Part 22

That the above £440 and interest was (after a great deal of money laid out about the chancel etc.,) cleared off and discharged about Lady Day, 1742, by the above twenty years care and trouble of the above John Tanner, vicar of the said parish of Lowestoft, who besides his contribution of eighty pounds, given by him when the subscription was first opened, gave likewise afterwards twenty years’ profits of that part of the tithes, which was settled on the vicar by the govenors of Queen Anne’s bounty, in the year 1721; disclaiming at the same time all merits to himself, and attributing it solely to the bounty and goodness of the Supreme Being, saying

At non nobis, Domine, sed nomini tuo sit Gloria. Amen. Not unto us, O Lord, but to thy name be the Glory. Amen.

With the impropriation there was likewise purchased a large barn (to lay the tithes in) copyhold, on which barn there was left unpaid £50. This money was also paid off at Michaelmas, 1745, by the care and good management, and bounty of the above worthy vicar John Tanner. This barn was surrendered, a little before the Mortmain Act took place, to Mr. Woolmer, of Carleton: Mr. Robert Hayward, jun., and Mr. John Durrant of Lowestoft; in trust, for the use of such person and persons as, from time to time, shall be entitled to the great tithes. It pays a quit rent of 1/8 to the Manor of Lowestoft.

The value of the living is also further increased from the fisheries. The Vicar receives from the owner of every boat employed in the herring fishery half a guinea, and for every boat employed in the mackarel fishery half a dole. When the North sea and Iceland fisheries flourished at Lowestoft, the Vicar was not allowed half a dole for every vessel sent upon those fisheries, but for every voyage which they made annually to those seas, which were not only one, but sometimes two, three and even four voyages. In the begining of the reign of Queen Elizabeth, about fourteen of these vessels, called doggers, were employed by this town in the North sea and Iceland fisheries, which paid a considerable sum annually to the Vicar. But these latter fisheries are now entirely ceased at Lowestoft, and have been so for many years.

This custom of allowing the vicar half a dole is a very antient one, but how long it has subsisted at Lowestoft is uncertain. At Yarmouth, in the year 1484 the half doles of fishing voyages were granted by the assembly to the use of the haven; but this custom, called the half-doles, had been before that time paid to the town even from time immemorial; for the fishermen had always given a whole dole, namely, half a dole to the use of the church, and the other half to the use of the town; and because one half part of the dole was given to sacred purposes, it was called Christ’s dole. Probably the payment of the half dole by the fishermen at Lowestoft to the same sacred use, is as antient as that at Yarmouth.

What is meant by a dole is this: from the amount which each boat raises by the sale of mackarel, during the voyage, a sum is first deducted for provisions and incidental expenses; the residue is divided into shares or doles of which the owner of the boat has a certain number, and the net owner the like for his nets, and the remainder is distributed among the boatmen according to their several stations, including the minister’s half dole. Thus, if a boat raises £100, take for provisions, etc., £25, then the residue, £76, will be the sum to divide into doles; and if the number of doles for boats, nets and men, together with the half dole to the Vicar, be 150, then the division will be 10s. per share or dole; and consequently, in that case, the Vicar will be entitled to 5s. for his half dole for that boat.

There not being any antient records now remaining, respecting the origin of this noble and beautiful structure, the church at Lowestoft, they being all burnt in the year 1606, when the dwelling-house belonging to Mr. Glesson, vicar of this town, was destroyed by fire, we are unable to ascertain with certainty the exact time when this building was erected; and consequently all the investigations in pursuit of this discovery must be attended with much difficulty and enveloped in the obscurity of probable conjecture.

It is evident, from what has been already observed at the begining of this section, respecting the grant of Henry I that there was a church belonging to this parish in the eleventh century, but how long it had been erected before that period is now uncertain, probably soon after Christianity was first introduced into the kingdom of the East Angles. In those early ages the generality of our English churches were undoubtedly very ordinary buildings; they were of Saxon origin, some few were built with stone, but the greater part of wood only, and consequently were much inferior to the stately edifices that were erected after the Norman conquest. To determine therefore, what kind of church it was that they had at Lowestoft at that early period is now impossible; all that can be advanced on the point is, that when we consider the barbarous taste which prevailed in that uncivilised age, the infant as well as the persecuted state of Christianity, and the violent commotions which at that time agitated this part of the kingdom, it may be concluded that it was but a mean building, and bore but a small resemblance to the size and elegence of the present structure.

But it may be asked, that if the original church at Lowestoft was a building of that inferior kind as is above represented, by what means was it that the present large and elegant structure came to be erected; since it is evident, that the ability of the inhabitants at any one period was never equal to the accomplishing such an expensive undertaking?

In answer to the question it may be observed that the church belonging to the impropriation of this parish, which made part of the endowment of the priory of St. Bartholomew, by Henry I, was the old original building, which was then standing, and not the present structure. The former of these buildings, was of very ancient date, probably soon after the establishment of Christianity in the Kingdom of the East Angles; therefore it may reasonable be supposed, that at the time when the grant of it was made, namely, in the reign of Henry I, it must be in a very decayed and ruinous state. This grant of Henry I was confirmed by a charter from Henry III, in the year 1230. When, therefore, the priory of St. Bartholomew was in full possession of the church and impropriation of this parish, by virtue, of this charter, they, in consequence of their zeal, or rather religious frenzy, for erecting churches and founding religious houses, which at that time so universally prevailed, the old ruinous church at Lowestoft was entirely taken down, and the present elegant structure erected in its place, through the munificence of the priory and pious ostentation of the times.

Tanner, in his Notitia, says “That Henry I gave churches in Suffolk to the priory of St. Bartholomew, without specifying the names of those churches; yet it may reasonably inferred that the church at Lowestoft was one of them; because, when the grant was confirmed by the charter of Henry III, this church was particularly mentioned.”

It is certain that the present church at Lowestoft was erected prior to the year 1365, because Weever has given an inscription which he found in the church, namely,

ROBERT INGLOSSE, Esquyer, which died in Anno 1365.

Therefore, it is evident, that the old church at Lowestoft was standing in the year 1230, when the grant of Henry I was confirmed by the charter of Henry III; and as it is equally evident, from the above inscription, that the present church was erected before the year 1365, it makes it clearly manifest that the present building was erected some time in the interval between the years 1230 and 1365; and consequently, that the present church of Lowestoft has been built 500 years.

After the church came into the possession of the priory of St. Bartholomew, it was found to be so old and mean a building, and in such a ruinous state, that it was necessary to take it entirely down and rebuild it, and which was accordingly done in its present noble and elegant style. The nave, the south aisle, and the chancel were the first parts that were taken down; but the north aisle was not re-built till some time after. This is evident, from the difference which may be observed in the form of the windows belonging to these aisles; the former being more acute than the latter, which points out a more ancient construction.

An ingenious writer has said that the very obtusely-pointed arches of the windows of our churches, shew, at first sight, that they are of no very great antiquity; for the very sharply-pointed arch, which succeeded the circular one about the year 1200, expanded itself by degrees, and grew more and more obtuse till, towards the reign of Henry VII. it approached the segment of a great circle. This observation tends to confirm what has been previously advanced, namely, that the present church at Lowestoft was wholly re-built at the same time, but that the north aisle was built some time after the other parts of the building. The walls belonging to the south part of this beautiful structure are at this time much inclined from the perpendicular; owing, probably, to the absurd and injurious practice of open graves, both within and without the building, too near the foundations a practice which too much prevails in other places.

[The south wall was rebuilt in 1871.]

The present church was erected chiefly through the munificence and liberality of the priory of St. Bartholomew of London; and, it is also probable that it was indebted to the same society afterwards for keeping it in repair, for when all supplies from those resources were entirely withdrawn, in consequence of the dissolution of the monasteries, in the reign of Henry VIII., the churches that were dependent on those foundations soon fell into decay, as the parishes to which they belonged were unable to support the expense of repairing them. Sometimes the Lords of the Manors belonging to parishes whose churches have been rebuilt, have been liberal benefactors on these occasions, especially about the time when the re-building of Lowestoft church was undertaken. John de la Pole, Lord of Wingfield Castle, was one of the principal benefactors, when that noble tower belonging to the church at Redenhall, in Norfolk was erected; and as the town of Lowestoft and the island of Lothingland were part of the estate of the De la Poles, in the reigns of Henry IV. and V., it might be supposed that this family contributed also to the rebuilding of Lowestoft Church; but not anything appears to confirm this supposition. No leopard’s faces (the badge of the De la Poles) are visible in any part of the building, as they are in many places in the tower at Redenhall. The building of this tower was begun about the year 1460, and finished in 1520; but the church at Lowestoft was not re-built till between the years 1230 and 1395; it is therefore probable that the De la Poles were not the proprietors of the town of Lowestoft and the island of Lothingland till after the rebuilding of Lowestoft church. This was the case at Corton and Kessingland, near Lowestoft, after the dissolution of Leystone abbey, and the abbey of the Minorisses, in London; and the church at Lowestoft would have experienced the same misfortune, after the suppression of the priory of St. Bartholomew, had not the town at that time prevented the lands which had been given many years before, for the sole use of this church, being alienated with the impropriation of this parish, and the other endowments of the priory, in the grant which was made to Sir Richard Rich, in the 36th of Henry VIII.

Probably Corton and Kessingland were not altogether in the same predicament as Lowestoft. For as the abbeys to which they belonged were in possession of their impropriations only, their churches were repaired out of the common revenues of those abbeys; whereas the priory of St. Bartholomew had not only the impropriation of Lowestoft, but was also, probably in possession of the lands which had been given for the sole use of the church; which lands were recovered again after the dissolution of the monasteries, for their original purposes. For it appears that the church lands belonging to this parish were never under the absolute power of the priory as the impropriation was, although it might have great influence concerning them; this is evident, by the feoffment of the said lands in the reign of Henry VII A.D. 1503, which shews that the right was not in the priory of St. Bartholomew; and consequently, might be the reason of their being recovered again by the parish soon after the dissolution.

But notwithstanding the recovery of the church lands, it appears that the town was much distressed after the dissolution of the monasteries, in keeping the church in decent repair. For in the year 1592 the church was in such a ruinous state that it cost upwards of £200 to repair it; out of which sum £68 18s. 8d. was collected of the inhabitants; £100 were borrowed of Mr. Bartlemewe, of Yarmouth, and the remainder was raised (including a provision for discharging the debt) from premiums by granting leases of the town lands under their full value; the situation of the inhabitants at this time obliging them to have recourse to these methods for repairing the church. It also appears that there had been paid by the churchwardens, towards repairing the church, of hayning-money collected in the roads, the sum of £63 18s. 3d. when the lands were unable to discharge the expenses of the repairs and other necessary expenses of the town, exclusive of money collected of the inhabitants. The church has also cost the parish several considerable sums since that time for repairs; so that, had not the town been assisted in repairing this building by the rents and profits of the church lands, that venerable pile had many years since fallen into decay, and mouldered into irreparable ruin.

The ruinous state of the church at this time arose, probably, from the profits of the lands given for keeping it in repair, being applied to other purposes. From the decree of the Court of Chancery, in 1616, respecting the town lands, it appears, that that decree was grounded on a complaint of the inhabitants that the rents and profits of those lands had been alienated to purposes not intended by the donors. That the lands called French’s, given for the use of the poor of this town were worth £20 a year, but that the poor received little more than 13d. a week from them. That the lands given for the use of the church were worth £40 a year, but that £10 a year only had been applied to that purpose; and that the overplus of all these lands had been expended in law-suits and divers other business of the town; contrary to the designs of the donors. It was also further complained, that the churchwardens had let the said lands at rents considerably below their value, in order to obtain fines and incomes, which amounted to £210 and upwards. And as the burthen of repairing the church, in consequence of these alienations, fell, in great measure, upon the inhabitants it occasioned an application to the Court of Chancery for redress. Nevertheless, if the distressed condition of the town at this time is considered, as being obliged to raise £120 in 1591, to defend their rights to Annott’s school; to raise £120 in 1597, to defend their rights against Yarmouth, respecting the herring fishery; to raise £200 in 1592 lo repair the church; also £114 in 1616 to discharge the expenses of the above suit in chancery; may easily account for some measures having been pursued which were not altogether justifiable, but were adopted through absolute necessity.

That part of the town lands which was given for the use of the church, and is chiefly appropriated towards keeping it in repair, and furnishing it with decent ornaments, is the gift of some charitable and religious persons, whose names, at this distant period, are wholly unknown; but, whoever they were, they are justly entitled to the grateful acknowledgments of the parish, as having been the means of preserving it from a burthen which at all times would have been inconvenient.

Under the general denomination of town lands belonging to this parish, are included, not only those above-mentioned, consisting of sixty-seven acres of land, divers tenants, a wind mill, and dole lands, and which were given for the use of the church, but also those that were given for the benefit of the poor. Concerning the lands given to the church, the donor is not only unknown at the present time, but was also unknown in the year 1552, the sixth of Edward VI, when one, John Jetter, the only surviving feoffee, made a new feoffment of the premises, dated 20th June; and who therein said “That he together with divers persons deceased, had them by the feoffment of Nicholas Hughson and William Fly, bearing date 10th November, 1503, 19 Henry VII.”

On the 12th June, 1644, when Francis Jessope, under a commission from the Earl of Manchester, pillaged this church of almost all the brass inscriptions, he took up, in the middle isle, twelve pieces belonging to twelve several generations of the Jetters. Margaret Jetter, 1573, widow, laid in the churchyard. The mother, probably, of Anthony Jetter, of Lowestoft, merchant, who was living in the 8th of Queen Elizabeth.

The feoffees named in the feoffment, dated October 14, 1678, are: John Arrow, vicar; Aldous Arnold, gent.; Samuel Barker, merchant; Samuel Barker, jun., Hewlin Luson, jun., Dan. Ketteridge, merchant; John Peache, merchant; William Bell Parker, clerk; John Jex, gent.; William Slop, draper; Robert Reeve, gent.; Samuel Collett, draper; Henry Roman, baker; James Harman, merchant; James Brame, baker; William Pashley, merchant; Thomas Brame, gent.; Aldous Arnold, surgeon; Obed Aldred, bricklayer; John Stannard, rope maker; Thomas Smith, beer brewer; Coe Arnold, beer brewer; Philip Walker, gent.; John Howard, grocer.

The other part of the town lands given for the use of the poor, called French’s, consisting of twenty-one acres and a half, were purchased with sixty pounds left by William French, by will, dated April 14, 1529, to buy free lands for the use of the poor; the profits of which lands were to be distributed in the following manner: to thirteen poor people of the town of Lowestoft, thirteenpence every Sunday, after divine service; and three shillings and fourpence to the churchwardens, yearly, for their trouble. About the beginning of the last century, in consequence of the great misapplication of the rents and profits arising from these lands, and also those given to the church, the inhabitants applied to the Court of Chancery, requesting that a commission might be appointed for making enquiry into the abuses, and to redress the same. A commission was accordingly granted, and an inquisition was held at Lowestoft, and in the year 1616 a decree was issued from that court (which cost the town £114 10s.) wherein it was ordered.

I. That the town lands belonging to Lowestoft should be let by the year, or by leases not exceeding seven years, by the feoffees (the churchwardens for the time being, being two) and six other inhabitants.

II. No new leases to be made before the old ones are expired.

III. The Rents to be received by the Churchwardens, and to be disposed of as follows:

1st. That twenty pounds be laid out annually in repairing and ornamenting the church.

2nd. To thirteen poor people of the town of Lowestoft, thirteen pence every Sunday, and three shillings and four pence, yearly, to the churchwardens, for their trouble.

3rd. Twenty pounds a year to the poor, including the above.

4th. Ten pounds a year to put out poor children apprentice, and a stock, to set poor people to work; and the remainder of the rents to be disposed of as the churchwarden, and twelve other inhabitants shall think proper, for the public good of the town.

5th. That in all the leases there shall be a reservation of the timber and wood; and that no wood or timber growing upon the premises shall be felled or taken, but for the reparations of the church and the houses standing on the said premises. And all underwood, when felled, shall be sold for the benefit of the poor and reparations of the church, by the churchwardens.

The decree in Chancery declares that this is the true intent and meaning of the donors, and therefore ordered that it should be fulfilled in the most ample and liberal manner. The Churchwardens are required on every Monday in Whitsun week to pass a true account to the new churchwardens, feoffees, and townsmen under pain of five pounds.

In 1738 the town lands belonging to the parish were let for between £90 and £100 per annum.

In 1644 they were let for the term of seven years, at the rent of £64 only. The rents of lands about this time were much reduced in general, probably from the violent commotions of that unhappy period.

In 1651 they were let for £71 1s. per annum.

In 1734 they were let for £90 per annum.

In 1756 they were let for £93 per annum.

In 1776 they were let for the annual rent of £163 4s. 6d., agriculture being so much improved of late years as to render farming very advantageous. The farming business was in such a flourishing state about this time, that the vicar of Lowestoft, in the year 1776, compounded with his parishioners, for his tithes at 3s. 6d in the pound, according to what the farms were let for; but in 1777 the said composition was 4s. in the pound.

In 1683 the lands realised £138 6s. 6d. per annum.

There is no Church rate in the parish of Lowestoft, the profits arising from the lands belonging to the church being amply sufficient for keeping it in repair. Whether the rents of these lands have always been applied to the uses intended by the donors, is now uncertain, but thus far may justly be observed, that through the great care and assiduity of the vicar, the Rev. Arrow, in appropriating to the use of the Church such part of the town lands as it is justly entitled to, and preventing their being alienated to purposes for which they were never intended by their generous benefactors, this stately edifice is not only kept in proper repair, but rendered truly elegant; so as to become an honour to religion, a credit to the parish, and the admiration of every stranger.