Great complaints having for sometime been made of the sad state of fen-drainage in the parts above Lynn, much stir was made on that account about the year 1794, and a Cut from Eaubrink to Lynn-harbour was then proposed as a remedy for that growing evil. The expediency of the measure being agreed upon, an act of parliament was obtained in 1795 for its accomplishment.And though above fifteen years have since elapsed, during most of which time a heavy tax has been levied on the lands there, yet the projected cut, that was to produce such vast benefits, is not yet begun: nor is it at all certain, or even very probable at present, that it ever will, notwithstanding the vast sums that have been collected, and are still collecting for that purpose, from the respective land-owners.[976]The act of parliament that was obtained, if not already renewed, must, it seems, be so soon, because of this excessive procrastination. How many such renewals must hereafter be resorted to before the work will commence, it is impossible to say. The promoters of this measure appear to have engaged in it before they were sufficiently aware of the magnitude and arduousness of the undertaking.Their giving it up at last would therefore be no great wonder.
In 1794 serious apprehensions of a French invasion began to be pretty generally entertained in this kingdom; and in the summer of that year a new body of volunteers was formed at Lynn, under the command of alderman Edward Everard, junior. This was more numerous than that which was formed here some years before, and it continued embodied till the summer of 1802. The present writer being most of that time out of town, cannot say much from his own knowledge of the character of this corps, but he believes it was very fair, and no way discommendable, or discreditable to its worthy commandant: and this seems strongly corroborated by a paragraph which appeared in theLynn Packetat the time when the corps was disbanded;[977]which also records the very day when that event took place.—Before we dismiss 1794, we may just hint that we had here then a violent thunderstorm, when a young girl was killed by the lightening. (See Norfolk Remembrancer, p. 29.)
The year 1796 is rendered very memorable here by the fatal disaster which happened then at the ferry in the mart time. On the 23rd of February, about 6 o’clock in the evening, many people, to the number of forty or more, got into the ferry-boat; and though the boat-men remonstrated with them, as being too many to be taken over at once, yet so anxious were they to get over without further delay that none of them could be persuaded to get out and wait for the return of the boat, it was a calm evening, but the tide was coming in very strong. The boat however proceeded safely till it had almost reached the opposite shore, when passing across some ropes belonging to a vessel lying there, it received a violent concussion which laid it pretty much on one side: at that moment the passengers, instead of keeping their places, rushed headlong to the lower side, and thereby overset the boat in an instant. Eleven of them lost their lives; among whom was a man and his wife and daughter; also two young persons on the point of marriage, who were afterwards found clasped in each others arms. It is rather wonderful that so many of them were saved; but it was saidto be owing to several boats being then very near the spot, which came almost instantly to their assistance, and succeeded in picking up and saving most of them. Although the Lynn ferry be but an awkward kind of passage, yet this seems to have been the only very serious accident that has occurred there for a very great length of time. Our ferry-men in general are somewhat more civil and decent than their brethren in other parts, who have often been classed among the most rude and brutish of all our countrymen.
In 1797 a whale measuring 44 feet, (according to the Norfolk Remembrancer,) was caught in Lynn channel. In the course of the same year our farmers are said to have discovered cleansing seed-wheatby water only, (fresh water we suppose,) to be the best and most certain preservative against the smut or brand. If it be really so, many have been at a great deal of needless trouble and expense in preparing their seed-wheat. But such an imputation is by no means peculiar to our wheat growers. It is commonly the case in a progress of investigation and experiment. Many a highly and generally esteemed practice or usage, beside those that have obtained in the preparation of seed-corn, have been afterwards found far from deserving the high estimation they had acquired, and in which they had been long held.[979]
In the course of the year 1798, the fear of an invasion from France became very strong and general in this part of the kingdom; which occasioned our armed associations to be considerably multiplied. Among the new armed companies which sprung up, or were formed that year in this country, we read of the Holkham Yeomanry Cavalry, commanded by T. W. Coke Esq. and E. Rolfe Esq. The Freebridge Smithdon Yeomanry Cavalry, commanded by H. Styleman Esq. The Freebridge Lynn Yeomanry Cavalry, commanded by Joseph Taylor Esq. and the Swaffham ditto, commanded by J. Micklethwaite Esq. &c. &c. The veryclergydiscovered a readiness and strong desire to learn the use of arms, and one of them appears actually to have become commandant of one of these new raised corps; for among the military officers then enumeratedthe name of therevd. T. Lloydappeared as captain of theNorth Walsham Volunteer company. This clerical ardour for taking up arms was said to be sometime after checked by episcopal authority, otherwise we might have had before now a very great number ofreverendcaptains, and majors, and colonels. The Freebridge Lynn Yeomanry Cavalry remain still undisbanded under the orders of their original leader.—An Act passed this year for draining &c. the lands and fen grounds in Outwell, Stow Bardolph, Wimbotsham, and Downham; which it is to be hoped has answered much better than theFeltwellnew drainage act, which we have already noticed.—On the 29th. of December this same year, at 11P.M.the thermometer was said to be at 3 below 0: a degree of cold never before noticed in this island—if we may rely on the authority of theNorfolk Remembrancer.
The year 1799 was rendered somewhat remarkable here by an attempt to establish a Newspaper, under the name of theLynn and Wisbech Packet; but it did not finally succeed, though persevered in for several years. Lynn seems not favourably situated for the success of such an undertaking, placed as it is in a corner of the country, and the adjacent parts well supplied with provincial papers of established repute and extensive circulation. It was therefore, perhaps, a rash and hopeless attempt, so that its relinquishment at last need not to excite any great surprise. The projector hoped, when he resolved to try this experiment, that it would prove a source of much gain, but he found in the endthat what he gained by it was only a pretty heavy loss, which placed him in the list of unfortunate adventurers.[982]
But what rendered this year still more remarkable and memorable, both here and throughout the kingdom, was the origination, introduction, and operation of theincome tax, which now took place and will not be soon forgotten. In former times this odious tax would have been very unwelcome in this country, and probably deemed intolerable by the whole nation. The people would have thought themselves degraded to the lowest degree, in being obliged to appear before certain of their own neighbours, in the character of commissioners, and there disclose upon oath the amount of their property and means of subsistence, in order to empower the tax-gatherers to take from them a tenth part of their yearly income, for the purpose of supporting and pursuing measures which many of them utterly disapproved. This vile impost was indeed doubly detestable, as it not only sunk the subjects below the rank of freemen, but also laid before them a strong incitement to falshood and perjury, and was, in all probability, the means of greatly increasing our national guilt and depravity. But these were considerations that weighedbut little with the minister and his associates. An increasing revenue was with them of infinitely greater importance.—On the 2nd. of June this year, a pleasure boat going off fromHeachamto a vessel lying in Lynn channel overset, and out of fourteen persons, who were on board, men women and children, twelve unfortunately perished.—This year also, from continued rains, the harvest was not got in, in some parts of Norfolk till the beginning of November; and in some parts of the kingdom some corn lay rotting in the fields at the beginning of December: a like instance had not occurred before for 40 or 50 years.
East Gate Lynn: taken down in 1800
One of the most memorable of the Lynn occurrences in 1800, was the taking down theEast-gates, which had stood many centuries, and made a somewhat venerable appearance. They had been for sometime a subject of complaint on account of the difficulty of entrance for highloaded waggons, by reason of the lowness of the arch. This act of dilapidation therefore was a case of necessity, and the removal of a nuisance, and it rendered that entrance into the town much pleasanter than before.—But an occurrence of this year which far more affected the public mind, in this town, as well as throughout the kingdom, was the regicide attempt of the maniac Hadfield on the evening of the 15th. of May, at Drury Lane theatre. The poor insane wretch fired a horse-pistol towards the king’s box just as his majesty entered it, but fortunately missed him, owing it seems to a person near him, with great presence of mind, raisinghis arm when in the act of firing, and so directing the contents of the pistol to the roof of the house. This shocking deed occasioned no small consternation in the house; but it soon subsided, and the play went on to the entire satisfaction and amusement of the whole company, the royal family not excepted.
The news of this horrid attempt upon the king’s life, and of his happy escape, deeply affected the minds of his Lynn subjects, from whom no less than two addresses were soon after presented to his majesty on the occasion; one from the mayor andcorporation, and the other from the mayor and theinhabitants.[984]Both of themwere penned in a language perfectly dutiful and loyal, which, without doubt, was expressed with the utmost truth and sincerity. The same may also be said of all the numerous addresses which then reached the throne, from all quarters; which proves the sovereign’s great popularity, and how high he stood in the estimation of his addressing subjects. His successor it is to be hoped will prove himself no less deserving of his people’s attachment.
Since the year 1800, and the commencement of the present century, nothing more remarkable is known to have occurred here than what has been produced by the operation of new taxes and new laws—especially ourpoorandpavinglaws.[985]These certainly have borne and are still bearing hard upon a large portion of the industrious inhabitants. Of these matters some notice has been taken already, and they will probably be further noticed when we come to give a view of thepresent stateof the town. Such remarkable occurrences as the author may be able to recollect, or any one else may put him in mind of, as having been overlooked in the preceding pages, shall be carefully inserted in aChronological Tableat the end of the work.—Having now brought this history down tothe present time, we shall here close this section.
Biographical sketches of some of the most eminent or distinguished personages among the natives or inhabitants of Lynn,from the reformation to the present day—Watts—Arrowsmith—Goodwin—Horne—Phelpes—Falkner—Goddard.
In the list of persons of real note, or memorable distinction who appeared since the reformation among the natives or inhabitants of this town, the first place, in order of time, seems to belong toWilliam Watts, said to have been a native of this borough, or its vicinity. The time of his birth is not recorded, but is supposed to have been about the close of the reign of Elizabeth. He probably received the rudiments of his education in the Grammar school of this town, which was from 1597 to 1608 under the care ofMr. John Man, afterwards minister of South Lynn, and from 1608 to 1612 or 13, under that ofMr. Henry Allston. He was afterwards sent to Caius College in Cambridge, where he appears to have made great proficiency, and to have finished his academical education. He then went and made some stay at Oxford; after which he travelled, as Anthony Wood says, into several countries, and became master of divers languages. In his travels he is supposed to have made his chief stay in Holland, where he became acquainted with the celebratedJohn Gerard Vossius, who entertained a very favourable and high opinion of him, and spoke of him asdoctissimus et clarissimus Watsius,qui optime de historia meruit. At his return, after the accession of Charles I, he was made one of the king’s chaplains, and preferred successively to livings and dignities in the church. Being, as mightbe expected, a zealous royalist, and adhering firmly to the king’s cause, he was sequestered, plundered, and left without a shelter for his wife and children. He was carried by his courage and resentment into the field with prince Rupert, during the hardiest of his exploits; and died, in 1649, on board his fleet, in the harbour of Kinsale. He had an especial hand, says Wood, in Sir Henry Spelman’s Glossary; he edited Matthew Paris, and, exclusively of other treatises, he published, before the civil war of England began, several numbers of new books, in the English tongue, (more than forty,) containing the occurrences in the wars between the king of Sweden and the Germans. When he returned from his travels, Newspapers were very little known in this country. They had first appeared in the reign of Elizabeth, under the sage direction of Burleigh; but they were published only occasionally, and were all extraordinary gazettes. They appeared frequently about the time of the armada, and are supposed to have then answered very important purposes. Being no longer deemed necessary when that danger was past, they were discontinued. The public curiosity having been much gratified by these publications, the people would be no longer satisfied without a newspaper. It was therefore not long before publications of that kind began to make their appearance. They were at first occasional, and afterwards weekly. “Nathaniel Butter, at the Pyde-Bull, St. Augustin’s gate,” established a weekly newspaper, in August 1622, entitled “The certain news of the present week.” How long he continued his hebdomadal intelligences does not appear. He is saidto have laid little before his readers, which could enlarge knowledge, or excite risibility; though his battles may have surprised and elevated, and his sieges may have alternately agitated the hopes and fears of his countrymen. He had, however, competitors and imitators. In February 1635–6 was first published a fresh paper of Weekly Newes. The foreign intelligence of May 22, was conveyed in number 13. This too was a small quarto of 14 pages; and it was printed in London, for Mercurius Britannicus; which proves sufficiently that that well known title had a more early origin than has been generally supposed. Similar papers were continued, though they assumed different names. Butter, who appears to have been the most active and enterprising newsmonger of his time, was influenced by his interest to tell—
“News, old news, and such news as you never heard of.”
“News, old news, and such news as you never heard of.”
He was thus induced to convert his Weekly News intohalf-yearly news, (two of which making a kind ofannual register) which shews that he was a person of no common enterprize. In order to insure success to so novel an undertaking, an able compiler seemed absolutely necessary; and Butter very judiciously fixed upon Watts for that department. He accordingly complied with the projector’s proposal, and so became the precursor ofJohnson,Burke,Kippis,Southey, and the rest of our distinguished literary characters, who have been since employed in similar departments. How long he continued thus employed we have not been able to discover; but it is probably it might be till near thecommencement of the civil wars: and as he was likely to have distinguished himself, in the mean time, as a warm, and perhaps violent advocate for the measures of the court, it may in some measure account for the hardship and severity which he and his family afterwards experienced from the opposite party, by the hands of the sequestrators. Be that as it might, William Watts was certainly a person so distinguished in his day, as to deserve to have his name preserved among the most eminent characters that sprung up here during the period we are now reviewing.
2.John ArrowsmithM.A. Fellow of Catherine Hall, in Cambridge, afterwards D.D., Master of St. John’s College, and member of the Westminster Assembly of Divines. Where he was born we have not been able to learn; but he came to this town about Michaelmas 1630, being then chosen minister of St. Nicholas’ chapel, in which capacity he continued during the whole time of his residence here, which was fourteen years. The town allowed him a salary of 100l.a year, which must have been equal to 6 or 700l.of our money. He was also allowed a house to live in, or 5l.a year in lieu of it, which would pay a house-rent now of between 30 and 40l.a year. It appears that he was treated here, during the whole of his residence, with singular and universal respect; from which it may be inferred that he came well recommended, conducted himself with great prudence and propriety, and that his ministerial labours were highly acceptable. Yet Arrowsmith evidently belonged to the puritans, a partyfor which Lynn was never understood to entertain any particular predilection. How far his ministry contributed to prepare the town for the new order of things which took place in consequence of the siege, and with which the generality of the inhabitants appeared very compliable, we have not the means of ascertaining. But whatever might be the political tendency of his public labours here, their being highly acceptable to his hearers seems very clear and undeniable. For though he and the principal cotemporary minister of St. Margaret’s had several assistants,[990a]who performed the parts assigned to them on Sundays and week days with good acceptance, yet the present writer has in his hands sufficient documents[990b]to provethat he stood above them all in the public estimation. It is therefore presumed that we are fully warranted in placing him among the most eminent of the inhabitantsof this town during the said period. The historian Neal speaks of him as a person “of unexceptionable character for learning and piety;” and further says, that “he was an accute disputant, and a judicious divine, as appears by hisTactica Sacra, a book of great reputation in those times.” He died before the restoration, and therefore his name does not appear inCalamyandRastrick’s lists of ejected ministers.
Before we take our final leave of Dr. Arrowsmith, it may not be improper to apprize the reader of two personswhom the town successively fixed upon to occupy the vacant place of principal minister of St. Nicholas, immediately previous to their making choice of him. These, as appears to the present writer, were no other than the twoGoodwins,ThomasandJohn, who became so famous and distinguished afterwards among the English nonconformists. In a document or record above alluded to, and extracted probably from the Hall-Books, the following passage occurs.—“1629, 12 June; Mr. Mayor and Mr. Tho. Gurlyn, aldn. travel to Cambridge to move Mr. Tho. Goodwin A.M. to come hither to (be) preacher in ys town, and Mr. M. A. CC elected sd. Mr. G. if he will accept thereof.” But he did not accept of their invitation, owing probably to his having been previously chosen lecturer of Trinity church in Cambridge, of which he afterwards became vicar.[993]
Having failed in their application to him, their next choice fell on John Goodwin, afterwards, if we are not mistaken, the noted minister of Coleman street, and the far-famed champion of arminianism and republicanism. He also was a Cambridge man, and had been Fellow of Queen’s College ever since 1617. He and Tho. Goodwin were both Norfolk men, and also near relations, if the present writer is not misinformed. But surely no tworelations—not even Herbert Marsh and William Frend, could be more unlike one another. Thomas was a high supralapsarian Calvinist, and, of course, mortally hated Arminianism: John, on the other hand, was a decided Arminian, and one of its most redoubtable champions; and therefore held Calvinism in the utmost abhorrence. His firm and successful opposition to that system is said to have saved him at the restoration from utter ruin, in which his antimonarchical and republican productions would have inevitably involved him, when one or more of his books, together with some ofMilton’s, were burnt by the common hangman:—a poor way, by the bye, to refute their contents, or arguments.
3.John Goodwinwhen invited to Lynn held the living ofRainhamin the same county: yet he accepted that invitation, took up his residence here, and became the successor of Mr. Nic. Price, as chief minister of St. Nicholas’ chapel. But his settlement here was not long, scarcely exceeding one year; for he was chosen July 31. 1629—acceded to that choice on the 10th of the next month, and within a year, or very little more, from that period, he was, as the MS. says,inhibited for preaching here, [by thebishopwe presume; butonwhat account does not appear;] and Dr. Arrowsmith was appointed to succeed him, at the michaelmas following, i.e. 1630, for further particulars concerning him, the reader is referred to the historians of the succeeding period, and to our general biographers.[994]With all his singularitiesand imperfections, he must have been in his day a very considerable and highly distinguished character.
4.John Horne—was another of our townsmen of former times, whose name deserves to be rescued from oblivion, and retained in the memory of the inhabitants. He was born atLong Sutton,Lincolnshire, in 1615; and educated at Trinity College in Cambridge, where he had Henry Hall B.D. for his tutor. He probably went into orders before 1640; and we are told that hepreached first at Sutton St. James, in his native neighbourhood. It has been also supposed that he had afterwards a curacy at or nearBullingbrook, in the same county, and it seems somewhat probable that he married during his residence at that place.[995]Be that asit might, it is certain that his stay there was not very long, for he took up his residence at Lynn in 1646,[996]where he continued ever after to the day of his death,which was full thirty years. His coming hither was in consequence of having obtained the living or vicarage of Allhallows, or All-saints, in South Lynn, where he succeeded Mr.John Man, whom we noticed before, at p.702of this work, and who had resided here, first asusher, thenmasterof the Grammar School, and afterwards asvicar of South Lynn, for the long space of between 50 and 60 years.[997a]
Having obtained the vicarage of South Lynn Allhallows, in 1646, Mr. H. continued in the faithful and diligent discharge of his duty there till 1662, when theact of uniformity, which took effect onBartholomew daythat year,[997b]rendered his situation there no longer tenable. He was then ejected from his vicarage of Allhallows in this town, as were also above 2000 worthy clergymen in different parts of the kingdom, to the great discouragement of integrity and piety, and the eternal disgrace of the rulers in church and state. A very respectable biographer and memorialist speaks of Mr. Horne as follows—“He was anArminianin the point of redemption, and contended earnestly for the universalityof it; but did not either believe or teach, that men may therefore live as they list, because Christ died for them; but taught that Christ therefore ‘died for all, that they which live should no longer live unto themselves, but unto him that died for them and rose again.’ 2 Cor. v. 14, 15. He was a man of most exemplary and primitive piety, and blameless conversation; very ready in the scriptures; excellently skilled in the oriental tongues, and very laborious in his private capacity after he was cast out of his living. He went constantly to church, and yet preachedthriceat his own house every Lord’s day; first, in the morning before sermon; then after dinner, before church-time; and again in the evening. On the other days of the week, beside lecture-sermons, he constantly expounded the scriptures in order twice a day, to all that would come to hear him, as some always did.[998]He was a man of great charity, commonly emptying his pocket of what money he had in it amongst the poor, when he went into the town. He was of great compassion and tenderheartedness towards such as were in any affliction; a man of wonderfull meekness, patience, and dispassionateness; and was generally very much honoured and esteemed for his goodness, both in town and country.” We need no further proof of his being held here in high and general esteem, than that he was suffered to live in the town, and exercise his ministry, for the whole fourteen years he resided here after his ejection, and which was perhaps the very worstpart of the persecuting and detestable reign of Charles II. Some old people used to say some years ago, that his lecturing or preaching place was in some obscure alley about Black-goose Street. However that was, Mr. Horne may justly be considered as thefather of the Lynn Dissenters: nor need they be ashamed to own him as such. Beside his other labours, which were so very abundant, his labours as awriterwere by no means inconsiderable. Mr.Palmerhas preserved the titles ofnear thirty publications, of different sizes, of which he was the author;[999]which shews how active he was in employing his pen, as well as his tongue, in promoting what he deemed useful and profitable instruction. On the whole, it may be pretty safely concluded that such a union of laboriousness, conscientiousness, and piety, as appeared in the person of Mr. Horne, was scarce ever witnessed in any minister of this town, either before or since his time. His memory therefore ought to be very highly honoured. He died here on the 14th of December 1676, aged 61. His wife survived him near ten years. She died May 24. 1686, aged 73.What family they had we are unable to say. One Son, namedThomas, died about two years before the father, at the age of 28: and we are inclined to think there was another son, of both the father’s names, who long survived his parents, and that this son was no other than the afterwards famous master of the Lynn grammar school, who may be justly calledthe Dr. Busby of this town. That he exercised over his pupils so severe a discipline as that of the celebrated master of Westminster School, is what we will not take upon us to affirm—nor yet that he educated an equal number of eminent men; but in the assiduity with which he executed his charge there must have been a strong resemblance, and especially in the length of time he continued at the head of his seminary, for he held the mastership of the Lynn grammar school upwards of fifty years. He must therefore have been notable and eminent in his day among the inhabitants of this town. On which account, whether he was the son of the former John Horne, or not, he is entitled to some notice in the present list.
5.John Horne junr.A.M. (of the University of Cambridge, as it is supposed) was born in 1644. So that in case he was the son of the former, he must have been born about two years before his father settled in this town, which will very well agree with the former supposition, of his being previously married, while he resided at, or near Bullingbrook. After he left the university, the subject of the present article was for some timeusherof the Grammar School at Norwich,whence he was invited to becomemasterof that at Lynn. This was in 1678: whereupon he removed hither, and continued at the head of this school above 50 years; so that it may pretty safely be concluded that he educated a far greater number of pupils than any other master in this town. He died in 1732. aged 88, and was buried in St. Nicholas’ chapel, close to the grave of the other John Horne; which, together with his refraining from going into orders, may corroborate the opinion of his being the son of that worthy and memorable man.[1001a]However that was, he appears to have been a person of a very respectable character, who faithfully served his generation, and deserved well of his cotemporaries and of posterity;[1001b]which, it is to be feared, is more than can be said of all, or every one of his successors.
6.Charles Phelpes. In point of time he ought to have been placed before the last, being his senior, by near twenty years. But as the former was supposed to be the son of the preceding, it was thought proper to let his name immediately follow. The subject of this article, if not a relation, was yet an intimate friend of the elder Horne, and perhaps an occasional assistant to him in the ministry; but of this there is no clear proof. Nor is it at all certain that he afterwards everofficiated in the congregation as a public teacher.[1002a]All we know of him is, that he was a person eminently distinguished here in his day for his religious knowledge, his benevolence, and his piety, which he strove unweariedly to promote by his example, his conversation, and his writings.[1002b]In short, he was a blessing to the town, and one of that sort of men that may not improperly be called the “salt of the earth,” to whose benevolent and pious exertions we owe almost every thing truly good and valuable that is to be found amongst us. He was therefore clearly entitled to a place in this list, or biographical sketch. He died on 3rd of January 1711 in the 85th. year of his age, as we learn from his grave stone to St. Nicholas’ Church yard, over against the great South door, where it is said, and said truly no doubt, that he was “a person of exemplary piety and goodness.” We have heard that he was great uncle to the late vicar of South Lynn of the same name, who, though of inferior worth, was yet far from being one of the worst sort of clergymen.
7.Guybon Goddard. We hear of him first asDeputy Recorderof this borough, in 1645, under the memorable Miles Corbet, who had been chosen Recorder the preceding year. Goddard continued his deputy till 1650, or rather till the beginning of the ensuing year, when he succeeded to the recordership, as appears from the following passage in the Hall-books. “Jan. 31. 1650, 51; This day Mr. Mayor and aldermen have elected and chosen in the place of Miles Corbet, Esq. (called by the Parliament to the service of Ireland)Guybon GoddardEsq. Recorder, provided always, that he, accepting of the place, shall come and inhabit in this town, for the better assistance of the succeeding mayors with his advice and councell.” It may be supposed that he took up his residence here accordingly. However that might be, it seems he retained the place over after, and executed the duties, attached to it with much credit to himself, and to the satisfaction of the body corporate and the rest the community. He was doubtless very good lawyer, but more distinguished perhaps as an antiquary, to which pursuit he was much devoted, in which his acquirements we supposed to have been very considerable. His brother-in-law,Sir William Dugdale, andParkinalso, make honourable mention of his antiquarian attainments,[1003]and is such a case theymust have been very competent judges. To archaiological objects in the adjacent and surrounding country he paid much attention, and still more to those that appertained to this town, his collection for a history of which is supposed to have been very complete, and excited for a long while very high expectation among his cotemporaries. But they were all sadly disappointed; for it was never suffered to see the light: and though the corporation, after his decease, endeavoured to procure it from his son, and offered for it what must have been at that time a handsome gratuity; yet it does not appear that they were able to obtain it. What became of it afterwards no one can tell: but it is most probable that it has long ago been irretrievably lost. Had it been preserved, and fallen into the present writer’s hands, it might (as was hinted at p.821,) have rendered this work far more worthy than it now is of the public patronage. In Parkin’s History of Freebridge (p. 293,) the death of Goddard is placed in 1671, which we suspect to be a mistake for 1677, as the application to his son was made about the beginning of the next year; and it is not likely it would have been deferred for so long a time as seven years. However that was Guybon Goddard seems clearly entitled to have his name enrolled among the memorable men of Lynn.
8.William Falkner,D.D.—He came to this town in 1658, recommended by Dr. Arrowsmith and Dr. Tuckney, and was engaged as an assistant to Mr. Hoogan,who had succeeded Dr. A. as senior or principal minister of St. Nicholas’ Chapel. Falkner was then Fellow of Peter-house in Cambridge; so that there is no reason to suppose him the same as thatWilliam Falconer,M.A. of Aberdeen, whom, according toGranger,Woodin his Fasti mentions, under 1671, as incorporated into the University of Oxford, and one of the first exhibitioners at Baliol College. At the death or removal of Mr. Hoogan, F. appears to have succeeded him as chief minister, and in that situation he is supposed to have continued ever after; though, considering the prominent appearance he made among his brethren, it is not likely that he was left without other preferments. His residence here was about 24 years. He died April, 9. 1682: nor does it appear that he was then an old man; about 50, perhaps, or very little more. We have not been able to learn the character of his public ministry and pastoral labours, or how far he therein resembled Horne, or Arrowsmith. But, as a scholar and writer, he must have stood high among the Lynn clergy, and even among those of the whole diocese; for he was very learned, and his writings for the most part, were well calculated to render him famous among his brethren, and gain him the approbation and applause of the highest dignitaries of the church, and the chief functionaries of the state, or civil government. For passive obedience and non-resistance, and the whole tory system, then the darling doctrine of the clergy and the court, he was a warm and able advocate. Nor was he less so for the church of England, against the Romanists, on the one hand,and our protestant sectaries, on the other. How he would have stood, had he lived a few years longer, or till the eve of the revolution, it is impossible to say. But it is certain that many, who were to the full as torified as he in the reign of Charles, changed their minds and their tones greatly during that of his successor, so as to caress as friends and brethren, those very sectaries and schismatics, as they used to call them, whom they had before endeavoured with all their might to distress and crush. That Dr. F. would have done the same, had he lived so long, is more than we are warranted to affirm, through we would fain hope that such would have been the case.—Among the books of which he was the author were several pieces of divinity, which first perhaps appeared separately, but were in 1684, two years after his death, printed together in a quarto volume. As it has never fallen in our way, we can say nothing of its merits. But his principal publications seem to be the following; 1.Libertas Ecclesiastica, an english octavo volume, published in 1674, and spoken of, by Granger, as a book of merit. 2. Avindication of Liturgies, or set forms of prayer: printed in London in 1680. This was animadverted upon and answered by the memorableDr. Collingesof Norwich, an eminent ejected Minister,firstin a piece entitled, “A reasonable account of the judgment of nonconforming ministers, as to prescribed forms of prayer; with a supplement in Answer to Dr. Falkner of Liturgies;” and afterwards in another piece, entitled, “The vindication of Liturgies, lately published by Dr. Falkner, proved no vindication, &c.” 3.Christian Loyalty: or adiscourse, wherein is asserted that just Royal Authority and Eminency which in this Church and Realm ofEnglandis yielded to theKING. Especially concerningsupremacyinCauses Ecclesiastical. Together with the disclaiming of allForeign Jurisdictionsand the unlawfulness of SubjectsTAKING ARMSagainst theKing. This is a most notable production, and it seems not a little unaccountable that it did not immediately procure him a mitre. It is much in the way of Sir Robert Filmer, and the rest of our great Tory-writers, and scarcely inferior to the very best of them. It was printed in London in 1679, and again, it seems, in 1684, which shews that it was well approved of and sought for. Dr. Falkner dying, as was said, in 1682, was succeeded at St. Nicholas’ by aMr. Killeingbeck, of whom we have heard nothing further.
Biographical Sketches continued—Littel—Pyle—Hepburn—Rastrick—Browne—Keene—&c.
9.Thomas Littel,D.D.He is supposed to have settled here, as one of our officiating clergy, pretty soon after the revolution; but whether as vicar and principal minister of the town, or as Lecturer, or inan inferior station as the Vicar’s curate, we cannot positively say. It is certain however that he soon succeeded as vicar or chief minister of the town, and continued in that situation for a great many years. Though a Doctor in Divinity, he is supposed not to have stood high among his brethren and contemporaries as a scholar, a preacher, or as a divine; but there were traits in his character that were of no unamiable cast, especially in regard to his attention to the edification of the common people. In more recent times he would probably have been deemed a methodistical clergyman, which is not mentioned here as dishonourable to his memory, but rather the contrary, as it is the opinion of the present writer, that if areasonable portionof methodism were imbibed by the clergy, it would render their ministry more popular, and prove of material advantage to the lower orders of their auditors. In Dr. Littel’s time, a great many of his hearers, of the poorer classes, as it would seem, became desirous of improving themselves in religious knowledge; and the course that appeared to them most likely, or the best for attaining that object was to establish private meetings for free discussion, or serious conference. Whether they had been led to this from something of the kind that existed among their dissenting neighbours here, we are not able to say; but it is certain that such exercises are much more common among dissenters than among churchmen. However that was, it seems they were not disposed to put the plan in practice without consulting Dr. Littel, who was then vicar of St. Margaret’s and chief minister of the town: and it does not appear thathe urged any material objection, or gave them any serious discouragement. But he was aware that it would not be safe or proper for him to countenance such a measure without the privity and permission of his diocesan. He accordingly applied toDr. Moore, who then filled the see of Norwich, and who, in his answer, dated September 10. 1697, appeared no way hostile to the measure, provided it were properly conducted; though he said, however friendly he might be to the design, yet he did not find he had any power by law to constitute and authorize such assemblies. Nevertheless he consented to allow the experiment to be here tried, under certain regulations. This episcopal letter is on the whole a very curious document, and not dishonourable to his lordship’s memory; but it is too long for insertion here. He cautioned them to avoid all discussions about state affairs, and whatever might tend to give umbrage to government; and he advised them to meet in small rather than large companies: which advice was probably adhered to. However that was, the intended measure was soon put in practice. For six or seven years the meetings seem to have been kept in private houses, under certain general regulations. But in 1704 the plan was further matured, new rules of conference were drawn up,[1010]and the meetings afterwards were generally if not constantly kept in the Vestry of St. Margaret’s Church, till the death of Dr. Littel, which happened in 1732.The Society then languished and dwindled away, so that in the year 1744 it was reduced to six members, whose names were Colins Banister, James Cowell, Joshua Edwardssenr. Adam Holditch, John Lee, and William Rayns: It appears to have been dissolved soon after, having existed about fifty years; and for a long time no memorial of it remained, except in some old papers which fell into the present writer’s hands accidentally. This Society had formed a library, a catalogue of which it also in this writer’s possession. What became of the books at last, does not appear. We know of nothing more creditable to the memory of Dr Littel, than the countenance he afforded to those serious people. It is supposed that his successor in the Vicarage of St. Margaret did not also succeed him as the patron of this Institution.
10.Thomas Pyle M.A.Of the birth-place and the early part of the life of the rev. T. Pyle, whose name is still mentioned with veneration by the few who remember him as a preacher, we have not been able to obtain any account. So rapid is the neglect or the forgetfulness of oral tradition! From his epitaph we learn indeed that he was born in 1674. About the year 1698, he was examined for ordination, at Norwich, by the celebrated and truly honest William Whiston, at that time chaplain to bishop Moore, who has stated in the interesting Memoirs of his Life, that Dr. Sydal and Mr. Pyle were the best scholars among the many candidates whom it was his office to examine. It is probable that he was ordained upon the title of one of the curacies of St Margaret’s parish, as he married, in1701, a Mrs Mary Rolfe of an affluent and respectable family in Lynn, and in the same year he was appointed by the Corporation to be minister or preacher of St. Nicholas’ Chapel. He published some political Sermons in the years 1706, 1707. and especially in the year 1715. In these discourses he vindicated and enforced those principles to which we are indebted for the expulsion of the Stuarts, and for the elevation of the Brunswick family to the throne. About the same period he became generally known as the author of a very useful Paraphrase on the Historical Books of the Old Testament, and another on the Acts, the Epistles and the Revelation of the New Testament. Soon afterwards he enlisted himself as a writer in the Bangorian Controversy, and was a strenuous and able advocate of the civil and religious principles of Bp. Hoadly. He appears to have been on terms of particular friendship with some of the greatest and best men in the Church of England, such as Dr. Sam. Clarke, Mr. Jackson of Leicester, Dr. Sykes, Bp. Hoadly, Dr. Herring, afterwards abp. of Canterbury; and equally so with some eminent dissenting ministers, particularly Dr. Sam. Chandler and Mr. Rastrick of Lynn. Many years after his death his youngest son, the rev. Philip Pyle, published several volumes of his “Sermons on plain and practical Subjects.” His writings are characterised by a perspicuity and manly sense, rather than by any elevation of style, or by a graceful negligence; and yet in the delivery of his sermons, so impressive was his elocution, that both in the metropolis and in the country, he was one of the most admiredpreachers of his time. The flowing lines were sent to him on his Sermon preached at Lincoln’s Inn, May 4th. 1735, on Gen. III, 19.
What sounds are these! What energy divine,What master-strokes in every precept shine!While from thy lips the warm expression breaks,What heart but melteth as the preacher speaks!Thy voice is nature, and thy diction clear,It strikes like music on the listening ear.—“Vain foolish man to murmur at thy fate,The bounteous hand of heaven still leaves thee great;Still makes thee first of beings here below,Still gives thee more of happiness than woe.To lazy indolence this world may seemA barron wilderness; an idle dream;Thistles and brambles to the slothful eye,But roses to the hand of industry.’Tis sordid avaries, with her sneaking train,Ambition, who torments herself in vain,Th’ unnumbered lusts that prey upon the mind,Fix the primeval curse on human kind.By their brow’s sweat their bread the labourers earn,But then no passions in their bosoms burn:Soon as the evening shade the day-light close,Unbroken slumbers crown their soft repose;And when the morning dawn salutes their eyes,Anteus-like, with double vigour rise.No stings of conscience! no remorse from sin!They feel the noblest paradise within;Content serene, that sunshine of the soul,With her warm beam invigorates the whole;Her blossom, health! her fruit, untainted joy!Nor pain nor death her relish can destroy;In unpolluted streams her pleasures flow,No weedy passions in her bosom grow.”—Thus faintly have I sketch’d thy glorious plan;Which fills, improves, adorns the inward man.Still urge thy generous task, to cleanse the mind,Till from the dregs of passion ’tis refin’d;To prune each vice, each folly of the age,Each wild excrescence of this earthly stage.Tho’ old in goodness, to the world resign’d,Still want thy heaven to give it to mankind.Religion’s friend! and virtue’s strongest guard!That heaven alone such merit can reward,Its joys approach no tongue but thine can tell;Doubt not to taste what thou describ’st so well.
What sounds are these! What energy divine,What master-strokes in every precept shine!While from thy lips the warm expression breaks,What heart but melteth as the preacher speaks!Thy voice is nature, and thy diction clear,It strikes like music on the listening ear.—“Vain foolish man to murmur at thy fate,The bounteous hand of heaven still leaves thee great;Still makes thee first of beings here below,Still gives thee more of happiness than woe.To lazy indolence this world may seemA barron wilderness; an idle dream;Thistles and brambles to the slothful eye,But roses to the hand of industry.’Tis sordid avaries, with her sneaking train,Ambition, who torments herself in vain,Th’ unnumbered lusts that prey upon the mind,Fix the primeval curse on human kind.By their brow’s sweat their bread the labourers earn,But then no passions in their bosoms burn:Soon as the evening shade the day-light close,Unbroken slumbers crown their soft repose;And when the morning dawn salutes their eyes,Anteus-like, with double vigour rise.No stings of conscience! no remorse from sin!They feel the noblest paradise within;Content serene, that sunshine of the soul,With her warm beam invigorates the whole;Her blossom, health! her fruit, untainted joy!Nor pain nor death her relish can destroy;In unpolluted streams her pleasures flow,No weedy passions in her bosom grow.”—Thus faintly have I sketch’d thy glorious plan;Which fills, improves, adorns the inward man.Still urge thy generous task, to cleanse the mind,Till from the dregs of passion ’tis refin’d;To prune each vice, each folly of the age,Each wild excrescence of this earthly stage.Tho’ old in goodness, to the world resign’d,Still want thy heaven to give it to mankind.Religion’s friend! and virtue’s strongest guard!That heaven alone such merit can reward,Its joys approach no tongue but thine can tell;Doubt not to taste what thou describ’st so well.
With such talents, and with such connections, it cannot easily be accounted for, that Mr. Pyle should remain during so long a life in a situation of comparative obscurity. Sir Robert Walpole was the member for Lynn; and both the political and religious opinions of Mr. Pyle were calculated to recommend him to queen Caroline, who then impartially dispensed the dignities of the Church. Perhaps the spirit of the man was not thought sufficiently accommodating for an introduction to a court; or, like the late Dr. Ogden of Cambridge, from some deficiency of external polish, he might be deemed not producible. A passage in Abp. Herring’s Correspondence with Mr. Duncombe seems to be decisive on this point. “Tom Pyle is a learned and worthy, as well as a lively and entertaining man. To be sure his success has not been equal to his merit, which yet, perhaps, is in some measure owing to himself; for that very impetuosity of spirit, which, under proper government, renders him the agreeable creature he is, has, in some circumstances of life, got the better of him, and hurt his views.”[1015a]From whatever cause,with the exception of a Prebend of Salisbury, which he received from Bp. Hoadly, he was only in succession Lecturer and Minister of Lynn St. Margaret, and vicar of Lynn All-saints—all truly but a poor and paltry pittance for such a man, and from a church which had such immense abundance of good things to bestow; most of which too were actually bestowed on far unworthier objects.—The following Letters which passed between Mr. Pyle and Abp. Herring are highly characteristic and interesting.
“My Lord,In the universal acclamation of joy for your Grace’s promotion to the Primacy of all England, may the feeble voice of an old man be heard, the short remainder of whose life, will pass off with a pleasure that nothing could have given, but seeing at the head of the Church, a Prelate so affectionately attached to the interests of Truth, Virtue, and Liberty.I am, my Lord, your Grace’s most dutiful Servant.Tho: Pyle.”
“My Lord,
In the universal acclamation of joy for your Grace’s promotion to the Primacy of all England, may the feeble voice of an old man be heard, the short remainder of whose life, will pass off with a pleasure that nothing could have given, but seeing at the head of the Church, a Prelate so affectionately attached to the interests of Truth, Virtue, and Liberty.
I am, my Lord, your Grace’s most dutiful Servant.Tho: Pyle.”