Chapter XVII: Section I

_Hints relating to some occurrences here_, _anterior to the breaking out of the war—Lynn declares for the king—its previous conduct charged with duplicity—siege and surrender of the town—subsequent events_.

Among the arbitrary measures of the government, which affected this town previously to the commencement of the war, was the levying of _Ship-money_. In 1634, the town is said to have been assessed towards a ship of 800 tons, with 260 men; but it does not appear what was the amount of the assessment. Two years after, however, (Nov. 6. 1637,) we learn, from the corporation books, that “the town was assessed 200_l._ for a ship of war.” This sum may be supposed nearly, if not quite equal to 2000_l._ of our money. We mean not to say that it was excessive or exorbitant: it was certainly arbitrary, and therefore illegal and objectionable. But by the heads of the town, if we may judge by their subsequent conduct, it was not deemed a serious grievance, or perhaps any grievance at all; for they declared for the court, and against the party which opposed those lawless exactions.

In the succeeding years, previously to the commencement of the war, the town appears to have been closely and carefully guarded, so that none were allowed to enter without permission: hence we find in 1639, the mayor appointing “two warders for the day time, one to stand at the South, and the other the East-Gate;” and the same to continue, “so long as he shall think fitting these dangerous times.” In 1640 and 1641, the town may be supposed guarded no less vigilantly; in the beginning of 1642, it was, it seems, further fortified, and furnished with seven pieces of brass cannon from London. In the early part of the same year, captain _Sherwood_ of Norwich, at the head of a troop of dragoons, came close under _St. Catherine’s Wall_, by the East-Gate, and demanded admittance, but was denied, says Mackerel, “by the mayor and townsmen”—but we presume it must have been rather by the _governor_; who, at that time, if we are not mistaken, was _Sir Hamon L’Estrange_, the father of the afterwards famous _Sir Roger_.

The three gates were now furnished with draw-bridges, and the town, from its situation and the repairs bestowed on its fortifications, must have been pretty strong. The parliament also thought it a place of no small consequence, and therefore it was besieged and taken at an early stage of the war, by the earl of Manchester, one of their commanders, at the head of a very respectable and formidable force, well supplied with artillery. The town held out near three weeks; for the siege began on August 28. and the place surrendered on the 16th. of September. Of this memorable siege and surrender, the following account is extracted from Rushworth’s Historical Collections, vol. 5. p. 283, which it is hoped will not prove unacceptable to the reader.

“The town of Lynn Regis (says Rushworth,) advantageously situated on
an arm of the sea, had for a long while fortified itself, on pretence
of _neutrality_, and for their own defence; but afterwards shewed
themselves _wholly for the king_: wherefore the earl of Manchester
being made the parliament’s major-general, for the associated
counties of Norfolk, Suffolk, &c. resolved to reduce it; and in order
thereunto, seized the town of _Old Lynn_, and there planted ordnance,
which much annoyed them in the other town. And two approaches were
made, one by the causeway that leads to the _South_, and the other to
the _East-gate_.” [Against the latter,] “The besieged made a brisk
sally, and at once fired two houses in Gauwood, [Gaywood] intending
to have destroyed the whole town, that the enemy might not have
quarters there. But that party were beaten in, and the rest of the
houses preserved. The besiegers summoned in pioneers, from all the
neighbouring parts, and by degrees brought their approaches within
half musket shot: and had begun from a battery on a hill, near to the
end of the town, next the sea, and resolved upon storming the town,
both by land and water, having provided many boats and ladders for
that purpose. But then received a letter from the town, intimating
their willingness to capitulate: and so a treaty was agreed on, to be
had by eight persons of a side. Those for the earl of Manchester
were, _Sir John Pargrave_, _Col. Russel_, _Col. Walton_, _Mr. Philip
Calthorpe_, _Mr. John Pickering_, _Mr. Gregory Gosset_, _Mr. John
Spilman_, and _Mr. William Goodz_. For the town _Sir Hamon
L’Estrange_, _Sir Richard Hovell_, _Mr. Clinch_, _Mr. Dereham_, _Mr.
Pallet_ their _recorder_, _Mr. Hudson_ the _mayor elect_, _Mr. Leek_,
and _Mr. Kirby_: Between whom, after a long debate, it was agreed to
this effect,—1. That the town, with the ordnance, arms, and
ammunition be delivered to the earl, and he to enter the town.—2.
That the gentlemen strangers in the town, shall have liberty to
depart, with every man a horse, sword and pistols.—3. That the
townsmen shall enjoy all rights and privileges appertaining to them,
with free trading as far as may consist with law.—4. All prisoners on
both sides to be set at liberty.—5. That the desires of the town
touching certain of their ships taken by the parliament frigates,
shall be represented by the earl, to the parliament and the earl of
_Warwick_.—6. That neither the persons nor estates, of any
inhabitants or strangers now resident in Lynn, shall be molested for
any thing past, or done by them since the earl of Manchester’s coming
into these parts.—7. That, for preventing of plundering, the town
shall raise and pay _ten shillings a man_, to all _private soldiers_
under the earl’s command, and a _fortnight’s pay_ to the
_officers_.—8. and lastly, That _Sir Hamon L’Estrange_, _Sir Richard
Hovell_, _Capt. Clinch_, _Mr. Recorder_, _Mr. Dereham_, and _Mr.
Leek_, remain as hostages, until the conditions be performed.”

“The same night, part of the Earl’s forces took possession of the
town; and the next morning his lordship made his entry, and sent 500
men to _Hull_. Soon after be withdrew the rest of his forces into
Lincolnshire, leaving Col. _Walton_ governor of Lynn.”

Here it may be observed, that the forces that besieged and took Lynn, consisted solely of infantry: the cavalry attached to this army had remained in Lincolnshire, under the command of _Cromwell_, who was now beginning to distinguish himself as a soldier. But neither he nor his cavalry, were present at this siege, though some people have thought otherwise, for no better reason, seemingly, than the idle presumption that Cromwell must have been concerned in all the notable transactions of that memorable period.

Among the remarkable occurrences which took place here during this siege, the following has been found in a certain MS. account of the town—

“On Sunday the 3rd of September, in the afternoon, and in the middle
of the sermon, came a shot of 18lb weight in at the window over the
west door of St. Margaret’s church, and took the middle pillar a
great part off, and broke it in many hundred pieces, dispersing them
in all directions, all over the church. One piece of the stone, fell
into a seat at the lower end of the church, where five men set,
[sat,] and split the board before them, on which they laid their
books; but no harm was done to them. The preacher, a reverend
divine, named _Mr. Hinson_, left his sermon and came out of the
church, and all the people departed in a most confused manner; {759a}
some leaving their hatts, some their books, and some their scarves;
but, praised be God, no further hurt was done to any person.” {759b}

Near three months after the surrender of Lynn, the following order of both houses was issued, bearing date December 9th 1643—

“Forasmuch as the Earl of Manchester, in his articles of agreement
with the town of king’s Lynn, remitted the offence in reference to
himself and his array while they lay before the town; but touched
upon no private injuries done by the malignants to the well-affected:
it is this day ordered by the Lords and Commons that such persons as
did take any of the goods of the well-affected, by themselves or such
as they appointed, or did any damage to their houses or mills, or any
other ways, shall make restitution to all such well-affected persons
as have been damnified, according to the greatness of their losses.
And that _Col. Walton_, governor of King’s Lynn, _Mr. Percival_ and
_Mr. Toll_, members of the House of Commons, [for that town,] shall
examine what damage hath been done to the well-affected, and appoint
such as have done them injury to make them reparation accordingly:
and if any of them shall refuse to make such reparation, that the
said governor, Mr. Percival, and Mr. Toll, shall have power to
sequester so much of the estates of such malignants as will make the
reparation, and assign it to those that have been damnified.” {760a}

Hence it appears, that the town was then divided into two great political parties, the most powerful of which approving, and even admiring the corruptions and insanities of the Court: how far the case is similar or dissimilar at present, we need not say.

Sometime after the above order was issued by the two Houses, a party of royalists, at the head of which was young _L’Estrange_, afterwards the noted Sir _Roger_, formed a plan for surprising the town and recovering it for the king, who had granted him a commission, constituting him its governor, in case of success. But the design was betrayed by two of his confederates, though both bound by an oath of secrecy: which shews what trusty and choice hands they were. L’Estrange was consequently seized, tried by a court-martial, and condemned to die as a traitor. The sentence however was not executed. He remained in prison from 1644 till 1648, when he luckily escaped, and sometime after got out of the kingdom, where he remained, as was said before, {760b} till the autumn of 1653, when he succeeded in making his peace with the Protector: after which he lived in this country unmolested to the day of his death, when he was at a very advanced age.

About two years after L’Estrange’s adventure, we find the following notice taken of this town in a Public Paper, called “The Weekly Account,” of Wednesday May 6. 1646—It is an order of Parliament dated April 31. and thus worded—“Whereas the town of Lynn Regis hath suffered very much by the _Lord Paulet_, It is ordered that reparation should be made to the said town, _according to their Petition_, out of his estate.”—The _Weekly account_ was a quarto news-paper, of one sheet, “containing certain special and remarkable passages from both Houses of Parliament, and collections of several Letters from the armies.”—We no where else meet with any account or intimation of damages sustained by Lynn from _Lord Paulet_: but the fact cannot be doubted. The town, it appears, had complained to Parliament, and _petitioned_ on the occasion. Could that petition be found, it would, no doubt, cast some light upon this dark part of our history.

It is very certain that this town was no small sufferer during that revolutionary period, as appears from the Journal of the House of Commons in Rushworth’s Historical Collections, Vol. 7. p. 1217, where we find the following passage—“Saturday, August 5, 1648. The House was informed that the town of _Lynn Regis_ did want much repair, being ruined by these times of war. The House ordered 2000 oaks for reparation thereof.” This conduct of the parliament, or _then_ House of Commons looked well, as it indicated some regard for _justice_. We seldom, if ever, meet with similar instances in the conduct of the other, or opposite party. It is not very usual with crowned heads, or their minions, to think much of making reparation for injuries, much and devoutly as it is to be wished, that it always formed a prominent and essential part of their character.

For the remaining years, down to the restoration, this town appears to have remained tranquil, and pretty loyal to the constituted authorities, or new order of things. It seems also to have soon surmounted its former sufferings, {762a} and to have fast advanced in wealth and prosperity. We discover no particular symptoms of disaffection here within those years, unless it was about 1650, when there was an insurrection of the royalists in this county, and a _major Saul_, a worthy gentleman, as an old MS. says, was hanged here in the Tuesday market place, for being concerned, it seems, in that affair.

About the same time, or within the same year, one _Dorothy Floyd_, (or _Lloyd_,) also was hanged here, as the same old MS. says, for _Witchcraft_: which we now just mention, as we had overlooked it before, in our account of those who unhappily suffered at Lynn for that reputed or imaginary crime. {762b}