History of Lynn from the death of William to that of Anne—her majesty’s accession—address to her from Lynn—dangerous state of the Boale or World’s End,and measures adopted for its preservation—the great storm in1703,and its effects on this town—address to the throne in1704—petitions to parliament the same year,from the counties of Bedford and Huntingdon,against unreasonable and exorbitant exactions at Lynn—constructive disloyalty of our corporation—minister’s house in Webster’s Row.
On the death of King William, Anne, the younger sister of his late queen, succeeded to the throne, by virtue of theact of settlement, which had passed in the preceding reign. She was proclaimed on March 8, 1701–2, a few hours after the king’s death; and her accession gave entire satisfaction to all her protestant subjects. Those of this town appeared on that occasion very conspicuous, as they were actually among those who addressed the throne within that selfsame month. We have never seen a copy of this address, but have learnt from our book of Extracts that it was dated March 30, 1702. Whether it was long or short, we know not; but there can be no doubt of its being very loyal: and, in point of style or diction we may take it for granted that it bore no small resemblance to those of succeeding years, of which we shall not fail by and by to exhibit some fair specimens.
About the time of which we are now speaking, Lynn was thought to be in some danger from the encroachment of the tide upon that point called the Boale, or world’s end; and the most effectual means that couldbe thought of were therefore adopted for the safety of the town.—This affair is thus noticed in the Hall books:—“Sept. 24. 1708; In pursuance of a late order wee have considered Robert Elsden’s Petition to us referred, and taken a view of the ground called the Boale or World’s End, and the lands and houses on either side, and are of opinion, that there is an absolute necessity that the said ground as it now is be preserved from being lost to sea, and for that purpose that some present meanes be considered by Jettys and Counter-shores to repell the flow and reflow the sea, without which the houses on the north side of the Mill ffleet, and consequently the town will be in great danger of ruin; and considering how necessary it is that present care be taken of the defence of the town so incumbent upon this House, which the said Elsden is in no wise able to performe, and also considering the advantage it will be to this corporation to have the duties of wharfage and groundage, stakes, mooreage and other dutys claimed and long enjoyed the owners of that ground united and made entire to this port, Wee have treated and contracted with the said Robert Elsden for the absolute purchase of the said ground and all profits and advantages thereunto belonging for the sum of 130l.and 20l.more at the end of five years if the said ground shall continue so long preserved from sea without considerable diminution.”—Then it is added—“Said Report and Articles are read and well approved by this House.” This was, no doubt, an advantageous bargain to the corporation; and as might be expected, theynow set themselves in good earnest about effectually preserving their new purchase. They laid out upon it a good deal of money; of which the following memoranda occur in their books—“Sept. 29. 1704: Ordered 100l.to be taken up for reimbursing the chamberlain’s charges about the Jetties and defences against the sea at the Boale, or World’s End.”—again—“Jan. 12 1704–5: Ordered that Mr. Hainsworth chamberlain’s account audited at 347l.8s.9d.relating to the Boale be allowed, and that he have 10l.10s.for his extraordinary trouble.”—This spot, we presume, has been ever since the property of the corporation, which we cannot find to have been ever the case before.
About this same time happened that dreadful national calamity, commonly calledthe great storm, the most tremendous and most disastrous, perhaps, ever experienced in this kingdom. It continued for several days but was at the highest on the 27th of November 1703. No place escaped its fury, but in some places it was most awfully terrible and destructive. It blew from thewest, and therefore could not so much affect this coast; and at Lynn the loss it occasioned was comparatively inconsiderable; amounting to seven or eight ships, twenty or thirty hands, and damage to the houses, or buildings, computed at about 1000l.and the whole including the shipping to about 3000l,[874]which was but atrifle, compared to the losses which some other places had then sustained.
On the western coast the ravages of this storm far exceeded what they were in these eastern parts. AtBristolit occasioned so high a tide as did above a 100,000l.damage to the merchants goods only. It also caused theSevernto break down its banks, and overflow a vast tract of land, by which 15000 sheep, besides other cattle were drowned. The famousEddystoneLighthouse also, which had borne several storms unmoved, was not able to stand this. It was swept off on the tremendous night of the 27th. and nothing was to be seen the next morning but the bare rock.Winstanleytoo, its ingenious projector and constructor, who happened then to be there, perished with the rest.[875]Soon after, on that very night, theWinchelsea, a homeward bound Virginia-man, split on the same rock, and most of its hands were lost.
It was computed that no less than 300 sail of ships, some of them belonging to the royal navy, were loston different parts of out coasts, and that there were drowned then in rivers and at sea, at least 8000 persons. Between one and two hundred lost their lives by the fall of houses, chimneys, &c. and a still greater number were grievously bruised and hurt from the same causes. More than 800 dwelling houses were blown down, and barns and outhouses without number. Above 400 wind-mills were overset and destroyed; upwards of one hundred churches were uncovered, and the lead from some of their roofs blown to an incredible distance: many of their steeples and battlements were also demolished. In addition to all which, above 250,000 trees were said to be then torn up by the roots. In short the whole country for sometime after exhibited the appearance of dejection, dismay, and desolation.
The public feelings being greatly affected by this national calamity, we need not be surprized that a generalfastwas soon after solemnly proclaimed and devoutly observed throughout the kingdom; and though we may not very readily fall in, or coincide with every idea suggested in the royal proclamation,[876]yet we cannothelp looking upon that fast as much more proper and justifiable than most of those that have been observed by our countrymen ever since.—After all, what were the deplorable ravages of that great and mighty storm, compared with those of a single campaign in some of our modern wars, when myriads of human beings have miserably perished, entire provinces cruelly laid waste, and whole nations involved in utter ruin? Yet these most calamitous scenes are seldom looked upon by governments and nations as the judgments of Heaven, or what ought to lead men to serious reflection, religious humiliation, and repentance.
In the course of the following year, (1704) our national feelings were very differently affected. The dejection of the preceding year was no longer felt, and the public mind became suddenly elated in a wonderful manner, and to an extraordinary degree. This was occasioned by the battle ofHochstet, orBlenheim, as we most commonly call it. That surprising victory filled the nation with such vainglorious triumph as to throw it almost into a state of atheistical intoxication. Addressesto the throne came in thick now from all quarters, and our corporation appeared conspicuous among those memorable addressers. Our address was not a little remarkable; but whether most so for its piety, good sense, and elegance, or for its loyalty, adulation, and fustian, or bombastry, may be left for the reader to judge.[878]
But however loyal or patriotic we seemed at this period, and elated with the idea of our military successes and national glory, we yet lay at the same time under some very unfavourable and disreputable imputations from some of our neighbours, on the score of extortion, or unwarrantable and exorbitant exactions in our commercial dealings. Nor is it at all clear that the charge was absolutely or entirely groundless.—These circumstances appear from the following document in the Hall-books.—
“Jan. 12th. 1704–5. Whereas Petitions have been lately exhibited to the Honourable House of Commons in Parliament by the Deputy Leuftenants, Justices of the Peace, Gentlemen and Inhabitants of the Countys of Bedford and Huntingdon, complaining of great duties and payments exacted by this town of Lynn by force of pretended By-Laws on all such sea coales brought into this port as are not consumed in this town, and for that under a pretence of a certain custome ofForeign bought and foreign soldall masters of ships and others not free of this corporation who bring in coales are compelled to lye three market days after arrival before they are permitted to sell their coales to any person whatsoever; and after they have layn such time yet they are permitted to sell to non but Freemen andinhabitants of the burgh at their own prices, whereby all other traders in Sea coales are discouraged, that trade monopolised there, and the prices raised to an excessive rate, and that the freemen and inhabitants thereby make exorbitant gains to themselves, to the great oppression of the petitioners and diminution of the queen’s revenue, which custom and practices are contrary to divers laws and statutes, viz. 9th of Ed. 3 and 25th. Ed. 3. and 11th. Rd. 2. and therefore pray to be relieved against them.—And whereas the matters in said petition are referr’d to a private committee it is ordered that Councell be taken in said case, and that such concession and disclaims[880a]be made before the committee or otherwise as by our Burgesses in Parliament with advice of such Councell shall be thought reasonable touching the duty of 8d.per Chalder and compelling Strangers ships to lye 3 days mentioned in the said case, and to act farther therein as they shall see cause,savingto this corporation the ancientcustome of fforeign bought of foreign sold, and theduty4d.per chaldertime out of mind received and injoyed.”[880b]
“Jan. 12th. 1704–5. Whereas Petitions have been lately exhibited to the Honourable House of Commons in Parliament by the Deputy Leuftenants, Justices of the Peace, Gentlemen and Inhabitants of the Countys of Bedford and Huntingdon, complaining of great duties and payments exacted by this town of Lynn by force of pretended By-Laws on all such sea coales brought into this port as are not consumed in this town, and for that under a pretence of a certain custome ofForeign bought and foreign soldall masters of ships and others not free of this corporation who bring in coales are compelled to lye three market days after arrival before they are permitted to sell their coales to any person whatsoever; and after they have layn such time yet they are permitted to sell to non but Freemen andinhabitants of the burgh at their own prices, whereby all other traders in Sea coales are discouraged, that trade monopolised there, and the prices raised to an excessive rate, and that the freemen and inhabitants thereby make exorbitant gains to themselves, to the great oppression of the petitioners and diminution of the queen’s revenue, which custom and practices are contrary to divers laws and statutes, viz. 9th of Ed. 3 and 25th. Ed. 3. and 11th. Rd. 2. and therefore pray to be relieved against them.—And whereas the matters in said petition are referr’d to a private committee it is ordered that Councell be taken in said case, and that such concession and disclaims[880a]be made before the committee or otherwise as by our Burgesses in Parliament with advice of such Councell shall be thought reasonable touching the duty of 8d.per Chalder and compelling Strangers ships to lye 3 days mentioned in the said case, and to act farther therein as they shall see cause,savingto this corporation the ancientcustome of fforeign bought of foreign sold, and theduty4d.per chaldertime out of mind received and injoyed.”[880b]
How this affair terminated we have not been able to ascertain.
Soon after the affair just now mentioned another circumstance transpired which had a still more serious aspect on our corporation, as it seemed to involve themin a kind of dispute with the crown itself, and to threaten them with a repetition of former alarming regal procedures, or another deprivation of their charters and municipal franchises. A process was accordingly commenced against them on the part of their sovereign, for the embezzlement, or non-payment of certain royal dues; and it is thus noticed in their own records—“June 13th. 1705; upon reading a writt directed to the sheriffe of this county, for seizing into Her Majesties hands the liberties of this Burgh, for default of entering claims, and answering and accounting for the debts, fines, and forfeitures due to Her Majestie arising within this Burgh. It is this day ordered that the Town Clerke forthwith take care to cause appearance to the said writt, and such other matters be performed as are incumbent on the mayor and burgesses.”—It is not said what was the result, but it may be supposed to have ended favourably, though, probably, not without absolute submission and great expense. But for any disloyalty that might be alleged against them in this instance, they seem to have made ample amends by their memorable address to the throne in 1706, which shall be given in the next section.
Among the advantages enjoyed formerly by the minister of the town, or the vicar of St. Margaret’s parish, was that of aparsonage housefor his habitation. This house was situated inWebster’s row, or Broad street. For sometime before the period of which we are now speaking there seems to have been some doubt, whetherthis house belonged to the corporation, or to the Dean and Chapter of Norwich. But now, during the deanship of the celebratedDr. Prideaux, the Dean and Chapter expressly relinquished their claim in favour of the corporation. But this is supposed to have proved to succeeding ministers an unfortunate relinquishment: for it does not seem that they had any longer an appropriate mansion in the town, but were obliged to shift for themselves, and procure a dwelling as they could, like the rest of the inhabitants. How the corporation came to deprive the minister of his parsonage house we have not learnt.—Of this affair the following notice occurs in the Hall-Books; “August 29. 1705; It appeareth by old deeds that the minister’s house in Webster’s Row belongeth to the mayor and burgesses, and Dr. Prideaux, Dean of Norwich, by his Letter produced doth disclaim the same, as never in possession of the Dean and Chapter of Norwich.”
State of Lynn under Q. Anne continued—pompous address to the throne in1706—cut made the same year from Kettlewell to Gannock gate—state of the Middleton river and water-mills—another notable address to the throne—execution of two children—state of the harbour—Dr. Hepburne and other doctors—the medical as well as clerical profession supposed to be more highly esteemed here formerly than at present—reasons for that supposition—law-suit—Walpole’s expulsion—death of Anne and accession of George I.
In the summer of 1706, our corporation distinguished themselves by another most elaborate and pompous address to the throne, which might well compensate for all that constructive disloyalty, or treasonable delinquency which seemed imputable to them the preceding year. Indeed, as far as words could do it, this address must have placed them among the most loyal, most zealous, and most devoted of all her majesty’s subjects. Whether she herself deemed it to have completely white washed them from their former foulness, or not, we are unable to say. But if she did really condescend to bestow upon it any thought at all, she could hardly avoid considering it as an extraordinary production: and the reader will probably view it in much the same light.[883]
In the self-same year, and soon after the date of the said addresses to the throne, there was here no small stir made about the corn water-mills, which were situated close by the present Lancastrian school. From those mills the fleet from thence to the harbour was called mill-fleet, and the lane adjoining had the name of mill-lane. Those corn water-mills appear to have been here long noted, and of great use to the town. But aboutthe time of which we are now speaking they were falling into decay, and so continued till they were at length entirely laid aside, and every vestige of them has long ago disappeared. The wind-mills now supply their place and do their work, at least so much of it as is wanted to be done here; for the chief of the meal and flour consumed in the town is brought from other parts. When Lynn depended for its bread entirely, or almost so, on its water-mills, they must have been of great consequence, and the laying of them by must have been much felt by the inhabitants. At present our situation is very different, and we perceive and feel no need of water-mills.[885]
In the spring of the very next year (1707) another flaming address to the throne went from Lynn; and as it is not inferior to the former in point of eloquence and sublimity, it may be desirable to have it preserved, for the entertainment of the rising generation.—It was dated April 25.—The following is a correct copy of it, as it stands in our volume of extracts—
“May it please your Majestie, Nothing could ever equal your Victories in the field but your Councells in the cabinet: thus happily in spite of all the Jesuiticall contrivances of your and our Ennemys to vanquish nationall and hereditary prejudices, to reconcile so many jarring and different pretensions, and to unite England and Scotland into one kingdome and interest, hitherto by all in vain attempted, will together with the Blenheim and Ramilies remain everlasting monuments of your Majesties glory.—Our Protestant succession is hereby extended thro’ the British Isle, Our Legislature, Trade, and Interest one, and all Jealousies and differences being removed, thatstrength which has often been a weakening to us, to the mutual endangering our constitution and safety, is now become a real security to both, and formidable to our enemies. Thus the hopes of our divisions, fomented by a popish Pretender and his heedless abettors, will be now extinguished, and wee shall always think it our dutie, as what is most agreeable to your Majestie and beneficiall to ourselves, to be unanimous with one another, and to pay a friendly regard to our united Neibours, as becomes fellow protestants and fellow subjects.—May your Majestie, seated on the throne of your united Britannia, long hold the ballance and arbitrate the peace and safely of Europe, and be as great and happy here, as your memory will be immortall and glorious hereafter.”[887]
“May it please your Majestie, Nothing could ever equal your Victories in the field but your Councells in the cabinet: thus happily in spite of all the Jesuiticall contrivances of your and our Ennemys to vanquish nationall and hereditary prejudices, to reconcile so many jarring and different pretensions, and to unite England and Scotland into one kingdome and interest, hitherto by all in vain attempted, will together with the Blenheim and Ramilies remain everlasting monuments of your Majesties glory.—Our Protestant succession is hereby extended thro’ the British Isle, Our Legislature, Trade, and Interest one, and all Jealousies and differences being removed, thatstrength which has often been a weakening to us, to the mutual endangering our constitution and safety, is now become a real security to both, and formidable to our enemies. Thus the hopes of our divisions, fomented by a popish Pretender and his heedless abettors, will be now extinguished, and wee shall always think it our dutie, as what is most agreeable to your Majestie and beneficiall to ourselves, to be unanimous with one another, and to pay a friendly regard to our united Neibours, as becomes fellow protestants and fellow subjects.—May your Majestie, seated on the throne of your united Britannia, long hold the ballance and arbitrate the peace and safely of Europe, and be as great and happy here, as your memory will be immortall and glorious hereafter.”[887]
We now take our leave of the Lynn Addresses. This and the two former are probably to be classed among the prime productions of our augustan age. Our volume of Extracts contains no more copies of addresses to the throne; which seems to indicate that a great tailing off took place afterwards in their style and composition, so that the succeeding ones were not worth preserving. However that was, these samples have been here inserted upon the supposition that theywere some of the best written and most eloquent that any of our sovereigns ever received from this borough: and it is in that view chiefly they are now recommended to the perusal and consideration of the reader.
In 1708, according to one of our MS. accounts of that time, two children were hanged here for felony, oneeleven, and the other butsevenyears of age; which if true, must indicate very early and shocking depravity in the sufferers, as well as unusual and excessive vigour on the part of the magistrates in the infliction of capital punishment.[888a]—In that also and the succeeding year, the wretched state of theharbourappears to have occasioned considerable disquietude and alarm in the town; and the most effectual means that could be thought of were adopted to remedy the growing evil, and tranquillize the minds of the inhabitants.[888b]
At the time now under review, two of the most prominent characters in this town were the elderPyleandDr. Hepburne. Of the former some account may be expected hereafter. The latter was a North-Briton, and of the medical profession. At what time he settled here does not very distinctly appear; but it is supposed to have been about the latter part of king William’s reign. Be that as it might, he soon became eminent as a physician, so as to stand at the head of the profession, in all this part of the kingdom, for near half a century. Walpole, with our principal nobility and gentry, held him in high estimation, and his practice became in time so very extensive that he was seldom to be found at home, so that the town was obliged then to have recourse for medical advice solely toBrowneandLidderdalethe two other physicians.
On the 3rd. of February 1709, the Hall voted Dr. Hepburne the freedom of the towngratis; and he took up that freedom on the 12th. of the next ensuing August.Browneis supposed to have had the same complimentpaid him: so hadLidderdaleon the 29th. of August 1737. so also hadTayleron the same day of the same month, ten years after. The last of our physicians, if we are not mistaken, who have been thought worthy of the honour of being made free of this ancient and renowned borough, was the late Dr.Hamilton. He was not, like Paul,free-born, nor did he, like most of his predecessors, become freegratis; but might say with the Roman chief captain, “With a great sum obtained I this freedom,” for it cost him at least 30l.which was a great deal more than it was worth to a mere medical man, fifty years ago. His being obliged to purchase it, and so dearly too, seems a pretty plain indication that a change of disposition towards the physicians had then taken place in the Hall, and that they were actually sinking in the estimation of that worshipful body. That same body is supposed to have been no less determined ever since, even from the commencement of this jubilee reign, against making any more of the physiciansfree, than his majesty is said to be against making any more of his subjectsDukes, except those of his own family. So remarkable a coincidence between the humour of our corporation and that of their beloved sovereign must, no doubt, be very curious to contemplate. As to the two physicians that are now, and have long been resident here, the present writer positively disavows any knowledge or suspicion of either of them being in the least uneasy in their state of villanage, or at all desirous of obtaining their freedom. On the contrary, he supposes them to be perfectly indifferent about that matter; even as much so as he is himself, who has not the least ideathat the freedom of Lynn, or of any other town, would be worth to him a singlegroat, or what would afford the smallest gratification.
Not only themedicalprofession, but even theclericalalso seems to be in lower estimation here now than what it was a hundred years ago. The heads of both professions were then, and long after, we presume, invariably admitted to their freedom, which is not the case now. The veryLecturer, if we are rightly informed, is at presentunfree, as well as the physicians. The Vicar also, as was before noted, had here then a parsonage-house, which he has not now. Nor is his present stipend, or income, any way equal to what it was at that period. Yet for all this seemingly declining credit of these two learned professions among us, it is more than probable, that both physic and divinity are as well understood, and as rightly and judiciously administered here now, as ever they were in the days of Thomas Pyle and George Hepburne.
In 1713 our corporation, in conjunction with some others, engaged in a law-suit about Sir Thomas White’s benefaction,[891]but it does not appear how it terminated.—About the same time, and somewhat earlier, Lynn must have been much agitated by the affair of Walpole, who was one of its parliamentary representatives. Because he would not join with the new ministry, they resolvedto be revenged, by accusing him of a breach of trust and corruption. They finally succeeded, though by small majorities, and had him committed to the Tower and expelled the House. Lynn re-elected him, but it was declared null and void: so he was kept out of parliament till after its dissolution, which took place on the 8th. of August 1713. Lynn then again re-elected him, and he sat in the new parliament which met on the 16th. of February 1714. The queen died a few months after, and was succeeded by George I. which opened the way and was the prelude to Walpole’s future elevation and prosperity.
State of Lynn under George I.—sketch of his character—attachment and wishes of the people divided between him and the son of James II commonly called the Pretender—our accounts of this town,during this reign,very barren of interesting or memorable incidents—enumeration of some of the most remarkable—the king dies and his son succeeds.
No prince, says Coxe, ever ascended a throne under more critical circumstances, and with less appearances of a quiet reign, than George the First; whether we consider the state of the European powers, the situation of parties in Great Britain, or his own character. As to the latter, he was ill calculated by nature, disposition, and habit to reconcile the then jarring parties, andremove the unfavourable impressions which it was natural for all people to entertain of a foreigner, destined to rule over them. He was already fifty-four years of age, and had been long habituated to a court of a very different description from that of England, and to manners and customs wholly repugnant to those of his new subjects. He was easy and familiar only in his hours of relaxation, and to those alone who formed his usual society; not fond of attracting notice, phlegmatic and grave in his public deportment, hating the splendour of majesty, shunning crowds, and fatigued even with the first acclamations of the multitude. This natural reserve was heightened by his ignorance of the language, of the first principles of the English constitution, and of the spirit and temper of the people.
It was currently reported, before his arrival, that measures were preparing to evade the laws which excluded foreigners from honours and employments. He had several mistresses, of whom two the most favoured were expected to accompany him to England, with a numerous train of Hanoverian followers, eager to share the spoils of thepromised land; to set up a court within a court, and an interest opposite to the true interest of England. It was also maliciously circulated that he was indifferent to his own succession, and scarcely willing to stretch out a hand to grasp the crown within his reach. “But, adds the same writer, he had excellent qualities for a sovereign, plainness of manners, simplicity of character, and benignity of temper; great application to business, extreme exactness in distributinghis time, the strictest economy in regulating his revenue; and, notwithstanding his military skill and tried valour,a love of peace; virtues, however, which required time before they were appreciated, and not of that specious cast to captivate the multitude, or raise the tide of popularity.”—Such was our first sovereign of the present family.[894]
A great part of the nation was hostile to the Hanover succession; but it was a divided party, and could never be brought to act in concert, or with whiggish energy. TheTorieswere then a very powerful body, and mostly in favour of the Pretender, but not so decidedly as theJacobites, who were to a man violent for his restoration. These two parties were then more numerous and powerful than theWhigs, or adherents of the House of Hanover and the protestant succession. But they wanted the talents, the unanimity, and the decision of the latter, and therefore proved unable to gain their point, or introduce the pretender and place him on the throne. An attempt, however, was made, chiefly in Scotland, to bring him in, in 1715, and again in 1745; but they both miscarried, so that the present family in the end got firm and undisputed possession of the sovereignty of these realms; and the pretending or rival family is now extinct. Considering the many adverse appearances, at and before the queen’s death, George’s quiet accession was not a little remarkable and surprising. His success, it has been thought, “was principally owing to the abilities, prudence, activity,and foresight of the great Whigs, and to the precautions which they had always taken, and now took to promote the succession in the protestant line, with whom the Hanoverian agents in London concerted their mode of conduct, and to whom George, from the first news he received of the queen’s death, wholly resigned himself and his cause.” In nothing did he discover so much discretion and wisdom, as in acting under the guidance of such able and trusty adherents.
The history of Lynn during this reign, seems remarkably barren of interesting, or very memorable incidents. Scarce any thing that we know of, relating to this town, occurred within that time that is worth recording. The town no doubt, or at least the members of the corporation, derived many good things from the high station then occupied by Walpole, their great patron and representative; and this circumstance would hardly fail to render Lynn the envy of most other corporations, who would naturally be desirous of obtaining so powerful a patronage. But upon this subject we will not here enlarge.
Among the principal objects that engaged the attention of our corporation during this reign, was an inquiry into the extent and limits of the estates in Dunham and East Lexham, belonging to the Gaywood Hospital, of which they were the trustees or guardians. This inquiry commenced as early as 1710–11. as appears from the following note or hint in our volume of Extracts—“March 23. 1710–11; St. Mary Magdalenestate to be surveyed and new buttal’d.”—Afterwards, under the year 1715, we read as follows; “July 27. upon reading the report of the Comittee, ordered to inspect the Estate in East Lexham and Dunham, belonging to Gaywood Hospital, It is ordered that a Letter be sent to Edmd. Wodehouse, Esq. to request and demand a new particular and abuttals of the lands there late in his possession, and that the Town Clerk attend the persons employed to new abuttal the same, as occasion shall require.”
This work appears to have been attended with considerable difficulty, and therefore to have made for a great while but very slow progress; but our gentlemen still persevered, and seemed fully determined to effect their purpose, in spite of all obstacles. Accordingly the affair is thus further noticed under 1718: “April 7th. Ordered a Letter be wrott to Edmd. Wodehouse, Esq. to desire new abuttals of the lands in Dunham and East Lexham, belonging to St. Mary Magdalen’s Hospitall, which he and his predecessors have holden 99 years by lease lately expired.”—A month after (i.e. May 7. 1718.) it was further “ordered thatMr. Mayor, (Ja: Boardman Esq.) Mr. Turner, Mr. Berney, Mr. Bagge, Mr. Rolfe,Aldermen; Mr. Robotham, Wm. Allen, Tho. Allen, Town Clerk, and Chamberlains, be a Comittee to inspect the Hospitall lands belonging to St. Mary Magdalen, at Dunham and East Lexham, and settle the schedules, and treat for a new Lease thereof; likewise to consider of the regaining the foldcourse at Dunham.”
Somewhat more than a year and half after the last date, we find the same business still employing the attention of our gentlemen. Hence, in our volume of Extracts, the following passage occurs.—“December 23rd. 1710. Order’d that alderman Bagg, with the town clerk, be desired to wait upon Mr. Wodehouse at Lexham, and endeavour to ascertain the lands late in his lease from St. Mary Magdalen’s Hospitall, and enquire after what other lands there are in Dunham and East Lexham for which no rent is paid.”[897]How they succeeded, or how the inquiry finally turned out, does not appear. But it is pretty certain that the Hospital and poor pensioners there, have never owed much obligation to the Wodehouse family; and but for the interference of the corporation, this charity, in all probability, had long ago been alienated and lost. Let this therefore stand on record among the good and worthy deeds of our body corporate.
The origin of the appointment ofWatchmenfor this town, is a circumstance that seems to be very little known here: but from the following hint in our volume of Extracts, it seems to be now of near 90 years standing.—“Feb. 3. 1719–20, Order’d that a Letter be sent to the members of parliament, to gett a clause incerted in the act now about passing for night watches for the city ofWestminster, in favour of this corporationto have the like regulation.” It seems probable therefore, that Lynn had its night watchmen as early as the city of Westminster, and of course earlier probably, than most other places in the kingdom. Somewhat more than two months after the last date, the following circumstance is memorized in our book of Extracts—“April 6. 1720, Mr. John Cary junr. is elected Master of the Writting School, and aldermen Berney and Scarlet, governors and inspectors of the said schoole.” This school still exists; but who are its present governors and inspectors we have not learnt. They may be supposed to be expertpenmen, or good judges of penmanship. On the 23rd. of the following December, it was “ordered that a book be prepared to register all the Acts of our Common Councell that pass the seale.”—This book ofthe Acts of our Common Council, though not quite so interesting as the book ofthe Acts of the Apostles, may nevertheless contain some very curious passages, which might be very useful for this work, could we have been favoured with a sight of it. But it is supposed to be a book ofsecrets, and so not accessible to the uninitiated and unprivileged. Containing now the acts of near 90 years, it may be presumed to be, by this time, rather bulky.
In the spring of 1722, our book of Extracts speaks of the Blockhouse being let on lease to one Quash. The reason of noticing this here, is, because the passage alluded to shews that one of the gates of the town anciently stood there, and bore the name ofSt. Agnes.—The passage reads thus:
“April 4th. 1722, Orderedthat a lease be made to Wm. Quash, mariner, of the messuage called the Blockhouse, in North End, being formerlySt. Agness Gates, for the terme of 99 years, at 10s.per annum, from Lady Day last, he putting the same into repair, and so keeping it as a dwelling house during the said terme, and leaving the same in tennantable repair at the expiration, excepting to this corporation the common way and passages as usual through the same.”
“April 4th. 1722, Orderedthat a lease be made to Wm. Quash, mariner, of the messuage called the Blockhouse, in North End, being formerlySt. Agness Gates, for the terme of 99 years, at 10s.per annum, from Lady Day last, he putting the same into repair, and so keeping it as a dwelling house during the said terme, and leaving the same in tennantable repair at the expiration, excepting to this corporation the common way and passages as usual through the same.”
On the 23rd. of the following November, according to the Hall Books, it was “ordered that the tolls for the carriage of goods through the two gates be suspended for one year, from Lady Day next.” This shews that toll was formerly paid for the passage of goods through our gates; but we have not learnt the reason of the suspension of that payment now for one year. It was a measure, no doubt, which some circumstances were thought to render necessary, at least by way of experiment. Its country and commercial connections had long given Lynn a bad name, for its extortioning spirit, and exorbitant exactions; and it is probable that the town had suffered on that account: this might therefore be an expedient used, along with others, for the purpose of retrieving its character. Whether it promoted that object in any degree, or proved of any material benefit to the town, we have not been able to discover.—Under the date of March 1. 1722–3, (or 1723, as we reckon) the following short note or hint occurs in our book of Extracts—“Market Tolls declared to be the Mayor’s.” By which it would seem that there werebefore some doubts entertained here upon this subject, and that it had never been fully settled, till now, to whom those tolls belonged.
In the following August, the resentment of the Hall, was excited in a very high degree against Dr. Browne the physician, for having set up, on some occasion, a kind of competition for precedence with the very Mayor himself. This daring deed is thus memorized in our book of Extracts—“August 29. 1723, Ordered that a Letter be written by the Town Clerke to Dr. Wm. Browne, to acquaint him with the resentment of this corporation of his affront to the mayor (Richd. Harwich Esq.) justices and gentlemen of this corporation, by an undue precedence he assumed and persisted in, on Monday last.” [also] “that the Letter now written by the Town Clerke, on that occasion, be sent to Doctor Browne.”—Things must have been then queerly situated at Lynn; especially between the mayor and Dr. Browne. What effect the Town clerk’s Letter had upon the doctor, we have not been able to discover. But we have always understood that there was never any great cordiality between him and the corporation. He resided here long after this, and afterwards removed to London, where he received the honour ofknighthood, and becamepresident of the Royal College of Physicians, to the no small gratification of his vanity, of which he had a most enormous portion. He has been spoken of as a good physician, but beyond that, or out of the line of his profession, he is not known to have acquired much respectability. In one thing he seemedmore fortunate than his contemporary Hepburne; for he diedrich, and the otherpoor. Hepburne’s numerous patients were, it seems, more liberal infeastingthan infeeinghim; whereas Browne would not have been satisfied with that sort of liberality. He was the grandfather of our present parliamentary representative, Sir Martin Browne Folkes, baronet.[901a]
In 1724 and 1725, the decayed, unsafe, and dangerous state of the river and harbour, which had been much complained of for many years before, continued still to engage the attention of our rulers, as appears by the following memoranda in the Hall records—“August 3. 1724; this dayCol. Armstrong’sReport concerning the river, with severall maps, &c. were brought into this House.” again—“Jan. 4th. 1724–5; To apply to Parliament for reviving the Extinct Powers for Commissioners concerning the navigation of the river Ouze.” again—“Febr. 3. appointed a Comittee to state, settle, and consider of proper ways and means, by tonnage upon goods imported, to raise 2500l.per annum, stipulated to be employed in amending and restoring the navigation of this harbor.”—again[901b]—“June7th. 1725; Ordered thatMr. Badsladebe paid 20l.for his disbursements for printing the severall schemes, cases, and answers, relating to this navigation.”
In the latter part of 1726, an affair came on between the corporation and oneHenry Southwell, a freeman, which ended rather disgracefully to the former. They seized a quantity of coals belonging to him, under pretence of their being foreign bought and foreign sold; for which he brought an action against the Town Clerk, which the corporation defended. They proceeded further, and actually disfranchised Southwell. Upon which he procured a mandamus, and obliged them to restore him to his freedom. This must have been not a little mortifying to them. They thought they had him entirely in their power, and could master him; whereas the mastery, in fact, belonged to him, and it so turned out that they were in his power: so that like the Irishman,[902]theycaught a Tartar, and thereby broughtthemselves into a most humiliating dilemma, and exposed themselves to the ridicule and derision of the whole country. The Hall-records notice and memorizet his affair as follows: “Nov. 16th. 1726; ordered that the suit brought by Henry Southwell, a freeman, against Edw. Bradfield, Town-clerk, for seizing a parcell of coales, fforeign bought and fforeign sold, which came into this port in a ship, Wm. Coverdale, master, a foreigner, for Wm. Taylor, fforeigner, be defended, at the publick charge—and that Hen: Southwell be disfranchised for his collouring bargains and sales, contrary to his Oath of ffreedom, and using opprobious words (in his Letters) to the corporation, unless he shews good cause to the contrary, upon due notice to him for that purpose to be given.”—again—“Febr. 3rd. 1726–7. Ordered that Mr. Hen: Southwell, appearing and shewing no sufficient cause to the contrary, be disfranchised the freedom of this burgh, and he is disfranchised accordingly.”—again—“April 29th. 1728.Ordered that the former order,made for discharging Hen:Southwell of the freedom of this burgh,be made void,and that he be restored again, according to the direction of a peremptory mandamus, issued out of his majesty’s court of King’s Bench, to the mayor, aldermen, and common councell for that purpose directed: and the said Hen: Southwell appearing, was sworn, and found pledges.”—This might have taught our corporation a very useful lesson, and been a standing warning to them never more to act in so arbitrary a manner, or attempt to extend their power beyond its due bounds.
Being now come to the close of this reign, it may be proper here just to mention some of the principal events by which it was distinguished. Among them the first in order of time was therebellionin 1715, in favour of the pretender; which, though it was suppressed early in the ensuing year, was far from being eradicated from the minds of the people. The malcontents were long after very numerous in the kingdom, and ever busy in forming new plots against the government, of which that wherein bishopAtterburywas concerned seems to have been the most formidable. The seasonable discovery of it prevented its being productive of much mischief, except to the conspirators themselves, some of whom paid very dear for the share they had in it; particularly Layer and Atterbury. The former was hanged and quartered, and the latter banished his country for ever.
But of all the occurrences of this reign the South Sea scheme, or grand bubble, as it is sometimes called, was that which proved most disastrous and calamitous to the nation. This memorable scheme was laid before the House of Commons by the South Sea Company, along with another from the Bank of England, in 1719, for reducing all the public Funds into one, in order to discharge the national debt, on some valuable consideration to be granted them, &c. After much debate and contest, it was determined in favour of the South Sea Company, and their proposals were accepted on Feb. 1. 1719–20. An Act afterwards passed both Houses for that purpose, which received the royal assent in April following. Upon the proposals being accepted, stock rose graduallyto a prodigious height; to 310 per cent. even before the bill received the royal assent; in a few days to 340, then to 400, and before the end of May to 500. In short, what by the artifices of the managers, and the credulity of the people, eager to grasp the riches now held out to them, by the 2nd. of June it got up to 890, and continued rising and falling till it amounted to above 1000. Nothing was now minded but the business of stock-jobbing. Exchange Alley, where these affairs were transacted, was in a continual hurry, and thither crowds of all ranks and qualities daily resorted. The desperate, who ventured first, were generally gainers, whilst the more wary, who came in later, were many of them great sufferers: so that thewrongheads, (as the saying then was,) had the better of thelongheads. A spirit of gaming thus prevailing in the nation, many projects were set on foot, which obtained the name ofbubbles, and were evidently the progeny of the grand bubble. They were near 100 in number, and it was reckoned that almost a million and half was won and lost in them. A proclamation was issued against them on the 11th. of June, and they were soon after entirely suppressed by order of the Lords Justices.
As to the South-Sea Stock, it continued to rise till about the end of August. It then began to fall, and fell faster than it rose; so that by Michaelmas-day it sunk to 150. In December it underwent a parliamentary enquiry, which inducedKnight, the South-Sea Company’s treasurer to abscond. In the end, parliamentapplied to the relief of the sufferers the estates of the sub-governor, deputy-governor, directors, &c. And also that of the Chancellor of the Exchequer,Aislabie. They were also incapacitated from sitting or voting in either House of Parliament, or holding any office or place of trust under his Majesty, his heirs, or successors. The following Summer an Act against the directors received the royal assent, and shortly after anotherfor restoring the public credit. The shareWalpolehad in settling this distracted affair, and restoring public credit, brought him into great favour at court, and facilitated his promotion. He was now made chancellor of the Exchequer, and first Commissioner of the Treasury, and continued prime minister to the end of this reign, and fifteen years after; to the no small benefit, no doubt, of many Lynn freemen, whatever may be said of the nation at large.
This reign was also distinguished by those memorable religious controversies which sprung from the novel or unfashionable opinions advanced and maintained by Clarke, Whiston, Peirce, Hoadly, and others, and which wrought a considerable revolution in the minds of a great many, both in the church and among the dissenters. The athanasian trinity was given up by numbers of our most learned countrymen; the nature of the kingdom of Christ, with the measure and extent of the obedience due to the civil magistrate, became better understood; the injustice and iniquity of imposing human creeds, or articles of faith, were more fully evinced; in short, the English nation is supposed to havebeen thenceforth more generally and accurately acquainted with the principles of civil and religious liberty, the claims of conscience, and rights of man, than at any former period. Of late years, however, we are thought to have made no advances on these grounds, but rather to have been moving in a retrogressive direction; so that our favourite wordlibertyitself would seem to be in danger of losing its wonted meaning, and becoming a vague, or rather an obsolete term in our language. Nor will the violent hubbub lately raised, by Lord Sidmouth’s illiberal, illconditioned, illfeatured, illdigested, and deservedly reprobated bill, be sufficient to invalidate this opinion.
The effects of the above-mentioned controversies extended even to this town; and the elderPyle, who was then at the head of our established clergy, as well as the elderRastrick, who was at the head of the dissenting interest here, were both actually brought over to what was deemed the heterodox side of the question. They were men of considerable eminence and learning, and had been both educated at Cambridge; for Rastrick was originally one of the established clergy, and had been for sometime vicar of Kirkton near Boston, before he left the church and joined the dissenters. But we will say no more of them here, as we shall have occasion to bring them forward again in our biographical sketches. The king died suddenly, at Osnaburgh in his German dominions, on the 11th of June 1727, and was succeeded by his only son, George prince of Wales, which brings us to the end of this section.
A view of the state of things in this town during the reign of George II.—his accession attended with no inauspicious circumstances;and his reign,on the whole,happy and prosperous—recital of some of the most notable and prominent acts of our municipality in the earlier part of it—account of certain subsequent proceedings and occurrences.
The reign of George II. commenced upon the arrival of the news of his father’s demise, which was very shortly, and within a few days after that event had taken place. He was proclaimed in London on the 15th of June, and at Edinburgh and Dublin on the 19th of the same month. His accession was attended by none of those untoward appearances which beclouded that of his predecessor. All the lords and others, the late king’s privy councellors, were sworn of his privy council, the former ministry retained their places, and Walpole held the premiership for fifteen years longer; nor was he displaced at last through any dislike or prejudice which the king had imbibed against him or his service, but by the persevering and prevailing exertions of the opposition party, headed byPulteney, who forced him to resign, contrary to the desire or inclination of the sovereign. His administration has been much censured, for its systematic corruption. But that corruption never extended so far as that of certain heaven-born ministers of more recent times; and it was certainly employed for much better purposes. His aversion to war, and constant endeavours to avoid it, cover a multitude of his sins: and it was probably not so often as most people imagine that this country has been favoured with better ministers than Sir Robert Walpole.
The reign of George II. may safely be pronounced, on the whole, one of the most happy and prosperous in the annals of this country. The principles of civil and religious liberty were then favoured at court, and recognized by the sovereign, as what had seated his family on the throne. Protestant Dissenters he considered as some of his best friends and most faithful subjects; nor did his ministers and courtiers ever presume to treat them with coolness and disrespect, or pretend to entertain any doubt or suspicion of their loyalty, or their attachment to the king and constitution, according to the principles laid down at the revolution. In short, this reign will be contemplated with no small pleasure by the sons of freedom, as a period when an open attachment to civil and religious liberty, or the real rights of man, subjected no one to the suspicion, or imputation, of being a traitor to his king and country. How far the same may be said of our situation for the last twenty years, is a question of which we shall not at present enter upon the discussion.
One of the first notable acts of our municipality, after the commencement of this reign, may be presumed to be that of addressing the throne, by way both of condolence and congratulation; the former on the death of the late sovereign, and the latter on the happy accession of his successor. But as no copy of this address has fallen in our way, we cannot form any judgment of its tenor or merit: only we are informed that our cities and boroughs, in general, did then actually send up such addresses; and it is not to be supposed that the same wasneglected or omitted at Lynn, especially as the prime minister himself was one of its representatives. This address, no doubt, was sufficiently loyal, but whether or not so eloquent and sublime as those sent up in the reign of queen Anne, must now be left among the uncertainties, or, perhaps, even among the inscrutables.
Not long after, or in the course of the autumn of that same year, as it would seem, the mayor, (Mr. Tho. Allen) according to one of our manuscript narratives, issuedan order to prohibit the barbers to shave on Sundays; for which we may be pretty sure his worship had not many thanks from that fraternity. How far this order was obeyed, or did contribute to the reformation and benefit of the town, we have not been able to discover. The wisdom and utility of such measures appear very questionable, and it is doubtful if they have ever answered any very good purposes, as they seem to be ill, or not at all, calculated to convince people of the evil of the conduct or practices against which they are directed. Some of our mayors, of more recent days, have taken upon them to issue similar orders, at the commencement of their mayoralty, but they have seldom, or never, thought it proper or expedient to enforce them throughout, or to the end of the year.
Mr John Goodwin, the mayor of the ensuing year, (1728–,) distinguished himself, according to the same narrative, in another way, by setting down a stone-cistern at the end of the Fish-Shambles, and also endowing one of the Almshouses in broad Street for one poorman with two shillings a week.—His successor, Mr. Andrew Taylor, distinguished himself still differently: for, as the same narrative words it, “He did abundance of good, as he thought, by taking away guns and killing of dogs; but was a friend to the Church, which he seldom troubled.” That is, if we rightly comprehend the meaning, he was, in talk, a mighty zealot for the Church, though he seldom would condescend, or deem it worth his while to honour it with his presence: which, to all thinking and discerning people, was a sure sign and clear proof that all his noisy zeal was nothing but mere pretence, to answer some mercenary or hypocritical end; and but for which he in reality cared no more for the church than the most heathenish or irreligious of his neighbours.
How many such churchmen as this Andrew Taylor have been mayors of this town since his time, it is impossible to say; but that numbers of them have pretended to be very stanch and zealous for the Church, while they seldom attended its stated service, or public worship, is very certain. That there were none of this description among the present members of the Hall seems much to be wished; and especially that a truly and christian spirit towards those of other denominations was more visible and predominant among them; which yet is suspected not to have been altogether the case at the formation or establishment of the Lancastrian school, and in some subsequent circumstances relating to that event. But this is not the proper place to make thesematters the subjects of inquiry, investigation, or animadversion.[912]
The successor of Taylor, Mr. Charles Harwick, who obtained the mayoralty in 1730, had most painful scenes to engage his attention, owing to the most shocking murder of a Mrs Ann Wright, which had been perpetrated in the town that year, by one George Smith, aided by Mary Taylor, Mrs Wright’s Servant, who had let him into the house in the dead of the night. For this black and horrid deed Mary Taylor was burnt alive in the market-place, and Smith was hanged at the same time, on a gallows erected, as Mackerell says, seventeen yards distant from the stake. This happened, it seems, in 1731, the latter part of Harwick’s mayoralty. The superlative atrociousness of that bloody deed, and the dreadful abandonment, dereliction, or depravity of mind which it discovered, called, undoubtedly, for the most exemplary and terrible punishment, in order to deter those of the like character from thecommission of similar crimes, as nothing else can be expected to have much effect on such, in restraining their flagitious propensities. A virtuous principle, however, after all, is the most powerful and effectual of all preventives against vicious or criminal excesses, and far beyond all the terrors of penal laws, or punitive justice. It is a great pity more care is not taken to instill this principle as much as possible into the minds of the rising generations
About the time last mentioned, oneJohn Rudkin, a member of our municipality, fell under the sore displeasure of his brethren, and was eventually expelled from among them. The affair is thus related in the Hall books—“April 26. 1731, Ordered that John Rudkin be discharged from the office of common Councell man, unless, next Hall-day, he can shew cause to the contrary; he having disclosed the councells of this assembly, and the secrets of this corporation, and hath behaved contemptuously towards the mayor (Charles Harwick Esq.[913]) and other members, justices of this burgh, and charged some of them with pyracy.”—again—“June 16. 1731, John Rudkin’s answer being insufficent, hewas expelled and discharged from the office of a common councell.” This shews that our corporation, as such, havecounselsandsecrets, that are deemed very improper and criminal to disclose; which seems to look somewhat dark and suspicious; for if all their proceedings were fair and just, honestly and solely directed for the public good, what need could there be to care if the whole world knew all about them?[914]—Corporations might be beneficial in their original institution, and in feudal times, to protect the inhabitants from baronial domination and tyranny; but they have become long ago (for the most part, at least,) grievous nuisances, rather than real benefits, to the British public.
At the period we are now reviewing, Lynn was by no means in a flourishing state, as may be pretty safely concluded from the following passage in our book of Extracts—“Dec. 23. 1731; Ordered that a memorial be sent to the Representatives in Parliament, touching the heavy burthen upon them, from the Land-Tax Act, and from the decrease of traders among them, praying reliefe.”—Things must have gotten to a sad pass tobring our high-minded corporation to so dejected and supplicating a posture. For sometime previous and subsequent to the date of the above extract, as the presentwriter has heard from ancient people who remembered the time, theindigenceof Lynn was a matter of general notoriety; so thatpoor Lynnused to be the common appellation of the town, in the language of the country people. It seems now to be the prevailing opinion that the late conduct of our rulers, in subjecting the small houses to taxation, and otherwise so unconscionably burdening the town, will soon bring things here again to the same pass, and restore to us the humiliating name ofpoor Lynnonce more. Our manyempty houseswould seem to corroborate this opinion; but we would fain hope their number will soon decrease, and that some favourable events, or happy turn of things will prevent such an opinion, or the fears entertained on this head being realized.
In the times we are now exploring, our mayor was allowed to confer the freedom of the town, on some one person whom he should think proper to select for that purpose: hence such notices as the following occur in our book of Extracts—“Dec. 8. 1732; Rd. Hawkins made ffree, as the mayor’s, John Farthing’s ffreeman.”—again—“May 8. 1733; Wm. Langley, mariner, made ffree, upon Andrew Taylor’s recommendation, not having had a ffreeman chosen for his mayoralty, as accustomed.”—again—“May 23. 1733; Edmd. Harwick, of Wiggenhall St. Maries, to have his ffreedom upon recommendation of alderman John Goodwin, he not having had a ffreeman chosen for his last mayoralty as hath been accustomed.”—About three months after, however, our Hall suddenly resolved to discontinue this custom, as appears from the following passage among our Extracts—“Aug. 29. 1733; Saml. Browne chosen mayor, and to have 150l.viz. 50l.for the better carrying on the mayoralty; 50l.for the entertainment on Michaelmas Day; and 50l.on St. John’s Day”—Then it is added—“And thatno succeeding mayor have the liberty of naming,or making a ffreeman,as his ffreeman,for the future.” But they did not long adhere to this order, or resolution, or persist in so self-denying a course, as we find by another note among the same Extracts, which is expressed thus—“May 22. 1739; The revd. Mr. Edmd. Keene had his ffreedom gratis,as his father’s ffreeman.”[917]Whether or not it was very wise to discontinue this custom, or afterwards to revive it, after it had been so expressly and formally abolished, we will not now stop to inquire, but shall here close this section.
Great chancery suit here about1738—violent storm or hurricane in1741—its effects here and in the adjacent country—the damages here repaired—perilous state then of the river and harbour—rebellion breaking out in1745—its effects in this town—its progress—suppressed after the battle of Culloden—reflections thereon—subsequent events relating to Lynn to the end of that reign—state of the nation—accession of George III.
About the time of which we have been speaking, our Corporation had a great suit in Chancery with one of their own principal members; and however justifiable or unjustifiable it might be, a falling out among brethren must be allowed to be, at any time and on any occasion, a very unpleasant occurrence. Our knowledge of this unlovely affair is derived from the following luminous passage in our book of Extracts—“Dec. 22. 1738; Whereas there was lately a suit depending in Chancery between the mayor and burgesses and Robt. Britiffe Esq. their trustee, against alderman Thomas Allen, (which was the 7th. Octr. 1738, agreed that Mr. Serjeant Urlin, Chas. Clarke Esq. and Mr. Tho. Nutting be appointed Referees to arbitrate) for the recovery of the ancient customary payment of 1d.per quarter for corn sold by the said Tho. Allen, upon contracts made by him with other merchants, not being freemen, for shipping such corn at a price certain, clear of all charges. Said Mr. Allen hath agreed to pay not only all the arrears for all corn he shipped off out of this port, where the same was not really his own risque and adventure, but in all future times to pay the saiddues for all corn which he shall contract for and sell to any persons not being freemen of the said borough, which shall be exported out of the said borough by water.” In this suit the corporation evidently got the better of their opponent; but this is far from having been invariably the case in all their law-suits, as has before appeared in the course of this work.
The year 1741 was rendered very remarkable and memorable in this town and country, on account of a violent storm, or hurricane, which then happened, and did great damage to the churches and other buildings. It arose on the 8th of September O. S. and blew down the spires of St. Nicholas’ chapel, and St. Margaret’s Church, and demolished a great part of the body of the latter. The following memoranda, written at that period, will further describe the awful effects of this disastrous visitation. Among our Extracts, so often quoted, it is noted as follows under the date of Sept. 9. 1741; “The Hurrycane yesterday blew down the spire and body of St. Margaret’s Church; also the spire of St. Nicholas’s Chappell.” And in another place, but of the same date, it is thus noted—“That whereas the Hurricane yesterday blew down St. Margaret’s spire and part of the Church, application be made to Sir Robert Walpole to procure ane act of parliament for rebuilding the same.” But a more particular account of the effects of this furious tempest we have found written on a blank leaf, at the end of a copy of the history of the great storm in 1703. It is in the handwriting of a Mr.Tho. Peirson, a clergyman, if we are not mistaken, whose property the book probably was, and it runs as follows—
“M E M. That on Tuesday 8. Sept. 1741, about 20 minutes after 12 at noon, was a most violent storm of wind and rain, which blew down St. Margarett’s Church Steeple and St. Nicholas at Lynn Regis, with the Weather-cock, &c. of All-Hallows Church in South Lynn,[920]Norfolk. Also the great West gabble-end, with a very large stack of chimneys, and the Weather-Hand of Middleton-Hall—And a great barn belonging to Henry Whiteman’s Farm at Tilney, with a small barn belonging to Thos. Cricks Farm at Outwell, in the Isle of Ely, the property of Me.—Besides divers other buildings in Marshland; and great damage was done to the Timber and others Trees in the country about Lynn and Downham.Ita Testor.Tho: Peirson.”
“M E M. That on Tuesday 8. Sept. 1741, about 20 minutes after 12 at noon, was a most violent storm of wind and rain, which blew down St. Margarett’s Church Steeple and St. Nicholas at Lynn Regis, with the Weather-cock, &c. of All-Hallows Church in South Lynn,[920]Norfolk. Also the great West gabble-end, with a very large stack of chimneys, and the Weather-Hand of Middleton-Hall—And a great barn belonging to Henry Whiteman’s Farm at Tilney, with a small barn belonging to Thos. Cricks Farm at Outwell, in the Isle of Ely, the property of Me.—Besides divers other buildings in Marshland; and great damage was done to the Timber and others Trees in the country about Lynn and Downham.
Ita Testor.Tho: Peirson.”
The damages sustained here from this storm were all in time repaired: those of St. Margaret’s Church, it seems, by virtue of an act of parliament. One of our MS. narratives informs us that the rebuilding of that church was begun in 1742, during the mayoralty of Edward Everard, and completed in 1747, during that of Walter Robertson; so that it appears to have beenabout five years in rebuilding. But the new, or present church, like Ezra and Nehemiah’s new temple at Jerusalem, is said to be much inferior to the former, in point of dimension, as well as beauty and magnificence. It may be supposed however, that thepardonsorindulgencesoffered to the contributors towards the old edifice, procured ampler funds for its completion than theact of parliamentthat was obtained for completing the new.
It would seem as if our very river and harbour had not entirely escaped the effects of that storm, and even that it did, or occasioned some very material damage to them; at least, there were great complaints made just after, of the bad and very perilous state to which they were then reduced. This will appear from the following passage, extracted from the Town Records—
“Sept. 9. 1741 agreed that the defences in sundry places of the Harbour are become insufficient to confine the fflux and reflux of the Tide, so that the Port and Harbour will soon be lost—That the two points of land on the east and west side of the river about a mile below the town are worn away by the rage of the sea, so that Marshland on one hand, and Gaywood and Wooton and all the low-lands thereabouts on the other, are in danger of being swallowed up by the sea—That, to guard against the flux and reflux, Piers are conceived to be absolutely necessary to be placed both above and below Lynn, for the preservation of the Town as well as the Port and Harbour.”
“Sept. 9. 1741 agreed that the defences in sundry places of the Harbour are become insufficient to confine the fflux and reflux of the Tide, so that the Port and Harbour will soon be lost—That the two points of land on the east and west side of the river about a mile below the town are worn away by the rage of the sea, so that Marshland on one hand, and Gaywood and Wooton and all the low-lands thereabouts on the other, are in danger of being swallowed up by the sea—That, to guard against the flux and reflux, Piers are conceived to be absolutely necessary to be placed both above and below Lynn, for the preservation of the Town as well as the Port and Harbour.”
Shortly after another meeting was held at the Hall on the same occasion; which is thus noticed in the same Extracts—“Octr. 15. 1741, Sir John Turner, bart. is desired to write to Sir Robert Walpole, to recommend a Surveyor to view the Harbour, and to draw a report thereof, in order to have the same laid before parliament.”—Three weeks after, the result of this application to the minister is thus announced—“Nov. 5th. Sir John Turner acquainted that he had received a Letter from Sir Robt. Walpole, recommending Mr. Roswell, then at Hull, to survey the Harbour; and he is accepted and approved of to be Surveyor, and B. Nuthall Esq. or his Deputy, Mr. Recorder, aldermen Goodwin, Allen, Farthing, Bagge—Mr. Hulton, Everard, Langley, or any five or more to be a committee to prepare instructions for him.”—again—“Dec. 14. 1741; Ordered 21l.to be presented to Mr. Rodwell [so the name is spelt here:] for his trouble and advice in matters relating to the Harbour and South Marsh.”—Furthermore—“Febr. 24 1741–2;—Mr. Wm. Reynolds presented his report touching his survey of the Harbour, together with ane estimate of the charges in the erecting of two Piers which he proposes for the restoration and preservation thereof, which is approved off.”
Afterwards we hear no more of this business, for nine months or more. Then we find it further noticed as follows—
“Novr. 29th. 1742; Ordered that application be made to parliament for the preservation of the channel and harbour of this Port and Borough, which are in danger of being lost.—The schemes of Mr Rosewelland Mr. Reynolds being read and approved of, it is agreed that the same be carryed into execution, and this House hath agreed to resolve itselfe into a Committee of the whole House, to consider of ways and means for raising moneys, by laying such rates and duties on goods and merchandizes imported into, and exported out of this Port, or by such other ways as they shall think proper for the effectuall carrying those schemes into execution, for preserving the channel and harbour aforesaid and rendring the same usefull and safe for navigation.”
“Novr. 29th. 1742; Ordered that application be made to parliament for the preservation of the channel and harbour of this Port and Borough, which are in danger of being lost.—The schemes of Mr Rosewelland Mr. Reynolds being read and approved of, it is agreed that the same be carryed into execution, and this House hath agreed to resolve itselfe into a Committee of the whole House, to consider of ways and means for raising moneys, by laying such rates and duties on goods and merchandizes imported into, and exported out of this Port, or by such other ways as they shall think proper for the effectuall carrying those schemes into execution, for preserving the channel and harbour aforesaid and rendring the same usefull and safe for navigation.”
What beneficial effects resulted from the above measures we have not been able to discover. Nor do our Extracts afford us any further information relating to the subject, except what is suggested in the following passage—“Dec. 19. 1744; A Committee [was appointed] to view the state of the banks, in Gaywood and Wooton, lying against the sea—and to view the breach made in the South Marsh bank, by the rageing tides, and enquire if the corporation may desert the lands lying upon the banks, and whether by such desertion the corporation will be discharged from the repairing said banks.”—This passage discovers more selfishness than public spirit. They seemed disposed to let the banks remain unrepaired, and take no further care of them, whatever might be the consequence to the country, provided they could be sure it might be done with perfect safety, or without any pecuniary risk to themselves. This is in the true corporation character.
The next year (1745) was very memorably distinguished by the rebellion, which then broke out in Scotland in favour of the pretender, or the son of James II.
“On the 6th of August this year some notices having been communicated to the government of such an attempt, aided by the French Court, a proclamation was published, offering a reward of 30,000l.for apprehending and securing the eldest son of the pretender, in case he should land, or attempt to land, in any of his majesty’s dominions. On the 17th. an account arrived, that several persons had landed between the islands ofMullandSkie, one of whom it was supposed was the pretender’s Son. On September 5, his majesty sent notice to the lord mayor of London, that the pretender’s eldest son had landed in Scotland, and that several persons had assembled there and broke out into open rebellion.“Soon after advice arrived, that the rebels had marched Southward. On the 13th. they passed the Forth, five miles above Stirling, and on the 17th. took possession of the city of Edinburgh. By that time generalCopewith his army landed at Dunbar, and began to march towards that capital. The rebels did not wait to be attacked by him, but came out to meet him, and on the 21st. at daybreak, they attacked him atPreston Pans, seven miles east of Edinburgh, and totally defeated him, making most of his infantry prisoners. The dragoons made their escape toBerwick, with little loss, save that of the braveColonel Gardiner. These advantages on the side of the rebels spread a generalconsternation throughout the kingdom; but all ranks and orders, as we are told, vied with each other in displaying their loyalty, and abhorrence of this unnatural rebellion.”
“On the 6th of August this year some notices having been communicated to the government of such an attempt, aided by the French Court, a proclamation was published, offering a reward of 30,000l.for apprehending and securing the eldest son of the pretender, in case he should land, or attempt to land, in any of his majesty’s dominions. On the 17th. an account arrived, that several persons had landed between the islands ofMullandSkie, one of whom it was supposed was the pretender’s Son. On September 5, his majesty sent notice to the lord mayor of London, that the pretender’s eldest son had landed in Scotland, and that several persons had assembled there and broke out into open rebellion.
“Soon after advice arrived, that the rebels had marched Southward. On the 13th. they passed the Forth, five miles above Stirling, and on the 17th. took possession of the city of Edinburgh. By that time generalCopewith his army landed at Dunbar, and began to march towards that capital. The rebels did not wait to be attacked by him, but came out to meet him, and on the 21st. at daybreak, they attacked him atPreston Pans, seven miles east of Edinburgh, and totally defeated him, making most of his infantry prisoners. The dragoons made their escape toBerwick, with little loss, save that of the braveColonel Gardiner. These advantages on the side of the rebels spread a generalconsternation throughout the kingdom; but all ranks and orders, as we are told, vied with each other in displaying their loyalty, and abhorrence of this unnatural rebellion.”