CHAP. V.

That the election for the members sent to the 3rd protectoral parliament (that of 1656,) was managed by the corporationsolelyseems pretty evident from the following note in the town books—

“1656. August 18th. This day general John Desborow and major general Philip Skippon are chosenin this houseto serve as burgesses for this borough in his Highness next parliament upon the 17th September next, according to a precept directed to Mr Mayor from the Sherife, and ordered thattheir charges be paid by this House.”

In the election of the members who represented Lynn in the protectorRichard’sparliament thecorporationappear to have exercised the same arbitrary power as before, of beingsole electors. Several of the other freemen at the same time desired permission to poll, but were not allowed. At the election which took place in April 1660 the freemen again applied for permission to vote which, after some hesitation, was acceded to, and the members were then chosen by thegeneral bodyof free burgesses.[769]

Thus we see how things formerly stood in this town, as to the state of political liberty, or the freedom of election. Former times appear not to have been verypure in those respects, any more than the present. In looking to our ancestors for much political rectitude or public virtue, we are often most sadly disappointed. It is now frequently made a subject of complaint or reflection, that our present members are chosen, in fact, by two or three individuals; but the same seems to have been almost always the case ever since the reformation, and revolution, as well as before. The freemen at large are indeedsaidto have avoicein the election of our members; but it is all a joke, while freedom of acting, or voting without constraint or control is totally out of the question. It is well known at what risk most of our pretendedfreemenwould vote freely at our elections,and how much it has cost some of them before now for presuming so to do. All this however must be very wrong, if our constitution ought to be in practice what is it in theory.

Maintenance of the clergy—state of the public morals and manners—mode and progress of reformation at Lynn,under the Common-wealth and Protectorate.

Of the Lynn clergy during this period Dr.Arrowsmithand Mr.Hornappear to have been by much the most eminent. The former we think was one of the ministers of St. Margaret’s parish. That his character, as a divine, stood very high, appears from his being appointed one of the Assembly of Divines, which was convened in 1643, and which appointment put an end probably to his residence here. He became afterwards Master of Peter-House in Cambridge. Mr. Horn must have settled here after the departure of Dr. Arrowsmith; not as his successor, however; for he was the minister ofSouth Lynn, and held that situation till after the restoration, when we find him among thosetwo thousandworthies, commonly called the “Ejected Ministers.” As minister of Alhallows or South Lynn, he laid his income at 80l.a year, a sum equal to 5 or 600l.atleast, of our money. This comfortable situation and ample income he gave up, to preserve a good conscience; an instance and a proof of integrity which must endear his memory to all honest and good men.

The clergy of St. Margaret’s parish had probably as good an income as their brother of Alhallows, but the exact amount of theirs we have not the means of ascertaining. But in the town-books there is the following memorandum dated December 18. 1637 “Lionell Gatford minister to have 50l.yearly and a dwelling house, provided he agree not to meddle in the election of church wardens or parish clark.”—This 50l.was equal to 3 or 400 of our pounds, so that the liberality of the corporation to their minister at that period must have far exceeded what we understand it to be at present. As the said 50l.was over and above, or exclusive of the vicarial dues, and what we call surplice fees, the minister’s income must have been what may be called very decent and handsome at the period of which we are now treating.

After this town had been reduced under the dominion of the parliament it soon began to put on a religious and puritanical appearance. The publicans and those who frequented their houses were now obliged to be very particularly upon their guard, and at their peril to observe a decency of behaviour. Those who were guilty oftipplingwere fined, as were also theoccupiersof the public houses where those offences were committed.Profane swearingwas also punished in like manner, as well asloiteringin the time of divine service on the Lord’s day.[774a]A strict attention to these matters began to be paid by the magistrates very shortly after the reduction of the town; and they appear to have pursued the same course pretty regularly thenceforward till the restoration. The town accordingly, soon assumed a decorous and respectable appearance. It was no longer disgraced as before by drunkenness, riot, or profane swearing. In fact, it was in a manner regenerated; and might with a good deal of propriety be denominated achristian town. TheLord’s Daywas observed with remarkable decorum and solemnity; and on theThursdays, inlecture time, theshopswere keptshut up, to the end the people and their servants might the better attend the hearing the word of God.[774b]On the whole, this town appears to have been for the greatest part of this period as well governed as at any one time either before or afterwards.

The love oftipplingappears to have been then in Lynn one of the greatest obstacles to the reformation of the people. The town was full of petty pot-houses, a great many of which were private and unlicensed. Even as late as 1657 we find no less than 40 or 50 of these private and unlawful places of resort heavily fined by the magistrates. This was, at the time, complained of, as a grievous oppression, and is so still represented in some of the existing MS. accounts of that period; which shews how unwilling the people were to forsake their immoralities, tho’ their rulers obliged them to do so outwardly. The restoration followed soon after, and we need not wonder that the profaneness and profligacy, then introduced andrestored, proved highly acceptable and pleasing to the majority of the Lynn people, who now found themselves pretty well freed from most of the former troublesome checks upon immorality and licentiousness.

Of the persevering exertions of our magistrates, during this period, to check the prevailing propensity of the lower orders to tippling, profane swearing, and the like irregularities, many instances occur in our old records. Of several of those instances, in 1644, some notice has been taken already. Others are recorded as having occurred in 1645,[775]but a far greater number in the followingyear, (1646,)[776]which seems to indicate the uncommon zeal and vigilance of the then chief magistrate, or chief magistrates, for they seem to have occurredpartly in the mayoralty ofEdward Robinson, and partly (but chiefly) in that ofThomas Toll, one of the members for the town, who appears to have stood high here then in the public estimation.

In some of the succeeding years the attention of our magistrates appears to have been no less engaged in these corrective measures. 1651 was one of those years.Bartholemew Wormellwas then mayor; at least for the first nine months of it; and he seems to have trod pretty much in the steps of his brotherToll. The offences that came under his cognisance seem to have exceeded in number rather than fallen short of those committed during the mayoralty of the latter. They were of various sorts; such asswearing,tippling,excessive drinking,keeping unlicensed alehouses,travelling on the Lord’s day,&c.By the distance between one and another of the years of remarkable delinquency and coercion, it would seem that the irregularities were checked for a time, but would afterwards break out afresh, with increasing force, like water pent up, or impeded in its course by a dam. At the distance of five or six years the vigorous interference of the magistrates appears always to have become necessary. 1645, 1651, and 1657, were the most remarkable years for the interposition of the municipal power to correct the existing abuses.

The last of those years (1657) was exceedingly remarkable for the number of petty pot-houses, or private drinking places then discovered in the town. They amounted seemingly tonear fifty, for such a number of persons appear to have been then fined, “for selling beer without licence.” Vice seems to have then skulked into those places of private resort, and no longer cared to shew its face in public. Most of our misdoings appear to have been then confined to those petty and private pot-houses, and but one misdeed occurs within that year which would seem to have been committed elsewhere; and the same is recorded in these words—“Received of Mr. James Davey, which he levied upon an offender for prophaneing the Lord’s day, 10s.”—In short, one cannot help concluding that the town was then, in point of outward decency, much superior to what it is in the present day. We are not quite sure that there were then anycommon brewerieshere: and if there were, it is not probable that they were theproperty of magistrates.

Nor did the improvement which then took place in the town consist merely in the outward deportment or appearance of the inhabitants, but it seems to have also extended to the temper and disposition of a great many of them; as appears from the numerous acts of humanity and deeds of charity which are found to have been then promoted and performed here, beyond any preceding or subsequent period that we know of. The sufferings and distresses of their fellow creatures, far and near, at home and abroad, were then viewed, or listened to, at Lynnwith sympathetic and commiserating attention, as is evinced by the numerous collections which then took place here for the relief of such sufferers and objects of distress and misery. The statement below in referencechieflyto the years 1653 and 1654, will give the reader some idea of the good character of our ancestors at the time of which we are treating.[779]—In short, we knownot of any period when Lynn abounded more than it did then, in acts of charity and humanity, in works of mercy and fruits of righteousness; or when it made, on the whole, a more christian-like appearance: notwithstanding the immoral propensities of many of the inhabitants, and the adherence of not a few of the rest to superstitious or fanatical delusions.

Miscellaneous remarks,or a cursory view of divers other matters relating to this town,within,or about the same period.

Nothing, perhaps, exhibits more strikingly the wide difference between that time and the present, than the then defective state ofpostage, or letter-carriage, between this town and London. Had any one then foretold that we should ever have a mail-coach or mail-cart, or any other conveyance to bring letters from London, or carry them thitherdaily, it would have passed as an idle tale, no more credible or probable than bishop Wilkins’ notion or supposition of the probability of future intercourse between our world and the moon. The former fact,however, has been realized. But at the period of which we are speaking Letters used to arrive here from London or were conveyed thither from this townonce a week, and that by a foot messenger.

Accordingly we have the following article, or memorandum in the corporation books, No. 8. under the year 1638, 9—“Feb. 11th. Richard Harrison and Richard Smith are chosen to be twofoot postsfor this town of Lynn to London interchangeably by turns every week, and to have 30s.each, from the town, per annum.” From the then mode of carrying on trade one may easily conceive that the intercourse between the two places was very small, and the letters conveyed to and fro very few, compared to what is the case at present. But the wages or salary of these postmen is not a little remarkable:—sixty shillingsa year for going afoot every week to London! Neither the generosity nor even the justice of the town seems to shine here. Who would undertake such a service now forsixty guineasa year? Yet we are not sure that theshillingof that time was altogether as valuable as ourguinea. It must however have been pretty nearly so: and within our own memory, even in this best of reigns, theguinea’s valuehas been reduced toseven shillings, if not lower. But on this subject we need not to enlarge.

In 1642 a measure was adopted, in theHall, which must needs be creditable to the memory of its then members. The affair is thus expressed in the corporation books, under that year, or rather in thebook of Extractsbefore mentioned—“October 9th. Ordered that theChartersshall be read by the town-clerk,in English, thatthose of this Housemay thebetter understand what they are sworn to maintain.” This seems very reasonable and very right, and indicates something like an earnest wish in the body corporate to avoidperjury, and to act conscientiously and honorably in their official capacities, or as municipal functionaries. How expedient it might beat this present timeto have a motion made in the Hall to the same effect, or to have a similar measure adopted there, it is not for us to determine. But we cannot help suspecting that some, if not the majority of our present corporate body are to the full as ignorant of the contents of their charters, and of what they aresworn to maintain, as ever their predecessors were, who adapted the measure, or passed the order in question.

Our body corporate at the period of which we are treating, and long after, entertained very different ideas on some points from those of their successors of the present day: and that difference was not, perhaps, more remarkable on any point than on the course to be taken with such of their own members, or brethren, whoceased to be residentsin the town, or becameabsentees. Formerly thenon-residenceof members was on no account allowed, or connived at.Aldermen,common-council-men, and even therecorder, as well as town-clerk and chamberlain, were required to be all residents: and whenever they ceased to be so, or happened to become absentees, they were always forthwith discharged, or cut off, as rotten and useless members. The necessityof this our corporation used formerly to insist upon, as what a due regard for the good government and prosperity of the town, as well as the very nature of their respective oaths and offices rendered indispensible. In short, it seemed to be their unanimous and invariable opinion that the nonresidence of any one of their fraternity was insufferable, and inconsistent with both honour and honesty, and of course with the character of agentleman.

Their successors of the present time view the subject in another and a very different light. Our absentees are now very numerous, and seem to be daily on the increase. They consist already of severalaldermenandcommon council men, with therecorderhimself at their head—[783]allhonourable men, no doubt: though we cannot help suspecting that their predecessors, of other times, would have bestowed upon them another and a somewhat more degrading appellation, and especially uponthe rest of the brotherhoodwho quietly suffer their nonresidence, or allow them to retain their membershipwhile they remain absentees. It is now a common complaint, that, owing to these absentees, the corporation business is much obstructed, so that it is often very difficult, and sometimes impossible to get what is calleda Hall: yet no one, it seems, has the honesty, or the courage to move for the expulsion of those worse than useless members, as would always have been the case heretofore. This obvious symptom of declension and depravity in this corporation, may serve, perhaps, to illustrate what is said to be also actually the case on our great national theatre, or throughout the empire.

How these matters, or this case, stood formerly will appear from the following samples, out of the corporation books—“February 17th (1644, 5) This day it is agreed by order of this House, that Gregory Turnall, late one of the common-councell here, by reason of hisabsenting himselffrom the Hall (tho’ he hath often been required) bedischargedour society.”—again—“1647, February. 14. This day it is agreed upon, that for that Mr. Richard Davy, late one of the common-councel of this House, is now gone to live at Yarmouth, therefore this House doe discharge him of the same place.” again—“March 16th. 1659. Nathaniel Atwooddischargedfrom the office of a common-councell-man, having longabsented himselfe, and beingemployed in the navy.”—again—“1661, October 25. Forasmuch as Mr. William Keeling,one of the aldermenof this burgh, hath a long timeabsented himselfefrom this burgh, and from attending the service as alderman of this burgh, although he hath been thereto often requested, and isnow at present absent out of the town, whereby the service of this burgh is very much impeded, to the great damage of the said burgh; it is thereupon this day ordered, that the said Wm. Keeling bedischargedfrom being an alderman of this burgh.”—again—“November 28. 1673. This day Mr. Giles Alden (by reason of his being very muchabsentfrom this society, whereby the business of this corporation is much impeded and neglected) is by the mayor and aldermendischargedfrom being one of the common-councell of this burgh.”—again,—“September 29. 1728. Ordered that Robert Britiffe Esq.Recorderof this burgh, bedischargedof his attendance as Recorder, for his neglect of duty andnonresidence.”—These extracts plainly shew what was the practice of our corporation formerly, in regard to such of their members as happened to become nonresidents or absentees, and how very different that practice was from that which prevails at present. The reader is now left to judge which is the most proper or reasonable, the former or the present practice.

At the period we are now reviewing, a roastedswanseems to have been in great request at our Lynn entertainments: hence we read under the date of Sept. 24. 1649—“Granted to John Bird, a lease for seven years of three ferry rights, at 10l.per annum, and a brace of swans well fatted to the mayor.” But the ferryman, probably, found it difficult sometimes to get, or to fatten those large birds; in which case the mayor might be expected to condescend to accept of an equivalent. Somethinglike this accordingly occurs under the date of March 15. 1657, “Ordered that the chamberlain pay to the mayor for the time being 40s.on the 1st of January yearly, in liew of a brace of fatted Swanns usually delivered to the mayor by the person who hired the Ferry rights.”—The taste of our countrymen has undergone a great change since; and the Swan no longer appears upon our tables.

South Gate Lynn. J Sellett del. Jukes & Sargent fecit

At the beginning of this period there were here no more thansix corn-meters, but on the 14th. November 1653 they were increased toten, which seems to indicate our trade, and particularly the corn trade, as well as the agriculture of the country to have been then in a state of progression.—The town seems also to have had then a greater intercourse with the country on itseasternthan on itssouthernside; which we may infer from the following article in the corporation books, dated April 4. 1653: “Ordered that Henry Bloye, theSouthgateporter, shall have the Tolls of that Gate at 1l.5s.a year; and James Browne, the porter at theEast-gate, shall pay for the Tolls of that Gate 1l.15s.a year, during the pleasure of this House.”—The East gate is supposed still to retain a similar superiority.—It is somewhat remarkable that in those days the town-clerks of Lynn, as well as the recorders, were regular barristers: accordingly we find it noted in the corporation records, “December 6. 1652—This day Thomas Ulber Esq. councellor at Law is chosen Town-clerk, in the room of John Williamson Esq. councellor at Law, discharged.”—Our corporation must have been thenwell furnished with legal knowledge. In later times all our town-clerks were below the degree of barristers.[787]

On the 3rd of July 1657 the tolls of the East and South Gates, (as appears from the town-books,) were let for 15l.a year, which seems to shew that they were now much more productive than in 1653, when they were let for only 3l.a year. It is very natural to infer from this, that the trade of the town, or its intercourse with the country had much increased during those years.—On the 18th of July in the next year, (1658, as we learn from the same source) St. James’ church yard was ordered to be a burying place for the parish of St. Margaret’s,for one year, “there not beingroomin St. Margaret’s church-yard:”—but it seems rather unaccountable how making St. James’ church yard the parish burying-place forone yearcould materially alter the case as to the want of room in St. Margaret’s church-yard, or furnish more room there for burying at the end of that term than there was at the beginning of it. It might however be here suggested by way of query, if it would not have been quite as well, on a recent occasion, and far better in point of expense, to have made use again of St. James’ churchyard (including the south side) instead of forming the new burying ground?—at least, till the times proved more favourable; which, it is to be hoped, will be the case in the next reign, if not sooner.

The period we are now reviewing, and the review of which we are now about to conclude, was perhaps the most remarkable of any in the history of this town, as well as that of England and of Britain. Nor does it seem to have been more remarkable for any thing than for the exertions then made to reform the morals and manners of the great mass of the people. But those exertions were generally too rough and violent, and therefore more calculated to make hypocrites than sincere converts, as must always be the case when such works are carried on by coercive means, rather than by rational persuasion, or upon right christian principles. Accordingly our reforming magistrates, by way of reclaiming their townsmen from their tippling propensities, and bringing them from drunkenness to sobriety, had recourse tofines and imprisonment, which as was before observed, fell sometimes very heavy upon the publicans, no less thansix and thirtyof whom were imprisoned in the course of one year, as we learn from one of our old MS. accounts. These measures excited a violent prejudice against our reformers, and against the reformation itself. Fining was calledplundering, and imprisonment, passed for persecution and tyranny. But the restoration brought things back into the old channel, and relieved our publicans and tipplers from these hardships.

History of Lynn from the Restoration to the Revolution.

Between the period which we have been last reviewing and that which we are now entering upon there was confessedly a very wide and glaring dissimilarity: no two periods could well exhibit a more obvious and striking contrast. The spirit of puritanism predominated in the former, and that of libertinism, or, in other words, of licentiousness and profligacy in the latter. The rulers of the nation, in the former period, were men of sobriety and gravity, in the latter they were dissipated and dissolute. The former appeared to have for their aim the amendment or improvement of the national manners and morals, the latter the very reverse, for they were actually the promoters and patrons of all manner of depravity, of every thing that was vile, profligate, or flagitious. The two brothers, Charles and James, and their ministers, were certainly some of thevilest wretches that providence ever sent to punish and plague and curse a sinful nation.

As to Cromwell, it is pretty much the fashion to decry and vilify him, as a dissembling villain, a base hypocritical knave and usurper: but no one need to envy the discernment, penetration, or sagacity of those men who cannot perceive that his moral character was not below that of either the first or second Charles, and that his character as a statesman, and his talents for government, were infinitely superior to those of either of them, or of any of their kindred. No proof has ever been produced that he was a greater dissembler, or a more unprincipled wretch than those two princes; and it might perhaps without much difficulty be shewn, that,in comparison with either of them, he was really an honest, virtuous, great and good man.—As to what is deemed his greatest crime, that of compassing the king’s death, the great law of self-preservation will certainly plead much in extenuation of that act; for it is now very well known that Cromwell was previously in possession of good and absolute proof that it was the king’s intention to sacrifice him, in case he could bring the treaty then on foot between him and the parliament to a successful termination. The intercepted Letter to the queen convinced Oliver that he had no chance for his life, if the king reascended the throne. He therefore resolved to prevent that, and save his own life by sacrificing that of the king.[790]This was very natural, and few men would have done otherwise.

Cursory remarks on the Restoration—its memorable effects—great joy manifested here on the occasion—several remarkable rejoicings at Lynn in the course of this period.

The Restoration was one of those revolutionary events which occur in the history of this country. It was effected, says one of our historians, “without any effusion of blood.” But what is more to be wondered at, is, that whereas so much blood had been spilt to compelCharles I.to come to terms with his people, towards which it is certain he at last made large concessions,Charles II.should be received without any conditions at all. Upon this bishop Burnet, in theHistory of his own times, observes, thatHale, afterwards lord chief justice, did move that a Committee might be appointed to look into the propositions that had been made, and the concessions that had been offered by the late king, and from thence digest such propositions as they should think fit to be sent over to the king. As such a motion was foreseen,Monkwas instructed how to answer [or overrule] it. He accordingly told the House, that he had information of such numbers of incendiaries still in the kingdom, that if any delay was put to the sending for the king, he could not answer for the peace either of the nation or army: and as the king was to bring neither army nor treasure with him, either to fright or corrupt them, propositions might be as well offered to him when he should come over; so moved for sending commissioners immediately. This was echoed with such a shout all over the House, thatHale’smotion was no more insisted on. To the King’s coming without conditions, says the bishop, may well be imputed all the errors of his reign.[792a]To allow him so to return and ascend the throne was certainly a flagrant proof of the folly and pusillanimity of the convention parliament, and of the baseness of that spirit which then predominated among out ancestors.

Such a tide of extravagant joy overspread the nation upon the king’s arrival, as in the end very much hurt and debased the morals of the people, and introduced an almost universal dissoluteness of manners, which was encouraged and propagated by the ill example of the king and the court. From the enthusiasm and fanaticism, which prevailed in the former period, the nation fell now into the opposite extreme of licentiousness and immorality; one or the other of which extremes being always the consequence of men’s not governing themselves by reason.[792b]Thus the country had no great cause to congratulate itself on the blessed effects of the restoration of royalty, or the revival of the old order of things. No nation in Europe could be more depraved and licentious than the English in the reign of Charles the second.

Much pains were taken, before his majesty’s arrival, to represent his character in the most favourable and respectable light. Though the first born of profligacy and scoundrelism, he was reported, by his faithful and thorough-paced agents, as the very mirror of wisdom, of virtue, and of piety. These reports were not moreindustriously or artfully circulated than they were readily and generally believed, so that we need not wonder if the country in general looked upon the arrival of Charles as the commencement of the golden age, or of the reign of a heaven-born prince. Such seems to have been actually the case. The confidence the people had in the king, says Kimber, from the extraordinary good opinion they had been prepossessed with in his favour, and their transports of joy at being delivered from the late confusions and distractions, by means of his restoration, will account for the excessive complaisance that was shewn to the court at the beginning of this great event, so that the parliament could scarce deny the king any thing. To the ill use made of this confidence is to be imputed the opposition which the court met with afterwards.

Our ecclesiastical historianNeal, speaking of the restoration, says,

“Here was an end of those distracted times which our historians have loaded with all the infamy and reproach that the wit of man could invent. The puritan ministers have been decried, as ignorant mechanicks, canting preachers, enemies to learning, and no better than public robbers. The universities were said to be reduced to a meer Munster, and that if theGothsandVandals, and even theTurks, had overrun the nation they could not have done more to introduce barbarism, disloyalty, and ignorance. Yet in these times, and by the men who then filled the university chairs, were educated the most learned divinesand eloquent preachers, such as theStillingfleets,Tillotsons,Bulls,Barrows,Whitbys, and others, who retained a high veneration for their learned tutors after they were ejected and displaced. The religious part of the common people have been stigmatized with the character ofhypocrites, their looks, their dress and behaviour, have been represented in the most odious colours; and yet one may venture to challenge these declaimers to produce any period of time since the reformation, wherein there was less open profaneness and impiety, and more of the spirit as well as the appearance of religion. Perhaps there was too much rigour and preciseness in indifferent matters; but the lusts of men were laid under a visible restraint; and though the legal constitution was unhappily broken, and men were governed by false politicks, yet better laws were never made against vice, or more rigorously executed. The dress and conversation of people was sober and virtuous, and their manner of living remarkably frugal. There was hardly a single bankruptcy to be heard of in a year, and in such a case the bankrupt had a mark of infamy upon him that he could never wipe off. Drunkenness fornication, profane swearing, and every kind of debauchery, were justly deemed infamous, and universally discountenanced. The clergy were laborious to excess in preaching and praying, and catechising youth and visiting their parishes. The magistrates did their duty in suppressing all kinds of games, stage-plays, and abuses in publick-houses. There was not a play acted on any theatre in England for almost twenty years. The Lord’s day was observed with unusual reverence;and there were a set of as learned and pious youths training up in the university as had ever been known. So that if such a reformation of manners had been obtained under a legal administration they would have deserved the character of the best of times.”“But when the legal constitution was restored, there returned with it a torrent of debauchery and wickedness. The times which followed the restoration were the reverse of those that preceded it; for the laws which had been enacted against vice for the last twenty years being declared null, and the magistrates changed, men set no bounds to their licentiousness. A proclamation indeed was published against those loose and riotous cavaliers, whose loyalty consisted in drinking health and railing at those who would not revel with them: but in reality the king was at the head of these disorders, being devoted to his pleasures, and having given himself up to an avowed course of lewdness; his bishops and chaplains said, that he usually came from his mistresses apartments to church, even on sacrament days.”

“But when the legal constitution was restored, there returned with it a torrent of debauchery and wickedness. The times which followed the restoration were the reverse of those that preceded it; for the laws which had been enacted against vice for the last twenty years being declared null, and the magistrates changed, men set no bounds to their licentiousness. A proclamation indeed was published against those loose and riotous cavaliers, whose loyalty consisted in drinking health and railing at those who would not revel with them: but in reality the king was at the head of these disorders, being devoted to his pleasures, and having given himself up to an avowed course of lewdness; his bishops and chaplains said, that he usually came from his mistresses apartments to church, even on sacrament days.”

Yet he was, on earth, the supreme head of the church, and that church the best constituted in the world. It must need, surely, be well, extremely well constituted (and so must any body) not to be contaminated, disordered, or distracted with, or by such a head.

“Nothing was to be seen at court but feasting, hard drinking, revelling, and amorous intrigues, which engendered the most enormous vices. From court the contagion spread like wild fire among the people, in somuch that men threw off the very profession of virtue and piety, under colour of drinking the king’s health: all kinds ofold cavalier riotingand debauchery revived; the appearances of religion which remained with some, furnished matters of ridicule to libertines and scoffers. Some, who had been concerned in the former changes, thought they could not redeem their credit better than by deriding all religion, and telling or making stories to render their former party ridiculous. To appear serious, or make conscience either of words or actions, was the way to be accounted a schismatick, a fanatick, or a sectarian; though if there was any real religion during the course of this reign, it was chiefly among those people. They who did not applaud the new ceremonies were marked out forpresbyterians, and every presbyterian was arebel. The old clergy who had been sequestered for scandal, having taken possession of their livings, were intoxicated with their new felicity, and threw off all the restraints oftheir order.—Such was the general dissoluteness of manners that attended the deluge of joy which overflowed the nation upon his majesties restoration.”[796a]

As to Lynn, at and subsequently to the restoration, it appears to have largely shared the general joy and other effects produced by that memorable event. When we consider the extreme rigour of the former government or governors of this town,[796b]in attempting fines andimprisonment to restrain the tippling and other vicious and licentious propensities of the inhabitants, we cannot much wonder at the excessive joy which the restoration excited here, as it was very natural to expect that that event would effectually remove those severities, and introduce a more lax and indulgent system. How long the first transports of joy lasted we are not able exactly to ascertain; but that they were at their height on the first royal birth day, the 29th of May 1660, we may very reasonably presume. On that day the town was all festivity and triumph. Among the curiosities that graced that memorable carnival were 300 young maids, or lasses of the town, dressed all in white, and parading through the principal streets.[797]Whether this may, or may not be considered as an emblem of the predilection of the sex for Charles, or that of Charles for the sex, we will not take upon us to say. That it was a whimsical contrivance seems very evident; and that it was peculiar to this town appears more than probable, as we do not recollect having heard of any thing like it elsewhere on that day, or on that occasion.

This was certainly one of the most gladsome seasons that Lynn ever witnessed: but it was not the only season of that description that occurred here during the period now under review. There are others of the same kind that ought here not to pass unnoticed. One of these was in the spring of 1680, on account of the arrival of the duke of York from Scotland, and the discomfiture of theWhigsor petitioners, (or the king’s rejection of the petitions of the people for the assembling of parliament,) and, of course, the success and triumph of theToriesor court party, then calledAbhorrers, as they professed to abhor such petitioning, and approve of the king’s governing without parliaments. On these interesting accounts there was much rejoicing at Lynn; and

“on the 30th of April that year, the following Address was read in the Hall, and signed the same day by every one of that House: and the mayor, (Giles Bridgeman) was desired to commend the same to the hands of the right honorable the Earl of Yarmouth (Lord Lieutenant of the County) to be presented by him to his Majesties.”“To the King’s most excellent Majestie,Dread Sir,—Wee your Majesties Dutifull and Loyall Subjects, the Mayor, Recorder, Aldermen, and Common-Councell of your Majesties ancient burgh of Lenn Regis, on behalf of ourselves and other the free Burgesses and principal inhabitants here doe in all humility prostrate ourselves at the feet of your most sacred Majestie, and in all duty acknowledge the infinite benefits wee of this burgh, with all other, the liedge peopleof this your Majesties Kingdom of England by your happy government and royall conduct next under God enjoye, and more particularly wee give your Majestie an oblation of our duty and thankfullness in yourpiousand resolute support and maintenance of the religion established by the Lawes of this kingdome in the Church of England in your couragious conserving the Regalities of your Crowneagainst insolent petitions, and protecting the lawfull liberties and freedoms of your subjects. Andwith our souls we bless Almighty God in the return of your royall brother,the Duke of Yorke,to your Majesties most Gracious presence, and doe cheerfully profess to maintaine and defend your Majesties most Royall person your Heirs and lawfull successors in your and their just rights,May it please your MajestieYour natural Liegemen.”

“To the King’s most excellent Majestie,

Dread Sir,—Wee your Majesties Dutifull and Loyall Subjects, the Mayor, Recorder, Aldermen, and Common-Councell of your Majesties ancient burgh of Lenn Regis, on behalf of ourselves and other the free Burgesses and principal inhabitants here doe in all humility prostrate ourselves at the feet of your most sacred Majestie, and in all duty acknowledge the infinite benefits wee of this burgh, with all other, the liedge peopleof this your Majesties Kingdom of England by your happy government and royall conduct next under God enjoye, and more particularly wee give your Majestie an oblation of our duty and thankfullness in yourpiousand resolute support and maintenance of the religion established by the Lawes of this kingdome in the Church of England in your couragious conserving the Regalities of your Crowneagainst insolent petitions, and protecting the lawfull liberties and freedoms of your subjects. Andwith our souls we bless Almighty God in the return of your royall brother,the Duke of Yorke,to your Majesties most Gracious presence, and doe cheerfully profess to maintaine and defend your Majesties most Royall person your Heirs and lawfull successors in your and their just rights,

May it please your Majestie

Your natural Liegemen.”

In this remarkable and curious Address to the Throne, what choice matter of joy, thankfulness, congratulation, and triumph is exhibited on the part of the Addressers! The King appeared resolved to govern despotically, or without a parliament. Many of his subjects had petitioned and prayed him to call or assemble a parliament. He had rejected those petitions and prayers with disdain. The Lynn Corporation address him on the occasion, congratulating, praising and extolling him to the skies for acting the despot and turning a deaf ear to the prayers and supplications ofhis aggrieved subjects. For such royal doings, and for the arrival and presence of the Duke of York at court, which presence had always been a curse to the nation, the corporation of Lynn congratulated their profligate sovereign, and offered to stand by him at all events. Moreover, they exhibit, all the while, a most sanctimonious appearance, and professwith all their souls to bless Almighty Godfor what was one of the greatest curses of their oppressed country.—So much for this royal and notable Address from Lynn.[800]

As to the accession of James to the throne, it appears to have been contemplated at Lynn with no small pleasure and satisfaction, and the day on which that memorable event was announced here to have been a day of uncommon rejoicing. We accordingly find the following note in the Town Books, “Febr. 10th. (1685) King James II. proclaimed with all due solemnities and signalls of Joy and Gladness.” Four days after was “ordered anAddressto the King’s Majestie.” But having never seen a copy of this Address the present writer cannot give a particular account of its contents. He cannot however doubt but it was in the usual style of Lynn Addresses to that monarch.

Another season of extraordinary festivity and exultation at Lynn occurred in 1686. It was on no less interesting an occasion than the erecting of the statue of the sovereign in the Tuesday Market place. We accordingly read, inMackerell’s“Chronological Account” of the town, of “great rejoicings here that year, at the setting up of the statue of king James II.” His majesty (as well as king John) seems to have been long the object of the admiration of the Lynn people. They admired him while Duke of York, and after his accession to the throne they never rested till they had set up his image or statue in the most public and conspicuous part of their town. Of this royal and memorable affair Mackerell has given the following information in another part of his work—

“An account ofKing JamesIId’s statue,and the Rejoicings at the setting up of the” [same.]“On the 13th day ofApril1686. which was the anniversary of their majesties coronation, the same was kept with all due solemnity; the mayor, aldermen, and the rest of the body, meeting in their formalities in theGuild-Hall, after Divine Service at the church, proceeded from thence attended with musick, to the great Market-place; in the middle whereof, by the Gentlemen and other Loyal Inhabitants of the corporation, was then erected the Effigies of his Sacred Majesty upon a Pedestal, with several carvings and embellishments, inclosed with a Pallisade of Iron, under inscribed,Non ImmemorQuantum Divinis Invictiss. PrincipisJacobiII.Virtutibus debeatHanc Regiæ Majestatis EffigiemÆternum Fidei et ObsequiiMonumentum,ErexitS. P. Q. L.Anno Salutis1686.

“An account ofKing JamesIId’s statue,and the Rejoicings at the setting up of the” [same.]

“On the 13th day ofApril1686. which was the anniversary of their majesties coronation, the same was kept with all due solemnity; the mayor, aldermen, and the rest of the body, meeting in their formalities in theGuild-Hall, after Divine Service at the church, proceeded from thence attended with musick, to the great Market-place; in the middle whereof, by the Gentlemen and other Loyal Inhabitants of the corporation, was then erected the Effigies of his Sacred Majesty upon a Pedestal, with several carvings and embellishments, inclosed with a Pallisade of Iron, under inscribed,

Non ImmemorQuantum Divinis Invictiss. PrincipisJacobiII.Virtutibus debeatHanc Regiæ Majestatis EffigiemÆternum Fidei et ObsequiiMonumentum,ErexitS. P. Q. L.Anno Salutis1686.

In English

“Not forgetting how much is due to theDivine Virtuesof theVictoriousKingJamesthe Second, the Senate and People of Lynn, as alasting Monumentof theirFaithandLoyalty, have erected this Statue of his Royal Majesty, in the year of our Lord One Thousand Six Hundred and Eighty six.“N.B. The King, Queen, and the rest of the Royal Family’s Healths were drank; and the Day was concluded with Ringing of Bells, Bonfires, all sorts of loud Musick, Fire works, discharging the Great Guns, with all other Demonstrations of Joy and Loyalty.”[803]

“N.B. The King, Queen, and the rest of the Royal Family’s Healths were drank; and the Day was concluded with Ringing of Bells, Bonfires, all sorts of loud Musick, Fire works, discharging the Great Guns, with all other Demonstrations of Joy and Loyalty.”[803]

Such is Mackerell’s account of the extraordinary festivities and rejoicings at Lynn on this great and important occasion. It was, no doubt, worth recording, and it may still be worth preserving here, if it were only for this special reason, that it may help to give us just ideas of the general character of corporations, and of their proceedings. Here is aStatueerected to one of the vilest of human beings; and here arevirtues, and evenDivine Virtues! ascribed to one who was as devoid of every thing of that kind as the very devil: and here is anInscriptiondenominating the erection of the Statue aLasting MonumentofFaithandLoyalty; and yet this boastedfaithandloyalty, andlasting Monument, lasted only aboutthreeorfouryears. The Statue was pulled down mutilated, decollated, disfigured, dismembered, and buried in dirt and rubbish, where it remains to this day.

There was here also a remarkable exhibition of joy and gratitude, as well as loyalty, in 1687, excited, it seems, by his majesty’s royal and memorable Declaration, and the consciousness of its being the duty of every member of the Church of England to defend and support him with theirlivesandfortunes.—The following Address to the Throne was accordingly agreedupon and ordered to be sealed with the common Seal, September 19. 1687.—

“Great Sir,—The known principles of the Church of England being such as oblige every member thereof with their Lives and Fortunes to defend and maintain your Majestie Your Royall Prerogative with all other rights belonging to your Majesties Imperiall Crown, makes us at this time humbly to begg your Majesty to receive this further attestation, not in the least doubting of the peaceable enjoyment of our religion under Your Majesties most sacred protection, returning our most hearty and humble thanks for Your Majesties late repeated Assurance thereof, expressed in Your Majesties late gracious Declaration.”

Such was the Address which was sent at that time from Lynn. But his sacred majesty soon found that the boasted principles of the Church of England were not sufficient to secure to him the attachment of his subjects and the quiet possessions of his throne, unless he relinquished those favourite projects of his which appeared hostile to that church. For the very next year a very alarming defection took place, and the majority of those of that communion became inimical to his government. Even theLife and fortune menforsook him, and beheld his downfal without concern or commiseration. So false did that description of his subjects prove to him, and so unavailing also in the end did he find even the great orthodox doctrine ofpassive obedienceandnonresistance, which had been the favourite doctrine of the Church of England during the whole of his brother’s reign.

A few months after the last mentioned affair took place in January 1688, a fresh occasion of rejoicing was presented to the Lynn people. This was the annunication of the queen’s pregnancy; which proved not a little satisfactory and gratifying to our corporation, as appears from the following note in their books:

“January 26. Ordered and agreed that Sunday the 29th Instant being appointed by his Majestie a day of Thanksgiving for her Majesties being happily with child, the several members of this House doe attend Mr. Mayor (Robert Sparrow Esq.) in their formalitys at morning and evening service, to render thanksgiving to Almighty God for so signall a blessing, and after evening service to repair to the Custom House to drink the king’s health with a Bonefire.”

On the 2nd. of the following July, the Gentlemen and good people of Lynn were furnished with matter of still higher gratification, by the knowledge of her majesty’s safe delivery, and the birth of aprince[805]who would be likely to inherit his royal sire’s faith, piety, sapience, and sublime virtues. This important intelligence, as might be expected, was very joyfully received, and occasioned the immediate assembling of the corporation. In that assembly, or meeting, was proposed and voted an Address to his Majesty, of which the following is a copy:

“Great Sir—Wee Your Majesties Dutifull Subjects crave leave of Your Majesty and your RoyallConsort that we join with Your Majestie in offering our most humble and hearty thanks to God Almighty in sending Your Majestie a Sonn and a Prince, and farther we begg of your Sacred Majestie to accept our Cordial thanks for your Majesties late favor to the body of this Corporation,[806]and also for your Princely condescension and affection by both your gracious Declarations, not only extending to the Church of England but to all other your peaceable and loyall Subjects, Assuring us by Your royall word you will stand by us, whereby we are not only obliged but resolved, when your Majestie shall think fitt to call a Parliament, wee will endeavour to elect such members as shall make your Majesty happie and Your Subjects easie, and shall pray for Your Majestie’s long and peaceable reigne over us. In witness whereof we have fixed our Town Seale the 2nd of July in the 4th year of your most gracious reign, Anno Domini 1688.”

In conclusion, it is presumed that we are fully warranted to affirm, that Lynn has never been more attached to any of our sovereigns than to KingJohnand KingJamesthe second; and that even his present majesty, with all his shining virtues, is not more, if so much beloved here as those two monarchs were. It may perhaps be difficult to account for it, yet it seems unquestionably to be the fact, that of all the princes that everswayed the British Sceptre, none ever shared more largely in the affection admiration, and veneration of the good people of this town than those three potentates. Nor have there been any other reigns under which our townsmen seemed more ready to congratulate themselves on the superior happiness they enjoyed, or the transcendent benefits and blessings they derived from the throne.

Brief account of divers other remarkable circumstances relating to Lynn during this same period—decay of trade—increase of poor—Anmer coal,&c.

After Charles’ restoration, or accession to the throne, it was not to be expected that he should remain long unaddressed by this town. Accordingly we find that within the very first month of his actual reign, (June 16. 1660,) a congratulatory Address to him was voted and ordered in the Hall; and moreover, “that the Fee farm rents formerly paid from this town to the Crown, and lately purchased by the mayor and burgesses, amounting to 41l.6s.2d.be restored to his majestie.” Having never seen this Address, or any copy of it, we can give no particular account of its contents; but we need not to doubt but it teemed with servility, or was in no small degree of a fawning, crouching or cringing cast. As to theFeefarm rentswhich belonged to theCrown, but had been lately purchased by the Mayor and burgesses, and were now restored to his majesty, they appear to require no comment, or farther elucidation in this place. The restoring of them to his majesty was a matter not of choice but of necessity: and in purchasing them the Corporation evidentlygained a loss; but to what amount we cannot say, having never learnt how much was paid for them.

A week after, (on the 23rd of the same month,) our Corporation agreed and ordered, thatOliver’s Charterconfirming the priviledges [of the town] becancelled. This also appears to have been a matter of absolute necessity; but whether so or not, that charter would be of no further use to the body corporate. Oliver’s day was now past, and whatever had sprung from him, if it did not actually disgrace the character of the holder or owner, yet was no longer held in any manner of estimation. That there is a copy now extant of this Charter of his we have not learnt.

Soon after the restoration this town began to suffer considerably from the decay of trade and consequent increase of the poor, which did not seem very well to accord with the excessive rejoicings that had then taken place. Within two years after that event those effects had made so alarming a progress, and the complaints of the sufferers had become so loud, that the body corporate found it necessary to take the affair into their immediate and most serious consideration, in order to check as much as possible the growing evil, and alleviatein some degree the sufferings of the poor inhabitants. The truth of this statement, and the mode of proceeding adopted then in the Hall in order to relieve or mitigate the distresses of the poor will appear by the following extract from the Corporation books.

“May 12. 1662. Forasmuch as the Poor of this Burgh thro’great lossesanddecay of tradeare grown very numerous, and the charge of them greater than can be well born by the inhabitants, and a great part of the coal trade carried on by Strangers and Foreigners, which bring their coals hither to sell in Ships and Vessells belonging to other Ports, who tho’ they reap a profit bear not the least part of the burthen, to the great discouragement of the Navigation belonging to this town and the impoverishing of the inhabitants thereof, It is thereupon [at the earnest request of the most considerable freemen Burgesses and Inhabitants of this town] this day ordered that every freeman or burgess of this burgh that shall from henceforth buy or cause to be bought of any stranger or foreign person not being free of this burgh any coals called Newcastle, Sunderland or Sea-water being lading or freight in any Ship or Vessell belonging to any such Stranger or outward Port whether the same be to sell again or for there (their) own expense shall pay for every chalder of coals so bought as aforesaid to the use of the mayor and burgesses of this burgh and their successors the sum of 12d.to be employed for and towards the necessary reliefe and maintenance of the poor of the said borough, thesame to be levyed of every such freeman or burgess so buying the same as aforesaid by distress and sale of their Goods, or by such other ways and means as shall be thought most fitt and meete—And it is further ordered that no burgess or inhabitant of this burgh shall take any such coals out of any such strangers’ Ship or Vessel with intent to sell the same again untill the end of three working days next after the arrivall of such Strangers’ Ship within this Port, to the end the inhabitants of this town may be served with coales in that time for their own firing, according to severall former orders made to that purpose, and publication of this order to be made by the bellman.”

How long this law remained in force, or this impost continued to be paid does not appear; but it is not very likely that it ceased, or was discontinued till the arrival of better times, and the removal of those evils which led to its adoption.Fourpencea chalder, if we are not mistaken, is still charged on the coals brought by strangers, and applied in like manner to the relief of the poor. Why should it be no more, when thrice as much was charged so long ago? and a shilling then was worth a great deal more of our money. Surely the present pressure of the poor rates, which so large a proportion of the householders so severely feel, would justify the adoption of such a measure now, if it be allowable.

Towards the close of the year when the above transaction took place this town was visited by Lord Townshend, Sir John Tracy, Sir Edward Walpole, JohnSpelman and Roger Spelman Esqrs. as commissioners under a late act of parliament for the well-governing and regulating of Corporations. This act seems to have sprung from the narrow and arbitrary policy of the Stuart princes, who aimed at having corporations as much as possible under their direction and management, or subject to their immediate and absolute power and control. These commissioners were entertained here at the expense of the mayor and burgesses. They were, it seems, invested with large powers, so as to be authorized to displace any they happened to dislike of our municipal functionaries, and put others whom they thought better of in their room. In this town they expelledaldermanRobert Thorogood and appointed one Lawrence Withers in his stead. A few weeks before “Mr. Fr. Rolfe was discharged from his office and place of Town-clerk, and Mr. Owen Barnes was elected in his room.”—This is said to have been done by themayor and aldermen; but it is probable that the Commissioners were privy to it, and that it was a step taken in compliance with an intimation from them, for the time of their visit had been previously fixed. Those appear to have been the only changes which then took place in the Hall.

Under 1663 a circumstance has been recorded which casts some light on the ideas or sentiments which the Lynn people then entertained of their parliamentary representatives; and though they no longer allowed them daily wages, as formerly, yet they evidently considered the honest and diligent discharge of their trust or serviceas entitled to more than mere thanks. Had they on the other hand failed in the performance of their delegated functions, their constituents undoubtedly would have deemed that failure censurable.—The circumstance alluded to is explained in the following extract from the Hall books: “June 13. 1663, It is this day ordered that the Chamberlaine remitt to London 40l.to buy two pieces of Plate, of the value of 201.each, to be presented as a gratuity from this House to Sir Edward Walpole and Sir William Howell (Hovell)[812]burgesses in parliament for this burgh, for their faithfull services in behalf of this burgh.” What were those services in behalf of this burgh, which are here glanced at, and were deemed so meritorious, we are not told; but it is very clear that these representatives had acquitted themselves entirely to the satisfaction of their constituents. It is much to be wished that the same could be said of all our present national representatives.

Under the same year an occurrence is mentioned in one of our MSS, which leaves a foul stain on the memory of our ancestors of that period, and shews how much they were then the slaves of bigotry and intolerance. This was the persecution and imprisonment of several members of that pacific and respectable sect calledQuakers, which seems to have been the only description ofsectaries, except thePresbyterians, that had then attempted to introduce themselves into this town. But they were bitterly opposed here, as they were then also throughout the nation; and their sufferings were very great and grievous during almost the whole reign ofCharlesandJamesthe second, to the lasting disgrace of a pretended christian and protestant government. It is toWilliamand theRevolutionthat we owe, under providence, the adoption of a wiser policy and the enjoyment of better times.

In 1664 the high price of coals was severely felt here. That commodity advanced that year from 17s.a chalder to 30s.and upwards. This seems to have been owing to the late impost of 1s.a chalder laid by the Corporation on all coals brought bystrangers, who consequently discontinued their visits. It seems rather probable that that impost or tax was now abolished, for we are told that the coal afterward,by reason of strangers’ resort, came again to the old price. It may therefore be concluded that the Lynn ships alone were not sufficient at that time to supply the town and all the inland country with that article. The same would probably be still the case, if this port was not frequented by any coal ships but such as belonged to the town. We are therefore, probably, much more indebted to strangers for our plentiful supplies of fuel than we are apt to imagine.

In 1665 Lynn was visited by that grievous scourge the Plague, which made great ravages here. “Wardsmen were appointed, one at the East and the other atthe South-gate to keep out all Mackerell Carts from coming into the town:” the communication with the county was cut off; no Mart was kept that year, and the very markets were for sometime discontinued.—In the Summer of the very next year, 1666, which was a hundred and forty five years ago, a cart, (as is recorded in one of our manuscripts,) came hither fromAnmer, loaded withcoals, which werehere sold by the mettorbushell. It seems therefore that there is coal somewhere about Anmer; but to what extent we cannot pretend to say. Nor does it appear what search or trial was there made for it, or why the attempt was given up. A good Coal-mine in that part of the country would, no doubt, be very desirable.

We know of no very remarkable event that occurred here afterward till 1670, when the town was honoured with a visit from theduke of Richmond and Lenox, of which the following notices are extracted from the Hall books—“July 23. It is this day ordered that his Grace the Duke of Richmond and Lenox upon his request shall have his Freedome of this Burgh gratis: and hereupon his Grace the said duke of Richmond and Lenox did this day come into this House and did take the Oathes of Aledgiance and of a Free Burgess; Mr. Thomas Greene and Mr. Benjamin Holly being his Suretyes.”—again—“July 28th. Ordered that the Chamberlain pay Mr. Mayor’s bill of Disbursements for the entertainment of the duke of Richmond and lord Townshend, 21l.6s.8d.and 13s.4d.for his Cook, and for a hogshead of French Wine sent aboard the duke’s Vessell.”—Hence it appears that the duke came and departed by water. But the Sum of 22l.would go then much further than it would at present. It would go now but a very little way in entertaining brace of peers, with their retinue, and purchasing a hogshead of French wine.

Towards the latter part of this year the Corporation was presented with a plan or map of their town, as appears from the following note in the Hall-books—“October 14. 1670, This day alderman Edmund Abbott brought into this House a Topographical Draught of the town of King’s Lynn, which was given to the town by Sir Algernoon Payton; and Henry Bell Esq. mayor, is desired to peruse the said draught, to be mended and put into a Frame, for the use of the mayor and burgesses.” The same, we presume, was done accordingly; but we are not quite sure that this draught is still in existence: if it be, a sight of it might help towards forming a pretty just idea of the then state or lineaments of the place. The principal Streets and Lanes, however, must have been then much in the same situation as at present. In other respects the town must be now very widely different from what it was then.

In the same year we find Lynn to be in a great measure amanufacturingtown, especially in theworsteadline, and to have many hands employed in that branch; as appears from the following note in the Hall-books. “December 2. 1670, The worstead weavers petition to procure an Act of Parliament for the liberty of a Dyerand Callender to live in the town for the better [or the benefit of the] trade.” Those weavers must have been pretty numerous, and their trade hopeful and promising, to warrant or justify such an application. Still it must seem rather odd that they should think the obtaining of their object required the aid of an act of parliament. It does not appear, however, that an application was actually made to the legislature on this occasion.

Account of the king’s intended visit to Lynn,in1671,with divers other occurrences relating to this town,in that and some of the subsequent years.

The king, who used frequently to visit Newmarket, where he had it royal Lodge or Palace, purposed in the autumn of 1671 to make an excursion into Norfolk, and to visit Lynn in the course of his tour. This appears from the following Note from the Hall-books—“1671, August 11. Ordered that 100l.be paid into the Chamberlain’s hands for defraying disbursements on account of his Majesties entertainment, who Sir Robert Stewart writes intends to visit Lynn next month, in his progress.”—Great preparations were accordingly made by our Corporation for the reception and entertainment of their sovereign. But it so happened that our good townsmen were disappointed at last, for his majestynever came; so that the great expense they had been at, in preparing for his reception was, in a manner, all thrown away.

It is not said what it was that prevented his majesty’s coming, or frustrated his royal intention of visiting his Lynn subjects at that time. But it seems most probable that the very foul weather which happened in that month, and the terrible inundation which then overwhelmed the country about Lynn, were the principal, if not the sole causes of the relinquishment of his purpose. The tide rose so high on the 17th. of September, as we learn from one of our MSS. that the country about Lynn was all under water, “the haycocks swam about the fields to the first house in Gaywood, and several boats were rowed from the East Gate to that Village, many Ships were lost, Marshland was all overflowed, great numbers of sheep perished, and an immense loss sustained.” In short, it seems to have been here such another disastrous flood as that which lately devastated the Lincolnshire Coast. The roads must, in many places, have been broken up, so that the approaches to the town must have been rendered difficult, if not impracticable. On the whole, therefore, we cannot wonder that this royal visit was given up. As to the whole of the provisions and dainties that had been prepared for the intended august visitor, it does not appear how it was disposed of at last; but as to what had been procured from the Metropolis, its final disposal is plainly enough suggested by the following Note from the Hall books:—“November 10, 1671. Ordered that the mayor have the whole banquet lately sent from London, he paying tenn pounds.”—So much for this intended royal feast at Lynn.

In the same year, we find Lord Townshend tampering with the Corporation, with a view to the introduction of one of his friends to be chosen one of the Lynn representatives in parliament: hence we find it thus noted in the Hall books—“1671. August 7. Whereas Lord Townshend hath by his Letters to this House recommended Sir Francis North knight, his Majesties Sollicitor General, as a person of great worth and honor, and upon all occasions fitt to be usefull to this burgh in their most important concernments: It is therefore this day ordered, that the said Sir Francis North Knight, shall have his freedom of this Burgh gratis.” He soon after became, as had been previously projected, one of our parliamentary delegates.

Early in 1672 an order was issued from the Hall, which shews that the occupiers of houses in the Tuesday Market-place were not then allowed to let their shops during the Mart, unless they paid rent for the same to the mayor and burgesses. The following note in the Hall books will serve to elucidate this circumstance—“January 19. Whereas severall persons (who have usually lett their shops in the Tuesday market-place during the time of the Mart, and have therefor paid a rent for the same to the mayor and burgesses) have of late refused to pay the accustomed rent, it is this day orderedthat the chamberlains doe demand the arrears, and in case of refusal to cause blinds or bootes to be built up against the Shops.” Such appears to have been the case formerly; but this claim, we apprehend, is no longer made. We have not learnt, however, how it came to be relinquished.

In July 1675 Mr.John Turnerwas admitted or chosen into the Hall, as common-council-man. Of him it is said that “he was chosen common-council-man, alderman, new-elect mayor, parliament-man, and captain of the trainbands, all in the course of two years.” From him sprung the family of that name which afterwards bore great sway in this town for a whole century. It is no disparagement to this family that it arose from a low origin; for where is that great family that has not so arisen? The noble, the royal, and the imperial not excepted. Many of whom are known to have sprung from and owed their rise to desperate Adventurers, captains of bands of robbers and ruffians, men, or rather demons, who defiled themselves with the foulest deeds, and made their way to power and greatness in defiance of all laws human and divine. To the founder of the Turner family no infamy has been imputed. Report has said that he was originally a waiter at an Inn at Cambridge, which cannot justly be considered as any disgrace to his descendants.

In 1676, according to one of the MSS. were first erected the new buildings, in Broad Street, designed for an Almshouse for twelve poor men, “at the cost andcharge of one JohnHeathcoteof Lynn.” Mackerell calls this personHelcote. Whatever his right name was, it is now almost forgotten, while that ofFraminghamis in everybody’s mouth: and yet the poor men owe, perhaps, as much to the memory of the former as they do to that of the latter, who has engrossed all the praise and credit of this charity. For had not this Helcote or Heathcote erected these buildings it is very doubtful if Framingham, rich as he was, had ever thought of endowing an almshouse. He was a man of low birth,[820]and became afterwards rich and ostentatious. The death of the founder gave him an opportunity to become the endower of this almshouse, and transmit his name to posterity, which he took care to ensure by having his Will publickly read, and a commemorative Sermon preached annually. Upon the whole, it is highly probable that vanity and ostentation had a larger share than charity, or pure benevolence, in the endowment of these Almshouses. That, however, cannot lessen the comfort or enjoyment of the poor men there admitted. The endowment does them as much good as if it had sprung from the worthiest motive, or most virtuous principle.

Back to Index Next