whose inhabitants used to be the means of promoting public decency, and checking the influence of licentious principles.[668]—3. The revolutionary character of the reformation. All great revolutions, from their very nature, tend to weaken the ties, and loosen the bands which preserve the good order of society and strengthen the moral habits of its members.—It may be reasonably concluded that each of these causes had a material effect on thistown and country at the memorable era of reformation, and long after.
We can discover no appearance or indication that the character or disposition of the Lynn people was further christianized, mollified, or any way improved by that extraordinary event; but rather the contrary. Among the principal transactions left upon record as having taken place here since the reformation, one of the first is “the burning of a Dutchman in the Market place for heresy.” This is said to have happened in the year 1335, and so at an early period of our protestantism. It is remarkable enough that the only instance that occurred in this town of putting a man to death for heresy, or burning him for his religion, happened after the reformation, or since the town became protestant; which shews that people may bear that honourable name and at the same time be very far from humanity and righteousness.
The poor hapless sufferer had probably fled to England and made choice of Lynn as a place of refuge from the persecution which then raged in his own country. He might be induced to take this step from the favourable reports he had heard at home of the generosity and hospitality of our nation towards strangers, and particularly the oppressed and friendless. If such was actually the case, he found himself at last miserably disappointed, and learnt by dear bought and bitter experience, that however abundant the liberality and tender mercies of England and of Lynn might be towards some descriptions of oppressed or distressed people, yet thatthey by no means extended to those calledheretics:—an appellation which has too often meant no more than that those branded with it differed from the ruling or predominant party, and were consigned by them to the ill opinion and detestation of the public.
The deplorable fate of this friendless stranger must stamp indelible disgrace on the memory of his brutal murderers? and it shews what little reason Lynn then had to congratulate itself on its change from popery to protestantism. We have no account what the dreadful heresy was, with which this unpitied victim to protestant bigotry and persecution was charged, and for which he suffered. Whatever it was, it could not be very dangerous or alarming; for as he was a foreigner there could be no danger of his disseminating it here among a people of whose language he can be supposed to have little or no knowledge. In short, every feeling heart must be shocked at the aggravated atrocity of this diabolical deed.
It is sad and mortifying enough to think how much this town has been under the influence of religious bigotry and intolerance, and the most pitiful narrowmindedness almost ever since. The harmlessQuakerswere here imprisoned and cruelly treated, and theBaptistswere harassed in the most unjust and shameful manner even after the revolution. Poor creatures, most wrongfully branded with the odious name ofwitches, were here also for no short period since the reformation, subjected to rigorous prosecutions and capital punishments. These facts are now just glanced at, but shall be more fully related hereafter in the course of the work.
Unfavourable as some of the reformed doctrines undoubtedly were to moral improvement, it cannot be said to be the case with all of them. Some were evidently of the opposite tendency, as were also some of the romish doctrines. But they could not be expected to produce the desired effect unless they were extensively promulgated; and that does not appear to have been the case in this country, at least till a long while after the commencement of the reformation. It was one of the great and glaring defects of the reforming system in England, that it did not provide a sufficient number of religious or public instructors in lieu of those of the old religion who had been suppressed and silenced at the dissolution of the monasteries and other religious houses, or in consequence of their aversion to the new order of things. These are known to have been very numerous, but the number of the reformed ministers, or protestant clergy, who were appointed to succeed them and supply their places as public instructors, appears to have been very inconsiderable; comparatively at least: and, what is not a little remarkable, they were also, for the most part, far less competent than their predecessors for the charge they undertook. In such circumstances, and with such a ministry, it might be expected that vice and licentiousness would increase and abound.
The state of things at Lynn, at, and long after the reformation, does not appear to have been at all favourable to moral and religious improvement. Before that period the town abounded with religious and moral instructors,such as they were, who certainly contributed in no small measure to preserve social order and public decency; and when they were afterwards superseded, their successors did not appear to greater advantage. They were not their superiors in abilities, and they were far inferior to them in number, and probably no less so in the public estimation, and the weight and extent of their influence over the minds of the inhabitants at large, especially those of the middling and lower orders, who constituted the main body or majority of the inhabitants. For among these there did not appear to be many then, as there had been formerly, who were dissatisfied with the old order of things, and anxious for a religious revolution.[672]
Before the reformation the number of ecclesiastics or religious functionaries at Lynn was very considerable, amounting perhaps to sixty or seventy at least. Of them fifteen belonged to theAustinConvent, twelve to theDominican, ten to theFranciscan, and eleven to theCarmelite: making in allforty eight. To these may be added the monks of theBenedictinePriory, those who belonged to the Conventde Penitentia, andto theCollegeof Priests, amounting, it may be supposed, on a moderate computation, to twenty or thirty more. Such a number as seventy or eighty, or evensixtyclergymen, or public teachers of religion, for this town, would now be thought too large of all reason and conscience. But they were no fewer here before the reformation, if indeed they were so few; and the influence of such a number of ghostly guides and instructors, to restrain immoral excesses, and preserve public decency and social order, must certainly have been very considerable.
At the reformation they were all silenced and suppressed. They were also succeeded, when successors could be found, (which was not always the case)[673]by men who had renounced the spiritual supremacy of the pope, and acknowledged that of the king, which was always an indispensible requirement and qualification. But very generally, it seems, throughout the nation, the protestant successors of the priests, monks, and friars, were poor hands, and ill qualified to instructand enlighten the people;[674]and such, it is probable, were those who succeeded in this town. There is reason to think that their number too was very small, not exceeding perhaps three or four, or half a dozen at most, which, considering also their deficiency in other respects, was not likely to render them in the eyes of the public of any thing like equal consideration with their expelled predecessors. The state of society therefore could not be expected to be much benefited or improved, or the progress of the reformation facilitated and advanced by their ministration.
To supply the wants or defects, and remedy in some measure the insufficiency of that new race of clergy, theBook of Homilieswas composed and introduced; portions of which were directed to be read in the churches instead of sermons. This seems to have been a wise and commendable contrivance, as things then stood. The generality of the clergy were not allowed to preach, owing, it is presumed, to their known or supposed incapacity, or insufficiency to perform that task properly, or to edification. Those of a superior class, who were judged equal to that task, were allowed to take out licences to empower or authorize them to preach to the people. Their preaching was extempore, or without book, as had always been the case before, in thisas well as every other country. They could not therefore be objected to on that account.
But it so happened that their preaching did not give general satisfaction; owing, perhaps, partly, if not chiefly, to its containing what Burnet calls “very foul and indiscreet reflections on the other party;”[675a](meaning the papists;) a party which still contained a large majority of the nation, with not a few of its first families. However that was, the sermons gave great offence, and the preachers were much blamed. Complaints against them were made to the king, “by hot men on both sides,”[675b]as the writer above mentioned expresses himself. On what ground those of their own side, the protestants, objected to their preaching, it is not easy to discover: nor does it appear to be very material. They must however have been rather unfortunate, to incur the displeasure of their friends as well as their enemies. But what makes this of most importance is what resulted from it, and which we will now proceed to relate.
Of the charges and accusations brought against those preachers it is very probable that not a few were utterly unfounded and false, the offspring of envy and malice. Others might be mere misrepresentations or exaggerations, proceeding from unintentional mistake or strong prejudice. But as the discourses referred to and complained of were delivered extemporaneously or off hand, the accused could not easily and effectually disprove what their accusers had alleged against them, as theycould do little more than oppose their own word or testimony to those allegations, which was not likely to prove always satisfactory to their superiors. In order therefore to justify themselves, and be secure in future from misrepresentation and false accusation, they came generally to write and read their sermons.[676]This was the beginning of preaching fromnotes, and thus was thereadingof sermons introduced among the clergy of the church of England, which has universally prevailed there ever since, with the exception of thepuritansin former times, and those calledevangelical clergyin the present day.
This practice seems to be still confined to the clergy of the church of England, and the English presbyterians; which may account for the small effect the ministry of either has on the lower orders of the community. By the Scotch Presbyterians, or the church of Scotland it has never been adopted, nor would it be deemed, beyond the Tweed, worthy the name ofpreaching: all there is extempore, or from memory; yet the common people there are of far superior morals, and infinitely better informed than those of this country; which furnishes at least a strong presumption that the ancient practice is abundantly preferable to the other in its tendency, aptitude, or adaptation to attract the attention, impress the minds, improve the manners and character, and promote the moral and religious proficiency of the lower ranks of society, which constitute the great body of the nation.
Such was the practice of the Lollards, or Wickliffitesformerly, when they brought half the nation over to their way of thinking; such also was the practice of the puritans and nonconformists afterwards, whose success was by no means inconsiderable, notwithstanding the grievous opposition and persecution which they had to encounter: and such, we all know, has been and is the practice of the popular dissenters and methodists of the present day, who seem to bid fair soon to bring two thirds of the thinking and serious part of the nation to enlist under their banners. In short, we know of no preaching, but what has been extempore or without book, that has ever made very deep impression, or produced any mighty and salutary effect upon the minds of the common people. If therefore this kind of preaching were to cease, or be discontinued among us, there is every reason to believe that the lower orders of our countrymen would soon become heathenized, barbarized, and brutalized to a most deplorable degree; and that the profession of religion would ere long be confined within narrow limits, and to a comparatively small party among our middling classes.
This modern device, or, as it may be called, the English mode of promoting religious knowledge byreadingsermons, which excludes half the nation from almost any chance of receiving instruction, has yet had its warm admirers and encomiasts among us, who have not failed most lavishly to congratulate or compliment their dear country on the important result of this contrivance, in the unequalled number of English printed sermons, of a cast and merit superior to those of any other nation. Now allowing all this to be true, andthat the generality of the clergy have aimed at excelling in the same way in all their unprinted discourses, must it not follow that they have taken pains to compose such elaborate productions as will be, after all, of little or no use to the greatest part of those who have been committed to their charge? This seems to be one reason why so many are seen to withdraw from the church and resort to the conventicle. May it not be said therefore, that the practice in question, or this change which commenced at the reformation, has proved unfavourable, not only to the interest of the common people of this country, but even to that of the established church itself?
As to this town, at and for some time after the reformation, it does not seem likely, from the character of that event, and the complexion and small number of the reformed successors of the priests, monks, and friars, that it derived much, if any, moral or intellectual improvement from that change. Its few officiating protestant clergymen, with their humdrum reading of homilies or illsuited sermons, could prove but poor substitutes for the numerous friars that preceded them, whose preaching, like that of our modern methodists, &c. was always animated and energetic, directed chiefly and powerfully to affect the feelings, and move and rouse the passions of their auditors: and it was delivered in a plain familiar style, and a language suited to the weakest understanding and meanest capacity. Here the friars excelled, and here the preachers of our modern popular sects excel also, and succeed abundantly, like their prototypes.[678]
It seems very probable, though it may be thought not a little strange, that the impression and influence of moral and religious principles have never been so general or extensive among the common people of this town and country since the reformation, as they were before, in the time and by means of the friars. They used to go about unweariedly, and dispense their precepts to all ranks of people, in a language suited to every capacity, so that those of the lowest condition appear to have been as much the objects of their attention, and as completely under their discipline as any of the rest. This cannot be said to have been the case at any one period with our established protestant clergy. One half, if not two thirds of those committed to their charge have generally lain beyond the range of their ministry, with little chance of deriving any benefit or advantage from their labours. They would therefore have remained from generation to generation in a state of mere barbarism or heathenism, but for the laudable exertions of some of our religious sectaries, who yet have been always viewed by our rulers with an evil eye, when they certainly ought to have been looked upon with approbation and gratitude, as richly entitled to their good opinion and encouragement.
We know of no period in the history of this town, from the reformation to the present time, when a great majority of its population was not involved in deplorable and heathenish darkness. Nor do we know of any period when the town was favoured with a more respectableclergy than those who officiate in the churches here at present. Yet the state of the town, even now, appears to answer to the above description; though there are here several dissenting chapels, besides the established places of worship, which are all well attended. In fact, more than two thirds of our population, at this very time, notwithstanding all the labours and efforts of our established and dissenting ministers, appear still to remain as destitute of any sense of religion as if religion had been actually abolished, or as if a law had passed to prohibit the public profession of it.
As to our churches and chapels, though they may be thought by some too numerous and too spacious, yet they are certainly very inadequate to the want or accommodation of the inhabitants, in case they were generally disposed to attend the public worship. The present writer has lately learnt and ascertained, that but little more than one third of our population could be held or accommodated for the purposes of religious worship in all these places.[680]How very unreasonable thereforemust those little jealousies be which our religious parties too often manifest towards each other, as if religion had been no more than a trade, and they thought it allowable to vilify their brother-tradesmen in order to draw more customers to their own shops. This evil spirit has been more manifest and predominant here of late years among Dissenters than among Churchmen.
Effects of the reformation at Lynn further exemplified—dissolution of the convents,chapels,and gilds—suppression and expulsion of the monks and friars—the consequences.
It seems very probable, and even morally certain, that all the inhabitants of this town, before the reformation, were in the habit of paying attention to religious institutions and observances, or to the externals of the religion that was then in vogue. The numerous friars and other religious functionaries would not fail to keep them to that, as they had, without doubt, sufficient inclination, influence and power so to do. From this state of things we may reasonably conclude that a change for the worse would, and actually did take place after the reformation, when so many convents and chapels were shut up, which were before much resorted to: inconsequence of which the bulk of the people were necessarily deprived of any fair chance or opportunity to attend upon, and profit by the public ministrations of their new or protestant pastors: and this, as was before observed, has really been the case here to this day.
The shutting up and demolition of thechapelsmust have been a very strange, impolitic, and unaccountable measure; and the suppression of thegildswas perhaps not much less so. The former measure deprived more than half the inhabitants of an opportunity to receive public instruction, or to attend public worship; and the latter dissolved and abolished a number of fraternal institutions, or friendly societies, of long standing, most of which, if not all, seem to have been very harmless, and many of them apparently of the same useful tendency as our modern benefit clubs, whose general utility is unquestionable, and universally acknowledged. Were our present government to abolish or prohibit these, it would certainly be, not only an unjustifiable deed, but a real and very serious grievance. How much less so the suppression of the Gilds may have been, it is perhaps not very easy to determine. Though the possessions of some of these Gilds were very considerable, yet they were all sequestered, and no part of them, that we know of applied to any public advantage, or real benefit to the community.[682]As it was with the sequestration of the possessions of the gild companies, so it was also with that of the possessions of ourconvents, or different religious orders. They were lavishly bestowedand thrown away on a certain royal minion, or court favourite, of the name ofEyre, from whom they soon passed into different hands as regardless as himself of the public welfare. Had a due regard been paid to the public good, these possessions might have been laid out, or applied, so as to form such foundations and establishments as might have proved of great and lasting benefit to the community, and amply compensate for any detriment that accrued to the lower ranks of society, or to the public morals, from the expulsion of the friars, or shutting up of their houses. But Henry was not the only sovereign of these realms who appeared more bent upon the gratification of his own caprice and waywardness than the promotion or advancement of the public weal.
Thepoorof this town must have sustained a most serious loss by the expulsion of the monks and friars and the sequestration of their revenues; which deprived them of their best friends, at whose houses they were entertained, not only with moral and religious instruction, but also with food for their bodies. For it is well known that the monasteries and convents were eminent for their hospitality, and furnished the poor with their chief support in those days. Thefriarsalso were very remarkable for the attention which they paid the poor and the rest of the common people, over whom they maintained no small influence, even in seasons of public commotion, distraction and anarchy. It is no wonder therefore that those of the lower orders long regretted their disappearance, and had songs composedto celebrate the superior felicity of the times when the country was honoured with their residence.[684a]
We know of buttwoperiods at which Lynn appears to have materially suffered from the circumstance of unoccupied orempty houses. One of those periods is the present, when the number of such houses amounts to some scores, owing to the extreme pressure of burdens brought upon the inhabitants by the inexcusable misdoings of some of their own townsmen.[684b]The otherperiod was at the reformation, or after the dissolution of the monasteries, when all the convents in this town with many chapels and other religious houses were shut up, and afterwards demolished; so that the people, for the most part, were left without places where they might attend public worship and receive religious instruction; which must have proved very unfavourable to the public morals, from its obvious and powerful tendency to deprave and barbarize those who were so situated.
Previously to the actual dissolution of the monasteries, &c. a formal surrender and resignation, and also aconfession, generally took place. This was solemnly declared to have been done voluntarily, though the contrary was well known to have been the fact. These deeds of surrender are still in being, with some also of the confessions; but most of them are said to have been destroyed in Mary’s reign: it being then, probably, in contemplation, if circumstances would admit, to restore those places to their former occupants.—The instruments or deeds of surrender from Lynn are supposed to be still extant in the Augmentation Office. But as the present writer has not seen them, he can only guess what their tenor was from such as have fallen in hisway, which he has met in Burnet’s History of the Reformation, and Martin’s History of Thetford.
The work last mentioned contains a copy of the surrender of the Dominican Convent at Thetford, addressed “To all the Faithful in Christ,” and solemnly declaring that “the Prior and Convent of the House or Priory commonly called The Black Friars and Convent of the same, with unanimous assent and consent, with minds deliberate, and with our free will and certain knowledge, and for certain just and reasonable causes, our souls and consciences in a special manner moving, freely and of our own accord have given, granted, and by these presents do give, grant and restore, release and confirm to the most illustrious prince, our lord Henry VIII, by the grace of God of England and France king, defender of the faith, lord of Ireland, and on earth supreme Head of the English church, all our said Priory or House called the Black Friars, in Thetford aforesaid, together with all and singular the messuages, gardens, tofts, lands, tenements, meadows, feeds, pastures, woods, rents, reversions, services, mills, &c. &c.”
This Surrender was dated 30. Henry VIII, and subscribed by thePrior Richard Cley,Robert Baldry,Edward Dyer,Edmund Palmer, and two more.—“Those mercenary monks (says Martin) were obliged by royal authority to resign what they valued most upon earth, and declare the will of their sovereign to be the motion of their own minds; whereas their possessions were extorted from them contrary to their wishesand inclinations. They acquired their wealth by hypocrisy, and parted with it under the influence of the same principle.”[687]But he should have remembered that hypocrisy of much the same sort was displayed by the corporations, or the different cities and boroughs, in the reign of James II, in the surrender of their respective charters: and the hypocrisy of the latter was perhaps much less excusable than that of the poor friars, because they were in much less peril.—The mayors and aldermen ran no risk of hanging, but several of the others were actually hanged, for refusing to surrender and play the hypocrites.
A copy of the Surrender of theCarmelitesin Stamford has been preserved by Burnet, and is as follows—
“Forasmuch as we the Prior and Friers of this House ofCarmelitesinStamford, commonly called the White Friers in Stamford, in the County ofLincoln, do profoundly consider that the perfection of Christian living doth not consist in some Ceremonies, wearing of a white Coat, disguising ourselves after strange fashions, dockying and becking, wearing Scapulars and Hoods, and other-like Papistical Ceremonies, wherein we have been most principally practised and noseled in times past; but the very true way to please God, and to live a true Christian Man, without all hyprocrisy and feigned dissimulation, is sincerely declared to us by our Master Christ, his Evangelists and Apostles; being minded hereafter to follow the same, conforming ourselves to the will and pleasure of our supreme Head,under God, on Earth, the King’s Majesty; and not to follow henceforth the superstitious traditions of any forinsecal potentate or power, with mutual assent and consent, do submit ourselves unto the mercy of our said Sovereign Lord, and with the Like mutual assent and consent do surrender,” &c.[688]—signed by the Prior and six Friers.
“Forasmuch as we the Prior and Friers of this House ofCarmelitesinStamford, commonly called the White Friers in Stamford, in the County ofLincoln, do profoundly consider that the perfection of Christian living doth not consist in some Ceremonies, wearing of a white Coat, disguising ourselves after strange fashions, dockying and becking, wearing Scapulars and Hoods, and other-like Papistical Ceremonies, wherein we have been most principally practised and noseled in times past; but the very true way to please God, and to live a true Christian Man, without all hyprocrisy and feigned dissimulation, is sincerely declared to us by our Master Christ, his Evangelists and Apostles; being minded hereafter to follow the same, conforming ourselves to the will and pleasure of our supreme Head,under God, on Earth, the King’s Majesty; and not to follow henceforth the superstitious traditions of any forinsecal potentate or power, with mutual assent and consent, do submit ourselves unto the mercy of our said Sovereign Lord, and with the Like mutual assent and consent do surrender,” &c.[688]—signed by the Prior and six Friers.
The poor monks and friars and nuns, previously to their expulsion, were forced to play the hypocrites and tell lies to save their necks, which was certainly very hard upon them. But rulers have seldom minded orcommiserated hardships of that sort. With whatever they ordain or impose they always expect a ready compliance, however unreasonable in itself, or however hard it may bear on the consciences of their subjects. The above religious orders, by falsely declaring that they surrendered voluntarily and of their own accord, saved their lives, but lost their livelihood. A few abbots &c. were provided for; but thousands of friars and nuns were turned out into the wide world pennyless; which must have been very inhuman and cruel. We are assured that the arts flourished in the convents to the last. Many of the abbots and other heads of houses had been terrified, persuaded, or bribed, as it is said, to surrender their trusts. Three only (those of Colchester, Reading and Glastonbury) resisted to the last, and fell by the hands of the executioner.[689]
With respect to Lynn, it does not appear that the heads of the houses or convents, or any of the brethren, made the least difficulty to surrender in the form and manner prescribed to them. They therefore ran no risk of the gallows: they saved their lives, but lost their living; for they were turned adrift and thrown uponthe wide world. Many of them, and of their fellow sufferers, had a pretty good chance of obtaining subsistence by their own ingenuity; for they had among them some excellent penmen, some notable carvers, some admirable embroiderers, some intelligent gardeners; and, in short, some that excelled in every useful art, and in all handycraft employments. There they had greatly the advantage of our modern clergy, many of whom, it is to be feared, know little beyond what appertains to the occupation of sportsmen or foxhunters, which would afford but a poor prospect of subsistence, if they had nothing else to depend upon.
Moreover, we must reckon among the most striking and memorable effects which the reformation had upon Lynn the very visible and degrading change it produced in the aspect or appearance of the town, reducing it, as it evidently did, to a most mean and paltry object, compared to what it was previously to that event. For the demolition and disappearance of so many stately edifices, which had long been the pride and boast of the inhabitants, must have had a most strange, humiliating and transforming effect upon the place, both with respect to its external aspect, or as it appeared without from the adjacent country, and also as it looked within, to those who passed through its streets, or observed it internally. It must have looked somewhat like a town that had undergone a close and successful siege, and which had been left half demolished and ruined by a victorious and exasperated enemy. In short, the present Lynn, or this town since the reformation,must have always made a far inferior, or much meaner figure than the former or papal Lynn, with its four large and stately convents, adorned with lofty towers, and ranged along the whole town from south to north. Besides them we must also reckon the Benedictine Priory, the convent of the friarsde Penitentia, the College, the churches or chapels of St. John, St. James, St. Catherine, St. Anne, those of our Lady at the Bridge and on the Mount, and undoubtedly other venerable structures, whose sites and very names are now forgotten and unknown.
In fine, there were perhaps not many towns in the kingdom, if indeed there were any at all, whose appearance underwent a greater change than this, at, and in consequence of the reformation. Had two persons, a papist and a protestant, who remembered the town in its former state, now visited and jointly surveyed it, one would have been apt to take up his lamentation and pronounceIchabod! its glory is departed! while the other would be no less apt exultingly to exclaim “Babylon is fallen, is fallen!”—But athirdperson, accustomed to view things with the eyes of a christian philosopher, would have given way to neither lamentation nor exultation, but would have considered the whole as the natural effect of a mighty revolution, and an additional proof of the changing and perishing nature of all human productions and sublunary magnificence.
History of Lynn for the first hundred years after the reformation; or rather, from the dissolution of the monasteries to the meeting of the long parliament and commencement of the civil wars.
In the preceding account of the immediate effects of the reformation upon this town little or nothing occurs that appears of a very pleasing or favourable nature. No symptoms are discernable of either moral or intellectual improvement. The town had become protestant, but superstition and ignorance still remained, and licentiousness and barbarism seemed rather to increase than diminish. The former religious functionaries or instructors were expelled, and they were succeeded by men less competent than themselves for the tuition or instruction of the people: and therefore it was not to be expected that the latter should be better taught, or further enlightened under their guidance and management. On the contrary, we may suppose them to have gone in a retrograde rather than in a progressive direction: and so it seems really to have happened. Infact, very little appears to have been done here of reformation work, or for the advancement of protestantism during the long period now under consideration, besides the expulsion of the monks and friars and demolition of their Houses. Of that little, some account shall be given in the following section.
Statement of the progress of protestantism,or of the most remarkable and memorable acts or works of reformation which took place at Lynn during the first century after its renunciation of the papal supremacy.
The first fruits of the reformation at Lynn seem to be the burning of the Dutchman before mentioned, and hanging, sometime after, a certain friar, of the name ofWilliam Gisborough. The former suffered for what was calledheresy, but we cannot find what the crime was that was laid to the charge of the latter. It seems most probable however, that it was denying the king’s spiritual supremacy, or maintaining that the pope, and not his majesty, was the supreme head of the church. This was a crime, or heresy, which Henry never would tolerate, after he had set up for himself in competition with the Roman pontiff, as a kind of antipope, or pontifex maximus of England. Many a luckless wight was put to death, during the latter part of his reign, for no other fault, or offence, but that of beingunconvinced of his majesty’s right and title to be on earth the supreme head of the English church. They could not, it seems, help their scruples; and therefore it was, surely, very hard and cruel to put them to death. But kings and courtiers are seldom disposed to be very tender, or shew much mercy to those who do not think well of their pretensions, however doubtful, unreasonable, or absurd they happen to be: and they come not unfrequently under one or other of these denominations.
InEdward’sreign, very little if any reformation work appears to have been carried on at Lynn. At his death we are told that Lord Audley came here and proclaimed Lady Jane Grey queen of England; which seems to imply that this town was favourable to her succession. However that was, her succession was frustrated, and she came soon after to an untimely and tragical end, though she appears to have been worthy of a better fate.—Marysucceeded; in whose reign the very name of reformation was exploded: its favourers were persecuted with the utmost rigour, hundreds of them suffered at the stake, and a still greater number fled their native country, and found an asylum in foreign parts, where they staid till the storm was blown over, or, in other words, till Mary was no more. She was succeeded by a sovereign that was more favourable to a certain description of reformation and reformers, though in other respects of an equally intolerant and unamiable character.
At the accession ofElizabeththe pope was again discarded, and her majesty assumed the character of reformer and supreme head of the church. The protestantexiles now returned home, and resumed the arduous task of reforming their countrymen, though from what is known to have been the conduct of too many of them while abroad, it would seem that they ought first of all to havereformed themselves. They rapidly obtained preferment in the church, and many of them were promoted to the vacant sees, some of whom soon became most bitter persecutors of the poor puritans and other protestant sectaries:—so little good effect had their former sufferings upon them, and so far was their experience of the bitterness of persecution from disposing them to refrain from being themselves concerned in the same bloody and detestable work.
The effect of the new order of things was soon felt at Lynn, and the inhabitants were furnished with convincing proofs that the new was once more to supersede and triumph over the old religion. In the first year of this queen’s reign, “the rood lofts,” we are told, “and the images that were upon them, were taken down from all the churches in this town.” There surely could be no great harm in this. The harm, if there was any, must lie in its being done before the people had been convinced of the inutility and impropriety of setting up such images and retaining them in their churches. The work certainly should have succeeded and not preceded the people’s conviction of its reasonableness and propriety.
At the same time, or in the course of the same year 1559 “The steps,” as we further learn, “were taken fromthe altars in this town, and the ground, at the upper, or east ends of all the churches levelled with that in the other parts of them.”—All this seems to have been a courtly or royal mode of reforming: for it appears to have been done before the inhabitants were convinced of its necessity, or knew any thing about the meaning of it. It was done, no doubt, by royal authority; and that is reason enough for any thing, in the eyes of most courtiers and statesmen. It was, however, a preposterous mode of proceeding, as it was beginning the work at the wrong end, and treating the people as if they had not been rational beings, but were to be brought under discipline and made to obey their masters or managers just like all other cattle. But mankind have been treated pretty much in the same way in all ages.
The year following, (1560,) “several gentlemen came here,” (as it is said,) “by order of the privy council, to take the state of St. James’s church, but were opposed and resisted by the corporation.” Whether the object of those gentlemen, in taking the state of the said church was to have it repaired and refitted for a place of worship, or something else, we are not told. If the former the corporation was probably to blame in resisting them, as there seemed to be need enough for an additional place of worship, if it was thought desirable that the inhabitants should more generally attend at such places. Nor is it very easy to conceive how the corporation durst resist them, if they were indeed authorised by Letters from the privy council to do what they proposed. In short, the circumstance is involved in too much obscurityand uncertainly to allow our hazarding any decided opinion upon it.
The next year, (1561,) “many popish relics and mass books are said to have been burnt here, in the market place.” This, probably, was also premature; being done, in all likelihood, before the inhabitants were sufficiently enlightened and satisfied of the inutility or perniciousness of those books and relicks. The articles thus destroyed were seemingly such as had belonged to this town, and had been, till then, carefully preserved here. It is not very clear that the destruction of them could be of any material advantage to the cause of the reformation: it only serves to shew the spirit and complexion of Elizabeth’s reforming system.—About seven years after the date of this last transaction, another very similar to it occurred here: for we are told under 1568, “This year several vestments, popish relics, strings of beads, and crucifixes, were brought from Tilney to Lynn, and burnt in the open market.” This seems to indicate that Tilney was a very noted place for that kind of ware before the reformation: but it was now, as we may suppose, entirely deprived of them, so as to be reduced, in that respect, upon a level with the rest of its neighbours. This, however, would not have signified much, had the people been carefully instructed and rationalized. But that really appears have been exceedingly and shamefully neglected at Lynn and the parts adjacent for a very long period after the accession of Elizabeth, as we shall endeavour to shew in the following Section.
Observations on the slow progress,or low state of protestantism,and of intellectual and moral improvement at Lynn during the period under consideration.
During no one part of the long century which we are now reviewing does it appear that this town had any great taste or desire for reformation. It was forced upon it at first, rather than sought for or desired; and it was submitted to out of pure loyalty, or profound deference to his majesty’s royal will and better judgment, as would, probably, have been the case had he appointed Mahomet, instead of the pope, or himself, to be the Head of the church. Be that as it might, it seems pretty evident that Lynn remained in a very dark and unimproved state from the era of the reformation till towards the middle of the seventeenth century, if not much longer. It bore indeed the name of a protestant town, but its faith, its morals, and its manners, appear not to have been at all superior, or more estimable than they were when it was a popish town, or remained under the papal jurisdiction. Thus it has often happened, that large communities as well as individuals have borne the honourable names of christians and protestants while they remained as far from the kingdom of heaven, or from the light and influence and spirit of the New Testament as the most superstitious romanists, or blindest heathens.
In the early part and near the commencement of this period,Baret, a native of this town, as was before mentioned, renouncing popery, embraced protestantism, andbecame a very laborious and famous preacher. But it was Norwich, and not Lynn that reaped the benefit of his labours; a pretty plain indication of the very low estimation in which eminent protestant preachers were then held among our ancestors. Had they highly appreciated the labours of such instructors, there can be little doubt but they would have invited and encouraged him to settle here: nor is it less probable that he would in that case have preferred his native town to any other place. But as there is not the least appearance of its being thought of getting him to settle here, it is very natural to conclude that Lynn was then no way zealous in the cause of reformation, and felt no kind of anxiety for introducing and establishing an able protestant ministry: and the same we presume continued to be the case for a very long season afterwards.
About the latter part of the reign of James I, or the beginning of that of his successor, the pious, learned, and memorableSamuel Faircloughbecame lecturer of this town: and he is the only protestant preacher that we know of among the Lynn clergy, during this long period, who set himself in good earnest, and with any prospect of success, about civilizing the town or reforming the inhabitants. But a host of enemies rose against him, which soon obliged him to desist and retire. The whole body ofpublicansandsinners, (and among the latter, without doubt, the manufacturers of strong beer, or thebrewers,[699]) became decidedly hostileto him; for it was found that great numbers of those who formerly used to spend their Sundays at the alehouses, now discontinued that practice, and attended Fairclough’s ministry. This was very alarming to the votaries of the great goddess Diana, of Lynn. Like the Ephesian craftsmen, they perceived that their beloved craft, by which they got their wealth, was in imminent danger, and therefore it was high time to bestir themselves, and make such an outcry and uproar against this troublesome preacher as would oblige him to desist and decamp.
What greatly promoted and insured the attainment of their wishes was, that the diocesan,Dr. Harsnett, with his spiritual (or rather diabolical) court took the same side. The other clergy of the town were also supposed, out of envy, to do the same, underhand. The pretext for this spiritual interference was, that the preacher did not use the sign of the cross in the ceremony of christening; which, however disorderly some might deem it, had certainly nothing in it of moral turpitude. Had the whole ceremony been omitted, as well as that idle appendage, there would have been, perhaps, no mighty loss to any body, except to the preacher himself, who, in that case, it may be supposed, would have sustained some loss. In short, this preacher of righteousness was driven away by the violence and threatening aspect of the opposition that had been raised against him, and which to him and friends appeared irresistible. He removed toClarein Suffolk, a more christianlike place, where, and in the adjacent parts, he long continuedeminently useful, as well as greatly and deservedly respected. The Lynn people by expelling him prolonged the duration of their own blindness and barbarism.
The fast ofLentrigidly enforced and strictly observed at Lynn to the very close of this period,a further proof of the dark and unreformed state of the town—additional observations.
That the observance ofLentwas rigorously enforced and religiously regarded here as late as the reign of Charles I, admits of no manner of doubt. None, but those whose cases absolutely required it, were allowed here to taste of flesh meat during all that season. In such caseslicenceswere applied for to the parish-minister, and obtained, provided the cases came well attested. But a strict charge was given not to exceed the bounds, or time, specified in the licence, without acquainting the minister, in order to have the licence renewed and continued. Of this we have sufficient evidence in the old parish-book of South Lynn, where, under the date of 1632, there is the following memorandum, in the hand writing of Mr.Man, who was then the minister of that parish.
“A Copy of a License for eating flesh in time of childbed, to the wife of goodman Sowell of South Lynn, blacksmyth, according to law, during the time of hersickness, granted the 14. of March 1633, and now eight dayes after, her sicknes still continuing, registered hereunder as followeth”—“Forasmuch as the wife of goodman Sowell of South Lynn (being a member of the Borough of King’s Lynn) in the county of Norfolk, blacksmith, now lying in childbed, is by the testimony of the midwife and her said husband and others, testified to me to be very weak and sick; these are therefore, upon her and friends very earnest request, so far as in me is, and according to the statute in that behalf provided, for the better recovery of her former health and strength again, to signify that by me the minister of the said parish, she is licensed, the time of Lent notwithstanding, to eat flesh: Always provided that the said license continue no longer in force than only for the time of this her present sicknes: And if this her present sicknes shall continue above the space of eight days next after the date hereof, that then I be certified thereof further to perform and do therein as law requireth. In witness whereof the day and year above written I have hereunto sett my hand and sealeBy me John Man cler. minister ibid:[702a]In the presence of me Tho. Lilly churchwarden.”[702b]
“A Copy of a License for eating flesh in time of childbed, to the wife of goodman Sowell of South Lynn, blacksmyth, according to law, during the time of hersickness, granted the 14. of March 1633, and now eight dayes after, her sicknes still continuing, registered hereunder as followeth”—
“Forasmuch as the wife of goodman Sowell of South Lynn (being a member of the Borough of King’s Lynn) in the county of Norfolk, blacksmith, now lying in childbed, is by the testimony of the midwife and her said husband and others, testified to me to be very weak and sick; these are therefore, upon her and friends very earnest request, so far as in me is, and according to the statute in that behalf provided, for the better recovery of her former health and strength again, to signify that by me the minister of the said parish, she is licensed, the time of Lent notwithstanding, to eat flesh: Always provided that the said license continue no longer in force than only for the time of this her present sicknes: And if this her present sicknes shall continue above the space of eight days next after the date hereof, that then I be certified thereof further to perform and do therein as law requireth. In witness whereof the day and year above written I have hereunto sett my hand and seale
By me John Man cler. minister ibid:[702a]In the presence of me Tho. Lilly churchwarden.”[702b]
The duty of the Lynn Clergy must have been much greater then, especially during the time of Lent, than it is at present; for it may be supposed that these applications for licences were not few or unfrequent: and if they were obliged to do this work for nothing, it must have been still harder upon them. However that was, this practice seems to have continued till the civil wars broke out, or till the town was besieged and taken by the Earl of Manchester, when it was strongly garrisoned by the parliament, and made to undergo a civil as well as religious reformation. This appears to have been the greatest and most thorough reformation this town ever underwent, or experienced; at least, since the days of Henry VIII: for the long parliament, like his majesty, seldom did things by halves, but generally carried on with energy and effect whatever they took earnestly in hand.
It may very safely be concluded that the religious observance of Lent was discontinued at Lynn from the time referred to till therestoration, when it seems to have been again revived, both here and throughout the kingdom, among all true churchmen. For it appears to have been one of those choice and invaluable blessings which Charles II, (thatmost sacred, andmost religioussovereign, as his bishops and clergy used to call him,) restored to us at his return from exile. Accordingly, we find, by the public prints and records of that period, that his majesty from the beginning of his reign, or first arrival, was attentive to this point. Amongother plain indications of this is a striking passage in theMercurius Publicus, of February 21, 1661, (a flaming weekly court paper of that time,) which is worded as follows.
“London Feb. 16.—We are commanded to give Notice of a malicious Slander against the good government of the city of London for observation of Lent according to law and hisMajestiesProclamation: some malecontents suggesting that the company ofFishmongershave confessed they are not able to supply the market with fish sufficient for this occasion; (and therefore that the late proclamation will be recalled) which is so false and bottomles a fiction that the most vigilant Lord Maior hath assured the Lords of hisMajestiesPrivy Council how the company of fishmongers do not only undertake to furnish the market with plenty and variety of good and wholesome fish, but to sell fish cheaper by twopence in a shilling; which is more than sufficient to stop the mouths of all that are averse to our good and wholesome laws (made upon so long experience, and so necessary for the common good and safety of this Island) which yet deprive none of the benefit of dispensation, whose condition really requires other dyet, such as are aged, or infants, women with child, sick persons, and such whose health and constitution is known to be prejudiced by continuall eating fish; for all whom the Law hath provided Licences and Dispensations to eat Flesh.”[704]
“London Feb. 16.—We are commanded to give Notice of a malicious Slander against the good government of the city of London for observation of Lent according to law and hisMajestiesProclamation: some malecontents suggesting that the company ofFishmongershave confessed they are not able to supply the market with fish sufficient for this occasion; (and therefore that the late proclamation will be recalled) which is so false and bottomles a fiction that the most vigilant Lord Maior hath assured the Lords of hisMajestiesPrivy Council how the company of fishmongers do not only undertake to furnish the market with plenty and variety of good and wholesome fish, but to sell fish cheaper by twopence in a shilling; which is more than sufficient to stop the mouths of all that are averse to our good and wholesome laws (made upon so long experience, and so necessary for the common good and safety of this Island) which yet deprive none of the benefit of dispensation, whose condition really requires other dyet, such as are aged, or infants, women with child, sick persons, and such whose health and constitution is known to be prejudiced by continuall eating fish; for all whom the Law hath provided Licences and Dispensations to eat Flesh.”[704]
Here Charles appears in the character of areligious king, to which he, of all men living, had, perhaps, the least pretension. Yet his bishops and clergy unblushingly gave him that title, and would frequently mention him, even in their addresses to the Deity himself, under the same appellation, and under one still stronger—“Ourmostreligious king!” So much for the bishops and clergy of those days. But it was inScotlandthat his majesty’sreligiousandreformingcharacter, at least in respect to the strict observance of Lent, was exhibited in the most striking light. This may be inferred from the following curious document in the above mentioned Court-newspaper of Feb. 26. 1662, which, though somewhat extraneous and out of place, the author hopes the reader will excuse his introducing it here, as he knew of no fitter place for its insertion.
“Edinburgh12. Febr. 1662.—Forasmuch as the not keeping of Lent and Fish days, conform to several Acts of Parliament and late Act of Council of the sixth ofFebruary1662, hath been occasioned by not exacting the penalties therein contained from the contraveeners, who, upon hopes of impunity, may still continue disobey the saids Acts, to the great prejudice of the kingdom: Therefore the Lords of his Majesties PrivyCouncil have thought fit to cause intimat publickly at the Mercat Cross ofEdinburgh, that none presume nor take upon hand to contraveen the saids Acts; with certification if they failize, the pains and penalties therein contained shall be exacted with all rigour: and that they will crave an account of all Magistrates and other Ministers of Justice, who are intrusted to procure obedience to the saids Acts, and give notice of the offendors within their respective bounds, as they will be answerable; and for that effect to cause, of new again, intimat the aforesaid Act; whereof the tenor follows—The Lords of His Majesties Privy Councill taking to their consideration the greatest advantage and profit will redound to all the Leiges of this kingdome, by keeping the time of Lent and the weekly Fish dayes,viz. Wednesday,Friday, andSaturday, and discharging of all persons to eat any flesh, during that time and upon the saids dayes; or to kill or sell in the Marcats any sort of Fleshes which are usually brought at other times, whereby the young brood and store will be preserved; so that hereafter the hazard of scarcity and dearth may be prevented, and the fishes, which by the mercy of God, abound in the salt and fresh waters of this kingdome, may be made use of for the food and entertainment of the Lieges, to the profit and encouragment of many poor families who live by fishing; the improvement whereof hath not been looked to these many years by gone, which hath been occasioned by the universal allowance of eating flesh and keeping of Mercats at all ordinary times without any restraint, against which many laudable Laws and Acts of Parliament have been made, prohibitingthe eating flesh during the said time of Lent or upon the saids Fishdays, under the pains therein contained. Therefore, Ordains and Commands, that the time of Lent, for this year, and yearly hereafter, shall begin and be kept as before the year of God 1640, and that the saids weekly Fishdays be strictly observed in all time coming. And that no subject of whatsoever rank, quality or degree (except they have a special Licence) presume to eat any flesh during the said time of Lent, or upon the saids three weekly Fishdayes; and that no Butchers, Cooks, or Hostlers, kill, make ready or sell any flesh, either publickly in Mercats or privately in their own houses, during the said time or upon the saids dayes, under the penalties following, to be exacted with all rigour,viz.For the first fault 10l; for the second 20l; and for the third fault 40l; and so to be multiplied according to the oft contraveening of the said Act, to be exacted and payed, the one half to the king’s Majesty, and the other half to the delators. Likeas, for the surer exacting of the said pains, they give power and warrand to all Magistrates within Burghs, and all Sheriffs, Stewards, and Bailies within their several Jurisdictions, to enquire after the contraveeners and to pursue them before the Lords of Privy Council, or such others as shall be appointed or delegat for that effect. And ordains Heraulds, Macers, or Messengers at Arms, to make publication hereof at the Mercat Cross ofEdinburgh, and other places needful, and that these presents be printed that none pretend ignorance.Pet. Wedderburne Cl. Sti. Concillii.”
“Edinburgh12. Febr. 1662.—Forasmuch as the not keeping of Lent and Fish days, conform to several Acts of Parliament and late Act of Council of the sixth ofFebruary1662, hath been occasioned by not exacting the penalties therein contained from the contraveeners, who, upon hopes of impunity, may still continue disobey the saids Acts, to the great prejudice of the kingdom: Therefore the Lords of his Majesties PrivyCouncil have thought fit to cause intimat publickly at the Mercat Cross ofEdinburgh, that none presume nor take upon hand to contraveen the saids Acts; with certification if they failize, the pains and penalties therein contained shall be exacted with all rigour: and that they will crave an account of all Magistrates and other Ministers of Justice, who are intrusted to procure obedience to the saids Acts, and give notice of the offendors within their respective bounds, as they will be answerable; and for that effect to cause, of new again, intimat the aforesaid Act; whereof the tenor follows—The Lords of His Majesties Privy Councill taking to their consideration the greatest advantage and profit will redound to all the Leiges of this kingdome, by keeping the time of Lent and the weekly Fish dayes,viz. Wednesday,Friday, andSaturday, and discharging of all persons to eat any flesh, during that time and upon the saids dayes; or to kill or sell in the Marcats any sort of Fleshes which are usually brought at other times, whereby the young brood and store will be preserved; so that hereafter the hazard of scarcity and dearth may be prevented, and the fishes, which by the mercy of God, abound in the salt and fresh waters of this kingdome, may be made use of for the food and entertainment of the Lieges, to the profit and encouragment of many poor families who live by fishing; the improvement whereof hath not been looked to these many years by gone, which hath been occasioned by the universal allowance of eating flesh and keeping of Mercats at all ordinary times without any restraint, against which many laudable Laws and Acts of Parliament have been made, prohibitingthe eating flesh during the said time of Lent or upon the saids Fishdays, under the pains therein contained. Therefore, Ordains and Commands, that the time of Lent, for this year, and yearly hereafter, shall begin and be kept as before the year of God 1640, and that the saids weekly Fishdays be strictly observed in all time coming. And that no subject of whatsoever rank, quality or degree (except they have a special Licence) presume to eat any flesh during the said time of Lent, or upon the saids three weekly Fishdayes; and that no Butchers, Cooks, or Hostlers, kill, make ready or sell any flesh, either publickly in Mercats or privately in their own houses, during the said time or upon the saids dayes, under the penalties following, to be exacted with all rigour,viz.For the first fault 10l; for the second 20l; and for the third fault 40l; and so to be multiplied according to the oft contraveening of the said Act, to be exacted and payed, the one half to the king’s Majesty, and the other half to the delators. Likeas, for the surer exacting of the said pains, they give power and warrand to all Magistrates within Burghs, and all Sheriffs, Stewards, and Bailies within their several Jurisdictions, to enquire after the contraveeners and to pursue them before the Lords of Privy Council, or such others as shall be appointed or delegat for that effect. And ordains Heraulds, Macers, or Messengers at Arms, to make publication hereof at the Mercat Cross ofEdinburgh, and other places needful, and that these presents be printed that none pretend ignorance.
Pet. Wedderburne Cl. Sti. Concillii.”
The above may serve as a sample of the manner in which that father of his people, king Charles II, managed, disciplined, and educated his Caledonian children. It was severe enough; but he sometimes far exceeded this specimen of his paternal attention; especially when he had some of the most obstreperous of those children of hishunted with bloodhounds, like wild beasts. This, as we learn from Laing’s excellent History of Scotland, was sometimes actually the case in that memorable reign. Having been naturally led to these digressions by the circumstance of the strict and religious observance of Lent in this town till near the middle of the 17th century, (which shews the small progress protestantism had made here down to that period,) we shall now resume the thread of our history.
Observations on other occurrences relating to Lynn during the period under consideration.
Lynn appears to have been several times visited, during this period, by the plague and other destructive diseases; and there is great reason to be thankful that it has not in more modern times experienced the like awful visitations. In 1540 the town is said to have been so severely afflicted with hot burning agues, (or intermittent fevers) and fluxes, that no Mart was kept here that year; which shews that the disorder must haveraged to a terrible degree, and proved a most severe scourge to the town. Theplaguealso was here three or four different times within this period. The last of them was in 1636, when it raged so violently and dreadfully that the markets were discontinued, and wooden houses or sheds were set up under the town-walk for the reception of the diseased, especially those of the poorer sort. It must have been a most awful season, and the present generation ought to rejoice in having escaped such calamities.—In 1598 also there was here a very great and destructive sickness: but it is not said of what sort or description it was: only we are told, that the mortality was so great, fromMarchtoJuly, that three hundred and twenty persons were buried in St. James’s Church Yard. To whatever cause it is to be ascribed, it seems to be a fact, that this town has been much healthier for the last 140 years than it was during the period of which we are now treating. There is a natural cause, no doubt, for that difference, though it may not be a very easy matter, perhaps, to discover it, or point it out.
It may be here further observed, that it was within this period the parish of All-Hallows, or All Saints, otherwiseSouth Lynn, became a part or member of this Borough; being before a separate parish or hamlet, subject to the jurisdiction of the sheriff of the county. This union, or incorporation was first effected in 1546, by aLicencefrom the king, and afterwards fully confirmed by theCharterof Philip and Mary, in the fourth year of their reign. From that period it has ever beenunder the jurisdiction of the mayor, as an integral or indivisible part of the borough. Yet it has been long after, (if not down quite to our time,) treated by the corporation somewhat like a step-daughter, or as regular governments (as they are called,) are too apt to treat ceded or conquered places. Of this some remarkable instances have occurred at different times, and especially in the reign of Charles II, when the South Lynnians were very wrongfully involved in a most vexatiouslaw-suitwith the mayor and corporation, about theLong Bridge, which ended unfavourably to the latter, as has been also the case with our corporation law-suits, not unfrequently since that period. The above cause was tried at Thetford in 1672 before Sir Matthew Hale, who was exceedingly severe on the conduct of the mayor and corporation in that affair.
Many events are mentioned as having occurred at Lynn, during this period, of whose circumstances we are left very much in the dark: among them are the following—in 1562,Sir Nicholas Le Strange(according to one old MS.) “began a suit against Lynn for the House of Corpus Christi:” but we are not told either where that house stood, or what was the ground of that knight’s claim to it, or yet how the suit terminated.—In 1567 St. Margaret’s spire is said to have been shot down by a Dutch ship that then lay in the harbour, as were also several little crosses and ornaments on different parts of the church.” But we cannot learn how all this happened; whether designedly, or otherwise, or what was its result. In 1575Henry Wodehouse, vice admiralof Norfolk is said to have arrested two Fly-Boats at Lynn, by process, which he delivered to the mayor, who refusing to serve them, brought great trouble on himself and several others.” This also is related so baldly, that it is impossible to form any adequate idea of the affair. Of much the same sort is what we read under 1587, “SirRobert Southwell, being admiral of Norfolk, with several commissioners and justices, sat at Lynn and held a court of admiralty, at which sixteenpirateswere condemned, and most of them executed atGannock.” It is in vain we enquire into the particular case or circumstantial history of those pirates: all we can learn is that there were so many then tried and condemned here, and thatGannockwas in the mean time the place of execution.
The following Lynn occurrences of this period are somewhat more luminous than the preceding ones. In 1576 queen Elizabeth visited Norwich; but it does not appear that her majesty deigned to honour Lynn with her royal presence. The corporation, however, went to meet her majesty. It is not said where, but we may suppose it to have been at Norwich, where her highness appears to have made some stay. At that interview, wherever it took place, our corporation presented their gracious sovereign with “arich purse, finely wrought with pearl and gold, containingan hundred old angels of gold;” the whole valued at 200l.a sum equal, perhaps, to 2 or 3,000l.of our money. This, no doubt, was very handsome, and a proof of the sterling loyalty,as well as of the wealth and liberality of our corporation. What our virgin queen thought of this specimen of Lynn loyalty and homage, we are not told: but if the same had been done to her renowned grandfather, Henry VII, when he visited this town, we may be very sure that it would have proved highly acceptable and gratifying, as he is well known to have been a most ardent lover of money. His grand-daughter was in some things very different from him. Nor are we quite certain, though the gift was very handsome, that her majesty did not on this occasion laugh in her sleeve at the vanity and ostentation of the donors, who appear to have given her too much reason for so doing. She is also understood as not entertaining, in general, a very exalted opinion of the sagacity of her corporations, or the wisdom of the ruling and leading men of her cities and boroughs, who in her different excursions would sometimes sadly expose their folly, and excite in no small degree her contempt and derision.[712]
In, or about 1582, it is said, “that certain lusty young fellows began to set up ringing again, which for sometime had been disused; divers of the aldermen, meaning to silence them, occasioned a great disturbance, which turned to the mayor’s disadvantage, and was the cause of spending a great deal of money.” For aught we know, the mayor and aldermen might be very right on this occasion. Where there is a great deal of ringing it is certainly a very serious nuisance to the inhabitants, especially those who live near the steeples.—It is probable that thoselusty young fellowsbelonged to some wealthy families, which enabled them to make so effectual a stand against the mayor and aldermen. Be that as it might, this circumstance may serve to shew what serious results may proceed from very frivolous causes, and how easily a parcel of idle fellows may sometimes disturb the tranquillity of a whole town, and bring every thing into the utmost confusion.
In 1587 thewife of one John Wankerand thewidow Porkerwere bothcartedhere forwhoredom: and wefurther learn, that the sin of whoredom was deemed so detestable then, both at Lynn, and Norwich, that whoever were guilty of it were publickly exposed fastened to a cart and driven through the whole town.—This must be highly honourable to the moral character of both places at that period, and furnishes a favourable idea of the state of society here in the mean time. But alas! how very different must have been the character of Lynn then, from what it is at present, when it is said to abound with that sort of sinners more than any other place of its size, and when that vice seems no longer detested, or thought to have any moral pravity or turpitude attached to it: and as to the interference of magistrates, that seems to be entirely out of the question. After all, it seems to be a fact, that the unexampled burdens under which the people now lie, have contributed in no small degree to bring things to this sad pass.
The year 1558 was rendered remarkable in the annals of this town, by anorder, as it is called, which was then made, “that on every firstMondayin the Month there should be a meeting at a certain house, consisting of the Mayor, some of the aldermen and common Council-men, and the preachers, in order to settle peace and quietness between man and man, and to decide all manner of controversies: and it was called,The Feast of Reconciliation.”—This certainly looks well, and seems to reflect honour on the memory of the projector or projectors of it, as well as those who afterwards devoted their time for so useful and laudable a purpose. It iscertainly much to be wished that every town and district was furnished with a similar institution; which, if properly conducted, would not fail to prove of very important benefit to the community. This therefore is here recorded as forming a favourable trait in the character of the magistrates and ministers of this town in the latter part of the reign of Elizabeth.—But, alas! those very people, at the same time, were persecuting, burning, and hanging, (and we may add,murdering) poor ignorant, friendless and harmless old creatures, under the name of witches!—Of this very dark shade, (which together with the preceding favourable trait exhibit so deplorable an inconsistency of character,) we shall take some further notice hereafter.
In the next reign, (that ofJamesI,) the obtaining of a royal Charter, and the recovery of the alienated revenues and possessions belonging to the Gaywood hospital, (of the latter of which we have spoken already) seem to have constituted the principal and most memorable transactions that appertain to this history. Besides which scarce any thing occurred worthy of being here recorded, unless it be the erection or establishment (in 1617) of aLibraryin the Vestry ofSt. Nicholas’s Chapel: which appears to have been the first institution of the kind in this town since the dissolution of the convents.[715]So that for about eighty years, or ever since thereformation, the character of the town as a literary, or bookish place, must have been at a miserable low ebb. We need not wonder therefore at the extreme ignorance that seemed to have prevailed here in the mean time. This library is said to have been founded by the mayor, burgesses, &c. The library in St. Margaret’s Church is said not to have been founded till about fourteen years after. How extensively useful these bibliothecal collections proved we have not the means of ascertaining. At any rate, they were creditable to those by whom they were projected and promoted.
Upon the accession ofCharlesI, one of the first and most remarkable circumstances that appear to have occurred here was theerection of St. Anne’s Fort, on which were mounted, as we are told, “several great pieces of ordnance, sent from London and planted here for the defence of the town.” This some, perhaps, would be apt to construe as ominous of the subsequent troubles of that reign, of which this town appears to have had its full share: for having declared against the parliament, it was by their forces closely besiegedand taken, and afterwards laid under contribution, and strongly garrisoned. As to theFort, we cannot find that it proved of any material use to the town in that time of danger: nor does it appear to have been ever calculated for the defence and protection of the place, or for any other purpose but to please little or full-grown children, who are naturally fond of ribands and rattles.[717]
A view of the Pilot Office, St. Ann’s Battery etc. Published Dec.r 1809 by W. Whittingham, Lynn
About the beginning of 1637, “an order came from the archbishop (Laud) to this town, that the ground at the east end of the churches should be raised; the communion table (or altar) placed at the upper end of the churches, under the east windows; and that they be decently railed in, and steps made to ascend thereto.”—This was evidently undoing what Elizabeth and her reformers had done at the beginning of her reign; for the ground at the upper or east end of the churches was then ordered, as we have seen, to be levelled with that in the other parts of them. That queen and her prelates were certainly quite high enough in their notions about these matters, and yet we see that they come not nearly up to Charles and Laud. Neither of these had any dislike to popery, provided they could be themselves at the head of it. Nor would it be a very easy matter to point out the time when the spirit of popery was more predominant, than it was in the church of Englandin the detestable reign of the first Charles, and under the vile administration and superintendence of archbishop Laud. The latter was a sworn and mortal enemy to both civil and religious liberty, as the whole tenor of his conduct shews. In short, he was no less superstitious, than intolerant, tyrannical, and cruel, as this order which he sent to Lynn, and many other parts of his conduct clearly evince: and he may be very safely said to have contributed largely to accelerate the ruin of the cause which he had espoused, and the downfal of the church of which he was unworthily the chief metropolitan.