Chapter LXVII: Section IX (4)

For the sake of those readers who live at a distance from Lynn, the affair here last alluded to may require some explanation. Be it known therefore, that the empirical Adventurer, called the _Dumb Doctor_, made his appearance at Lynn about four and twenty years ago; and for a good while after spent most of his time between this town and Wisbeach. It was given out that he had been deaf and dumb from his birth, and that he was a native of New England, or some part of North America, where he had, somehow, (miraculously, or at least in some very extraordinary and wonderful manner no doubt) acquired very deep knowledge and skill in the healing art; and after having performed great and astonishing cures in his own country, had actually crossed the wide Atlantic out of pure kindness and compassion to the sick and infirm folk of this kingdom, most of whose complaints he might be expected capable of removing.—The tale very generally took with our good townsmen, and numbers of ailing people, gentle and simple, well-bred and ill-bred, from all quarters, flocked to the impostor for relief. Not a few of them also declared that they had actually derived great benefit from his prescriptions.—Thus he went on very prosperously, till an old acquaintance of his unluckily came to town, blew him up, and blasted all his hopes. He then suddenly decamped, and was never since seen or heard of in these parts.—It seems he had belonged so a company of strolling players, from which honourable fraternity he had been on some occasion expelled: upon which he took up the medical profession, pretending to be deaf and dumb, and a native of North America, as was before stated.—This may serve to shew that with all our skepticism and infidelity, and our large stock of fancied light and discernment, learning and refinement, we are by no means so far removed from the easy faith and blind credulity of our ancestors, or become such complete proofs against the wiles of imposture, or the specious arts of daring deceivers, as might be supposed, from our confident, loud, and boisterous boastings.

{328} Sullivan’s Lectures on the Feudal System, and Laws of England, p. 180.

{329a} Blackstone ii. 51, and iv. 411.

{329b} See Caste 1. 423.

{330} Sullivan’s Lectures, No. xvii, xviii, and xxviii.

{331} Leckie’s Historical Survey of the foreign affairs of Great Britain, Part I, page 57, &c.

{333} Leckie, as before, p. 66.

{334} Blackstone iv. 408. Neal Hist. Pur. I. 1.

{335} Blackstone iv. 409.—Our _Game Laws_ are not only exceedingly detested, by those of the middle as well as lower orders, throughout the country, (which constitute the major part of the nation,) but seem also to be among the most grievous and disgraceful of all our present laws. In no view can they be deemed respectable or defensible. Nor is the conduct of our magistrates perhaps ever more unseemly or disreputable than in the unfeeling, cruel, and relentless rigour with which they put these vile laws in execution. In nothing probably more than in this does our present state resemble that of France before the revolution. The Game Laws there were then intolerably severe and grievous, and enforced by the magistrates with unrelenting and diabolical rigour; so that they used to fill even the very Gallies with their hapless victims: all which recoiled with vengeance upon them and their abettors, the privileged orders, in the dreadful change which ensued. Those laws no longer exist in that country: but a recent traveller, (Pinkney,) informs us, “that though there are now no game laws in France, there is a decency and moderation in the lower orders, which answer the same purpose. No one presumes to shoot game, except on land of which he is the proprietor or tenant.”—No where in England are these laws supposed to be more grievously felt than in Norfolk; of which a popular and respectable author of the present day speaks as follows—“What is denominated _Game_ is very plentiful is this county. The arable lands affording both food and cover, and the gentry, being particularly attached to the amusement of sporting, have recourse to the strong arm of the law for its preservation. This tenacity on the part of the landholders, producing covetous desires in the tenants, is a strong inducement to poaching, and the source of numberless disagreements, which too frequently terminate in suits at law. Hence they are oppressive to one party and disgraceful to the other. The various statutes, called ‘the Game Laws,’ are justly deemed the opprobrium of the English code; and in no county perhaps are those statutes acted upon with greater rigor than they usually are in Norfolk. The endless litigations upon this despicable point have lately become the subject of theatrical ridicule; and this county has on the occasion been made the _butt_ of dramatic satire. “Searchum, get warrants immediately, for seizing guns, nets, and snares; let every dog in the parish be collected for hanging to-morrow morning. Give them a taste for _Norfolk discipline_.” Happy would it be for the country, if ridicule, as reason has hitherto failed, should be able to induce the legislature to abrogate laws, which, as they were made to support an assumed claim, can only be continued in force to protect an usurped right.” [Beauties of England v. xi. p. 90, &c.]

It is most disgusting to men of sound and liberal minds to hear with what complacency, selfgratulation, as well as selfimportance, the magistrates, at the convivial meetings of the gentry, will be sometimes expatiating on the rigour of their proceedings against the transgressors of the game laws, and describing how effectually they curb and keep in awe the farmers, and trounce to their utter undoing some of the most active among the lower order of poachers. Such a conduct is nothing less than a publishing of their own shame, and a boasting of their own misdoings; and had they expanded and reflecting minds, or any minds at all, they would blush for such a conduct, and carefully and studiously refrain from it, as well as from all manner of excess in their proceedings against poachers, many of whom with their luckless families have been utterly ruined by them. Some of those ill-fated culprits have perished in prison, after long and rigorous confinement: one of whom, named _Saunders_, died miserably in goal, after a _six years_ incarceration, who probably was as well bred as some of his relentless judges; on which occasion the following lines were composed:

“_Epitaph on Nathaniel Saunders_, _gentleman_:

“Nat! thou’st escap’d just in the nick of time!
Thine was a barbarous and a bloody crime!
How long confin’d?—six years—that’s only fair;
What was his crime? the scoundrel kill’d a hare!”

{338a} Blackstone, iv. 410.

{338b} Ibid, 411.

{340} Not a few of the most high-spirited and warlike withdrew into foreign parts; some sailed to the Mediterranean, and found at Constantinople a ready protector in the emperor of the east, who united them to the Barangi, or battle-ax guards, as some of their countrymen had been long before. [See Andrews, vol. 1.]

{341a} Blackstone, vol. 1. Robinson’s Sermon on Slavery, and appendix. Sullivan’s Lectures, 258.

{341b} It has been suggested that some vestiges of our ancient vassalage is discoverable still in the abject state of the bulk of those miscalled _freemen_, nine out of ten of whom, perhaps, have no will of their own in the choice of representatives, but implicitly act under the direction of the modern masters of the town.—The author, however, does not mean to give the name of _slave-holders_ to the two families that now nominate, appoint, return, or send our members to parliament.

{342} The author hopes the reader will excuse the repetition of this topic: he wishes all the different orders of the community may be convinced that they are brethren, and that those of the higher orders may possess the proper feelings towards their inferiors, even of the very lowest degrees, who though they have not so much at stake in these perilous times, are yet of the very same species with themselves, and so must be entitled to their tender and fraternal attentions.

{343} The same seems also to have been the case in the recent continental conquests and changes: the lower orders and bulk of the people appear to be gainers rather than losers by those events: they were so burdened and oppressed by the old governments, without any hope of redress, or the least prospect of melioration, that they became at last quite regardless who should be their rulers, and rather hailed than deprecated the French emperor’s successes and triumphs; believing, it seems, that, if he became their master, their condition, as it could not well be worse, would or might probably be better than what it then was become under their own native princes, who treated them, not as men, or beings of the same species with themselves, but rather as beasts of burden, made only for their use and service; and who were oftentimes disposed of by them and sold like other cattle. Such was the abject and degraded state of the lower classes and great body of the people in most of the regular and old established governments of Europe, before the French revolution. Had the rulers been wise enough afterwards to conciliate the good will and esteem, and secure the attachment of the people, by holding out and granting to them what would be worth contending for, the French had never been able to over-run every country and overturn every government as, they have done. Emancipating the people, and admitting them to the enjoyment of real freedom, would render them a different race of men, capable of effectually defending their country; and repelling any hostile attack or invasion. But the statesmen, directors, and managers of the old governments are not, it seems, to be convinced of these obvious, salutary, and important truths. Instead of adopting such a plan, they have too plainly manifested a disposition to augment rather than diminish the burdens and sufferings of the people. The consequence was natural, and what might have been expected. But the managers of the old institutions have not yet begun to learn wisdom from observation and experience.—Even the pretended patriots _of Spain_, who have made such fuss about their national liberty and independence, have shewn as much reluctance as the rest, to ease the burdens of the people, or ameliorate the condition of the great body of the nation; and as they seem bent upon perpetuating the old tyranny, and unwilling to avail themselves of the only step that would give their resistance any chance of success, their miscarriage and downfal ought to be viewed without regret.

{346a} See Carte, and Parkin; also Beauties of England, vol. xi.

{346b} The business was at least acceded to by bishop Nykke, but the surrender seems to have been made by his successor bishop Rugg.

{349} It must be a mistake, and should no doubt be 1039; so that he filled the see but one year.—See Beauties of England, as before.

{350} See Beauties of England, vol. xi, where a fuller account is given of some of these bishops.

{351} Armstrong’s history of Norfolk, vol. 1. p. 206.

{358} See Tour of Norfolk, p. 180: also Beauties of England as before.

{359} Pope Urban promised _the full remission of all their sins_, not only to everyone who crossed the seas in that quarrel, and personally engaged in that bloody crusade against the other pope and his adherents, but also to all who would engage to pay any number of able soldiers employed on the occasion, and even to all such as would advance any part of their substance to the general (bp. Spencer,) towards defraying the expences of the expedition. The pope’s absolution, pronounced by the said episcopal commander in chief, was expressed as follows—

“By the authority apostolical, to me in this behalf committed, We
absolve thee A. B. from all thy sins confessed with thy mouth, and
being contrite with thy heart, and whereof thou wouldst be confessed,
if they came into thy memory: and we grant unto thee plenary
remission of all manner of sins, and we promise unto thee thy part of
the reward of all just men, and of everlasting salvation. And as
many privileges as are granted unto them that go to fight for the
Holy Land, we grant onto thee; and of all the prayers and benefits of
the church, the universal synod, as also the holy catholic church we
make thee partaker.”—(See Fox, Vol. 1.)

{360} There were doubtless many Lynn people in that army; the general being lord of this town.

{363} It is somewhat remarkable, that though both Mackerell and Parkin appear to have made use of that MS Volume, and the former drew most of his materials from it, for the most part verbatim, yet neither of them take any notice of those letters, which yet form the most curious part of the whole volume.

{365} The documents or papers above referred to, consist of 1. a Letter from John Wentworth mayor of Lynn to the king (Hon. iv.) dated on St. Martin’s day 1403, and complaining of the opposite party, as outrageous persons who committed the most horrid crimes, and proceeded in the most riotous manner against their opponents, with the intent to spoil and rob them of their goods, burn their houses, slay and dismember their persons, &c. It is not the first letter he wrote to his majesty, for he refers to others of anterior date. Those however are lost, or we might possess a more correct knowledge of this business. The _second_ of those papers is a Letter from Petipas, then mayor, to some of his friends, complaining of Wentworth and his adherents and _assentaunts_ for troubling him in the discharge of his duty, and requiring them “be bille or be mouthe” [by letter or by word of mouth] to acquaint his reverend lord of Norwich [i.e. the bishop] with the affair, and solicit his interference. &c. Its date is 1413, the first of Henry V.—The _third_ is from the same, and seemingly to the same, and written, it is presumed, in 1414, the former part of which was the latter part of his 2nd year, for he was then mayor two years successively. The _fourth_ was from _Thomas Hunt_, who became mayor in the autumn of 1415 to _Johan Spencer_, viscount de Norff. [i.e. the High Sheriff of the county] and is dated “atte Lenn ye tede day of the mone of Juylet, ye yere of ye regne of King Henry ye fyft ye ferth:” which was A.D. 1416. This curious paper complains of _Thomas Felwell_, goldsmith, who had been indicted for his misdeeds, as an instigator of _a rysing_ and _ryot_—also of _Thomas Hardell_, and _Thomas Enemethe_, “and very many of the misdoers resorten and drawen again in counsailles to Barth. Petipas in sustenance of his p. tie,” &c. It also offers the said Viscount, or high sheriff, a _present of a young He-Bear_, which seems a queer circumstance. But what makes this paper of most importance, is its confirming, along with the other documents, the very distracted state of the town at that period.—The _fifth_ is addressed “to the lord bishopp of Norwich” (the above _John de Wakeryng_ it seems.) “from his owen humblest tenants and devout Bedesmen, the Mayre and good men of his town of Lenne Bishopp.” Its date is the 9 of March, the 3rd of Henry V. which seems to answer to A.D. 1415, or 1415–16, and the mayor was probably the above _Thomas Hunt_.—The _sixth_ and last of those papers was a royal injunction or mandate from “Henry (VI.) by the Grace of God king of England and of France and lord of Ireland unto the Mair of the town of Lenne Byshopp;” and relates chiefly, as was before hinted, to some irregularity or neglect in the choice of the 24 Jurats, directing and enjoining that they should be freemen and lawful, and of the most discreet, sufficient, and _least suspicious_ persons of the said town; and each of them possessing property in lands and tenements to the amount of C. S (i.e. one hundred shillings) a year—equal no doubt to more than 100_l._ a year now: also directing that in case any of the 24 Jurats happened to die in the course of the year, others equally unexceptionable should be immediately chosen in their room, &c.—As a sample of the style and orthography of the magistrates of Lynn 400 years ago, and a specimen of their mode of address to their prelatical lord and master, we shall here subjoin the mayor and aldermen’s Letter to bishop _Wakeryng_.

“Worschipfull Lord and reverent fader in God, we commaund us unto
yow, humble thankant yow wt alle oure hertes, of good & graciouse
lordschip yt. yo han schewed to us before yis tyme prayand to yow of
good continunace & revrent fader, for as meche as we han conteyned be
John Thornham yor. servt. yt ye are & will be graciouse lord to us,
therefor as unknowen men, we wryten to yow in our symple manr.
preying yow yt Barth. Petypas, Will Hallyate, Thomas Middleton
taylor, Thomas Barrington goldsmyth, Thomas Monethe, Thomas Beckham,
John Balders, Thomas Littleport, Thomas Hardell, John Blome, Rich.
Baxter, Andrew Fourbe, abide out of yor. towne of lenne unto the tyme
of yor. stalling at Norwich, the whiche schalle not be longe be the
grace of God, atte which tyme we shalle mete with yow & fulliche
declare to yow all manr. of hevynesse ye whiche yay han wroght to us,
& yt. to yor. worschipfull person disclosed & fulliche in hye & in
lowe, put it in govnance of yow & of yor counsayll, & for truly sire
sithen ye. tyme yt. yay wenten out of ye town of Lenne, of whiche ye
shun sone be lord of, be ye grace of God stode never in beter reste &
pees than it hath done sithen that tyme, & yet dothe atte this day, &
be yor. good governance, these persons above wretyn sett an syde, we
tryste in God to have reste & pees for ever more in yor. towne & in
our persons ye shal fynd us as lowly tenants as any that longs to yow
within yor. lordshippes, & wt. our bodyes & our goodes, be as lowly
to yow worschipful and revrend fader in God we preye, ye. holy
trinite: keep yow body and soule, & fullfill your desires as ye can
yor. self devise. Written at Lenne ye IX day of Marche under ye
seall of the office of Mayralty.

Your owen humblest tenants and devout Bedesmen,
Mayre and good men of your towne of Lenne Bishopp.”

In this lowly and abject manner did these humblest tenants and devout beadesmen, the mayor and corporation of Lynn, of that day, approach their high and mighty lord, bishop Wakeryng. They were indeed his subjects and vassals, as their predecessors had long been; and they might think that such cringing conduct became them: but some of them would occasionally shew a disposition to kick and resist, as had been the ease in bishop _Spencer’s_ time, and also now, it seems, in the case of _Patipas_, as well as of _Miller_ afterwards, who is said to have gone to law with the bishop and cast him. But, in general, corporations, while they are some of the most unfeeling, relentless, and tyrannical towards their inferiors, are at the same time some of that most abject and obsequious of all men towards their superiors and masters: hardly presuming at any time to have a will of their own. They are as ready to erect statues to bad as to good kings; and the premier, however corrupt or flagitious, is pretty surf of being always their lord chancellor, or keeper of their conscience.

{370} That year the king and queen, with their eldest son Arthur prince of Wales, and Margaret countess of Richmond, the king’s mother, visited Lynn, and were lodged at the Austin monastery, on the site of which Mr. Rishton’s house now stands. The occasion of this royal visit we know not.

{372} See Tour of Norfolk 286, &c. also Beaut. of Engl. as before.

{377} See Smith’s Inquiry, 2. 101. He also observes that how servile soever may have been originally the condition of the inhabitants of the towns, they yet arrived at liberty and independence much earlier than the occupiers of land in the country.

{379} Smith, as before, 104. Among the other principal works that relate to these matters are Madox Firma Burgi, and Brady’s historical treatise of cities and boroughs.

{380} See Political Review for December, 1809.

{381} See Monthly Rev. for August 1805, p. 446.

{383} Smith, as before, p. 106.

{384} Smith, as before, p. 108.

{385} Smith, 110.

{387} See Mackerell, 223.

{388} See above, page 366.

{389} Of the spirit, or principle that dictated the erection of those statues it may now be safely said, that it was thoroughly vile and disgraceful.—What better can be said of the spirit that was so predominant here during Pitt’s administration and execrable reign of terror, when all honest men who saw, deprecated, and reprobated his madbrain system were held up to the contempt and derision of every political coxcomb, and even to the fury of the populace, as Jacobins and traitors? Time has already done something towards justifying the views and principles of these persecuted people; and futurity will do them still ampler justice. The present generation is likely to be now soon convinced that their politics, which have been so bitterly and violently decried, were a thousand times more worthy of adoption than those of their malicious opponents and revilers: and posterity will not fail to exhibit in their proper colours the extreme folly and wrongheadedness of the measures that this illfated country has been pursuing for the last eighteen years and upwards.

{390} Parkin, 116.

{391} The Jews were then very numerous in this country, as well as very opulent, and continued so for no short period. They were generally ill used, and sometimes underwent the most cruel and base treatment. Yet on some occasions, they met with different and better usage, and at least what may be called the appearance of favour and encouragement. The following instance is not a little remarkable and striking—“It will hardly be credited, [says Andrews] that, in 1241, Henry III issued writs to the sheriffs, ordering them to convene a _parliament of Jews_: six from some towns, and two from others. The writs are now extant. The Jews were proud of this; but Henry only meant to plunder them.” The last assertion if probably too true. Henry was just that kind of man. It is however very little known that he was, beforehand with Bonaparte in convening a Jewish parliament or Sanhedrim. But the characters of these two potentates are extremely dissimilar, and so probably were their motives for convening the Jewish delegates.—In the above mentioned reign of Richard I. the Jews were most shamefully and cruelly plundered and massacred here in different places. In the guilt and infamy of those foul and horrid deeds Lynn appears to have been deeply implicated. The tragical tale is related by _Parkin_ from William of Newburgh, and by _Mackerell from_ Hollingshed.—It states that one of the Lynn Jews being converted to christianity, his brethren were so enraged against him, that they resolved to kill him whenever they had an opportunity. Having accordingly met him one day in the street, they instantly fell upon him, fully intending to execute their bloody purpose, but he escaped out of their hands, and fled into the next church; they followed him thither, and breaking open the doors, would have taken him out by force. Crowds of the inhabitants, with a great number of foreigners, consisting of mariners and others, who traded here, now came upon them, rescued the man, and drove them into their own houses. The townsmen refrained from any further acts of violence, fearful of incurring the displeasure of their sovereign, who had taken the Jews under his protection; but the mariners and the other strangers followed them to their own dwellings, massacred them there, plundered their houses and set them on fire, and immediately taking shipping, escaped with their spoil.—Of the truth of some part of this story some doubt may very reasonably be entertained. It is not very likely that the Jews should act as is here represented toward their converted brother, as they could not be insensible of the extreme risk of such a conduct. Nor is it at all probable that the town rabble should refrain from assisting the strangers in the massacre of the Jews, or desist from joining them in plundering and burning those unhappy people’s houses. These may be presumed to be additions to what did then really happen, and designed for the purpose of exaggerating the conduct and blackening the character of the poor Jews, as well as throwing the whole blame and infamy of the most shocking part of the conduct of the opposite party on those foreign mariners and other strangers who happened to be then in the town. It was always the manner of the pretended christians of those days, to impute some previous horrid atrocity to the Jews, in order to blind people’s eyes, and extenuate their own barbarous and diabolical treatment of them. Upon the whole the plunder and massacre of the Jews seem to be that part of the above story which is unquestionably authentic. But Lynn was not the only place in England where the Jews were then so treated. The brutal and horrid work began in London, whence it extended to Lynn and other places, even as far as York, where it ended in a scene most shockingly tragical; the effects of which proved fatal to the commercial prosperity of that ancient city.—See Andrew, 1. 192.

{392} Parkin, 120 whose authority is Madox’s Hist. of the Exchequer.

{393a} Parkin, as before.

{393b} That Lynn was a mayor-town in the reign, or before the death of JOHN, has been disputed by some; but the fact seems fully ascertained from the Patent rolls—that king’s letters patents, dated at Devizes, Wilts, June 7 (1216) in the 18th year of his reign, being addressed to _the_ MAYOR _and good men of Lenn_.

{395} See Gibson’s Camden—Parkin—Mackerell, and Tour of Norfolk.

{396} Carte 1. 340.

{398} Compare Parkin, Rapin, Carte, and Andrews.

{399a} See Gibson’s Camden.

{399b} Parkin, 122.

{401} Parkin, p. 122.

{402} Parkin, as before.

{405a} Parkin 123.

{405b} See Parkin, as before; who further observes, that Lynn was famous at that time for importing wine: and it seems that foreign wine was then very cheap here, compared with what it is at present. Hence Parkin mentions a pipe of wine as selling here then at 1_l._ 15_s._ and a tun of wine at 50_s._ These were probably red wine, for he afterwards mentions a tun of white wine as having been sold for three marks and a half, i.e. 2_l._ 6_s._ 3_d._—The mark being 13_s._ 4_d._—Wine sells here now at a price above 50 times higher than what it did at that period. Salmon was an article that appears to have always fetched a high price in those days; and Parkin, in the place from which these articles have been extracted, mentions 20_s._ as paid for 5 Salmons sent to the bishop of Norwich at South Elmham, on Monday before the feast of the purification. Ten such Salmons were then, it seems, as valuable as a pipe of wine.

{411} The word Gild, (says Chambers,) is formed from the Saxon _Gildan_, to pay, became every man was _gildare_, i.e. to pay something towards the charge and support of the company.

{412} Annual Review, for 1807, 490.

{413a} See Jacob’s Law Dictionary, under the word GUILD.

{413b} Religious persons, clerks, knights and their eldest sons, excepted.

{413c} Chamber’s Cyclopædia, under GILD and FRANK _pledge_.

{415} See Turner’s Hist. of the Anglo-Saxon, 2nd Ed. vol. 2. p. 109, &c.

{420} Parkin, 134, 5.

{421a} The Gilds of the common people, or those which had no large possessions attached to them, were then probably not meddled with, but suffered to go on as before. Some of them, as we have before seen, existed in Camden’s time, and perhaps a good while afterwards.

{421b} St. George’s Hall, after it became the property of the corporation, was long used as a court-house, to hold the quarter-sessions for the county. Those sessions have since been removed to the Trinity Guildhall, now the Town-hall: since which time St. George’s hall has been converted into a Play-house, and is now during the mart time, and for sometime after, occupied annually by a company of comedians.

{423} A word is here left out: _Security_, perhaps.

{424a} _surety_, perhaps.

{424b} It probably should be 2_s._

{425a} Here is an illegible word: those that follow also are scarcely intelligible.

{425b} Our modern clerks are better paid.

{425c} They had secrets, it seems, which they deemed of much importance; but it does not appear of what sort they were.

{426a} Some word or words seem here wanting.

{426b} This shews that this Gild also had a Hall.

{426c} Supposing the number of members to be 50, his annual stipend, or salary amounted to only 25_s._ A chaplain now would expect fifty times that sum, at least.

{427} _Hoods_ must have been the word omitted.

{429} A strange word, whose meaning seems not very easy to ascertain.

{430} This shews that some of the members of this Gild were poor.

{431a} This Gild consisted then, it seems, of 50 members.

{431b} By this it appears that the Corpus Christi Gild had a separate Hall, but where it stood does not appear. That Gild seems therefore to have been another of the superior order.

{431c} It seems by this that the Gild of St. Lawrence also was one of those of a superior order.

{432a} The minstrels, it may be supposed, were employed on their public days, to add to the conviviality, or glee and hilarity of those meetings; which shews the members were not of an uncheerly cast. Minstrels must have been then in no small request at Lynn.

{432b} “A Bill” [of expences relating to the Almshouse, with memoranda.]

_s._ _d._ The Alderman’s ffee 3. 4. Mess [Mass] Pence 6. 8. For sowing [sewing] blankets & Sheets 0. 8. A Bucket for the Almeshouse 0. 5. Straw to the Beds 0. 3. To Wm. Lister Almes 0. 4. To Nicholas . . . Almes 0. 8. To a Mason for a daies work 0. 7. His man 0. 4. Shinks 0. 1. For 3 pair sheets 7. 6. 2 pair ditto 4. 8. 3 Mattrisses 8. 0. For Mass pence at Oferings 4. 0. For the Hearth making in ye Kitchen 1. 8. For a Lanthorn in the middle of the house 0. 7. For the Bed bottoms 1. 1.

Paid for the souls of Nicholas Bardeny Prior of Lynn, Wm. Wattlett, John Dean, and many more, each of them 2s. 6d.

Robt. Soame gave a Load of Oatstraw for repairing their Beds.

Ordered that the Keeper ring the Bell at 6 o’clock at night, & there be prayers daily, & that the Alderman visit the Almeshouse once a month to see that nothing be amiss.

{436a} This is the only mention we have met with of _Saint Julian’s Horn_, the history of which, no doubt, would be very amusing, if it could be recovered.

{436b} This shews that even our suffragan bishops assumed the power of granting indulgences, or licences to sin with impunity, on such conditions as they chose to prescribe.

{439a} Parkin, 130.

{439b} Ibid. 141.

{440a} Parkin, 142.

{440b} Those of the Gilds seem to be _the only aldermen_ of Lynn in those days, see page 395.

{441} Of St Audrey and her _smock_, and our Lady and her _appearances_ at Thetford, some account may be found in Martin’s History of that town. Speaking of the church of St. Audrey, he says, it was of but small revenue, but that a famous relique made ample amends to the priest for the smallness of his stipend. He then introduces the following extract from _Bacon’s Reliques of Rome_, fol. 181.—

“In Thetford, a Mayor town in Norfolk, there was a parish church, now
destroyed, called St. Audrise. In this church among other reliques,
was a _smock_ of St. Audrise, which was there kept as a great Jewel
and precious Relique. The virtue of that _smock_ was mighty and
manifold, but specially in putting away the toothach and swelling of
the throte: so that the paciente was first of all shriven and hard
masse, and did such oblations as the priest of the church enjoyned.”

The Vulgar supposed this relique to be so full of sacred virtue, that they ordered, in their Wills, certain persons to go in pilgrimage to it for the salvation of their souls. Margaret Whoop, of East Harling, had the following clause in her Will, which was dated 1501: “I will that another man go in pilgrimage for me to Thetford, and offer for me to St. Audrey’s Smock.” See Martin’s Thetford, p. 79.—Nothing is more probable than that this same smock, in those days, drew many a pilgrim from Lynn to Thetford.

Of the blessed Virgin’s _appearances_ to divers persons at Thetford, one was to a woman who had lost the use of her tongue, but whom she cured the same time. The person who asserted and recorded this was a monk. The same monk has prefaced his account of another of the Virgin’s miracles at Thetford in the following notable and curious manner.

“I have thought proper to relate a most remarkable miracle, because
of its tendency to exemplify the mercy of _God_, and to exhibit the
praise of _his mother_, and is most worthy of public attention; for
whatever tends to the Glory of God, and relates to his mother, is not
to be concealed or denied, but to be received as matter of
fact.”—[Then comes the marvellous tale—] “William Heddrich, junr.
carpenter, and Isabell his wife, lived in a town of Norfolk, called
Hockham. They had a child 3 years old, who in harvest time was
carried with them into the field, as was customary with peasants who
went to their day labour. On a certain day about sun setting, the
child happened to be sleep, and actually fell into a sound sleep on
the edge of the field where his parents were reaping. In the dusk of
the evening, a man driving his cart along that side of the field
where the child lay, unfortunately the wheel went over the child’s
head, unknown to the driver, and killed him on the spot. The father
of the child was following the cart when the accident happened. He
took the child up in his arms, and finding him dead and besmeared
with his own blood, he made bitter lamentations. He then ran to an
eminent surgeon in the same town, who had healed many who had
laboured under various infirmities, by the sovereign efficacy of his
medicines. After the surgeon had minutely examined the child, he
found no symptoms of life; but he advised the father to carry it
home, and the next day prepare for its funeral. When the father had
heard the opinion of the surgeon, and was convinced that he was
deprived of his child, with heart full of grief he look up the corpse
and went to his house, and delivered it to his wife, that she might
lay it on the bed. Then he assembled his friends and neighbours
together, in order to watch that night, as was customary before a
funeral. Being thus met they devoted themselves to watching, and
with the greatest ardour of devotion prayed to the blessed _mother of
God_, vowing that, if by her intercession the child should be
restored to life, they would go on a pilgrimage naked to the image of
the blessed virgin, in the church of the monks in Thetford, and there
make the usual offering. When they had made an end of their prayers
and vows, about midnight, the child revived. Those that were
present, when they beheld the happy effect of their prayers, praised
and blessed God. And, to perform their vows, they took the child,
and carried it before the image of the blessed virgin, and fulfilled
the obligation they had put themselves under.”—see Appendix to
Martin’s Thetford, p. 83.

Such were some of the pious and popular tales of other times, in the parts about Lynn: but before we affect to pity the credulous weakness and miserable stupidity of our ancestors, who could receive them, let us be careful that we ourselves are free from similar failings, or from other failings equally inexcusable and disgraceful.

{444} The electioners, this year, who chose the Alderman and Scabins, were 8 persons deputed.

{445a} What wages!

{445b} There to play an anteme of our Lady.

{448} Parkin, 145.

{449a} Mackerell’s History of Lynn, 254.—what the last expression, _after the conquest_, means, seems difficult to make out.

{449b} Of this _Tabernacle_ the author regrets that he can give no particular account. The above extract is the only record where he has met with any mention of it.—It was probably a rich shrine enclosing an image of our Saviour.

{451} At p. 39 of the said MS. volume, speaking of the people of Lynn, the writer says, “John de Grey, bishop of Norwich, was their great friend and benefactor: in 1207 he gave king John a palfrey, in order to have Duplicates of the Charter which he had obtained for his town of Lynn, it being owing to this bishop that Lynn ever had a charter, as the original one of king John now in the custody of that corporation testifies: the whole, or chief liberties of that town being before that time in the bishop.” [De Grey confirmed the royal charter against his own successors.]

{453} St. Nicholas and St. James.

{454a} Skivins, Skivini, or Scabini, were the custodes, guardians, governors, or stewards.

{454b} Mr. Day’s MS. volume, 48, and Parkin, 148.

{455a} A sextary was an ancient measure, said to be a pint and half, but it appears here, from the price &c. to be much more, and was _four gallons_.

{455b} _Four Gallons_ of Wine sold then for 10_d._

{455c} The word obliterated was probably serta, a coronet [or chaplet.]

{455d} The skivins were _four_ in number, as appears from a deed of Thomas bp. of Ely in the 25th of Henry VI. Simon Pigot, Richard Cosyn, Thomas Benet, and William Pilton, then called therein, custodes sive scabins, &c. They served, as I take it, in all, two years, the seniors going off yearly, when two others were chosen &c. they had the charge &c. as appears, of the goods and effects of the guild.—_Parkin_.

{457} Ante palmatam. Hence we may perceive the old custom of shaking hands at an agreement or bargain. [Striking hands is still customary in some places in making bargains; the buyer holds his hand open, and the seller strikes it with open hand; whence they are said to have _struck a bargain_.]

{459a} Psalm 116.

{459b} It probably should be _Dirge_.

{459c} 14th of September.

{461} Nativus servus—[This seems to do little credit to the feelings, or to the memory of these rich gild brethren: Why should any sober, industrious person, though of servile birth, or origin, be thus disdainfully precluded from partaking of the benefit of their institution, while he could advance the admission, or entrance money?]

{462a} Same date. Quere if not Edward, 1. 1279.

{462b} We have not these meetings any where explained: nor do we well know in what they were distinguished from those called generals.

{464} The remainder of the above article, being rather long, and what would take up too much room in the text, but too curious, perhaps, to be omitted, is thrown into this note, and is as follows.—

“And that the said skivins are to take keyage of merchandizes lying
on the key in manner and form following. viz. For every pipe
(dolium) of wine lying on the kay beyond one day 1_d._ and no more
for a week, and so for every week.—_Also_, for every pipe of Wad.
{465a} lying on the kay beyond a day 1_d._ and no more for a week,
and so for every week.—_Also_, for every fardwell called gybe {465b}
of the weight of one pipe or above lying on the kay beyond a day
1_d._ and no more for a week, and so for every week—And in the same
manner for any other goods or ware of the weight of one pipe of wine
or more lying, &c—Of every ship bringing in goods, or carrying out,
4_d._ or less according to the discretion of the skivins—_Also_ for
three stones, called Slipstones, lying on the kay beyond a day, a
farthing, and not more for a week, and so for every week.—_Also_, for
two pieces of Lead {465c} lying on the kay above one day a farthing,
and not more for a week, and so for every week—_Also_, for sand,
chalk, clay, stone, tiles, and other things, of the weight of one
load, lying on the kay above a day, an halfpenny, _&c._—_Also_, for
the load of one boat of sand, chalk, &c. lying, &c. a
farthing.—_Also_, for any wares or goods not herein named, according
to the custom the skivins have used.—_Also_, tor every millstone,
lying above a day, an halfpenny, &c.—_Also_, for every last of
Quernstones. {465d} lying on the kay above a day, one penny
&c.—_Also_, for every last of pitch and brimstone lying one day,
1_d._ and so for every day.—_Also_, for every hawser tyed to the kay,
one penny.—_Also_, The sd. [qu. said] day it is ordered that no bad
persons, nor any spiritual {465e} person, should work upon the kay.”

{465a} Quere.

{465b} A grant, pack, or bale of goods? gybe, from Gibbus.

{465c} Duob. peciis plumbi, probably what are now called piggs.

{465d} De Quernstonis, small grinding stones for mustard, malt &c. as I take it: Quern for corn by corruption.

{465e} Spiritual: it is likely that some of the monks or fryars used to do sq.

[These notes are Parkin’s.]

{466a} This article may be considered as a rule for preserving good manners at the guild. The prohibition of coming there _barefooted_, is a plain indication, that it was common then, even for those of the better sort, to go about ordinarily without shoes and stockings. The case is very different now: and yet it may be questioned, if we live happier than they did. The former article contains directions for the conduct of the brethren and burgesses at Stirbich and other such fairs.

{466b} The remainder of the account of this guild, in the said MS. Volume, consists of brief notices, or rather the names of its aldermen at different periods: [by _Parkin_.] Of which the following is the substance.—

Richard Lambert occurs Alderm. 1272. 56. Henry 3.

Robert de London alderm. occurs 15. Edward I. and 18. Edward I. Wm
de Lyndesey was his deputy. Peter de Thrundeyn chos. ald. on Friday
after the assumpt. of the Virg. M. 18. Ed. I. and occurs also in the
34. of the said king.

Simon Fitz Simon occ. ald. 15. § Ed. 2. John de Morton then Mayor
3rd. time.

Robt. de Derby, Q. if not ald. 3. Ed. 3. seems to occ.

Jeff. Drew ald. occ. 27. and 31. Ed. 3.

Tho. Bottesham occ. ald. 44. Ed. 3. and in 1379.

Wm. Franceys ald. 14. Ed. 3.

Hen. Betely occ. ald. tem. Rich. 2.

Roger Galyon occ. Mayor and Ald. 13. Hen. 4. 25 July.

John Brunham occ. ald. 7. Hen. 4. 5. and in 3.

Tho. Hunt occ. ald. 20 June 1 Hen. 6.

Hen. Thoresby occ. ald. 25. Hen. 6. and 21 Hen. 6.

Walter Cony ald. 1464. above 14 years, dy’d 29 Sept. 1479.

{471} _Seche_ is here distinguished from _Sechehythe_.

{472} Mr. Day’s MS. volume, p. 59, &c.

{476} How happy it was for them to have betwixt them and God such a powerful mediator as _saint Francis_!

{477a} I.e. a halfpenny.

{477b} All this is very good.

{477c} The meaning of that word seems difficult to make out.

{479} This shows that the _mornspechs_ and _generals_ were different sorts of meetings; but it seems not very clear wherein they were so.—Quere, if the former were not the religious, and the latter the convivial meetings.

{480a} Ob. seems to be here a contraction of _obolus_, and signifies a _half-penny_.

{480b} How very different from the present was that time when _three fat sheep_ sold for _eight shillings_, and _three fatted calves_ for only _eight shilling and ten pence_! The difference in a great measure may consist in the comparative value of money, or of the precious metals. They were then, perhaps, above 20 times more valuable, and less plentiful, than now. We are told that the Jewish Solomon made silver to be in Jerusalem as stone, and that it was nothing accounted of in his days: our own Solomon seems to be in the way to bring things to the same pass. But this is no sure indication of national prosperity—Solomon’s subjects, for all the vast influx of wealth, were grievously oppressed and unhappy, of which his unwise successor felt the sad and fatal effects.—The dissolution of monasteries, expulsion of the monks, and introduction of protestantism were long bewailed by many of our country men, as very serious evils, and the causes of the dearness of provisions, &c. Their sentiments and feelings they would often express in verse as well as prose: whence one of our old popular songs had in it these remarkable expressions—

“I remember the time, before the monks went hence,
That a bushel of wheat sold for fourteen pence,
And forty eggs a penny—”

We are also told that about the time when those changes took place, beef sold at a _half penny_ a pound, and mutton at _three farthings_, and that butchers then sold _penny pieces_ of beef to the poor, which weighed 2_lb._ & half, and often 3_lb._ and moreover, that 14 such pieces were sold for shilling.—When the price advanced soon after, it is no wonder that many would impute it to the late religious changes, or previous ecclesiastical revolution.

{480c} Ob. seems to be here a contraction of _obolus_, and signifies a _half-penny_.

{485} Our Gilds were somewhat like the navies of our good allies the Portuguese and Spaniards, where almost every ship bears the name of some saint or other: but it does not seem that they are at all the better for that.

{486} How many _Gild Halls_ there were formerly at Lynn, besides those of _St. George_ and the _Trinity_, it is now impossible to say: but we may pretty safely presume that there were several; one of them was probably that place in Purfleet Street which was a dissenting meeting house 40 or 50 years ago, and is now occupied as a school room: but we pretend not to guess to what Gild it belonged.

{488} Beauties of England, vol. xi, 245.

{489a} See Parkin 126.

{489b} We cannot find what church this was.

{489c} Men were then in England conveyed with the land.

{490} Parkin as before.

{491a} Parkin, 129.

{491b} Eccl. History, 1. 447. Ed. 1774.

{495} “As the pontiff, (says Mosheim) allowed these four Mendicant orders the liberty of travelling wherever they thought proper, of conversing with persons of all ranks, of instructing the youth and the multitude wherever they went; and, as these monks exhibited, in their outward appearance and manner of life, more striking marks of gravity and holiness than were observable in the other monastic societies, they arose all at once to the very summit of fame, and were regarded with the utmost esteem and veneration throughout all the countries of Europe. The enthusiastic attachment to these sanctimonious beggars went so far, that, as we learn from the most authentic records, several cities were divided, or cantoned out, into four parts, with a view to these four orders; the first part was assigned to the Dominicans; the second to the Franciscans; the third to the Carmelites; and the fourth to the Augustinians. The people were unwilling to receive the sacraments from any other hands than those of the Mendicants, to whose churches they crowded to perform their devotion, while living, and were extremely desirous to deposite there also their remains after death; all which occasioned grievous complaints among the ordinary priests, to whom the care of souls was committed, and who considered themselves as the spiritual guides of the multitude.” [These Medicants were evidently the Methodists and Evangelical Clergy of those days, and might, for aught we know, merit the popularity which they had acquired as much to the full as their successors of the present day.] “Nor did the influence and credit of the Mendicants end here; for we find that they were employed, not only in spiritual matters, but also in temporal and political affairs of the greatest consequence, in composing the differences of princes, concluding treaties of peace, concerting alliances, presiding in cabinet councils, governing courts, levying taxes, and other occupations, not only remote from, but absolutely inconsistent with, the monastic character and profession.” Mosh. E. H. iii. 53.

{498} See Mosheim E. H. ii. 412, &c.—Let us not think of reproaching the _papists_ for the absurdities of their Carmelites:—Our own _protestant_ order of _free-masons_ can any day match them in the ridiculous extravagance of their pretensions to high antiquity, or empty and pompous boasts of a very remote and dignified origin. Nor were the Carmelites perhaps in any view less respectable than the said protestant order.

{499a} Beaut. of Engl. vol. xi.

{499b} Parkin 151.

{504} The very extraordinary zeal and enthusiasm exhibited by these missionary labourers, which amount to a proof of their sincerity, must have eminently fitted them for such hazardous services, and desperate undertakings as those above described. Between those adventures of the _Franciscans_ and some that occur in the early history of that truly respectable protestant religious order, or party, commonly called _Quakers_, there appears a very strong and striking resemblance.

{505} See Mosheim’s Eccl. Hist. iii. 56. Also Priestley’s ii. 233, &c. whence the above account is chiefly extracted.

{507} There were then probably several images of the virgin in this town, all much resorted to; but that in her chapel on the mount, and this, might be the chief of them.

{508} In France they were called _Jacobins_, from having obtained the house of _St. James_, at Paris, for their principal church, or convent; the identical place, it is supposed, which gave the very same name in our time to a certain order of politicians, who used to hold their meetings there, and who seem to have too much resembled their former and stinted namesakes in the violence and ferociousness of their tempers and proceedings.