Part 15

Lynn is a notable instance of a town declaring for the revolution, without entering at all into the spirit of it: for it continued still as bigoted and intolerant as before. This was remarkably exemplified in the bitter and violent persecution that broke out here about 1690, against a society of protestant dissenters of the Baptist denomination, and especially against _James Marham_, their minister. He appears to have been a very worthy man, zealous and diligent in propagating that sort of religious knowledge which he thought most useful and interesting to his fellow-creatures. Some of the great ones, or heads of the town became his chief persecutors. What they affected to take most umbrage at was, the denomination to which he belonged. They pretended that it was a _new_ religion; and they would not suffer it to be disseminated in the town, but were resolved to break up the meeting. They first proceeded against him under the Conventicle Act, and employed two men, named _Robert Whitehead_ and _Henry Oseincraft_, as _informers_; who having been at the meeting, laid their information before the justices, or aldermen, {861} who forthwith issued their warrants to levy 20_l._ on the _house_, 20_l._ on the _preacher_, and 5_s._ on each of the _hearers_. Marham owned that he hired the meeting-house, but produced the licence, or certificate, which shewed it to have been regularly registered as a place of worship, according to the Toleration Act; but that they over-ruled, and caused their levy to be executed, both upon him and others. And finding afterwards that he persisted in continuing the meeting, they resolved to ruin him, by charging him with some heinous crime, which the account does not specify. They got one person to swear against him, intending then to commit him to prison; but the witness could not substantiate the charge; so that they were obliged to drop the proceeding. Marham now getting a copy of their levy, found that the informers had sworn, that when they were at the meeting-house one _John_ Marham was _preaching_; whereas there was no preacher of that name. The preacher that was speaking when they were at the meeting was a minister from London, whose name was _Wm. Lang_, but he was only _praying_, and not preaching, at the time. They had also sworn, that one _Francis Robinson_ was then at the meeting, which was not true. Having made these discoveries Marham was advised to proceed against them at common Law, which he accordingly did; and the two informers were put into the crown office. The great men now interfered, and prevailed with Marham’s attorney to desist from further prosecution, “as he would answer it, (says the account) in the hands or _custody of a messenger_.” {862} These threats inducing the attorney to stay the proceedings for a time, the informers, advised by their patrons or employers, took advantage of that to remove the cause from common law to chancery. A notice or subpœna was then served upon Marham to answer their bill of complaint, which bill consisted of 31 sheets. “Though the substance of it, (our account says) _will be proved utterly false_, yet it will cost more money by far than Marham is able to disburse, without _evident ruin_.” An appeal was therefore made to the whole denomination for assistance; and they are thought to have come forward pretty liberally on the occasion, the _particular_ as well as the _general_ baptists, to the latter of which Marham belonged. He was up in London and gave in his answer in February 1693; but when or how the affair ended does not appear, for our account was published before it was brought to its final issue. As a chancery cause it might remain long undetermined, perhaps for some years. But how or whensoever it ended, here is enough to shew very clearly with what illiberality, intolerance, tyranny, and villany, the gentry or chief men of Lynn were capable of acting at that period. Much of the same spirit continued here very long after, even down to the memory of the present writer.

About the beginning of 1690 (or 1689–90) the _hosiers_ of this town appeared much concerned and alarmed, (as had indeed been the case for some time before, {864}) at the prevalence of the _weaving_ method, by which that of _knitting_ was much discouraged and fallen off, to the great injury of vast numbers of the poor, who were consequently left without employment. They therefore now petitioned the Hall to have the case brought before parliament, which was readily acceded to. This affair is thus memorized in the Town-Books.—“Jan. 17. (1689–90) On petition of the Hosiers of this Town in behalf of the poore, against the new invention of _weaving_ worstead hose; whereby many thousands of the poor are destitute of employment; It is ordered and agreed that a Petition from this House to the Honorable House of Commons representing that grievance, now read, be sealed with the common seal of this burgh.”

It may therefore be presumed that this petition was actually presented to the House of Commons, but what was there made of it, or what reception it met does not appear. It must, however, have indicated a very contracted idea of trade, or the rights of manufacturing adventurers. Near seven years after a different sort of petition was presented by this town to the same house; of which the following notice occurs in the Hall or Town-Books—“Oct. 26. 1696; Mr Mayor, Mr Recorder, Sir Henry Hobart baronet, Sir John Turner knight, Sir Charles Turner knight, Robert Walpole, Maurice Kendall, Esquires, Mr. Bell, Mr. Holly, Mr. Turner, or any five of them, to manage and present a petition to the parliament to remove obstructions, and for preserving navigation—[and] for removing the Dam and Sluices near Salters load.”—The obtaining the object of this petition might probably have proved very beneficial to the country; but it does not appear that the application succeeded.

Our corporation, as might be expected, did not neglect during this reign to send some loyal _addresses_ to the throne. How many they actually did send we have not the means of ascertaining. One was probably sent upon their majesties accession, though we have not met with any particular account of it. We are indeed informed in our extracts from the Hall-Books, that Thursday, the 11th of April 1689, the day of the coronation of King William and Queen Mary, was appointed _to be kept here with all due solemnity_: whence one might pretty safely infer, that an Address did soon after follow. Such was the case, we presume, with all the rest of our corporations.

Another address was sent from Lynn in 1696, occasioned by the discovery of the _assassination plot_, and the intended French _invasion_. One of our historians {865} speaking of that horrid plot, thus adds—“At the same time there was to be an invasion from France, for which purpose king _James_ was come to _Calais_, and the troops, artillery, and stores, were immediately ordered to be embarked; but by the news of the assassination plot having miscarried, and the speedy sending of a formidable fleet under admiral _Russell_, this other part of the design was frustrated; and Calais was not long after bombarded by the English. The king on February 21. acquainted parliament with the discovery of the plot; upon which both Houses addressed his majesty to congratulate him on his happy preservation: and the House of Commons drew up and subscribed an _association_ to stand by one another in defence of his majesty’s sacred person and government, against the late king James and all his adherents. The Lords also agreed to the same association; and the example of the two Houses was followed by all the corporations in the kingdom.”—The part which Lynn took in this memorable business is thus noticed in the book of extracts from the Hall records—“March 11th. (1695–6) sign’d an Address to his Majestie in the nature of ane Association to stand by and assist his Majesty against all his Ennemys whatsomever.”—We have seen no copy of this address.

On the king’s return from the continent, in the autumn of 1697, another address went to him from this town, of which the following is a copy—

“Great Sir. Wee your Majesties most dutifull and loyall subjects, the mayor, aldermen, and common-councell, and chiefe inhabitants of the burgh of King’s Lynn in the county of Norfolk, crave leave to prostate ourselves at your Royall feet, with sincerest joye and most devout thankfulness adoreing the Divine Goodness for watching over your pretious life (in all the Dangers it has been exposed to by sea and land) upon the safety whereof the fate of so many nations did depend. The comfort is too bigg for us to express, To behold your sacred person with happyness and honor retorned to these your dominions after the vast toyles of a war ingaged in for the security of your realms and the tranquillity of Europe. For no sooner had your princely tenderness secured to us the inestimable blessings of Lawe, Liberty, and Religion, but injured and ruined provinces abroad implored your ayd. Then it was you awakened the slumbering genius of this warlike people, and with matchless conduct, courage, vigilance, you led forth the British forces to fame and great atchievements in forreign lands. Let other chiefes and potentates of your allyance have their deserved praise; but it is your majesties right for what by your councell and armes has been done in accomplishing the great worke to remain possest of the brightest share of the glory that attends it, will outweigh the pomp of all other triumphs to be the chosen instrument of Providence to calm a stormy world, to make wars and desolation to cease, and to restore repose and peace to christendome. May the same propitious providence make these blessings durable and perpetuall, may your sacred Majestie be still the charge of the Life Guards of Heaven, may your royall cares be sweetened, though they can never be requited, by the constant loyalty and duty of a gratefull people; may your days be long and prosperous, and your renoune increase; may your Realms flourish in virtue, union, plenty and peace; and when you shall be called to a heavenly crowne may generations to come rise up and call you blessed.”

This Address, no doubt, was drawn up by one of our first orators and ablest hands of that day, and in his very best manner. But our augustan age does not appear to have commenced till after the accession of Q. Anne. Our addresses to the throne became then long and frequent; and they were all penned in so striking a style of eloquence as clearly evinced the abundant confidence the compilers had in their own parts and powers.

In 1697 our corporation had a law-suit with one _Hulton_, before Lord Chief Justice Holt, which by the following hint in the Hall-Books they appear to have gained—“March 29. 1697, Recovered, on a tryall before Lord Chief Justice Holt, of Leonard Holton a Quitt rent of 23_s._ 6_d._ per annum, and arrears for 38 years to Michaelmas 1694, on his house, late Th: Toll Esq: and also a rent charge of 6_s._ 8_d._ per annum.”—In the same year they had also a suit in the court of Exchequer, with one _Vinckeson_, of which the following notice occurs in the Hall-books—“June 16. Ordered that Hubert Vinckeson be prosecuted in the court of Exchequer for the duty of Lastage of great quantities of corn and graine belonging to fforreigners and strangers to the liberties of this burgh, which have been unjustly coloured and own’d by him, contrary to his aath of ffreedome.”—It does not appear that there was any thing unjustifiable in this prosecution.

About this same period our _water-works_ appear to have been a losing concern to our corporation; which they seem to have felt so far as to have the following notice of it inserted in their books—“April 20. 1696. It is reported that the charges and disbursements of maintaining the water-rents for ten 10 years last past, as per particulars is 1427_l._ 7_s._ {869} 8_d._ the rents and profits thereof for the sametime is 1338_l._ 14_s._ 2_d._—Lost by the water account in ten years 288_l._ 13_s._ 6_d._ which divided by ten years is 28_l._ 17_s._ 4_d._ per annum.”—How this concern turned out afterwards, or how it stands at present, we have not had hitherto the means of ascertaining.

At this period which we are now reviewing the whole body of our _coal-meters_ and _head-porters_ brought themselves into most sad disgrace, by certain dishonest and fraudulent doings. The customhouse complained against them and had them all turned out at once:—but some weeks after, on profession of contrition or promise of amendment, they were again restored. Of this unpleasant affair, so disreputable and humiliating to these meters and porters, our Corporation have preserved the following memorial in their books—“July 11th. 1701; Upon Information this day made to this House by the chief officers of his Majesties Customes of this Port against the whole body of the Company of Head Porters and Metters of the Port and Burgh, that they have severally received deputations and instructions from the Right Honorable the Lords Commissioners, as metters, weighers, and measurers, in pursuance of an act for granting to his Majesty severall duties upon coales and culme, have every one of them taken and received bribes, and made short and false certificates and retornes, and been guilty of other corrupt ill practices contrary to the said trust and the oath and duty of their offices of Head Porters and Metters, and to the defrauding his Majestie of the said Duties; which upon examination they have this day severally confest: it is therefore this day ordered that all and every of them be and stand discharged from the said offices of Head Porters and Metters of this burgh and port.”—Then we read as follows—“August 13. Upon the humble application and submission of divers of the corne and coale metters, head porters, this House hath reestablished them, and ordere’d that beside the accustomed oath they give security by bond with one surety in 20_l._ for the just performance, and so to continue for the future.”—This regulation is probably still in force.

About the same time our corporation appeared to claim kindred and fall passionately in love with gentility and high life, or the titled classes of the community, as contradistinguished from the unprivileged orders or swinish multitude; which is evinced by the conclusion of the following passage in the Hall-Books, on the regulation of Tolls,—“Nov. 24. 1701; Ordered that the present Tables of Petty Tolls, taken by water and at the gates, be regulated according to the alterations now made, and such as are now marked be exchanged, and that new tables thereof be made to be hung up at the gates, and delivered to the wharfinger; and that _all Noblemen_, _Knights_, _Esquires_, and _Clergymen be from henceforth exempted from all Tolls for goods bought by them_.” One can perceive in this neither justice nor charity; and it was probably the offspring of mere caprice.

At the period now under review our clergy were, seemingly, treated, or provided for by the corporation more liberally and handsomely than they are at present. In 1702 the minister and lecturer had their Stipends augmented to 100_l._ a year each; which must have been equal to 3 or 400_l._ at least, of our money. Before that time they had but 50_l._ each, as appears by the following articles in the Hall-Books—“Aug. 29, 1701; Ordered that Mr. Th: Pile be appointed minister or preacher at St. Nicholas Chaple to preach once every Sunday, and to read divine Service once every day in the week, except Sundayes, at St. Margarets Church, and he shall be allowed 50_l._ per annum.”—again—“March 18. 1701; Dr. Th: Little chosen Lecturer at St. Margarets Church, in the room of Mr. Fysh deceased, and to have 50_l._ per annum.”—again—“Nov. 20. 1702; Mr. Th: Pyle and Dr. Little’s stypends _augmented more_ 50_l._ _per annum each_, on Mr Jaggard’s decease.”—If we are not mistaken, there has not been afterwards any further augmentation for 60 or 70 years; when 50_l._ more were added to the minister or vicar: and the same has been added lately.—Being now brought to the close of William’s reign, and the accession of Anne, we shall here finish this section.

SECTION III.

_History of Lynn from the death of William to that of Anne—her majesty’s accession—address to her from Lynn—dangerous state of the Boale or World’s End_, _and measures adopted for its preservation—the great storm in_ 1703, _and its effects on this town—address to the throne in_ 1704—_petitions to parliament the same year_, _from the counties of Bedford and Huntingdon_, _against unreasonable and exorbitant exactions at Lynn—constructive disloyalty of our corporation—minister’s house in Webster’s Row_.

On the death of King William, Anne, the younger sister of his late queen, succeeded to the throne, by virtue of the _act of settlement_, which had passed in the preceding reign. She was proclaimed on March 8, 1701–2, a few hours after the king’s death; and her accession gave entire satisfaction to all her protestant subjects. Those of this town appeared on that occasion very conspicuous, as they were actually among those who addressed the throne within that selfsame month. We have never seen a copy of this address, but have learnt from our book of Extracts that it was dated March 30, 1702. Whether it was long or short, we know not; but there can be no doubt of its being very loyal: and, in point of style or diction we may take it for granted that it bore no small resemblance to those of succeeding years, of which we shall not fail by and by to exhibit some fair specimens.

About the time of which we are now speaking, Lynn was thought to be in some danger from the encroachment of the tide upon that point called the Boale, or world’s end; and the most effectual means that could be thought of were therefore adopted for the safety of the town.—This affair is thus noticed in the Hall books:—“Sept. 24. 1708; In pursuance of a late order wee have considered Robert Elsden’s Petition to us referred, and taken a view of the ground called the Boale or World’s End, and the lands and houses on either side, and are of opinion, that there is an absolute necessity that the said ground as it now is be preserved from being lost to sea, and for that purpose that some present meanes be considered by Jettys and Counter-shores to repell the flow and reflow the sea, without which the houses on the north side of the Mill ffleet, and consequently the town will be in great danger of ruin; and considering how necessary it is that present care be taken of the defence of the town so incumbent upon this House, which the said Elsden is in no wise able to performe, and also considering the advantage it will be to this corporation to have the duties of wharfage and groundage, stakes, mooreage and other dutys claimed and long enjoyed the owners of that ground united and made entire to this port, Wee have treated and contracted with the said Robert Elsden for the absolute purchase of the said ground and all profits and advantages thereunto belonging for the sum of 130_l._ and 20_l._ more at the end of five years if the said ground shall continue so long preserved from sea without considerable diminution.”—Then it is added—“Said Report and Articles are read and well approved by this House.” This was, no doubt, an advantageous bargain to the corporation; and as might be expected, they now set themselves in good earnest about effectually preserving their new purchase. They laid out upon it a good deal of money; of which the following memoranda occur in their books—“Sept. 29. 1704: Ordered 100_l._ to be taken up for reimbursing the chamberlain’s charges about the Jetties and defences against the sea at the Boale, or World’s End.”—again—“Jan. 12 1704–5: Ordered that Mr. Hainsworth chamberlain’s account audited at 347_l._ 8_s._ 9_d._ relating to the Boale be allowed, and that he have 10_l._ 10_s._ for his extraordinary trouble.”—This spot, we presume, has been ever since the property of the corporation, which we cannot find to have been ever the case before.

About this same time happened that dreadful national calamity, commonly called _the great storm_, the most tremendous and most disastrous, perhaps, ever experienced in this kingdom. It continued for several days but was at the highest on the 27th of November 1703. No place escaped its fury, but in some places it was most awfully terrible and destructive. It blew from the _west_, and therefore could not so much affect this coast; and at Lynn the loss it occasioned was comparatively inconsiderable; amounting to seven or eight ships, twenty or thirty hands, and damage to the houses, or buildings, computed at about 1000_l._ and the whole including the shipping to about 3000_l_, {874} which was but a trifle, compared to the losses which some other places had then sustained.

On the western coast the ravages of this storm far exceeded what they were in these eastern parts. At _Bristol_ it occasioned so high a tide as did above a 100,000_l._ damage to the merchants goods only. It also caused the _Severn_ to break down its banks, and overflow a vast tract of land, by which 15000 sheep, besides other cattle were drowned. The famous _Eddystone_ Lighthouse also, which had borne several storms unmoved, was not able to stand this. It was swept off on the tremendous night of the 27th. and nothing was to be seen the next morning but the bare rock. _Winstanley_ too, its ingenious projector and constructor, who happened then to be there, perished with the rest. {875} Soon after, on that very night, the _Winchelsea_, a homeward bound Virginia-man, split on the same rock, and most of its hands were lost.

It was computed that no less than 300 sail of ships, some of them belonging to the royal navy, were lost on different parts of out coasts, and that there were drowned then in rivers and at sea, at least 8000 persons. Between one and two hundred lost their lives by the fall of houses, chimneys, &c. and a still greater number were grievously bruised and hurt from the same causes. More than 800 dwelling houses were blown down, and barns and outhouses without number. Above 400 wind-mills were overset and destroyed; upwards of one hundred churches were uncovered, and the lead from some of their roofs blown to an incredible distance: many of their steeples and battlements were also demolished. In addition to all which, above 250,000 trees were said to be then torn up by the roots. In short the whole country for sometime after exhibited the appearance of dejection, dismay, and desolation.

The public feelings being greatly affected by this national calamity, we need not be surprized that a general _fast_ was soon after solemnly proclaimed and devoutly observed throughout the kingdom; and though we may not very readily fall in, or coincide with every idea suggested in the royal proclamation, {876} yet we cannot help looking upon that fast as much more proper and justifiable than most of those that have been observed by our countrymen ever since.—After all, what were the deplorable ravages of that great and mighty storm, compared with those of a single campaign in some of our modern wars, when myriads of human beings have miserably perished, entire provinces cruelly laid waste, and whole nations involved in utter ruin? Yet these most calamitous scenes are seldom looked upon by governments and nations as the judgments of Heaven, or what ought to lead men to serious reflection, religious humiliation, and repentance.