CHAPTER XXIII.

Eminent Citizens of the Nineteenth Century.

_Professor Taylor_.

PROFESSOR TAYLOR claims the first place in our notices of the eminent citizens of this period, as a politician, a musician, and a public man. After his death a memoir of him appeared in the _Norfolk News_ of March 28th, and April 4th, 1863, and from it we derive the following details:—

“Mr. Edward Taylor was the great grandson of the celebrated Dr. John Taylor, a man not less beloved for the kindliness of his disposition, than he was venerated for his vast learning. Dr. Taylor was born at Lancaster in the year 1694, and came to Norwich (according to Mr. Edward Taylor’s account) in 1733. Here he remained till 1757, and here it was that he produced many of his works, amongst others his famous Hebrew Concordance, which was published in two large volumes, folio, and was the labour of fourteen years. Many copies of the frontispiece (a fine portrait engraved by Houbraken) are still extant in this city. Dr. Taylor must have been fond of music, and must also have made it a personal study. This we infer, less from his having published ‘A Collection of Tunes in Various Airs’ for the use of his Norwich congregation, than from his having been able to Prefix thereto ‘Instructions in the Art of Psalmody.’ The airs themselves have no other accompaniment added than an unfigured bass, but the collection contains many of the finest melodies which are now in use. The instructions were intended to enable a student to sing at sight.

“When Dr. Taylor quitted Norwich, his only surviving son, Richard, remained, and carried on the business of a manufacturer in St. George Colegate. Mr. John Taylor, father of the subject of this memoir, was born the 30th July, 1750. In 1773, he entered into the business of a yarn maker, in partnership with his brother, in the parish where their father had lived. If not a musical composer, John had the reputation of being at least a tolerable poet, and he was peculiarly happy in writing words for music.

“In April, 1777, Mr. John Taylor married Susannah, the youngest daughter of Mr. John Cook of Norwich. Mr. Edward Taylor was born on the 22nd of January, 1784, in the parish of St. George Colegate.

“In his boyish days, Edward Taylor was made to imbibe the usual quantity of Greek and Latin, and the cask ever after retained the flavour of the wine. But music even then was his chief delight. When arrived at manhood he was tall and well formed; he had a fair, though by no means a pallid complexion, a penetrating eye, and a majestic voice, which sounded in conversation like the roll of a bass drum. In whatever part of the world he had been met, it would have been said at a glance, ‘That’s an Englishman.’ He had that unmistakeable stamp of bluntness and sturdy independence which seems to be an Englishman’s birthright. He was proud, not altogether without reason, of his ancestors, whose religious and political opinions he inherited. Hence, he was a Dissenter of the Unitarian School, and what was then called a Radical Reformer. Deeming himself to be in the right, he of course considered all those who differed from him to be in the wrong. But being himself consistent, he knew how to respect consistency in others. His hostility was confined to men’s doctrines and measures; it was never extended to their persons. In a word, he was generous, manly, and sincere, and he therefore enjoyed the friendship of good and true men, whatever might be their party or creed. Mr. Taylor married, in 1808, Deborah, daughter of Mr. William Newson, of Stump Cross, in this city, a man of upright and honourable character, and a successful tradesman.”

The memoir contains a sketch of Mr. Taylor’s political doings, which we shall give in another part of this work, and it then proceeds:—

“On the 19th January, 1824, he had the honour of dining with the Duke of Sussex, at Kensington Palace. The next year, 1825, terminated Mr. Taylor’s residence in his native city, though to the end of his life he continued to take a warm interest in whatever concerned its welfare. On the 21st of May, having already made arrangements for giving up his business in Norwich, he went up to London to prepare for making it his future abode. On the 5th of August, he served on the Norwich grand jury for the last time, and the next day took his final departure. On the 15th, he joined his brother Philip and his cousin John Martineau in their business, as civil engineers, having hired a house for that purpose in York Place, City Road.

“On the 3rd of January, 1826, the year after Mr. Taylor finally left the city for London, he came down to a dinner which was given at the Rampant Horse Hotel in his honour. The original intention had been to place his portrait in St. Andrew’s Hall, and Sir James Smith had actually written some lines to be placed under it, beginning—

‘Avaunt, ye base, approach ye wise and good, Thus in this hall once Edward Taylor stood.’

But that idea was abandoned, and a presentation of a service of plate was determined upon by his fellow-citizens. The proposition originated with the strongest of his political antagonists in the Corporation. The plate was given at this dinner at the Rampant Horse, the chairman being Henry Francis, Esq., against whom Mr. Taylor had entered the lists in the severest contest ever known in the Mancroft Ward. This rendered the compliment greater.

“Mr. Edward Taylor’s first music master was the Rev. Charles Smyth, a man who was equally remarkable for his eccentricity and musical learning. Mr. Taylor always spoke with great respect of Mr. Smyth’s musical knowledge. How long the lessons continued we have no means of ascertaining, but we afterwards find Taylor gaining instruction with the Cathedral boys under Dr. Beckwith at the music room in the Cathedral. He also had lessons in the vestry room of the Octagon Chapel; and he acquired some skill upon the flute and oboe from Mr. Fish. But we believe that his musical education was throughout gratuitously bestowed, out of respect to himself and his family. Doubtless he was greatly indebted for his extensive knowledge of the art, as well as of the German and Italian languages, to his own perseverance in solitary study.”

The author of the memoir, after giving a sketch of the “Hall Concert”, notices Mr. Taylor’s labours on behalf of the Musical Festivals in this city, as already related in our brief account of those celebrations. Mr. Taylor was one of their chief promoters, and he worked hard to make them successful. In reference to Mr. Taylor’s career in London, the author of the memoir says,—

“It has been before stated that on the 15th August, 1825, Mr. Taylor entered upon a new course of life, in London, in connection with his brother Philip and Mr. John Martineau, who were civil engineers. Had the business proved lucrative, there is no reason to suppose that Mr. Taylor would have left it. It is certain that when he went to live in London, nothing was further from his thoughts than that he would ever embrace music as a profession.

“Mr. Taylor began anew the battle of life by taking private pupils. From the first moment of his entering the musical profession, his classical attainments, his skill as a translator, his superior mental powers, and his extensive musical research, were honestly and fully recognized. On the 29th March, 1827, Mr. Taylor made his first appearance before a London audience as a public singer. His debût was at Covent Garden, at the Oratorios under the management of Sir H. R. Bishop. The song he chose was ‘The Battle of Hohenlinden,’ composed by C. Smith, and the reception he received from a very crowded audience was exceedingly favourable.”

After quoting some very eulogistic notices of Mr. Taylor’s subsequent performances, the writer of the memoir continues:—

“In this year (1828) was published ‘Airs of the Rhine,’ accompaniments by William Horsley, Mus. Bac., Oxon, the poetry translated by Edward Taylor. Of Mr. Taylor’s brief sketch of German music prefixed to this collection, the _Quarterly Musical Review_ (conducted by Mr. R. M. Bacon) says, ‘It is so agreeably written, and contains so many authentic and interesting particulars, that we must do him the justice to give it a place at length. It will speak more for the publication than anything we can say to interest the reader.’

“In 1837, Mr. Taylor was elected Gresham Professor of Music. The place had been for 200 years a mere sinecure, generally held by persons totally ignorant of music, but he did much to render it useful to the art. In 1838 he published his ‘Three Inaugural Lectures,’ which he dedicated to the Trustees of Gresham College. He was not content with reading his lectures, however good. He illustrated them by having some compositions of the master who might be under discussion, well sung in parts by a competent choir. Amateurs of distinction and professional men lent their aid, and this attracted large audiences to the theatre.

“In 1843, Professor Taylor, who had been musical critic for the _Spectator_ for fourteen years, retired from that department, and he received a very complimentary letter from Mr. Rintoul the editor, who said, ‘I can bear my willing testimony to the high aims, the great ability, the persevering zeal, and undeviating punctuality with which you have upheld the cause of good music in my journal for the long period of fourteen years. I believe that a selection from your writings in the _Spectator_ would comprise a body of the soundest and best musical criticism in the language; and when you retire, I know not that any second man in England is qualified to sustain the elevated standard that you have raised, &c.’ High praise indeed, but well deserved.

“In the year 1845, Professor Taylor published, in the _British and Foreign Review_, an article headed ‘The English Cathedral Service; its Glory, its Decline, and its Designed Extinction.’ This was subsequently published by permission of the proprietor in the form of a thin octavo volume. It was a masterly defence of the musical services of our Cathedrals, and of the choirs, against the spoliation of the deans and chapters, which had been silently and surely going on ever since the time of Queen Elizabeth. It made a strong sensation at the time, and even now, whoever would strike a blow for the cause of Cathedral music, (which in Professor Taylor’s opinion is the salt which can alone save the musical taste of the people from corruption) will find the best weapons ready to his hand contained in this little volume.

“Professor Taylor, who had been long a widower, died (March 12th, 1863,) with the utmost tranquillity, at his house at Brentwood. He had three children, all of whom survive him; a son, Mr. John Edward Taylor, who was with him in his last moments, and two daughters, one of whom is married and lives in Germany, her sister living with her.

“We believe that Mr. Taylor left injunctions that his manuscripts should not be published, which is surely to be regretted. If his rare and valuable musical library, the acquisition of which was the labour of a life, should be sold, we trust that it will not go piecemeal to the hoards of individual collectors, but be bought for the use of Gresham College and its future musical professors.”

The compiler of this history had some long interviews with Professor Taylor when he last visited Norwich in 1857, and he then stated that he had large collections of music, and a large number of lectures on the music of every period. He delivered a very splendid lecture on the music of the Elizabethan age, in aid of the funds of the Free Library, before a large audience, in the Lecture Hall, St. Andrew’s.

_The Rev. Mark Wilks_.

The Rev. Mark Wilks, who lived in the last, and in the early part of the present century, was a very remarkable character as a politician and a preacher. From his biography, written by his daughter and published in 1821, we derive the following particulars. He was the son of a subordinate officer in the army, and was born at Gibraltar on February 5th, 1748. When his father and family returned to England they lived at Birmingham, where young Mark was brought up to a trade, and where he became an itinerant Baptist preacher, without any chapel. The Countess of Huntingdon heard of his exertions, and invited him to her college at Trevecca, to which he removed in 1775, and studied there for a year. In 1776 the Countess appointed him to be minister of the Tabernacle in Norwich, which became the scene of his most continued and concentrated exertions. The first sermon he preached here was on a Sunday evening to a crowded congregation, and he made a great impression. He preached in the same pulpit that Whitfield once occupied, and the simplicity of the new minister’s appearance, and the negligence of his exterior, surpassed that of the apostle of Calvinism. His long hair fell carelessly over his shoulders; his meagre person and ruddy countenance gave him at mature age the aspect of youth. The whole of his demeanour was illuminated by the fire of affectionate zeal, and by an earnestness of manner, evincing that he was honest in the sacred cause of truth. From this time he continued his ministry till 1778, when in the spring of that year he married Susannah Jackson of Norwich. This was an event which he ever justly estimated as the happiest of his life, but it severed his connexion with the patroness of the Tabernacle. Her rule was to dismiss the students of her college on their marriage. The Countess of Huntingdon regretted the separation and recommended him to several destitute congregations, none of which, however, were then suited to his views.

After travelling about for some time in Wiltshire, where he preached in several chapels, he returned to Norwich, and on January 1st, 1780, his new meeting place was opened, and he became a pastor under the denomination of Calvinistic Methodist, without the customary form of ordination. During the interval which elapsed between his return to Norwich and his establishment as a Baptist minister, his congregation rapidly increased, and continued to increase from 1780 till 1788. He lived in retirement, and performed with satisfaction and marked punctuality the duties of his ministry. His congregation was formed into a regular Baptist church in May, 1788, and it remained so all his life. On this change many of his former supporters left him, so that his income was reduced. He therefore took a farm in the neighbourhood of Norwich, and commenced farming on an extensive scale. Employment or poverty was his only alternative, and he followed the example of the apostle Paul by supporting himself.

We now approach a period in his life in which he distinguished himself not only as a pastor, but also as a citizen and patriot; for in the year 1790 commenced those great events in France which laid the foundation of the long war between this country and that unfortunate empire, a war disastrous to both. On July 14th, 1791, Mr. Wilks preached two eloquent discourses to commemorate the leading features of the first French Revolution, before crowded congregations, composed of the most influential persons in the city and its neighbourhood. The propriety of such discourses from the pulpit may be doubted, but they caused great excitement, as the preacher defended the revolution, which was then viewed with terror by many people. We shall notice this, however, more at length in the political part of our narrative, in which we shall have to speak of the very active part which Mr. Wilks took in political affairs both in the city and county. That Mr. Wilks was a rather violent partisan, and more of a Radical than a Whig, will appear by an extract from his biography, respecting a county election.

“When the Honourable William Wyndham first offered himself as a candidate for the county of Norfolk, he came in the character of a Whig, and a professed friend of civil and religious liberty. Mr. Wilks then warmly supported him, and to his exertions Mr. Wyndham attributed his success. But the revolution in France effected a strange change in the principles of Mr. Wyndham; and on his second appearance as candidate for Norfolk, he presented himself in the character of a ‘war minister,’ and the enthusiastic abettor of the most disgraceful and perilous measures ever pursued by weak and wicked men. Instead, therefore, of receiving support, he met with the most determined opposition from those who had been before his active friends. As Mr. Wilks on his former election had supported him by the most vigorous exertions, he now appeared foremost in the ranks of his opponents; and Mr. Wyndham regarded him with fear and jealousy. The following anecdote will show with what gratitude he returned the former services of him whom he had called his friend. One morning, as a very intimate friend of Mr. Wilks was passing by the house of a poor man, he was unexpectedly invited in, and was informed by the man that his wife had just found an open letter, the contents of which were of the greatest importance to Mr. Wilks. It indeed proved so. It was a letter from Mr. Wyndham to one of his friends at Norwich, desiring him to be most vigilant in watching the movements and expressions of Mr. Wilks; and if at any time he uttered anything which might be made to appear treasonable, to make him acquainted with it, assuring him that he would take the most prompt and severe means for his conviction. No sooner had Mr. Wilks read this letter than he hastened with it to the printer’s, and in a few hours the perfidy of Mr. Wyndham was publicly known in every part of the city, and the original letter returned to its proprietor, to his inexpressible dismay and confusion. The family and friends of Mr. Wilks regarded this circumstance as an interposition of a watchful Providence. But for this circumstance a few days might have seen him the inmate of a dungeon, and his life devoted, through the incautiousness of a sentence, to the treachery of an enemy. This supposition may appear less improbable when it is known, that at that time some who had been less active and less violent than himself, had been snatched from their families during the stillness of the midnight hour, and had been conveyed to prison without any form or reason assigned to them. This attempt upon the liberty, and perhaps the life, of Mr. Wilks had the beneficial effect of making him more vigilant over his words, and more cautious, although not less bold and decisive in all his proceedings. Yet his wife and friends entertained so great an anxiety for his safety, that they strongly importuned him to seek an asylum under the calmer skies of America, but he resisted their importunities.

“It must be mentioned, as an instance of the generosity of Mr. Wilks’ disposition, as well as a proof that his political conduct originated in genuine principles of patriotism, that when Mr. Wyndham again returned as a candidate for Norfolk as conjoint supporter of the Whig interest in union with Mr. Coke, Mr. Wilks never suffered the recollection of his private wrongs to interfere with the principles that Mr. Wyndham had come forward to maintain, but supported him with the same firmness and ardour as he had ever done.

“But it is necessary to return to those incidents of his life, the order of which has been neglected in pursuing the chain of his political character, and which he considered of far greater importance than any other. In the year 1792, the Baptist Missionary Society was established by Carey, Fuller, Pearce, and Ryland. Those incomparable men, in a small room at Kettering, planted the germ of that tree which has since spread its branches into the remotest corners of the earth. The Indian Banyan is famed for its fertility; it is planted, it grows, and its branches descending, strike root, and reproduce another tree; its branches again descend, and produce another tree; trees succeed in endless multiplication, till a far and wide-spreading beauteous forest is formed from the vast trunk of what was once a single plant. In India flourishes a moral Banyan; it has been planted by the hand of a Carey, a Fuller, a Pearce, a Ryland, and a Wilks; watered and cultivated by their labours and their prayers, its roots have taken a deeper and deeper root, and the day is approaching when the sultry clime of India shall be covered by its shadows, cheered by its verdant foliage, and refreshed by its heavenly fruits.

“It is well known that Mr. Wilks’ devotion to the missionary cause was early and invincible. Whether he was present at its establishment is rather doubtful; but from its commencement he regarded it as the dawn of happiness to the world, and put into action all his powers and his influence in promoting so benevolent an end. But it was not in the mission alone that he evinced his benevolence and his disinterestedness. Nine years had elapsed since he first commenced farming, and during that time and the succeeding year he preached regularly, and fulfilled all the duties incumbent on his station, without receiving for his services the smallest remuneration. Whether in this instance he acted in all respects with prudence has frequently been doubted by himself as well as his friends. His conduct originated in feelings of the purest benevolence, although perhaps it lost its excellence in losing its justice.”

In the year 1797 Mr. Wilks was obliged to quit his farm, the lease of which had expired. He immediately engaged another at Aldborough, a village near Harleston in Suffolk, and went there to reside with his family in March, 1797. The distance of that place was seventeen miles from Norwich; yet although he was necessarily obliged to omit the week-day preaching, he never once neglected the regular performance of his pastoral duties on Sunday. In every kind of weather he constantly travelled thirty-four miles every Sunday to preach to a congregation from whom he received no remuneration. This course of exertion, however, could not be long continued. With the engagements of his farm, which were at this time very considerable, and the care attendant on a large family of twelve children, he found it was necessary either to give up his church or to leave his farm. Though his farm was a very profitable one, he did not hesitate which course to pursue; and he took another farm at Cossey, near Norwich, where he continued for some time, and where he often preached to the people in the village.

In March, 1802, he purchased a farm at the village of Sprowston, only two miles from Norwich. Here he enjoyed the society of his friends in the city, and in every respect his own comfort and that of his family were improved by this removal. His congregation increased, and the chapel in which he preached became too small for all who wished to attend his ministry. His friends were therefore desirous of erecting a more commodious one, and purchased a piece of ground for its erection. In September, 1812, he laid the first stone, and Mr. Andrew Fuller preached on the occasion.

In 1814, he went on a begging tour for his meeting house, and travelled through the counties of Norfolk, Suffolk, Essex, and Cambridgeshire, and thence to London. In six weeks he collected about £400, but his exertions brought on a serious illness. After his return his family scarcely hoped for his recovery. On May 4th, 1814, the new meeting house, in St. Clement’s, Norwich, was opened by Mr. M. Wilks of London, and Mr. A. Fuller. The pastor was present, but in a very feeble state of health. He recovered slowly in a few weeks, and when his health was sufficiently restored, he made another effort to diminish the debt on the new chapel. Though he frequently considered himself to be in a dying state, yet at every interval of ease he pursued his work with unremitting ardour. It is unnecessary to relate all the details of the few latter years of his life; the long journeys he took in the years 1815 and 1816, were a proof of the generosity of his heart. His last two years he spent in retirement, yet in the performance of his ministerial duties; and ever ready to advance the interests of his church, of his family, and of mankind.

He was ill only four days previous to his death, which took place on February 5th, 1819. When it was publicly known in the city that he was no more, hundreds of people went to his house to take a last look of him whom living they had so much loved and respected. And the bitter tears of his surviving relatives, the deep affliction of his friends, and the sorrow of mourning multitudes, bore a sad testimony to his worth as a husband, a father, a friend, a minister, a neighbour, and a christian.

He died on his birthday, when he had attained the age of seventy-one. His much valued friend, the Rev. W. Hull of Norwich, spoke at his interment to a large assembly of sincere mourners, and to a great concourse of spectators. The Rev. Mark Wilks of London, his nephew, preached a funeral sermon on Sunday, February 14th, before a large congregation. The deceased was buried under the pulpit where he had preached the gospel for forty years. Of his family of twelve children, including his four sons, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, none of them and none of their descendants now live in Norwich.

_The Rev. John Alexander_.

The Rev. John Alexander was the pastor of the Independent Congregation in Prince’s Street for a period of fifty years. He was much beloved by all who knew him for his kindly disposition and genuine piety. Bishop Stanley often spoke of him in terms of the highest commendation as a christian minister. He took an active interest in all the philanthropic and educational movements of the district, and was for some time the Chairman of the Board of Management of the Norfolk and Norwich Hospital. After his death, on July 31st, 1868, a short memoir of him appeared in the _Norfolk News_; and this memoir contained nearly the whole history of Prince’s Street Chapel in this city. We give the following extracts:—

“Mr. Alexander was born at Lancaster in 1792. Of his father, the Rev. William Alexander, our deceased friend published an interesting _Memoir_; and, as showing his own appreciation of the excellencies of his parents, he placed on the title page these lines of Cowper’s:—

‘My boast is, not that I deduce my birth From loins enthroned, and rulers of the earth; But higher far my proud pretensions rise, The son of parents passed into the skies.’

In the same volume we find him thus writing in reference to his early days:—‘The reader will, I trust, perceive that our domestic discipline, union, and affection, together with the sweet influences of religion, rendered us a happy family. The recollections and the love of home, too, and our reverence for holy parents, became a shield of protection to us, and “a way of escape” in the day of evil.’ With an atmosphere like this surrounding his childhood, we wonder not that he became in early life the subject of deep religious convictions. In 1807 he entered a large commercial establishment connected with a household in which ‘the most beautiful domestic order was combined with everything that was pure and lovely in religion.’ This privilege was greatly prized by him, and he ever cherished a grateful sense of the goodness of God in placing him there. During this period he attended the ministry of the Rev. P. S. Charrier of Liverpool, and joined the church under his care. For some time he had cherished a desire, and entertained a hope, in reference to the christian ministry, which was now soon to be realised.

“The celebrated Dr. Edward Williams, one of the tutors at Rotherham College, happened just then to visit Liverpool, and unexpectedly spoke to him on the subject, offering him the advantages of the institution over which he presided. This incident naturally made a deep impression on his mind, and led him very seriously and prayerfully to consider the matter. Of course, he lost no time in communicating his thoughts to his father, who urged on him the greatest caution, saying, ‘God forbid you should take it up, except in compliance with the will of God.’ Nothing daunted, however, by the somewhat discouraging aspect of the ministry set before him in his father’s letters, he intimated to him, in reply to his inquiries, that he retained an unalterable ‘determination to give himself to the work, believing he had been called of God to it;’ and in 1814 he was admitted as a student into Hoxton College. Here the amiable qualities which distinguished him all through life soon endeared him to every fellow-student, and one still surviving speaks of hours spent with him as ‘the happiest, holiest, and most profitable spent under the college roof.’

“In his _Thirty Years’ History of the Church and Congregation in Prince’s Street Chapel_, he gives us an account of his first visit to and subsequent residence in this city. From that source we learn that early in the year 1817 he received an invitation to preach for a few Sabbaths in the Tabernacle, and that on Friday, April 4th, 1817, (the day on which a fatal steam-packet catastrophe occurred by which many lives were lost), he entered Norwich. On the following Sunday evening he preached from the text, ‘Therefore be ye also ready; for in such an hour as ye think not, the Son of Man cometh.’ The place was crowded; and, says he, ‘The Lord stood by me and strengthened me.’ At the expiration of three Sabbaths he returned to London, promising to visit Norwich again and preach during the whole of the Midsummer vacation. He resumed his labours with very great encouragement at the Tabernacle on July 6th; and some legal difficulty occurring as to the power of appointing the minister, he consented, with the approbation of his tutors, to continue them till the disputed point was settled, which was not till the following December. The legal decision was such as necessitated him to give notice the very day it arrived, that in the evening he should preach his last sermon in the Tabernacle. On that occasion he chose as his text, words which the people believed to have been divinely suggested to his mind, ‘Weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning.’ That text, it was often afterwards remarked, built the new chapel. The prospect, however, of the toil connected with the establishment of a new church and congregation, and the building of a chapel, was such that he shrank from it, and took his place in the coach to return to London on his way to Kidderminster, where he had been requested to supply, with a view to settlement.

“But so deep was the impression his services had produced, and so warm the interest and affection created, that the people would not part from him. On the day of his departure, a deputation waited on him and pressed on him an invitation to become their minister with such affectionate earnestness, that, says he ‘I felt the appeal to be irresistible, and I promised to lay the whole matter before my tutor and friends, and to make it the subject of serious and prayerful re-consideration.’ The result was that he returned, and for some time preached in the Lancasterian School-room. At length the site on which Prince’s Street Chapel now stands was purchased, and the foundation stone laid on the 16th of March, 1819. It was opened on December 1st in the same year, and thenceforward, for the space of about five and forty years, it continued to be the scene of the living and life-quickening ministry of one whose ‘praise is in all the churches.’ Of the characteristics of Mr. Alexander’s preaching this is not the place to speak beyond saying it was truly evangelical and eminently successful. But he was not the preacher only. He was the faithful pastor, the unswerving friend, and the cheerful companion as well. Hence in times of sorrow or of joy he was a welcome guest, either in the family meeting or at more social gatherings. He carried summer and sunshine with him into every circle, and never left any without leaving a longing in every heart, young and old, for the next visit. When he crossed the threshold, the young loved to caress and to be caressed by him, whilst to the others the cares of life seemed lessened, and the burden lightened, as he spoke to them a few words of loving sympathy or wise counsel, and left them with his soft tones of benediction treasured in their hearts and vibrating on their ears.

“Time rolled on, ever finding him at his work, till thirty years had gone, when his friends gathered round him in St. Andrew’s Hall to testify their high appreciation of his excellencies, and their deep and strong affection for him as their pastor and their friend. On that occasion it was the desire of the people to present a purse to him as a substantial token of their esteem, but there being at that time a debt of £400 remaining on the chapel, he, with that characteristic unselfishness which ever marked him, urgently requested that they would abandon the purse, but remove the debt. But it must not be supposed that Mr. Alexander’s energies were confined to the cause of Christ at Prince’s Street Chapel, or that the members of his church and congregation were allowed to claim him as exclusively belonging to them. This was seen when ten years more of active service had passed, and troops of admirers, from far and near, flocked again to St. Andrew’s Hall to do him honour. On that occasion the Mayor (J. G. Johnson, Esq.,) represented the city, and the Rev. S. Titlow the Church of England, in most eulogistic speeches. The Baptist Churches of the county presented him with an address, whilst brethren of his own denomination, and others, lay and ministerial, seemed to vie with one another in magnifying ‘the grace of God’ in him. The desire entertained ten years before was now carried into effect, and a purse, with an elegant skeleton timepiece, and a memorial engrossed on vellum and framed, were presented to him, and a gold watch and chain to Mrs. Alexander. The timepiece bore the following inscription:—

Presented to the Rev. John Alexander, together with a purse of 500 sovereigns, on his commencing the fortieth year of his ministry in Norwich, by the members of his congregation and numerous other friends, as a memorial of Christian esteem and love.—Norwich, June 3rd, 1856.

From that time the infirmities of age, and the claims of a large congregation, led him to desire help, which was secured for him in the person of an assistant minister. With that help he happily and zealously worked on in his Master’s service through another decade of years, when once more the old Gothic hall resounded with his praises and witnessed another outburst of affectionate congratulation. Having lived to see the jubilee of his ministry, he now resigned the pastoral office, and was presented with an annuity of £200 and a magnificent epergne, on which a suitable inscription was engraved. With trembling emotion the venerable man read his reply and acknowledgment, in which, after recording the goodness of God and the kindness of his friends through the long period of fifty years, he stated that during his pastorate more than a thousand members had been added to the church, two chapels had been added to the one in Prince’s Street, four Sunday Schools had been raised and supplied with a hundred teachers and with nearly a thousand children, and eight members of the church had become ministers of the Gospel.

“Seldom is it the lot of the most favoured ministers thus to be blessed and made a blessing. We shall not attempt to describe what Mr. Alexander was in the pulpit, on the platform, in the committee room, or from the press, nor how he discharged his duties as chairman of ‘The Congregational Union of England and Wales,’ and secretary of ‘The Association for the Spread of the Gospel in the County.’ Much less shall we venture a word on his private or domestic life. We hope another and abler pen will pourtray his character more fully, and hence we content ourselves by adding words written by a friend, ‘His life is his eulogy.’ It was a holy life, a useful life, an honourable life, a happy life.

“The last sermon Mr. Alexander preached was delivered in Prince’s Street Chapel on April 22nd, 1866, from 2 _Cor._ ii. 14–17. The last time that he spoke in St. Andrew’s Hall was a few months before his death, on the occasion of the mayor’s invitation to the Sunday school teachers, and the last public religious service he attended was in the Old Meeting House on Sunday evening, July 19th, 1868, where his presence was ever as welcome as in his own chapel.

“Of his history since his retirement into private life, little only can be said. At first the ease and seeming uselessness imposed on him by the infirmities of age had a depressing influence on his mind, but latterly this gave place to his wonted calm confidence in God, and his usual joyousness of heart. Occasionally, to the grief of his friends, the decline of his mental powers was painfully visible, but this was often relieved by his still sparkling and felicitous utterances, and his fervent devotional exercises.

“Some lines written in our album so recently as last November will, perhaps, best indicate the state of his mind, and the theme on which it delighted to dwell:—

Amidst the fragrance richly shed, And beauty blooming in the bowers, The willow bends its mournful head, And seems to weep among the flowers.

And so in human life we find, How bright soever it appears, That grief is rooted in the mind, And smiles are mingled with its tears.

But there’s a garden in the sky Where mourning willows cannot grow, Where tears are wiped from every eye, And streams of joy unmingled flow.

“And now the time drew nigh that he must die. For only a few days he was withdrawn from the outer world. During that time it was very evident that constant intercourse was being carried on with heaven. On asking him, two days prior to his death, if the Saviour he had so long and faithfully preached to others was now near and precious to himself, he replied, ‘Oh, what should I do without Him!’ The day before his departure he was much in prayer. His family were all remembered before God, as were also the servants of the household. And very touching were the words in which he sought a blessing on the ministers of the city, and on their work, with whom he had lived in closest and loving fellowship. And so he passed away, spending his last hours, as he had spent his life, in blessing others.

“On Tuesday, the 4th of August, he was carried to his grave amid the lamentations of a vast concourse of his fellow-citizens, and friends from the country, who had known him and esteemed him very highly in love for his works’ sake. The funeral service at the grave was conducted by the Revs. G. Gould, J. Hallett, P. Colborne, and G. S. Barrett, B.A.; but gathered there were clergymen and ministers of every denomination, as well as laymen of all classes, from the mayor to the humblest artisan.

“And so has passed away from our midst, full of days and honours, one, whom it was a privilege to have known, and an impossibility not to have loved. His Christian catholicity, his large-hearted charity, his generous liberality, his untarnished reputation, and his fidelity to Christian truth, together with other virtues that adorned his long life, constrain us to thank God for having given him to Norwich, and, now that He has taken him to Himself, constrain us to say ‘Let me die the death of the righteous, and let my last end be like his!’”

The funeral sermon was preached by the Rev. John Stoughton, of London, before a large congregation in St. Andrew’s Hall.

_The Gurney Family_.

The members of the Gurney family, from an early period, have been distinguished by their station, wealth, and intelligence, both in Norfolk and Norwich. Memoirs of Joseph John Gurney, with selections from his journal and correspondence, were edited by Joseph Bevan Braithwaite, and published by Mr. Fletcher of this city. From these memoirs we derive the following interesting details respecting the family, and the Society of Friends in Norwich.

“The family of Gurney or Gournay is said to have sprung from a house of Norman barons, who followed William the Conqueror into England and obtained a large estate in this country, chiefly in the county of Norfolk. From them descended a long line of country gentlemen, who maintained themselves at Harpley, and West Barsham, in this county, for many generations, and from a very early period had one of their residences in this city. The last of these dying without male issue, about the commencement of the reign of Charles II., the old family estates at that period became dispersed amongst females. The name of Gurney was, however, honourably continued through a descendant of one of the younger sons of an earlier generation, John Gurney, the ancestor of the present family. He was born in the year 1655, and notwithstanding his family connections, commenced life in Norwich in somewhat straitened circumstances. Devoting himself in his youth to the cause of religion, we find him in the year 1678, at the age of twenty-three, already connected with the oppressed, persecuted Quakers.

“The family of John Gurney appear previously to have had some connexion with the Puritans. Henry Gurney, indeed, of West Barsham, the representative of the family in the early part of the 17th century, had a distaste for Puritanism, if, at least, we are to judge from the insertion in his will (proved in 1623) of a special charge to his younger son, ‘That none hould any fantisticall or erroneous opinions, so adjudged by our bishop or civill lawes.’ But Edmund Gurney, rector of Harpley, one of these younger sons, who was a person of influence, became known as a zealous Puritan; he declined wearing the surplice, and was probably among those who took the covenant in 1643. After him John Gurney successively named two of his children. Others of his connexions were also inclined to Puritanism, and some of them, like himself, joined the Society of Friends. In the case of the early Friends generally, their ultimate settlement in those gospel principles by which they became distinguished from others, was preceded by a state of much religious awakening and earnest seeking after God, in which they ‘searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.’

“Through what course of experience John Gurney arrived at his conviction, the scanty materials of his history do not inform us. Let it suffice us to know that what he became convinced of, was precious to him as the truth, and that for it he was prepared to suffer. On the 29th of the ninth month (O. S.), 1682, (so the records of the Friends in Norwich inform us,) ‘Friends being kept out of their meeting house, met together in the street to wait upon the Lord,’ and, being there, John Gurney and another Friend, were violently pulled out from among the rest, as if they had been malefactors, and carried before a justice of the peace, by whom, as they declined giving, on such an account, the required bail, they were committed until the next quarter sessions. In the following year, 1683, he was again imprisoned, for refusing to take an oath, and continued in prison, under successive recommitments, nearly three years. He died in the year 1721, having greatly prospered in his temporal concerns; and, what is far more important, having, according to the testimony of those who knew him, taken particular care in the religious education of all his children, and continued faithful to the end.

“His two elder sons, John and Joseph, were both men of marked character. John was gifted with much natural eloquence, and obtained considerable reputation by the spirit and ability with which he successfully defended the Norwich trade, before a committee of the House of Lords, against some apprehended encroachments. He subsequently received from Sir Robert Walpole the offer of a seat in parliament, which, however, he declined as inconsistent with his religious principles in the then state of the law. Religion had early taken possession of his heart, and about the 22nd year of his age, in obedience to the call of apprehended duty, he had yielded himself to the work of the public ministry of the gospel, in which service he laboured diligently for many years; neither the temptation of prosperity nor the kindness and esteem of great men of this world, being, in the simple and forcible language of the memorial respecting him, ‘permitted to separate him from that truth which the Lord had eminently convinced him of.’

“Besides numerous other descendants, he was the grandfather of Martha Birkbeck, whose daughter Jane became the first wife of Joseph John Gurney. Joseph Gurney, his younger brother, who, towards the close of his life, fixed his residence at Keswick, near Norwich, also became a valued minister of the gospel among Friends. His christian profession was eminently adorned by a life of humility, benevolence, and moderation. He died in the year 1750, after a suffering illness which he bore with exemplary resignation, giving a final evidence of the truth of what he then expressed that it had been ‘the business of his whole life to be prepared for such a time!’

“His eldest son, John Gurney, was a man of great activity and energy, and notwithstanding his extensive engagements in business, devoted much of his time to the interests of his own religious society, to the principles of which he was warmly attached. In the midst of a course of remarkable temporal prosperity, it is instructive to observe the fears which he expresses in one of his private memoranda, lest his increasing opulence should lead away his children from those religious habits and associations in which they had been educated. He left three sons, all of whom married and settled near Norwich. Richard Gurney the eldest, on his father’s decease, in 1770, became the occupant of the family residence at Keswick. John Gurney, the father of J. J. Gurney, had previously to the birth of the latter settled at Earlham. Joseph Gurney, the youngest, resided at Lakenham Grove. The three families were naturally much associated, and exercised an important influence upon each other. At a later period especially, the consistency with which Joseph Gurney, of The Grove, was enabled to maintain his position as a Friend, and as a christian minister, rendered his influence peculiarly valuable.”

John Gurney, of Earlham, is eulogised highly by the editor of these memoirs as generous, ardent, and warm-hearted, abounding in kindness to all, uniting very remarkable activity, both in public and private business, with an acute intellect and extensive information. His wife was Catherine Bell, a daughter of Daniel Bell of Stamford Hill, near London, her mother being a granddaughter of Robert Barclay, the well-known author of the “Apology.” She is described as a woman of very superior mind as well as personal charms, and as a serious christian and decided Friend. She died in the autumn of 1792, leaving her sorrowing husband the widowed parent of eleven children. The following list of the names may be found useful:—

Catherine died unmarried, 1850.

Rachel died unmarried, 1827.

Elizabeth, married in 1800 to Joseph Fry, of London, became the celebrated Mrs. Fry, who died in 1845.

John died in 1814.

Richenda married in 1816 to Francis Cunningham, who died in 1855.

Hannah married in 1807 to Thomas Fowell Buxton.

Louisa, married in 1806 to Samuel Hoare, died in 1836.

Priscilla died unmarried, 1821.

Samuel, who died in 1856.

Joseph John, who died in 1847.

Daniel, still living.

_Joseph John Gurney_, _Esq._

Among the eminent citizens of this century, none will take a higher place than the late J. J. Gurney, Esq., the well-known philanthropist. He was born at Earlham Hall on August 8th, 1788. That hall was one of the happiest homes in England. It was also the birth-place of Mrs. Elizabeth Fry, sister of J. J. Gurney, and almost as celebrated as her brother. Here they were both trained with religious care, and passed their days of childhood and youth in happiness and peace. In after life they were associated together in works of benevolence, and the brother often aided his sister in many of her schemes for improving prison discipline.

In 1803, soon after he had completed his 15th year, Joseph John was sent to Oxford with his cousin Gurney Barclay to pursue his studies under the care of John Rogers, a private tutor. Young J. J. Gurney continued at Oxford two years, with the exception of the vacations, which he spent mostly at home. His tutor, though resident at Oxford, was not in that character connected with the university or with any of the colleges. The student became an excellent classical and oriental scholar, and ultimately the author of several valuable religious works, such as “Essays on Christianity,” “Thoughts on Habit and Discipline.” He was scarcely seventeen when, in August, 1805, he was removed from the care of John Rogers. He had become attached to his tutor and to his studies, and he quitted the place with regret, but there was brightness in the thought of settling at home. The bank in which his father was a partner had been established in Norwich in the year 1770. After that time the concern was considerably extended with branch banks at Lynn, Fakenham, Yarmouth, and other places. His elder brother, John, had been placed in the establishment at Lynn, and his brother Samuel had been sent up to London, where he had become the head of a district concern; so that circumstances had prepared the way for that which J. J. Gurney himself had desired—a place in the bank at Norwich. Here in the enjoyment of daily communication with his father, and a home at Earlham with his sisters, the ensuing three years of his life passed in peace and joy. In the year 1806, he accompanied his father and a large family party in a tour to the English lakes and through Scotland. On their return, J. J. Gurney was regular in his attendance at the bank, but he found time for study at home, and he carefully read ancient historians in the original languages. Gradually, however, his attention became unceasingly directed to biblical literature, which continued for some years to absorb much of his leisure. His habits of study were eminently methodical, exemplifying his favourite maxim, which he was afterwards accustomed strongly to inculcate upon his young friends, “Be a whole man to one thing at a time.” His position and tastes introduced him to the highly-cultivated society, for which Norwich was at the time remarkable, at the house of his cousin Hudson Gurney, where he was accustomed to meet many persons who were eminent for their parts and learning. He had early become a favourite with Dr. Bathurst, then Bishop of Norwich, and their intercourse gradually ripened into a warm friendship, which was maintained unbroken till that prelate’s decease, in 1837, at the very advanced age of ninety-three. Young J. J. Gurney was but just twenty-one when, as one of his father’s executors and representative at Earlham, and as a partner in the bank, very grave responsibilities devolved upon him. However, he continued to pursue his studies with ardour, and he made his first essay as an author in an article published in the _Classical Journal_ on September 9th, 1810, under the title of “A Critical Notice of Sir William Drummond’s Dissertations on the Herculanesia.” After this effort his mind became increasingly drawn towards the principles of the Society of Friends, and many of his allusions to his feelings, in his autobiography, are peculiarly interesting and instructive, indicating the spiritual phase of his mind. The example of his sister, Elizabeth Fry, as well as of his sister Priscilla, who like her, had become a decided Friend and a preacher of the gospel, strengthened his convictions; but the influence of other members of the family who resided at Earlham, as well as of many other estimable persons, tended in an opposite direction. The editor of the Memoirs, already referred to, says:—

“Whilst Joseph John Gurney’s religious convictions were thus gradually drawing him into a narrower path in connection with the Society of Friends, his heart was becoming increasingly enlarged in Christian concern for the welfare of others. He had already warmly interested himself in the formation of a Lancasterian School in Norwich, an institution which long continued to have his effective support. The establishment of an auxiliary Bible Society in this city, was an object into which he now entered with youthful ardour. The general meeting for its formation was held on the 11th of the 9th month, 1811.”

The philanthropist was married to Jane Birkbeck on October 10th, 1817, in his 29th year, and it appears to have been a very happy marriage. The event took place at Wells Meeting, and, after a short sojourn at Hunstanton, the newly-married couple travelled to their home at Earlham, where they received the visits of many friends, who were most hospitably entertained. After his marriage, J. J. Gurney continued at Earlham; and the hall, where his father had resided, and in which he himself lived from his birth, was his settled residence.

“To this place (with its lovely lawn nested among large trees) he was strongly attached all his life. And they who knew him there can still picture him in his study among his books, or in his drawing-room among his friends, his countenance beaming with love and intelligence, the life of the whole circle; or in his garden amongst his flowers, with his Greek Testament in his hand, still drawing from the books ‘of nature and of grace’ that lay open before him, new motives to raise the heart to the Author of all his blessings.

“Placed by circumstances, though not the elder brother, in the position which his father had occupied in Norfolk as Master of Earlham, and a partner in the bank, it was his delight, as far as possible, to continue Earlham as the family house. Even after his marriage, his sisters, Catherine, Rachel, and Priscilla, continued to live with him, occupying their own apartments, and it was the custom of the other members of the family frequently to meet there as under a common roof. * * * Up to the period of his brother John’s decease, and for some time afterwards, it was the habit of his brothers and himself, with their brothers-in-law, Thomas Fowell Buxton and Samuel Hoare, to improve these occasions by a mutual impartial examination of their conduct, in which each with brotherly openness stated what he conceived to be the brother’s faults. Happy indeed was such an intercourse between such minds. * * * Besides this, to him, delightful band of brothers and sisters, his house was, as must have been already apparent to the reader, freely opened to a large circle.

“Whilst every year strengthened his conviction of the soundness and importance of the christian principles which he professed, he rejoiced in that liberty wherewith Christ had made him free to embrace as brethren all those in whom he thought he could discern traces of his heavenly image.

“Towards the close of the year (1817) in company with his wife, his brother Samuel Gurney, his brother and sister Buxton, and Francis and Richenda Cunningham, he took a short tour upon the continent of Europe, their principal objects being to establish a branch Bible Society in Paris, and to procure information as to the systems of prison discipline adopted in the jails of Antwerp and Ghent. Having accomplished their objects, they returned home after an absence of about a month.”

Soon afterwards J. J. Gurney began to preach at meetings of the Friends in Norwich and elsewhere.

“Early in the year 1818, private business called him to London. His sister, Elizabeth Fry, had previously entered upon her important labours for the benefit of the prisoners in Newgate, and for the improvement of prison discipline generally. Joseph John Gurney warmly entered into his sister’s views, and accompanied her to the committee of the House of Commons on the occasion of giving her evidence, and afterwards to Lord Sidmouth, then Secretary of State for the Home Department.

“His visit to London and the pamphlet on _Prison Discipline_, soon afterward published by his brother-in-law, Thomas Fowell Buxton, tended to deepen in his own mind a sense of the importance of that subject, and an opportunity soon occurred for endeavouring to influence the authorities at Norwich to some exertion respecting it. The mayor and corporation, attended by the sheriffs and other citizens, whilst perambulating the boundaries of the county of the city, were by his desire invited to partake of refreshment in passing by the hall at Earlham. Besides those immediately connected with the magistracy many others assembled, the whole company consisting of about 800 persons. On this occasion, Joseph John Gurney, in an address to the mayor and corporation, urged the erection of a new jail, and its establishment on better principles, with a view to the employment of the prisoners, and the improvement of their morals; enforcing his appeal by a reference to the extraordinary change that had then recently taken place in Newgate, through the exertions of a committee of ladies, and concluding by offering a donation of £100 towards the object. The effort was not without fruit, though the result was not immediately apparent.”

The editor of his Memoirs proceeds:—

“In the 8th and 9th month of this year (1818), in company with his wife, his sister Elizabeth Fry, and one of her daughters, he took a journey into Scotland, visiting many of the prisons both there and in the north of England, besides attending many of the meetings of Friends. On this occasion, in conformity with the christian order established in the Society of Friends, he was furnished with a minute or testimonial expressing the concurrence of his Friends of his own ‘Monthly Meeting’ in his prospects of religious service.”

We have now to view the philanthropist not only in the varied relations of private life, but also in the very important character of a christian minister. He gradually became the most distinguished member of the Society of Friends in all England, and he often delivered exceedingly impressive discourses in Norwich and other large towns, preaching the gospel with a peculiar grace of manner which fascinated every audience. We have often heard him preach before large congregations of educated people in the Meeting House at Liverpool, and always with great effect. His journal is full of details of his labours in all parts of England, Scotland, and Ireland. He became a Home Missionary, working hard at his own expense; but we must confine this brief sketch to his doings here in Norwich. The death of his beloved wife at Earlham on October 6th, 1822, put his religious principle to the severest test, and in his letters he expresses deep sorrow, but he was of too active a disposition to be long subdued by grief. During the few months succeeding his loss, he continued mostly at home in the enjoyment of the society of his sisters, Catherine and Rachel; his children becoming increasingly the objects of his tender solicitude. In the mean time, besides attending to the necessary claims of business, and to the various public objects that had long shared his interest, he devoted his leisure to study, finding relief, as he intimates, “Not in the indulgence of sorrow, but in a diligent attention to the calls of duty.”

After giving many extracts from his journal, Mr. Braithwaite continues in reference to the anti-slavery agitation:—

“Retiring for a few days to Cromer Hall, he found a large and interesting circle. Amongst others, the late William Wilberforce and Zachary Macaulay were there, deliberating with his brother-in-law Thomas Fowell Buxton on the position and prospects of the Anti-Slavery question. It was the occasion on which the latter appears to have arrived at his final decision, to accept the responsible post of advocate of the cause as successor to Wilberforce. In this important undertaking, and throughout the succeeding struggle, Joseph John Gurney gave him his warm and efficient encouragement and support.”

Mr. J. J. Gurney, Mr. Clarkson, Mr. T. F. Buxton, Mr. Wilberforce, and others, were earnest advocates for the total abolition of the slave trade and of slavery; and they attended many public meetings at which they denounced and exposed the horrid traffic. Ultimately, as we all know, their efforts were rewarded, by rousing public indignation to such a pitch as to result in the passing of an act of parliament emancipating the slaves in the West Indies, at a cost of twenty millions.

The panic in the monetary and commercial world, and the sudden run upon the banks in London and the country, have rendered the winter of 1825–1826 memorable. As a banker, J. J. Gurney did not escape his share of anxiety, as appears from his journal, but his firm weathered the storm. Another circumstance was at this time deeply interesting to his feelings, namely, his attachment to Mary Fowler, daughter of Rachel Fowler, a cousin of his late wife. After some correspondence he made Mary Fowler an offer of marriage, which she accepted. On July 18th, 1827, they were married at Elm Grove. On this interesting occasion, he remarks in his journal,—

“Bright, hopeful, and happy was our wedding day. We dined on the lawn, a large united company, and rejoiced together, I trust in the Lord. Mary and I left the party at Elm Grove, in the afternoon, for North Devon.”

They arrived at Linton, and thence proceeded to Ilfracombe. There they spent the honeymoon, and then the happy husband brought his second wife home to Earlham, where they were received with joy. After this he was visited by many eminent characters at Earlham, including Dr. Chalmers, who stayed with him several days.

“None can have attentively perused the foregoing pages” (says the editor of the memoirs) “without perceiving that one leading feature of Joseph John Gurneys character was an unweared active benevolence. Like his sister, Elizabeth Fry, he seemed continually to live under a deep sense of his responsibility towards others. A cheerful and bountiful giver, it was not merely by large pecuniary assistance that he proved his interest in objects connected with the welfare of his fellow-men: to these objects he was exemplary in devoting no common share of his time and personal attention. The steady devotion to the Anti-slavery and Bible Societies is already before the reader. In addition to these great and often absorbing interests, his exertions for the distressed labouring population of Norwich were unremitting. Year after year, during the winter, or on any occasion when their distress was aggravated by want of employment, he was at his post, stirring up his fellow-citizens to the necessary measures for the alleviation of their wants. The District Visiting Society, which was mainly instrumental in originating the Soup Society and the Coal Society, found in him a steady and effective supporter. Often would he say that the painful consciousness of the poverty and suffering of many thousands around him, almost prevented his enjoyment of the abundant blessings with which he was himself so richly favoured. On one occasion he expended a considerable sum in providing the capital for an attempt to supply the poor weavers and mechanics with employment during a scarcity of work. But, though like many similar attempts, it failed to answer the expectation of the promoter, and was abandoned, it served at least to furnish another proof of the sincerity and earnestness with which he laboured for their welfare.

“The depressions in trade occasioned by the panic of 1825 will be long remembered. Norwich did not escape its influence. As a banker, Joseph John Gurney was more than usually absorbed in his own immediate cares, but his heart at once turned towards his suffering fellow-citizens. ‘The dreadful distress,’ he writes to a friend, ‘which prevails in the great mass of our once labouring, now, alas! idle population, has been such as to call forth my strenuous efforts on their behalf. In this, success has been mercifully vouchsafed. We have raised £3300 in five days.’

“One more illustration deserves notice. In the winter of 1829–30, the manufactures of Norwich were again greatly depressed. The weavers became unsettled, holding riotous meetings, and using threatening language against their employers. The state of things was alarming. J. J. Gurney felt it to be his duty to use his influence in checking the spirit of discontent that was rapidly spreading. He attended one of the very large and tumultuous meetings of the operatives, and endeavoured to persuade them to desist from their disorderly proceedings, and quietly to resume their work. With a view of still further winning them by kindness, he invited a deputation from those assembled to breakfast at Earlham on the following morning. Between forty and fifty of them came, with Dover, a notorious Chartist leader, at their head. After the usual family reading of the Scriptures, they sat down to a plentiful repast which had been provided for them in the large dining room, of which they partook heartily; and their host afterwards addressed them in a kind, conciliatory manner upon the subject of wages, and their duty to their employers. The men conducted themselves in an orderly manner and appeared grateful for the attention shown them. The scene was not soon to be forgotten.”

The editor gives some illustrations of the philanthropist’s benevolent character, by narrating instances of his visits to prisoners in the Jail, and to afflicted inmates of the Bethel and the Norfolk and Norwich Hospital. A volume might be filled by an account of his acts of private benevolence, but we must pass on to more public matters. He seldom took an active part in contested elections, but at the election in 1833, after the passing of the Reform Act, the Whig candidates, one of whom was his near relative, were defeated, chiefly, as was generally believed, through the influence of bribery. On this subject J. J. Gurney wrote,—

“As usual, I took little or no interest in the election, but when a petition was presented to Parliament against the returned members on the score of bribery, I imagined it to be my place to subscribe to the object, and wrote a letter in the Norwich newspapers stating the grounds of my so doing. Those grounds were in no degree personal, but simply moral and Christian. But the appearance of evil was not avoided. The measure was construed into an act of political partizanship; and I entirely lost ground by it in my own true calling, that of promoting simple Christianity among all classes.”

He had thought of becoming a candidate for the representation of this city, or some other place, in Parliament. After some long conferences with his friends he abandoned the idea and devoted himself to his higher calling. Mr. J. J. Gurney was a well-known Liberal in politics, but he did not often speak at political meetings in this city. His speeches were always short and generally pertinent; and showed good sense accompanied with the seriousness of conviction. On whatever side of any question he spoke he was listened to very attentively, and all parties believed that he delivered the unbiassed opinion of an honest man. His conduct on every occasion gained him the esteem of all friends of civil and religious liberty.

In 1835, he was once more plunged into deep affliction by the long illness and death of his wife. Her health had of late years been much improved, and she had been unremitting in her attentions to his daughter during her illness from typhus fever, without apparently suffering in consequence. The disease was, however, lurking in her constitution, and after some time made its appearance. The fever gradually gained ground, and she sank under it on Nov. 9th of that year. She died happily, amid her mourning friends; and her husband knelt down at her bedside and returned thanks for her deliverance from every trouble!

His journal contains many details of his visits to Manchester and Liverpool, of his journeys in Derbyshire and North Wales, of his journeys in Scotland and the north of England, of his voyage to America, of his journey to Ohio, Indiana, and North Carolina, of his journey from Richmond to Washington, of interviews with eminent statesmen, of labours at New York, of a voyage to the West Indies and proceedings there, of a tour on the continent, and of his return home. But we cannot follow him in all his wanderings in many lands, where he went about doing good, promoting benevolent objects and preaching the gospel, his heart being too large to be confined to his native country, much less to his native city. On his return from the continent in 1841, he attended a meeting of the Bible Society, and delivered his last great speech, which occupied two hours, on the state of religion in Europe. A shorthand writer took notes of that address, which was so full of information that it was afterwards published in the Journal of the Bible Society.

Soon after his return home he married Eliza P. Kirkbridge. The event took place at Darlington, on October 10th, 1841, as noted in his journal. After the marriage he delivered an address on the “Victory which is of faith.” The dinner party was cheerful, and concluded with a short religious service. He and his bride parted from their friends, made a short tour, and returned to Earlham, which they “reached in health and great peace, the place comfortable and homeish, and the reception from his dearest children glowing.”

J. J. Gurney signed the total-abstinence pledge at the house of his friend, Richard Dykes Alexander, at Ipswich, on April 8th, 1843. He and his wife attended a great “Teetotal Meeting” held at Norwich, on the arrival of Father Mathew, on September 9th, that year. The lord bishop, Dr. Stanley, was present and requested J. J. Gurney to preside. He did so, and declared himself to be a pledged teetotaller. He spoke fully and carefully on the subject, and the lord bishop afterwards expressed his admiration of the apostle of temperance as the instrument of effecting so much moral good.

As a man of business, Mr. J. J. Gurney was ready, punctual, and attentive. He was very modest, but of a candid and social disposition. Though in large or mixed companies he seldom appeared forward, yet in the society of his friends he was exceedingly agreeable. In private life no man was more estimable as a husband, a father, a neighbour, and a friend. In Norwich and in the surrounding district he was universally honoured and beloved. He was a great reader of the bible, and he was regular and exact in family worship, but he was a stranger to bigotry, no stickler for forms, and no friend to mysticism in matters of religion.

The autumn of 1846 was spent by the philanthropist quietly at home, with the exception of engagements connected with the attendance of meetings of Friends, and with what proved to be a farewell visit to his beloved daughter at Darlington, and to his friends in several places on his way home. He attended a committee of the Norwich District Visiting Society on December 28th in that year, and on his return to Earlham he complained of great exhaustion, feverishness, &c. A few simple remedies were administered, but the uncomfortable symptoms remaining his medical man was summoned on the following morning. He pronounced it a slight bilious attack, and seemed to have no anxiety about the recovery. The philanthropist, however, gradually sank, apparently from exhaustion, and he died on January 4th, 1847, in the 59th year of his age. The news of his death spread a gloom over the city, and the universal lamentations of the citizens proved that they regarded him as a father and a friend, as indeed he had been to thousands of them. The sensation in Norwich and its neighbourhood cannot easily be described, and is probably without precedent in the case of a mere private individual. During the entire interval of seven days between his decease and the funeral, the half-closed shops and the darkened windows of the houses gave ample proof of the feelings of the inhabitants. It furnished the principal topic of conversation in every family, in every private circle, in every group by the wayside. People of all ranks vied with each other in their eulogies of their departed friend. Everyone had his own story to tell of some public benefit, or of some private kindness which had been shown to others or to himself.

The funeral, as might have been expected from this unusual public emotion, was an extraordinary scene. All the shops were closed and all business was suspended in the city. A number of gentlemen, including the mayor, the ex-mayor, and the sheriff, went out in carriages as far as Earlham Hall. The citizens generally formed the funeral procession, and followed the hearse and plain carriages from the hall to the burial place at the Gildencroft. There was no pomp or parade, no mockery of woe. A simplicity in harmony with the character of the departed marked all the arrangements. As the procession moved on towards the city it was joined by an increasing number of the inhabitants, who issued forth in a continuous stream to pay their last tribute to the memory of departed worth. Silently and sadly many stood while the hearse passed slowly by, and many a tearful countenance among the crowd bore testimony to their love for the dead. The procession gradually increased in numbers all the way to the Gildencroft, and after the thousands of people had gathered round the grave a profound silence ensued, which was at length broken by a Friend repeating the verses, “O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?” &c. Another pause then took place, followed by another address, and then the body was lowered into its last resting place. The circle of mourning relatives, including J. H. Gurney and his wife, the surrounding crowd of spectators—persons of all ranks, of all ages, of all communions—magistrates and artizans, clergymen and Nonconformists—representatives, in short, of the whole people of Norwich, now took their last farewell of Joseph John Gurney, and slowly turned towards the meeting house, where a meeting for worship was to be held. The service was deeply impressive, and formed an appropriate conclusion to the solemn occasion. At the Cathedral, on the following Sunday, the good Bishop Stanley preached a funeral sermon before a large congregation. His text was “Watchman, what of the night?” and after enlarging on it, he alluded in a most pathetic and impressive manner to the virtues of the deceased, and we never before saw so many people so deeply moved. The death of the beloved citizen was also publicly adverted to in most of the places of worship in Norwich.

Mr. J. J. Gurney was the author of various works, the most popular being one on the _Evidences of Christianity_. It is a production more calculated to confirm the faith of a believer than to convert a free thinker who may not admit the possibility of anything supernatural. He also published a work on “The Vows and Practices of Friends;” “Essays on Christianity;” “Essays on the Moral Character of Christ,” and “Love to God;” “The Papal and Hierarchical System compared with the Religion of the New Testament, &c.” His last and best work is entitled, “Thoughts on Habit and Discipline,” an excellent moral treatise.

_Bishop Bathurst_.

Henry Bathurst, LL.D., canon of Christchurch, rector of Cirencester, and prebend of Durham, was installed bishop of Norwich in 1805. He was a prelate much esteemed and respected. His christian deportment, conciliatory manners, and general benevolence, endeared him to this city and diocese. He was eminently distinguished for his liberal sentiments, and for his attachment to the great principles of civil and religious liberty. He was often seen walking arm in arm with Dissenters in our streets. He voted in the House of Peers for the Repeal of the Catholic Disabilities Bill, and also in favour of the Reform Bill. This disinterested and noble advocacy of liberal principles is thought to have stood in the way of his promotion to an archbishopric. He died April 7th, 1837, in the 93rd year of his age, and much lamented. A statue to his memory was placed in the choir of the Cathedral. This beautiful work of art was the last work of Sir Francis Chantrey, and is executed in his masterly style from a block of the purest Carrara marble. It is placed on a plain pedestal of white marble, and fixed in the recess at the foot of the altar steps, on the north side of the choir, commonly called Queen Elizabeth’s seat, because she sat there when she visited Norwich. The bishop is represented in a sitting posture, clothed in full ecclesiastical costume, and the artist has admirably succeeded in giving to his face that expression of benevolence for which he was so well known.

The following is a translation of the Latin inscription on the pedestal:—

To the Memory of The Right Reverend Father in Christ, HENRY BATHURST, Doctor in Civil Law, Who, While for more than 30 years he presided over This Diocese, By his frankness and purity of heart, Gentleness of manners, and pleasantness of conversation, attached to himself the good will of all: His friends, In testimony of their regret for one so much beloved, Have caused this effigy to be erected. He died 5 Ap. A.D. 1837, in the 93rd year Of his age.

_Bishop Stanley_.

Dr. Stanley was born January 1st, 1779, and became rector of Alderley, in Cheshire. After twice declining the office, he was installed bishop of Norwich, August 17th, 1837. He ruled the diocese for twelve years, and was highly esteemed by all sects for his unceasing efforts to promote the spiritual interests of every class of society, and his readiness on every occasion to co-operate with Dissenters in every good work. He often attended their meetings to promote religious and benevolent objects. In one of his sermons he quoted the injunction “The servant of the Lord must not strive, but be gentle unto all men; in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves;” &c. His subsequent conduct furnished ample evidence of the sincerity with which he obeyed this injunction; and although some of his clergy were somewhat estranged from him by his frequent expressions of unbounded charity, yet all were obliged to esteem him for his noble zeal and consistency of character. He was distinguished for his extensive liberality to the poor and his interest in their education. He was often seen going about from school to school, and the kindliness of his heart was so well known to the children that they sometimes pulled his coat behind to obtain his benignant smile, which to them was like sunshine after rain. On all occasions he was earnest in his advocacy of civil and religious liberty, and active in his exertions on behalf of all benevolent associations, both of the Church and of Dissenters. He was also a promoter of all literary institutions in the city and elsewhere, and often attended their anniversaries at which he delivered animated addresses. He did not lay claim to the character of a man of science; but astronomy, geology, botany, and natural history were his favourite studies. He was the author of two interesting volumes on “The History of Birds,” which were published by the Society for the Promotion of Christian Knowledge. He was elected president of the Linnæan Society, and he accepted an appointment as one of the commissioners chosen to inquire into the state of the British Museum.

Bishop Stanley was so little of a bigot that he appeared once on the same platform with Father Mathew, a Roman Catholic, at a temperance meeting in St. Andrew’s Hall. He then and there eulogised the apostle of temperance, and advocated the cause with great eloquence. On another occasion he invited Jenny Lind, now Madame Goldscmidt, to the palace, when she visited this city. At the palace one evening, she sang before a large company. When it became known that the lord bishop of the diocese had actually entertained an operatic singer, great was the indignation of some of the clergy. This however did not at all distress the good bishop, who held on the even tenor of his way, doing good whenever he had an opportunity. By his frequent earnest discourses in many churches in this diocese, he caused quite a revival of religion among the clergy and church-going people. He died, much lamented, on September 6th, 1849, in the 70th year of his age, and he was buried in the middle of the nave of the Cathedral, in the presence of thousands who had known and loved him. A short time after his decease, a slab to his memory was laid over his grave, bearing the following inscription:—

In the love of Christ Here rests from his labours EDWARD STANLEY, Thirty-two years Rector of Alderley, Twelve years Bishop of Norwich, Buried amidst the mourning Of the Diocese which he had animated, The City which he had served, The Poor whom he had visited, The Schools which he had fostered, The Family which he had loved, Of all Christian people With whom, howsoever divided, he had joined In whatsoever things were true and honest, And just, and pure, and lovely, And of good report. Born January 1st, 1779. Installed August 17th, 1837. Died September 6th, 1849, Aged 70. Buried September 21st, 1849.

_Bishop Hinds_.

Samuel Hinds, D.D., succeeded Bishop Stanley. He was the sixty-seventh bishop of the diocese, and was installed on January 24th, 1850. He was the son of Abel and Elizabeth Thornhill Hinds, born Dec. 23rd, 1793, in Barbadoes; and at the age of twelve he was sent to England, to the school of Mr. Phillips, at Frenchay, near Bristol. He entered at Baliol College, Oxford, but for want of rooms removed to Queen’s, graduated in honours 1815 (second in classics), and in the year following he obtained the Latin essay. He returned to Barbadoes as a missionary and remained there five years, the three latter as vice-principal of Codrington College. After he returned to England he became vice-principal of Alban Hall, Oxford; and he accompanied Archbishop Whately to Ireland, as his private chaplain. He was subsequently presented with the living of Yardley, in Herts., by Dr. Coplestone, bishop of Llandaff. Dr. Hinds again returned to Ireland, having been preferred to the living of Castlenock by Archbishop Whateley, and was chosen private chaplain to Lord Clarendon, lord lieutenant of Ireland. Hence he removed to the deanery of Carlisle, but was scarcely settled there when he was appointed to the bishopric of Norwich. He had previously refused the bishoprics of New Zealand and Cork. He laboured in this diocese for seven years, often preaching in the churches, attending religious meetings, and delivering addresses of a high character. He generally preached at the anniversaries of the Church Associations in this city. He resigned the see of Norwich in April, 1857, and retired into private life. His health is said to have been impaired by his arduous labours in conducting the Oxford commissions which the government had entrusted to him, and which, added to his duties in the diocese and the office of chaplain to the house of lords, proved too much for his constitution. Dr. Hinds is perhaps the most learned of modern bishops. His literary talents are considerable. He is the author of the “Rise and Progress of Christianity,” first published in the “Enclyclopædia Metropolitana,” and considered a standard work, highly esteemed for its comprehensive views of religious truth. The “Three Temples of the One God;” “Catechists’ Manual;” and “Inspirations of the Scriptures,” are works from his pen, which testify to his deep learning and great research. He is the author of many beautiful poems and hymns, some of which are familiar to the congregation at Norwich Cathedral, from being repeated in the service as arranged to music. The confirmation hymn is simple and appropriate.

_Mr. William Dalrymple_.

In a brief history of the _Norfolk and Norwich Hospital_, published by Dr. Copeman, we find the following memoir of the subject of this notice:—

“Mr. Dalrymple was a native of Norwich, his father having removed thither from Scotland. He was born in 1772, and at an early age was sent to the Grammar School at Aylsham, in Norfolk, from whence he was removed to the Free School at Norwich, where he became a favourite pupil of its then head master, the celebrated Dr. Parr. Here he had for a schoolfellow Dr. Maltby, and with both, Dr. Parr kept up a friendly intercourse of visits to the latest period of his life. It affords a strong proof of Mr. Dalrymple’s early talents and his industry in cultivating them, that, although in accordance with the then custom of requiring medical apprenticeship to extend to seven years, he was obliged to leave school at the age of fourteen, he had yet attained such a proficiency in classical reading, and so correct an appreciation of its beauties, that, amidst all the urgent and various occupations and anxieties of his succeeding life, he found the greatest relief to his toils in a recurrence to his favourite authors. His taste was scholarlike as well as scientific; his conversation embued with classical allusion, and his felicity in quotation remarkable. {527}

“Mr. Dalrymple was apprenticed in London, and studied at Guy’s and St. Thomas’ Hospitals under Cline and Sir Astley Cooper. He returned to Norwich in 1793, and opened a surgery in his father’s house; and although for several years his progress in establishing a practice was slow, he at last attained the highest reputation as a surgeon in his native city, and for many years enjoyed the confidence, friendship, and patronage of a very large number of patients of every grade of society and in every district of the county.

“In 1812 Mr. Dalrymple was elected assistant surgeon to the Norfolk and Norwich Hospital, and two years afterwards succeeded to the full surgeoncy, a post which he occupied with great credit to himself and benefit to his profession until 1839, a period of twenty-five years. He was then in the 67th year of his age, his powers were less vigorous, and finding himself no longer equal to his hospital practice, he resigned his position there, receiving a cordial acknowledgment from the governors, of ‘the able, humane, and successful exercise of his official duties,’ and being honoured by a request to accept the appointment of honorary consulting surgeon. In 1844 Mr. Dalrymple finally retired from professional life, and died in London on the 5th of December, 1848, aged 75 years.

“From the year 1831 to 1835, I had ample opportunities, as house surgeon of the hospital, of observing, and profiting by, the mode in which the late Mr. Dalrymple performed his public professional duties in that institution; and remember with pleasure and satisfaction, that I was sometimes able to render assistance, and save trouble, to one so deserving of the gratitude and goodwill of those with whom he had to do. At the period referred to, Mr. Dalrymple was beginning to feel the burden of heavy surgical responsibilities more weighty than his somewhat feeble frame would bear; his naturally acute sensibility was increased by a measure of debility resulting from overmuch professional occupation. The sudden call to perform a serious and difficult operation was accompanied sometimes with a degree of shock to his nerves, which told upon him injuriously; and the desire he had to save the life of the sufferer submitted to his charge (always a predominant feeling in his mind,) would well-nigh overpower him with emotion. I have often heard him say that he was not able to sleep the night before he had to perform the operation of lithotomy, although in such cases his success was great; but he possessed so much sympathy for his patient, and felt his own responsibility so strongly, that he failed to secure to his mind that rest which alone could have enabled him to meet the contingencies of his profession with composure. This nervous sensibility was due in part to original constitution, and increased by professional toil. Sometimes it arises from defective knowledge, or from want of success; but so far from either being the case with Mr. Dalrymple, his knowledge was ample, the result of many years’ industrious application of a mind capable of vast acquirements—sufficient to have given him confidence in the treatment of any case submitted to his care; his success was beyond that of many placed in similar circumstances; such, indeed, as might fairly have been expected from one who had so much sympathy for suffering humanity, and who devoted the whole energy of his mind to devise means to relieve it. For a long period no one but himself, perhaps, was aware of the stress upon his feelings which his professional duties, so well performed, were wont to occasion; and when it did become apparent to others, it was delightful to witness how pleased, how grateful, how kind in expression he was for any attention, encouragement, or assistance offered him; and how highly he estimated the friendship of those who watched an opportunity to perform those little offices of kindness and consideration, which, although difficult to be defined, can always be appreciated by a sensitive mind and a feeling heart.

“The experience of a long and active professional life endued Mr. Dalrymple with the valuable qualification of forming a right judgment in cases of a complex and difficult nature, which was fully appreciated and acknowledged. The firmness and decision of his opinion upon a difficult case, when once formed, could not fail to impress the practitioner by whom he was consulted with confidence, and his patient with the assurance that dependence might be placed upon the result of his deliberations.

“No one who had the privilege of Mr. Dalrymple’s acquaintance can think of him otherwise than as a kind friend, a highly intelligent and well-informed man, an amusing and instructive companion, and a profoundly gifted practitioner of the art and science it was the business and happiness of his life to pursue.”

_Mr. John Greene Crosse_.

We make the following extracts from a memoir of Mr. Crosse published in Dr. Copeman’s _History of the Norfolk and Norwich Hospital_.

“John Greene Crosse was the second son of Mr. William Crosse, of Finborough, in Suffolk, and was born on the 6th of September, 1790. In order to make known some particulars of his early life and education, I cannot do better than quote his own journal, which contains many remarks upon the subject evidently intended to have formed part of a history of his life. In April, 1819, he penned the following observations.

“‘I never went to boarding school, which contributed, with many other occurrences of my subsequent life, to fix me in the unsocial habits that hitherto never did and never will forsake me. In my early years, no classical learning, not a line of Latin, was taught at the proximate market town to which I resorted as a daily pupil; and my first lessons of reading, arithmetic, and writing were received from a master of whom I entertained the greatest horror, for the ferocity of his conduct, the severe discipline by which he drove into us the simplest rudimental knowledge. His stern brow, raucous voice, and long cane, are now livelily depicted to my mind: how much I owe to him, I am even now, with a long life in retrospect, unable to tell; but I was glad when circumstances arose that released me from his tutorage.’

“‘Very small matters, and such as we have no control over, and call accidental because unable to trace the chain of causes giving rise to them, influence our mortal destinies. I had attained my 12th (?) year, under such tremendous instruction as is related, when a Welsh gentleman making some mistake at college (not implicating his good character, an _informality_ I should call it) found it well to rusticate; and taking with him his premature wife, sought a living by opening a classical school in Stowmarket. I became one of his early pupils; and but for this good, easy man’s settling in the town, should never have launched into such studies as Latin and Greek; of which, it is true, I did not learn much, nor very accurately. But he was, nevertheless, a plodding, working man; an increasing family made him exert his abilities to the utmost; and I got out of him all the instruction I ever received as a school-boy in the learned languages. When about fifteen years of age, returning from my daily school, in a feat in jumping, I had the accident, I ought not perhaps to say the misfortune, to break my leg. The respectable village surgeon attended me: he was one of the old school; of fine, soft, soothing manners, clean dressed, with powdered head; rode slowly a very well-looking horse; in short, he was a gentleman, and commanded the respect of every one when he entered the house; he was also a skilful and kind surgeon. What wonder that the idea should be awakened in my mind to be of the medical profession! to be as great a man as he—the Village Doctor! to whom every one bowed, and who could relieve pain and cure injuries so quickly and skilfully. I had conceived an object of ambition, and the idea never deserted me. I was in a month upon my crutches, and soon recovered; a surgical case fixed my future destinies.’

“‘I persevered a few years longer at Latin, Greek, French, and Euclid. My father was successful and able now to place me out well; wished me to be a lawyer, and I was for a time under the instruction of a gentleman of that profession—attending bankruptcy meetings, and feasting at midnight at the expense of the already distracted creditors. Those were good times for lawyers. A learned chancellor, whom I met on one such occasion, I well remember complimenting me on my quickness in counting money; but all would not do, my mind was prepossessed—I quitted the law to follow my inclination; I made my own choice; it was a pledge to success. The surgeon who cured my leg agreed to take me as his first and only pupil, and I was accordingly articled in due form for five years.’

“On the 27th of September, 1811, Mr. Crosse went to London for the purpose of studying his profession in that Metropolis, and was the following day introduced to Mr., afterwards Sir Charles Bell, whose pupil he became, with whom he contracted a close intimacy, and of whose merits as a teacher and man of science he always spoke in the highest terms of respect and gratitude. In the following January, he entered to Abernethy’s Lectures; and in April, 1812, became a student at St. George’s Hospital, where his industrious habits and intelligence attracted the particular attention and marked notice of the medical officers of that noble institution. In the following month, he entered as a pupil at the Lock Hospital; and in the course of the year, officiated as House Surgeon during the temporary absence of the gentleman who occupied that situation. In the following winter session, commencing October, 1812, he studied under Brodie, Bell, Brande, Clarke, Home, and others; and remarks in his journal, ‘very industrious all this winter, sitting up constantly till past two a.m.’ In March, 1813, he became a dresser to Sir Everard Home at St. George’s Hospital; attended Midwifery under Dr. Clarke; and on the 16th of April, passed the College of Surgeons in London. After a short holiday, he returned to London on the 13th of May, and attended the Eye Infirmary at Charter-house Square. In June, he resigned his dressership under Sir E. Home; became acquainted with the late Mr. Travers, Abernethy, Sir W. Blizard, and Dr. Macartney, whom he agreed to accompany to Dublin; and much of his spare time during this summer was devoted to the study of German, a language he ever after cultivated that he might enjoy the profundity and research of the professional literature of that country.

“Mr. Crosse left England for Dublin on the 2nd of October, 1813, arriving there the following day. In December he became Demonstrator of Anatomy under Dr. Macartney, and remained there until October, 1814, when he returned to London, having received a very handsome testimonial from the numerous students of the school in which he taught, as to his ability and energy in the capacity of their instructor in anatomy.

“On quitting Dublin, Mr. Crosse returned to Suffolk, and was afterwards introduced to the late Dr. Rigby of Norwich. In December he went to Paris, where he remained until the end of February, 1815, during which period he took French Lessons, wrote his Diary in the French language, and availed himself of every possible opportunity of increasing his professional knowledge.

“On the 29th of March, 1815, Mr. Crosse came to Norwich; and after remaining one year in lodgings, took a house in St. Giles’, in which he resided for many years. He soon after published his “Sketches of the Medical Schools of Paris,” and showed, both by his writings and the industrious pursuit of his professional avocation, that he was destined to arrive at considerable eminence in the locality he had chosen for the arena of his future life. On the 19th of July, 1823, he was the successful candidate for the appointment of Assistant Surgeon to the Norfolk and Norwich Hospital. So great was his desire to become connected with the Hospital, and so strong the competition in which he was engaged to obtain this object, that his health gave way under the exertions he made to succeed; and he was obliged to absent himself for a time, on which occasion he took a trip to Holland, visiting Brighton on his return. The result was favourable, and he returned to Norwich in good health. On the death of Mr. Bond, in 1826, he was elected full Surgeon to the Hospital, and thus attained one of the greatest objects of his ambition.

“The rapid rise and progress of Mr. Crosse’s reputation as a professional man, and the large extent of his private practice, are too well known to require further notice; but notwithstanding the unremitting exertions required to fulfil his private engagements, he never allowed them to interfere with his public duties; and the devotedness of his service to the Norfolk and Norwich Hospital was remarkable. It may be truly said that no private patient received more kindness, skill, and attention at his hands, than did those who were placed under his care in the wards of the Hospital.

“As an operating surgeon, Mr. Crosse had but few superiors, and not many equals. He was possessed of considerable manual tact and dexterity, which, coupled with a sound judgment as to the necessity for the performance of an operation, stamped him as a surgeon of first-rate attainments. In his early professional life he studied anatomy with great assiduity, and his subsequent occupation as Demonstrator of Anatomy at Dublin so impressed the subject upon his memory, that the constitution and form of the human body were always in his mind’s eye; and thus he was rendered equal, at all times and upon all occasions, to the serious emergencies of surgery. In short, he obtained and held for a long period the foremost rank in his profession in this district; and such was the quality of his mind, that he would probably have been pre-eminent in whatever locality it might have fallen to his lot to be placed.

“In 1819, Mr. Crosse published _A History of the Variolous Epidemic of Norwich_, which has been, and is even now, quoted as an excellent standard work. In 1822 he published _Memoirs of the Life of the late Dr. Rigby_, prefixed to the valuable Essay which the Doctor had published some years before _On Uterine Hæmorrhage_.

“In 1835, the Jacksonian Prize was awarded him for his _Essay on the Formation_, _Constituents_, _and Extraction of the Urinary Calculus_; and in the same year he received, in consequence of this Essay, the Diploma of M.D. from the University of Heidelberg.

“From 1822 to the close of his life, Mr. Crosse contributed many valuable Papers to different medical periodicals, which are of deep interest to professional men.

“In 1836, Mr. Crosse was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society—a distinction which marked him for eminence throughout the whole civilized world. In 1845, the College of St. Andrew conferred the Degree of M.D. upon him, and there is scarcely a medical or surgical society in Europe of which he was not a member, as well as being an honorary member of the most eminent societies in Asia and America.

“During the last year of Mr. Crosse’s life (1850), it became painfully evident to his friends that he was gradually losing that vigour of mind and body which had so long characterized him; and at the urgent solicitation of his medical advisers, he was induced to leave home for a few weeks, when he took the opportunity of consulting Sir B. Brodie and Dr. Watson in London, and spent a short time with the late Dr. Mackness at Hastings, of whose kindness he afterwards spoke in the highest terms of gratitude. On his return home, he endeavoured to resume his professional and even his literary avocations; but although in a degree benefited by his holiday, he gradually lost power, and it was clear that his race was almost run.”

He died in his 60th year, having been a resident in Norwich 35 years.

_Dr. Hooker_.

Norwich and Norfolk have produced an array of distinguished botanists, such as Smith, Turner, Lindley, and the elder Hooker. The president of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, Dr. Joseph D. Hooker, F.R.S., is the son of Sir William J. Hooker, formerly Director of the Royal Gardens at Kew, and he succeeded his father in that very important post on November 12th, 1865. The present director of Kew sprung from a race of botanists. His paternal grandfather, a citizen of Norwich, devoted his leisure to the cultivation of curious plants. This circumstance, doubtless, helped to create that taste for botany which, in the career of his illustrious father, has borne such ripe fruits. On the maternal side, the grandfather of Dr. Hooker was Mr. Dawson Turner, of Yarmouth. The eldest daughter of this gentleman became the wife of Sir William J. Hooker in 1814. Mr. Turner’s is a well-known name in the annals of British botany; he is the author of various botanical publications, and it was at his suggestion that a narrative of a visit made to Iceland in 1809 by his future son-in-law was given to the world, a work which brought the name of Sir William J. Hooker prominently before the scientific world. So descended Dr. Joseph D. Hooker was born at Halesworth, in Suffolk, on June 30th, 1817. Although thus by birth a native of Suffolk, he is by descent a Norwich man. He has been a great botanical traveller in many parts of the world, and he has added greatly to our knowledge of the plants of Asia and India. On August 19th, 1868, as President of the British Association, when the meeting took place in Norwich, he delivered the Inaugural Address in the Drill Hall before a large audience.

_Mrs. Opie_.

Amelia Opie was the daughter of Dr. Alderson, a physician in Norwich, and was born here in 1769. The varied circumstances of her early life gave the bent to her after career. In her girlhood she beguiled the solitude of her father’s summer house by composing songs and tragedies; on her visits to London, the superior society into which the graces of her person and the accomplishments of her mind introduced her, served to stimulate her aspirations; and after her marriage, in 1798, to the painter, Mr. John Opie, she was encouraged by her husband to become a candidate for literary fame. Accordingly, in 1801, she published a novel, entitled _Father and Daughter_. Although this tale showed no artistic ability in dealing either with incidents or with characters, yet it was the production of a lively fancy and a feeling heart, and speedily brought its author into notice. She was encouraged to publish a volume of sweet and graceful poems in 1802, and to persist in the kind of novel writing which she had commenced so successfully. _Adelaide Mowbray_ followed in 1804, and _Simple Tales_ in 1806. The death of her husband in 1807, and her return to Norwich, did not slacken her industry. She published _Temper_ in 1812, _Tales of Real Life_ in 1813, _Valentine’s Eve_ in 1816, _Tales of the Heart_ in 1818, and _Madeline_ in 1822. At length, in 1825, her assumption of the tenets and garb of the Society of Friends checked her literary ardour, and changed her mode of life. Nothing afterwards proceeded from her pen except a volume entitled _Detraction Displayed_, and some contributions in prose and verse to various periodicals. A good deal of her life was spent in travelling and in the exercise of Christian benevolence. When in this city she was often seen in the assize court, sitting near the judge. She seemed to take a great deal of interest in criminal cases. She died here in 1853. A life of Mrs. Opie, by Miss C. L. Brightwell, was published in 1854.

_Dr. William Crotch_.

The celebrated musician, William Crotch, was born in the parish of St. George at Colegate in this city, July 5th, 1775. His genius for music may be supposed to have commenced with his existence, as his parents did not remember any period in which he did not shew a great predilection for an organ, to which instrument he seemed to have a special attachment. Indeed he had a _penchant_ for every musical instrument at an early age. As soon as he could walk alone, which was at the beginning of his second year, he would frequently quit his mother’s breast to hear a tune on the organ, and when he wanted any particular tune, he would put his finger upon that key on which the tune began; and as it sometimes happened that more than one tune began on the same key, he would strike two or three of the first or leading notes of the tune he chose to have played. Before he was two years and a quarter old, he played “God save the King” with both hands. At two years and a half he had played to several ladies and gentlemen, and was soon afterwards noticed in the public journals. At two and three quarters he could distinguish any note, and call it by its proper name, though he did not see it struck. His memory was so retentive, that a gentleman only playing to him the Minuet in _Rodelinda_ two or three times in the evening, was astonished to hear him perform it next morning, as soon as he went to the organ. Before he was three years old, he played at Beccles, Ipswich, and other places. Afterwards he was taken to Lynn, Bury, &c., and in October, 1778, to Cambridge. In November, he was nominated to a degree of Bachelor of Arts, with a small annuity annexed to it. In December he went to London, and after performing before the foreign ambassadors, maids of honour, &c., in 1779, he was introduced to the sovereign, to whom he gave the greatest satisfaction, as he had done to the nobility and gentry in general, but more particularly to the greatest musicians. At the early age of 22 he was appointed professor of music in the University of Oxford, and there, in 1799, took his degree of doctor in that art. In 1800 and the four following years, he read lectures on music at Oxford. Next he was appointed lecturer on music at the Royal Institution; and subsequently, in 1823, principal of the Royal Academy of Music. He published a number of vocal and instrumental compositions, of which the best is his oratorio of “Palestine.” In 1831 appeared an octavo volume, containing the substance of his lectures on music, delivered at Oxford and in London. He also published “Elements of Musical Composition and Thorough Bass.” He arranged for the piano-forte a number of Handel’s oratorios and operas, besides symphonies and quartetts of Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven. He performed all his public duties laboriously, zealously, and honourably, and in private life he was much beloved. He died on December 29th, 1847, in the house of his son, at Taunton.