Chapter C: Appendix: N (4)

At Patrington, in Holderness, in the East Riding of Yorkshire, there is to-day (May, 1901) an ancient hostelry known by the sign of the “Dog and Duck.” At this house, I doubt not, both John and Christopher Wright full many a time and oft had quenched their thirst and heard and discussed the rural gossip of their day; for Plowland Hall was only about a mile distant from the “Dog and Duck” and its good cheer. The “Hildyard Arms” and the “Holderness” Inn, Patrington, may have been likewise, belike, favourite haunts of theirs, for human nature is pretty much the same generation after generation. And even our social habits bind us to the Past. What thoughts crowd into the mind when one makes a visit to the “Dog and Duck,” at Patrington, within a short walk of Plowland Hall!

It is possible that, between the reigns of Elizabeth and Victoria, Plowland Hall was reduced to smaller proportions than it had been in the days of John and Christopher Wright. This was the case with Ugthorpe Hall, the seat of the Catholic Ratcliffes, near Whitby, situate in a lovely little dingle or dell amid the Cleveland Moors; also it was the case with Grosmont House, the seat of the Catholic Hodgsons, near Whitby, situate near and almost laved by the rushing waters of the Yorkshire Esk.]

[Footnote 129:——Father Henry Garnet knew John Wright, but, according to Garnet’s testimony, he did not know Christopher Wright, a fact which alone tends to show that the younger Wright was essentially a subordinate conspirator; for certainly Father Garnet knew, more or less, all the principal plotters, namely, Catesby, Thomas Winter, John Wright, Percy, and even Fawkes, whom he once saw, and to whom he gave letters of introduction when Fawkes went to Flanders, in 1605, to see Stanley and Owen.]

[Footnote 130:——Father Hart was captured, along with Father John Percy (alias Fisher, afterwards famous for his controversy with Archbishop Laud, who could not “abide” the Jesuits), at the house of Lord Vaux of Harrowden. Hart was banished for a time, but died in England, in 1650, aged seventy-two.

Query——Did Hart make any communication to Bellarmine or Eudæmon-Joannes, I wonder?]

[Footnote 131:——See Jardine’s “_Criminal Trials_;” vol ii., p. 166.]

[Footnote 132:——See Foley’s “_Records_,” vol. i., p. 173, citing “Gunpowder Plot Book,” No. 177. Eudæmon-Joannes, in his “_Apologia_” for Henry Garnet, gives reasons why Father Hart, S.J., may have thus acted. Dr. Abbott, in his “_Antilogia_,” in reply to Eudæmon-Joannes, answers Joannes at great length.]

[Footnote 133:——Vol. ii., p. 120. It may be here stated that by the Common Law of England a confessor was obliged to reveal the fact to the Government in the case of his receiving from a penitent the confession of the heinous crime of High Treason.

Garnet said that “the priest is bound to find all lawful means to hinder and discover it, but that the seal of the Confessional must be saved, _salvo sigillo confessionis_.”——See Foley’s “_Records_,” vol. iv., p. 162.——It seems to me that this statement of Garnet is of the utmost importance.]

[Footnote 134:——Afterwards the well-known Lord Coke, the famous Editor of Judge Littleton’s work on “_Tenures_.”——For a diverting account of Coke and his domestic infelicities see Lord Macaulay’s Essay on “Lord Bacon.”]

[Footnote 135:——Catesby, John Wright, Christopher Wright, and Thomas Percy were already dead; the two first were slain at Holbeach; Christopher Wright and Thomas Percy both were wounded unto death at the same place; but certainly Percy and possibly Christopher Wright actually breathed their last a day or two afterwards. Query——Where were the bodies of these four men interred? Were they first quartered as traitors according to law?

Tresham died in the Tower, but his body was quartered, and its members exposed at Northampton in the usual way.]

[Footnote 136:——Jardine’s “_Criminal Trials_,” vol. ii., p. 135. This of the learned Attorney-General reminds one of the late Lord Bowen’s witty saying: “Truth will out; even in an Affidavit!”]

[Footnote 137:——Father Henry Garnet, the chief of the Jesuits in England, said that he considered the authors of the Gunpowder Treason were not only deserving of the punishment that some of them had undergone, but even a more severe one, if possible.——See Foley’s “_Records_.”]

[Footnote 138:——Fonblanque, in his “_Annals of the House of Percy_,” in the chapter dealing with Thomas Percy, expresses the opinion that the Government’s behaviour was comparatively mild, regard being had to the atrocious nature of the designment against the King and Parliament. Such is candidly my own opinion, and this, although I remember that James’s Oath of Allegiance and very tyrannical anti-recusant legislation were the dire consequences of the Plot, which (_me judice_)——far more than the Marian burnings, the Elizabethan Acts of Supremacy, of Uniformity, Constructive Treason, and the Spanish Armada, all put together——led finally to England’s being “bereft” of what to a Roman Catholic is “the one true faith.”

In regard to James’s Oath of Allegiance (1609), it is to be recollected that while strict Roman Catholics, whether “Jesuitized” or not, refused to take the oath, some Catholics thought they might lawfully take it. Among such was the Arch-priest, Blackwell, who, however, was deposed from his office, as, in general terms, Rome condemned the oath. “The sting” of this famous oath was “in its tail;” inasmuch as it not only contained a disclaimer of the deposing power of the Pope, but declared that the doctrine of the deposing power was “impious, heretical, and damnable.” It is remarkable that all the Roman Catholic peers took the Oath of Allegiance, except Lord Teynham, a collateral descendant of William Roper, the husband of Margaret More.

“An apostate” Jesuit, named Sir Christopher Perkins, aided in framing this searching test, so the Government knew exactly how to get the unhappy papist recusants tightly within their grip. (Perkins, like Sir Edwin Sandys, a philosophic friend of Sir Toby Matthews, was an incipient rationalist. Shakespeare may have known Sir Toby Matthews.)

For valuable information (derived from an unpublished manuscript) as to the working of this Oath of Allegiance, see the late Richard Simpson’s Article, entitled, “A Glimpse of the Working of the Penal Laws,” in “_The Rambler_,” vol. vi., p. 401 (1856). If this Article has not been printed separately, it ought to be. In it occur the names Middleton, Gascoigne, Ingleby, Whitham, Cholmeley, Vavasour, Dolman, Mennell (or Meynell), and Catterick, of Yorkshire; Preston and Towneley, of Lancashire; Tichbourne, of Hampshire; Wiseman, of Essex; Gage, of Sussex; Vaux, of Northamptonshire; Throckmorton, of Warwickshire; Tregean, of Cornwall; Plowden, of Shropshire; Morgan, of Monmouthshire; Edwards, of Flintshire; together with other English and Welsh names, which can be only described as synonymous with honour, high-mindedness, heroism, and all goodness.]

[Footnote 139:——James Usher[A] (1581-1656), Protestant Archbishop of Armagh, was an Anglo-Irishman, who was “learned to a miracle,” so the great English Jurist, Seldon, said.——See “Usher,” “_National Dictionary of Biography_.”——Usher was, through his mother, who became a Roman Catholic, a grandson of James Stanihurst (Recorder of Dublin, and Speaker of the Irish House of Commons), whose family were the patrons of Edmund Campion, when in Ireland. The great orator wrote his history of that country after leaving Oxford, and before going to Douay. Usher crossed over to England in 1602. He held in the University of Dublin, in 1607, a divinity professorship, worth £8 a year, which was founded by Mr. James Cotterell, who died in York. Now, I find from the Register of St. Michael-le-Belfrey, York, that there is a record of the burial of a “Mr. James Cotterell——in the mynster——the 29th day of August, 1595.” This, I have no doubt, was the self-same gentleman as the “Mr. Cotterell,” from whose house, on the 29th day of May, 1579, Thomas Warde made M’gery Slater “his true and honourable wife;” and the same Mr. James Cotterell as founded the Dublin divinity professorship. Dr. Usher knew personally Lord Mordaunt, the son of the Lord Mordaunt who died in the Tower in 1608; and also, according to the “_National Dictionary of Biography_,” Father Oswald Tesimond. If so, it is _possible_ that Usher knew personally Lord Mounteagle and Thomas Warde, and it may be it was from them that he gathered hints upon which he founded his oracular statement. (I desire here to express my sense of obligation to the Rev. E. S. Carter, M.A., the Vicar of St. Michael-le-Belfrey, York, who most kindly and generously gifted me with a copy of his singularly valuable “_Parish Register_” Part I., edited by Dr. Francis Collins, from which I have obtained that item of domestic information so valuable as a leading clue for the purposes of this Inquiry, namely, the marriage of Thomas Warde, of Mulwaith.)]

[Footnote A: “_The Life of Archbishop Usher_” by Barnard (1656), however, does not bear out the statement of the Author of the Article on “Usher” in the “_National Dictionary of Biography_.” For Barnard says that the Jesuit who debated at Drayton, in Northamptonshire, with Archbishop Usher, was called “Beaumond,” but that his real name was Rookwood, and that he was a brother of Ambrose Rookwood, the Gunpowder plotter. The debate was arranged by Lord Mordaunt (afterwards the Earl of Peterborough), to the end that his wife, the Lady Mordaunt, a daughter of the Earl of Nottingham, might become convinced of the soundness of the exacting claims of the Church of Rome. The upshot was that not only was the Lady Mordaunt _not_ convinced, but that the Lord Mordaunt himself became a Protestant! The topics for discussion were:——Transubstantiation, Invocation of Saints, Images, and the Visibility of the Church. According to Barnard, Beaumond at the third day of meeting sent to excuse himself, saying, “That all the arguments he had framed within his own head, and thought he had them as perfect as his _‘Pater noster_,’ he had forgotten and could not recover them again; that he believed it was the just judgment of God upon him thus to desert him in the defence of His cause for the undertaking of himself to dispute with a man of that eminency and learning without the licence of his superior.”

If it were a Rookwood, probably it was Robert (S.J.)]

[Footnote 140:——The “_Oliver Cromwell_,” by John Morley (Macmillan, 1900), contains a picture of Usher, taken from the original portrait by Sir Peter Lely, in the National Portrait Gallery. The face is one of great keenness and power.]

[Footnote 141:——“Style” in handwriting is its genius, its ethos, its air, its aroma, its active, its essential principle. “Style is the man.”]

[Footnote 142:——See the Rev. John Gerard’s published fac-simile.]

[Footnote 143:——“Shift off,” no doubt, is meant as “_The Kings Book_” gives it. (I should like to say that a gentleman, a member of Trinity College, Cambridge, the Rev. Edmond Nolan, B.A., suggested to me in August, 1900, when I had the pleasure of meeting him in York, that probably “shift of” was really “shift off.”)]

[Footnote 144:——This enigmatical sentence partook of the nature of a clever sleight of mental strategy or of a skilful manœuvre of mental tactics. In the case of a man of Oldcorne’s combination of the mystical and the practical, it is probable that there would be wheels within wheels, and depths below depths, which are beyond the reach of us ordinary mortals to detect or to fathom. But all this mystery would tend to grip hold of the attention of the reader by compelling him to peruse and weigh the document again and again, and so would tend to beat its warning message into his brains, and so impel beneficent action.]

[Footnote 145:——Gerard’s “_Narrative_” likewise omits the word “good,” which shows us that the Jesuit was indebted to the Royal Author for his copy of the document.]

[Footnote 146:——The Mounteagle Letter is a remarkably clever composition. Its liveliness, its pithiness, its directness, and its force, in spite of its designed obscurity, gain upon one more and more the oftener one ponders it. But Father Oldcorne was a very clever man. His combination of qualities, theoretical and practical, shows him to have been a man of distinct genius.

In Foley’s “_Records_,” vol. iv., there is, as has been already remarked, a portrait of this great Yorkshire Jesuit, showing a portion of Old Ouse Bridge, York, and St. William’s Chapel in the left-hand corner. The face depicted betokens an intellect of great acumen, a heart of great benevolence, both controlled by a will strong with the strength of persistent discipline. The keenness of the countenance portrayed struck a distinguished Oxford friend of mine forcibly the moment he beheld the picture, for he remarked forthwith, “He has an acute look!” The countenance, moreover, as another Protestant friend in effect observed, has that look of infinite patience, of calm resignation, and of sweet melancholy, which was so characteristic of the best of the old English Roman Catholics during “troublesome times.”

This phrase, “troublesome times,” was used in my hearing about the year 1890 by an ancient lady, the late Mrs. Ann Matterson, widow, of High-field, Bishop Thornton, near Ripon. Mrs. Matterson was an interesting specimen of the solid, calm, old, Garden-of-the-Soul type of English Catholic, or as they proudly and touchingly put it, “Catholics that have never lost the Faith.” My informant said she was the daughter of one Francis Darnbrough——a family well known in that part of Yorkshire, a Darnbrough being Wakeman (or Mayor) of Ripon in 1542: that her father’s branch of the Darnbrough family had regained the Catholic Faith through marriages with the Bishop Thornton Hawkesworths, hereditary Catholics, who were formerly tenants under the Lords Grantley and Markenfield, of Markenfield Hall. Mrs. Matterson furthermore told me on that occasion that she was distantly connected (through the marriage of her aunt with a Mr. William Bickerdyke) with one of the York Catholic Martyrs, whose cause of canonization had been, in 1886, introduced at Rome, namely, with “the Venerable” Robert Bickerdyke, a gentleman born at Low Hall, near Scotton, in the Parish of Farnham, near Knaresbrough, and who suffered at the York Tyburn, in 1586, for being “reconciled to the Church of Rome.” The aged lady also said that her uncle, William Bickerdyke, had lived at Brampton Hall, on the River Ure, close to Mulwith: that Brampton Hall had belonged to the ancient and now extinct Yorkshire Catholic family of Tankard, or Tancred——one branch of which had their seat at Whixley: and that at Brampton Hall there had been a place to hide the priest in during “troublesome times.”

For an interesting work on priests’ hiding-places see “_Secret Chambers and Hiding-places_,” by Allen Fea (Bousfield, 1901).]

[Footnote 147:——The following letter (1599, probably), which ends with the words: “I comitte you to sweete Jesus his hole protection,” etc., will be read with interest. It was written by Richard Collinge, Coolinge, or Cowling, a Jesuit, who was a native of York, being the son of a certain Raulf Cowling (then pronounced Cooling), whose name appears in the York Elizabethan “Subsidy Roll for 1581” as of “St. Olave’s parish and Belfray’s without Bootham Bar,” and as being assessed in goods at the sum of £3, which shows him to have been a well-to-do citizen. Raulf Cowling died a captive in York Castle for his profession of the Catholic Faith.

This valuable letter (for which I am indebted to the great generosity of Dr. Collins, of Pateley Bridge) was written probably in 1599, and intercepted by the Government. From the document we learn that Father Richard Collinge, S.J., was not only a cousin to Guy Fawkes, but also to the Harringtons, of Mount St. John. William Harrington, the elder, who harboured “the Blessed” Edmund Campion for ten days in the spring of 1581 at that secluded, tranquil, and lovely spot, Mount St. John, near the Hambleton Hills, Thirsk, Yorkshire, would be not only father to “the Venerable” William Harrington, the martyr for his priesthood at the London Tyburn, but uncle to Father Richard Collinge, and cousin once removed to Guy Fawkes himself. Guy’s mother married for her second husband Denis Bainebridge, of Scotton, a Roman Catholic gentleman connected with the ancient and honourable Roman Catholic family of Pulleyn (Pullein, or Pulleine), of Killinghall and Scotton, by reason of the marriage of Denis Bainbridge’s mother to Walter Pulleyn, Esq., as her third husband. We learn also from Father Collinge’s letter that, belike, Mr. Denis Bainbridge, Guy Fawkes’ step-father, was one of those gentlemen that are “ornamental” rather than “useful.” He was, however, certainly a papist, and his name, together with that of his wife, occurs in Peacock’s “_List for 1604_,” under the Parish of “Farnham.” There is a blank left for the name of the wife of Denis Bainbridge, probably because Mr. Peacock could not decipher the name indicated. I think that Mrs. Denis Bainbridge must have sprung originally from Nidderdale or Wharfedale, and that she was akin to the Vavasours, of Weston and Newton Hall, near Ripley; to the Johnsons, of Leathley; and the Palmes, of Lindley; both of the two last in that part of the Forest of Knaresbrough which is near to the town of Otley. But further researches may solve the problem as to the maiden name of her who gave birth to Guy Fawkes.

Guy Fawkes called himself “John Johnson” when accosted by the Earl of Suffolk and Lord Mounteagle in the cellar under the House of Lords, on Monday, the 4th November. Possibly, therefore, his mother was a Johnson. Query——Does the Rev. Dr. Robert Collyer, of Chicago, U.S.A., know of any tradition hereon?

“Good Sir,——I pray you lette me intreate y^{r} favoure and
frendshippe for my Cosen Germane Mr Guydo Fawks who serves S^{r}
William (Stanley) as I understande he is in greate wante and
y^{r} worde in his behalfe may stande him in greate steede. I
have not deserved aine such curtesie at y^{r} handes as for my
sake to helpe my friendes but assure yrselfe that yf there be
aine thinge I can doe for you, you may commande me for the
respecte I beare to our ould friendshippe but also by this
meanes you shalle bynde me more unto you. He hath lefte a
prettie livinge here in his countre which his mother being
married to an unthriftie husbande since his departure I think
hath wastied awaye.[A] Yet she and the reste of our friends are
in good health. I durste not as yet goe to them but this sommer
I meane to see them all God willinge lette him tell my Cousin
Martin Harrington that I was at his Brother Henries house at
_the mounte_ but he was not then at home he and his wyfe are
well and have manie prettie children. Mr D. Worthington’s
brother hath wrote a letter unto him desiringe a speedie answere
he is a good honeste and devoute man I often mete with him for
nowe I am residente at his Cozens house in that province which
is fallen to my lotte they expecte therefor for some helpe
nothinge is wanting but a beginner amonge them so they saye for
the redemption of Israel. Remember I pray you my commendacons to
my good and honourable godmother my L. Marie[B] (Percie) and the
twoe devoute sisters in her companie. Mr Roberte Chambers[C]
writte to me for his mother, the charge is geven to Mr
Duckette[D] to inquire for her for she is in his vicinitie tho
four Sirsbies of his companie as [? are] here very well. Within
this week I have sene both Cor^{n} & Gould and Batte, to-morrowe
I shall mete w^{th} John Lassells. Thinges goe well forwarde
here o^{r} enemies persecute us all more than ever and are in
particulare feare or rather looke for some what more from o^{r}
owne malcontents. Thus requesting y^{r} favoure in my suite and
remembrance in y^{r} beste memories as you shall have myne _I
comitte you to sweete Jesus his hole protection_ this St John
Baps^{t} Eve.——Yours in Christe Richard Collinge.

“Lette D. Kellison know that his brother Valentine is in goode
healthe and a well wisher but noe Catholike.”

Addressed thus:——

“All Molto Mag^{co} Sig^{re}
il Signiore Guilio
Piccioli a
Venezia” [_i.e._, Venice].

(Endorsed) Fugitives.

Vol. cclxxi., No. 21.

_Cf._ also a letter of Father Richard Holtby, S.J., of Fryton, Hovingham, North Riding of Yorkshire, to Father Parsons, dated 6th May, 1609, ending:——“_I commit you to our sweet Saviour His keeping._”——Foley’s “_Records_,” vol. iii., p. 9.]

[Footnote A: Guy Fawkes’ little patrimony was situate in Gillygate and Clifton, then in the suburbs of the City of York.——See Robert Davies’ “_Fawkeses, of York_,” and William Camidge’s pamphlet, “_Guy Fawkes_” (Burdekin, York).

Miss Catharine Pullein, of Rotherfield, Sussex, and Edward Pulleyn, Esq., of York and Lastingham, I have reason to believe, likewise belong to this ancient family so long settled near Knaresbrough.——See Flower’s “_Visitation of Yorkshire_,” and Glover’s “_Visitation_,” for a pedigree of the family in the time of Elizabeth.]

[Footnote B: The Lady Mary Percy was niece to Francis and Mary Slingsby (daughter of Sir Thomas Percy), of Scriven Hall, whose monuments are still to be seen in the Knaresbrough Parish Church. Dr. Collins tells me that “Sirsbie” was then “a Knaresbrough name,” and occurs in the Knaresbrough Parish Church Registers of that period. The name “Sizey,” which is given in Peacock’s “_List_,” under “Knaresbrough,” is probably the way “Sirsbie” was pronounced, just as “subtle” is pronounced “su(b)tle.”]

[Footnote C: I incline to think that this Robert Chambers is the same as the Robert Chambers mentioned in the “_Douay Diary_,” edited by Dr. Knox (David Nutt); the name, Robert Chambers, appears as one of the students at the English College, Rome. Gould and Batte (or Bates) were probably also the names of priests who had been at this College. Corn may have been Father Oldcorne, S.J., who came to England as a missionary in 1588 with Father John Gerard; or he may have been Father Thomas Cornforth, S.J., a native of Durham, and a great friend of Edward fourth Lord Vaux of Harrowden, whose mother was Elizabeth Roper, a daughter of Sir John Roper first Lord Teynham. Father Cornforth became a Jesuit in 1600. He was at the English College at Rome, and came to England in April, 1599.]

[Footnote D: The Duckette here mentioned was doubtless Father Richard Holtby, S.J., who succeeded Garnet as Superior of the English Jesuits. Holtby was born at Fryton——in the Parish of Hovingham, in the Vale of Mowbray——between Slingsby and Hovingham, where his brother, George Holtby, lived.——See Peacock’s “_List of Roman Catholics in Yorkshire in 1604_;” also Foster’s Edition of Glover’s “_Visitation of Yorkshire_.”——It was Richard Holtby, then a secular priest, who found for Campion secluded, lovely Mount St. John. I think it is probable that, after being harboured by Sir William Babthorpe, at Babthorpe Hall or Osgodby (or both), Campion would proceed through the Vale of Ouse and Derwent to Thixendale, in the Parish of Leavening, to the house of a Mrs. Bulmer; thence, I opine, to Fryton, in the Parish of Hovingham; thence to Grimston Manor, in the Parish of Gilling East; thence through the Vale of Mowbray, by Coxwold, to Mount St. John, the home of the Harringtons, who seem to have quitted the place soon after the year 1603, because the Gregory family are found recorded in the Parish Registers shortly after that date, and they certainly resided at Mount St. John. (Communicated to me by the Rev. Henry Clayforth, M.A., Vicar of Feliskirk, near Thirsk.) Near Mount St. John are Upsal Castle, magnificently situated, and Kirby Knowle Castle (commonly called New Building). These were ancient Catholic houses, formerly of a branch of the Constable family. In Kirby Knowle Castle, embosomed in trees, is still to be seen a priests’ hiding-place. During the early part of the nineteenth century a skeleton was found in this hiding-place——possibly that of a priest. (Communicated to me by the late Very Rev. Monsignor Edward Canon Goldie, of York, about the year 1889.) George S. Thompson, Esquire, now lives at Kirby Knowle Castle, or New Building. This gentleman married a Miss Elsley, of York, whose family, I believe, formerly owned Mount St. John, through their relatives, the Gregories, who seem to have succeeded the Harringtons, harbourers of the great Campion, whom Lord Burleigh himself styled “one of the diamonds of England.” Campion’s guides through Yorkshire were Mr. Tempest (probably of Broughton Hall, near Skipton-in-Craven), Mr. More (probably of Barnbrough Hall, near Doncaster, which came to the descendants of Sir Thomas More, through the Cresacre family), Mr. Smyth (brother-in-law of William Harrington, the elder), and Father Richard Holtby.——See Simpson’s “_Life of Campion_,” second Edition (Hodges, London).——In recent years the Walker family have owned Mount St. John, but I believe that to-day (1901) Sir Lowthian Bell is the owner. When I visited this historic and ravishing spot, the Honourable Mrs. Bosville was the lessee, and the writer has a pleasant recollection of that lady’s gracious courtesy (1898).]

[Footnote 148:——Jardine, in his “_Narrative_” p. 37, has the following exceptionally interesting paragraph: “Sir William Waad in a letter to Lord Salisbury, reporting a conversation with Fawkes, says, ‘Fawkes’s mother is alive and re-married, and he hath a brother in one of the Inns of Court. John and Christopher Wright were school-fellows of Fawkes and neighbours’ children. Tesimond, the Jesuit, was at that time schoolfellow also with them. So as this crew have been brought up together.’”——State Paper Office, Add. Papers No. 481, Jardine (now Record Office).

Probably what Fawkes said was that _he_ (Fawkes) _and Tesimond_ were neighbours’ children; for John and Christopher Wright’s parents were of Plowland Hall, in the Parish of Welwick, in Holderness, as we have seen. Two explanations, however, are possible, which will reconcile this statement that, after all, Fawkes may have _said that he and the Wrights were neighbours’ children_. One is that possibly the young Wrights boarded with some citizen dwelling in St. Michael-le-Belfrey’s Parish, York, whilst they were at the Royal School of St. Peter, then in the Horse Fayre, Gillygate (but now in Clifton), York; the other explanation is that possibly a portion of the fourteen years during which the mother of John and Christopher Wright was (as we have seen already _ante_) imprisoned for her resolute profession of the Catholic religion was spent in company with her husband, Robert Wright, in some private gentleman’s house in the Belfrey Parish, in the City of York——a thing then very common. For example, Dr. Thomas Vavasour, a physician, of Christ’s Parish, who——_or whose wife_, Mrs. Dorothy Vavasour——favoured Campion, and probably harboured him in 1581, was for a time imprisoned in the house of his brother. This was probably Mr. Edward Vavasour, a Protestant gentleman, who resided in “the Belfray” Parish, and was a freeman of York and one of its tradesmen, being, I find, a hatter. In the York “Subsidy Roll for 1581” Edward Vavasour’s name appears as being assessed in goods at £8. Dr. Thomas Vavasour’s name does not appear in the Subsidy Roll. I believe he was then in prison, at Hull, for his persistent refusal to conform to the Queen’s demands in matters of faith.

Query——Did Father Oldcorne learn his “medicine” from Dr. Vavasour, of the Parish of Christ? What was the system of medical training in the “golden days”?]

[Footnote 149:——As revealing the interior state (1) of Oldcorne’s mind in relation to the Gunpowder enterprise, and (2) of Tesimond’s mind, respectively, the former stands in sharp contrast with the latter, and must be pregnant with significance to the discerning and judicious reader.]

[Footnote 150:——Vol. ii., pp. 285, 286.]

[Footnote 151:——“_Somers’ Tracts_,” Edited by Sir Walter Scott, vol. ii., p. 106, says: “Tesimond severely censured Hall (alias Oldcorne) for his timidity on the occasion, calling him a phlegmatic fellow.”

Dr. Abbott’s “_Antilogia_” confirms Jardine’s report of Tesimond’s denunciation, _although Foley most improperly omits it_.]

[Footnote 152:——The diverse demeanour on this critical occasion of these two Jesuits (both natives of the same City, most probably, and fellow-scholars in the then recently re-founded Grammar School belonging to York Minster) is very striking, and reminds one of the following sagacious remark of that clear writer, Dr. James Martineau: “In human psychology, feeling when it transcends sensation is not without idea, but is a type of idea.”——“_Essays and Addresses_,” vol. iv., p. 202 (Longmans, 1891).——Such feeling then is _mens cordis_——the mind of the heart.]

[Footnote 153:——Hindlip Hall, about four miles from Worcester, was built on an eminence in 1572 and the following years of Elizabeth’s reign. It had a large prospect of the surrounding country, and contained many conveyances, secret chambers, and priests’ hiding-places, perhaps more than any house in England. The old Hall of the Abingtons was pulled down at the beginning of the nineteenth century. The present mansion was built by the Lord Hindlip’s family, I believe. This demesne is one of the most historic spots in the kingdom, owing to its memorable associations with Fathers Garnet and Oldcorne, Garnet having left Coughton at the request of Oldcorne, in December, 1605. The two Jesuits were nourished, after Salisbury instituted his search, during seven days, seven nights, and some odd hours, mainly by broth and other warm drinks, conveyed to them through a quill or reed passed “through a little hole in a chimney that backed another chimney into a gentlewoman’s chamber.” Doubtless Mrs. Abington and Miss Anne Vaux (the devoted friend of Father Garnet, who, along with Brother Nicholas Owen, accompanied him to Hindlip) had administered this food to the two famishing Jesuits detained in durance.]

[Footnote 154:——Father Garnet’s house in Thames Street, London, had been broken up, this place of Jesuit sojourning having become known to the Government. Consequently, Garnet, at the beginning of September, 1605, went down to Gothurst, in Buckinghamshire, the seat of Sir Everard and Lady Digby.

Christopher Wright, it will be remembered, quitted his lodging near Temple Bar, on October the 5th, and, I opine, then went down to Lapworth, or Clopton, near Stratford-on-Avon. Catesby was born at Lapworth.

It will be remembered that the Ardens, the relatives of Shakespeare’s mother, were allied to the Throckmortons, and therefore to Francis Throckmorton, the friend of Mary Queen of Scots. It is a remarkable coincidence that the great dramatist was, through both the Ardens and the Throckmortons, connected with those whose quartered remains he may have had in his mind’s eye (in addition to those of the Gunpowder conspirators) when in 1606, in “Macbeth,” he writ of “the hangman’s bloody hands.”

For an account of the Somerville-Arden and the Francis Throckmorton alleged conspiracies against the life of Queen Elizabeth, see Froude’s “_History_.” For an account of Shakespeare’s family, including the Ardens, see Mrs. C. C. Stope’s recent book (Elliot Stock, 1901).]

[Footnote 155:——In the “_Life of Sir Everard Digby_,” by “One of his descendants” (Kegan Paul), is to be found a vivid and historically accurate account of the proceedings of November the 5th and afterwards. The conspirators’ line of flight would be nearly parallel with the London and North Western Railway from Euston Station to Rugby.]

[Footnote 156:——The country crossed by these unhappy fugitives is undoubtedly the very “heart of England,” and in spring and summer is one of the gardens of England. As those then flying, on that gloomy November day, from the Avenger of blood, were probably almost all men of strong family affections, and certainly all ardent lovers of their country, how often must the feelings have welled up in their heart, as from some intermittent crystalline spring, so beautifully expressed by the old Latin poet:——

“Linquenda tellus, et domus, et placens
Uxor: neque harum, quas colis, arborum
Te, praeter invisas cupressos,
Ulla brevem dominum sequetur.”——_Horace._[A]

Alas! Like many another wrong-doer, before and since, they thought of this too late.

Well-nigh the final glimpse we get of Christopher Wright is from a letter the conspirator, Thomas Bates, wrote to a priest, which is given in Gerard’s “_Narrative_,” p. 210. Christopher Wright, we are told by Bates, on the morning of the day when the powder exploded at Holbeach House, “flung to Bates, out of a window, £100, and desired him, as he was a Catholic, to give unto his wife, and his brother’s wife, £80, and take £20 himself:”——Wright owing Bates some money.]

[Footnote A:

“Land must be left, and home, and charming wife,
And of these trees which you cultivate,
None will follow you, their short-lived owner and lord,
Save the detested cypress.”]

[Footnote 157:——Does Greenway’s “_Narrative_” clearly state how many of these conspirators received from Tesimond the sacraments? If so, what sacraments were they?

The Government would have had a clear case of inciting to open rebellion against Tesimond if they had caught him, but he escaped to Flanders. He was “a very deep dog,” was Master Tesimond, and no mistake. But he was wholly under the finger and thumb (_me judice_) of Catesby, which shows what a powerful man of genius Catesby must have been.

Father Henry Garnet, at his trial, allowed that Tesimond had acted “ill,” in seeking to rouse the country to open rebellion.]

[Footnote 158:——This lady was Muriel, the widow of John Littleton, who had been involved in the rebellion of Robert Devereux Earl of Essex. She was the daughter of Elizabeth’s Lord Chancellor, Sir Thomas Bromley.——See Aiken’s “_Memoirs of the Reign of James I._”

For a true estimate of the second Earl of Essex, see Dr. R. W. Church’s “Bacon” (Macmillan).——See also Major Hume’s “_Courtships of Queen Elizabeth_ (Fisher Unwin) and his “_Treason and Plot_” (Nesbit).]

[Footnote 159:——How well-grounded Oldcorne’s suspicions of Littleton were, and how soundly he had discerned the man’s spirit, is proved from the fact that after Littleton had been condemned to death for harbouring his cousin, the Master of Holbeach, and Robert Winter, the Master of Huddington, Littleton sought to save his life by telling the Government that Oldcorne had “answered that the [Gunpowder] action was good, and that he seemed to approve of it.” Littleton also said that “since this last rebellion he heard Hall [_i.e._, Oldcorne] once preach in the house of the said Mr. Abington, at which time he seemed to confirm his hearers in the Catholic cause.”——See Foley’s “_Records_,” vol. iv., p. 219.]

[Footnote 160:——On the 5th of October, 1900, I saw this Declaration by the courtesy of the authorities at the Record Office, London, and compared it with the Letter to Lord Mounteagle. Miss Emma M. Walford was present the while.——See Appendix.]

[Footnote 161:——This luminous definition is by that great writer, Frederic Harrison.]

[Footnote 162:——It is not less dangerous to indulge in Irony. For an emphatic proof of this see the “_Life of Lord Bowen_,” p. 115 (Murray), by Sir H. S. Cunningham, K.C.I.E.

_Cf._ the great Stagyrite’s discountenancing the study by the inexperienced (the young in years or in character) of the fundamental grounds of those moral rules that each man must observe if he would faithfully do his duty from day to day, and “walk sure-footedly” in this life.——See “_The Nicomachean Ethics of Aristotle_,” book i. See also Professor Muirhead’s “_Chapters from the Ethics_” (Murray).

Hector, in “Troilus and Cressida,” act ii., scene 2, speaks of “Young men, whom Aristotle thought unfit to hear moral philosophy.”]

[Footnote 163:——Jardine thinks that Oldcorne manifests a disposition “to hesitate and argue about the moral complexion” of the Gunpowder Treason; and this disposition Jardine regards as exhibiting in Oldcorne, “apparently a man of humane and quiet character,” a “distorted perception of right and wrong.”——See “_Criminal Trials_,” pp. 232, 233.

But it is evident that, for the nonce, the London Magistrate’s judicial temper of mind had deserted him, when he sniffed too closely the moral air breathed by a Jesuit. For manifest is it that, _e.g._, all acts of insubordination against an established government are not treasons and rebellions when that government is hopelessly tyrannical, inhuman, and corrupt. Nor are all acts of slaughter of human beings acts of wilful murder. They may be acts of justifiable tyrannicide, as, possibly, in the case of “the man Charles Stuart, King of England;” and acts of justifiable homicide, as in the case of every just war, or of every legitimate slaying upon the gallows.]

[Footnote 164:——In this connection the following words of the conspirator John Grant should be remembered. After the Jury had found a verdict of “guilty” against the prisoners, at Westminster Hall, on being asked what he could say wherefore judgment of death should not be pronounced against him, Grant replied, “He was guilty of a conspiracy intended, but never effected.”

_Cf._ Wordsworth’s Sonnet on the Gunpowder Plot, which is very penetrating.]

[Footnote 165:——Let it be remembered by the gentle, though unreflecting, reader who is disposed to be unnerved at the sound of the word “Casuist,” as at the sound of something “uncanny,” that Casuistry is that great science, so indispensable to statesmen, warriors, and politicians, especially in these days of democratic self-government, whereby the electing, self-governing people are told by their own authorized expert representatives so much of public affairs as it is for the common good should be known by them, _but no more_. The late Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone once styled Casuistry “a great and noble science.” Now, the Marquis of Salisbury, K.G., the present Prime Minister of King Edward VII., denominated Mr. Gladstone in the House of Lords, when paying his tribute to the memory of that “king of men,” “a great Christian statesman.” And justly; for although Mr. Gladstone was himself a master in the science of Casuistry, the object that science has in view is to forge a palladium for Truth, and this at the cost of endless intellectual labour. Casuistry, properly understood, counts all mere intellectual toils as cheaply purchased, no matter at what cost, provided only that Truth herself——unsullied Truth——be saved. For, after its kind, in whatever sphere, Truth is infinitely more excellent than the diamond, neither is the ruby so lovely; while _partial Truth_, according to its degree, is not less true than the full orb of Truth.]

[Footnote 166:——This phrase, “sacrilegious murder,” is used by Shakespeare in “Macbeth,” and so precisely does it express the double crime of the Gunpowder plotters that I feel certain that from this allusion——as well as from the evident allusion to the well-known equivocations of Father Henry Garnet (alias Farmer) before the Privy Council——the great dramatist must have had the Gunpowder Plot in his mind the whole time he wrote this finest of his tragedies.

I suggest, too, that the words “The bell invites me. Hear it not, Duncan? for it is a knell that summons thee to heaven or to hell” are an allusion to the mysterious warning bell that the plotters thought they heard whilst working in the mine.——See Jardine’s “_Narrative of the Gunpowder Plot_,” p. 54.

Compare also Mr. H. W. Mabie’s description of the tragedy of “Macbeth” in his very recent and valuable “_Life of Shakespeare_” (Macmillan & Co.). Mr. Mabie’s account sounds in one’s ears like a very echo of a recital of the facts and purposes of the Gunpowder Plot.]

[Footnote 167:——Now, as the conspirators were engaged in a joint-enterprise, it must be evident to every clear-minded thinker that the repentance of _any one of the joint-plotters_ must have shed an imputed beneficent influence over and upon all the band. For just as no man liveth only to himself, and no man dieth only to himself, so, by a parity of reasoning, no man is morally resurrected only to himself. Therefore, the moment Christopher Wright was, in the pure eyes of Edward Oldcorne, freed from the leprosy of his sacrilegious-murderous crime——freed (1) by his owning to the same in word; (2) by his manifesting sorrow for the same in heart; and, above and beyond all, freed (3) by his making amends for the same in deed, through the earnest and part performance he had given and made of his unconquerable purpose of reversal, in assenting to the proposal of his listener to pen the revealing Letter——from that moment Christopher Wright, I say, and, through him (though in a secondary, subordinate, derivative sense), all the remaining twelve plotters, would rise up, as an army from the dead; would rise up and stand once more with head erect and in marching order——that noble posture and manly attitude which is ever the reward, sure and certain, of a recovered sense of justice, sincerity, truth.]

[Footnote 168:——The Government, it is said, appointed a special Commission to try Humphrey Littleton and some others at Worcester. The following quotation is taken from “the Relation of Humphrey Littleton, made January 26th, 1605-6,” written by one Sir Richard Lewkner to the Lords of the Privy Council. Lewkner was one of the Commissioners.

This sentence is to be specially noted in this “Relation”:——“The servant of the said Hall [_i.e._, Oldcorne] is now prisoner in Worcester Gaol, and can, as he thinks, go directly to the secret place where the said Hall lieth hid.”

Now, what was the name of this servant? It certainly was not Ralph Ashley (alias George Chambers), Jesuit lay-brother, for he and Nicholas Owen, the servant of Garnet, who died in the Tower, “in their hands,” whatever that may mean, were not captured at Hindlip until a few days before their masters. This treacherous servant of Oldcorne, whoever he was, was possibly the self-same person who told the Government that Ashley “had carried letters to and fro about this conspiracy.”——See Gerard’s “_Narrative_,” p. 271.——The man may have shrewdly suspected it from something in Ashley’s deportment or from his riding up and down the country in a way that portended that something unusual was afoot. He may have been a “weak or bad Catholic” servant of Mr. Abington, whom that gentleman placed at the special disposal of Oldcorne for a class of work which could be done by one who was not a Jesuit lay-brother. The Government had evidently got a clue to something from somebody, because I find Father Oldcorne making answer in the course of one of his examinations:——“He sayth he bought a black horse of Mr. Wynter at May next shall be three yeares, and sould him againe.” Examination, 5th March, 1606.——See Foley’s “_Records_,” vol. iv., p. 224.

According to Foley’s “_Records_,” Oldcorne was indicted at Worcester for——

(1) Inviting Garnet, a denounced traitor, to Hindlip.

(2) Writing to Father Robert Jones, S.J., in Herefordshire, to aid in concealing Stephen Littleton and Robert Winter, thus making himself an accomplice.

(3) Of approving the Plot as a good action, though it failed of effect.

Father Jones had provided a place of concealment at Coombe, in the Parish of Welch Newton, on the borders of Herefordshire, which then abounded in Catholics. Stephen Littleton and Robert Winter, being captured at Hagley, in Worcestershire, were executed as traitors according to law. Hagley House is now the residence of Charles George Baron Lyttelton and Viscount Cobham.]

[Footnote 169:——A learned Cretan Jesuit, Father L’Henreux, who was appointed by Pope Urban VIII. Rector of the Greek College at Rome, wrote a powerful “_Apologia_” in behalf of Father Henry Garnet, which was published in 1610. In 1613 Dr. Robert Abbott, a Master of Balliol College, Oxford, and Regius Professor of Divinity at that University, wrote his “_Antilogia_” as a reply to Eudæmon-Joannes’ “_Apologia_.” It would be a boon to historical students if both the “_Apologia_” and the “_Antilogia_” were “Englished” by some competent hand. Abbott was made Bishop of Salisbury, partly on account of the learning he displayed in his “_Antilogia_.” He was a Calvinist, and a vigorous writer, being styled “the hammer of Popery and Arminianism.”

Dr. Lancelot Andrewes (in answer to Cardinal Bellarmine) and Isaac Casaubon also contributed to the literature of the controversies anent the Plot, and modern editions of their works with notes are desiderata. Casaubon is best known, at the present day, through his “_Life_,” by Mark Pattison; Andrewes, through the late Dr. R. W. Church’s “Lecture,” now in “_The Pascal_” volume (Macmillan) of that judicious and learned man.]

[Footnote 170:——See Jardine’s “_Criminal Trials_,” vol. ii., p. 120, quoting “_Apologia_,” p. 200.

Sir Everard Digby was the only conspirator who pleaded “guilty,” and he was arraigned by a different Indictment from that which charged the rest of the surviving conspirators.]

[Footnote 171:——My contention is that the conclusion is inevitable to the discerning mind that the sphinx-like nescience——the face set like a flint——with which Oldcorne met Littleton’s inquiry, displays indisputable evidence of a sub-consciousness on Oldcorne’s part, of what? Of a _special_, _private_, _official knowledge_ (as distinct from a general, public, personal knowledge) of what had been intended to be the executed Gunpowder Plot, but which Oldcorne himself had thwarted, and so prevented everlastingly any one single human creature being able, even for the infinitesimal part of an instant, to contemplate “_post factum_”——after the fact——and in the concrete; which, indeed, judged “from the outside,” and as the bulk of mankind are entitled to judge it, was the only side or aspect of the baleful enterprise that was of practical and, therefore, to them, of paramount personal consequence. The conspirator John Grant expressed the state of the case exactly when he said in Westminster Hall, after being asked what he could say wherefore judgment of death should not be pronounced against him, “He was guilty of a conspiracy intended, but never effected.”]

[Footnote 172:——See Butler’s “_Memoirs of English Catholics_,” vol. ii., p. 260. See also Gerard’s “_Narrative_.”——It is possible (according to Gerard) that Oldcorne may have been even still more cruelly tortured, namely, as Dr. Lingard says, during five hours for each of five successive days; but to me, humanly speaking, this is incredible.]

[Footnote 173:——Father Edward Oldcorne and Brother Ralph Ashley are both, along with others, now styled by Rome, “Venerable Servants of God.” The Decree introducing the cause of these “English Martyrs,” dated 1886, and signed by the present Pope, Leo XIII., is kept in the English College at Rome, where Oldcorne had himself entered as a student a little more than three hundred and four years previously, namely, in 1582.

Through the truly kind courtesy of the Right Rev. Monsignor Giles, D.D., President of the English College, Rome, the writer was privileged to see, along with the Rev. Father Darby, O.S.B., and some other gentlemen, this Decree in the afternoon of Saturday, the 13th of October, 1900, the Feast of St. Edward the Confessor, King of England. In the forenoon of the same day the first great band of the English Pilgrims for the Holy Year, the Year of Jubilee, had received, in St. Peter’s, the Papal Blessing, amid great rejoicing, the apse or place of honour in this, the largest Church in Christendom, being graciously accorded to these fifteen hundred British Catholic subjects of Her late Most Gracious Majesty Queen Victoria.]

[Footnote 174:——As to the precise teaching of the theologians of Father Oldcorne’s Church respecting the famous dictum of St. Augustine of Hippo, “_Extra ecclesiam nulla salus_,” see the book of the once celebrated Douay theologian, Dr. Hawarden, entitled, “_Charity and Truth; or Catholics not uncharitable in saying that none are saved out of the Catholic Communion, because the rule is not universal_” (1728). And, again, that great Yorkshire son of St. Philip Neri, Dr. Frederic William Faber, an ultramontane papist of the ultramontane papists, has thus recorded his own potent testimony on this subject in his singularly able and beautiful work, entitled, “_The Creator and the Creature_,” first edition, p. 368.

Dr. Faber says: “We are speaking of Catholics. If our thoughts break their bounds and run out beyond the Church, nothing that has been said has been said with any view to those without. I have no profession of faith to make about them, except that God is infinitely merciful to every soul; that no one ever has been, or ever can be, lost by surprise or trapped in his ignorance; and as to those who may be lost, I confidently believe that our Heavenly Father threw His arms round each created spirit, and looked it full in the face with bright eyes of love in the darkness of its mortal life, and that of its own deliberate will it would not have Him.”]

[Footnote 175:——Either from the phonograph or even the shorthand scribe.]

[Footnote 176:——Are the Indictments in existence of Father Oldcorne and Ralph Ashley, who seem to have been tried in the Shire Hall, Worcester, at the Lent Assizes of 1606? If so, they and extracts from any Minute Books still extant bearing on the subject would be of great interest and value to the historical Inquirer, if published.]

[Footnote 177:——Oldcorne realized experimentally, in the final action of the great tragedy, what it means, as Goethe has it, for a man “to adjust his compass at the Cross.”

And than Oldcorne no human creature ever lived that had a better right to anticipate those magnificent words of triumph over death of one of Yorkshire’s supremest geniuses: “_If my barque sink, ’tis to another sea._”]

[Footnote 178:——In Morris’s “_Troubles of our Catholic Forefathers_,” third series, p. 325, we read: “In 1572 John Oldcorne is one of the four sworn men against the late rebels and other evil-disposed people suspected of papistry, for St. Sampson’s parish.”

Again, under date April 10th, 1577, we read: “And now also John Oldcorne, of St. Sampson’s parish, who cometh not to the church on Sundays and holidays, personally appeared before these presents, and sayeth he is content to suffer the churchwarden of the same parish to take his distresses for his offence.”

There is also for January, 1598, the following pathetic entry concerning the mother of Father Oldcorne:——

“Monckewarde Saint Sampson’s, Elizabeth Awdcorne, alias Oldcorne, old and lame a recusant.”

York is now divided into six wards for the purposes of municipal government, namely: Bootham, Monk, Micklegate, Walmgate, Guildhall, and Castlegate. Until the nineteenth century there were only the first four wards, which, indeed, corresponded to the four great Gates or chief Ways for entering the City.

The writer remembers with pleasure that, now some years ago, his fellow-citizens of Micklegate Ward, on the west side of York, did him the honour of electing him to occupy a seat, for the term of three years, in the Council Chamber of his native City, which, he is proud to remember, was the City wherein first drew the breath of life Edward Oldcorne; one, he has every reason to believe, whose keen, sane mind, and ready, skilful hand were instrumental, under Heaven, in penning that immortal document which saved the life, certainly, of King James I., of His Royal Consort Queen Anne of Denmark, of Henry Prince of Wales, and Charles Duke of York, afterwards King Charles I., as well as the life of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, the Gentlemen of the House of Commons, and many Foreign Ambassadors, in the year of grace 1605, now well-nigh three centuries ago.

As some readers may be, perchance, interested in a few particulars concerning the ancient Parish of St. Sampson, which is in the heart of the City of York, close to the Market Place, I propose to mention a few. First of all, then, the ancient parish church which bears the name of the old British Saint, St. Sampson, is pre-eminently one of “the grey old churches of our native land,” whereof in the reign of King Henry V. (Shakespeare’s ideal English monarch) there were in the City of York and its suburbs no less than forty-one, though in the reigns of Edward VI. and Elizabeth the number was reduced. That forty-one was the number originally we know from a subsidy of Parliament which granted to King Harry, in 1413, two shillings in the pound leviable on all spirituals and temporals in the realm for carrying on the then war with France.——See Drake’s “_Eboracum_,” p. 234.

St. Sampson’s Church consists of a lower nave and chancel with north and south aisles to both, extending nearly to the west base of the tower. The architecture of the church is in the decorated and the perpendicular styles. King Richard III., in 1393, granted the advowson of this church to the Vicars Choral of York Minster. The present Vicar (1901) is the Rev. William Haworth, one of the Vicars Choral of the Minster, to whom I am indebted for information respecting the Registers of St. Sampson’s Church and the Church of Holy Trinity, King’s Court, or Christ’s.

Mr. Councillor John Earle Wilkinson, “mine host” of the “Garrick’s Head” Hotel, Low Petergate, York, who was the Guardian of the Poor for the old Parish of St. Sampson (as he is now the Guardian for Ward No. 2 of the United Parish of York), kindly informed me on the 10th July, 1901, that the following streets are in the Ecclesiastical Parish of St. Sampson. Hence we may conclude that it was in a house in one of these streets that were spent the earliest years of Edward Oldcorne, the son of John Oldcorne, Tiler, and of Elizabeth, his wife:——

(1) Church Street, a street between the Market Place (which Market Place is formed by St. Sampson’s Square and Parliament Street) and Goodramgate towards Monk Bar. Here is St. Sampson’s Church.

(2) Patrick Pool, to the east of St. Sampson’s Church.

(3) The right-hand side of Newgate, leading into High Jubbergate (formerly Jews-Gate).

(4) Little Shambles and Pump Yard.

(5) That part of Parliament Street on the south-west which includes the site of the York City and County Bank.

(6) That part of Parliament Street on the north-east which includes Mr. F. H. Vaughan’s “Clock” Hotel.

(7) Silver Street, to the west of St. Sampson’s Church, connecting Church Street with High Jubbergate.

(8) On the north side of Church Street, opposite St. Sampson’s Church, Swinegate.

Finkle Street.

(9) Back (or Little) Swinegate, between Swinegate and Finkle Street.

(10) That part of Little Stonegate which includes the back part of the premises of Messrs. Myers and Burnell, Coachbuilders, and the Model Lodging House opposite.

(11) Coffee Yard.