The History of Lynn, Vol. 2 [of 2]
Part 20
In the third mayoralty of John Cary senior, which commenced in 1765, a shocking murder was committed here by one John Rudderham, (commonly and ironically called _honest John_) for which bloody and horrid deed he was soon after tried, condemned, and executed. Such, it has been said, was the deplorable depravity and ignorance of this unhappy wretch, that he appeared not to have any sense of moral evil, or any idea of the existence of a Supreme Being, and of a future state. Though born and brought up in a christian country, and even deemed a member of a christian church, yet he was utterly ignorant of every thing belonging to christianity, as appeared from the first conversation he had with a person who attended him while under sentence of death. Being asked by that person, if he had _ever heard of the Lord Jesus Christ_? He seriously answered that he could not positively say whether he had or not: “and yet (said he) I do rather think that I have really heard something of _such a gentleman_, though I cannot now remember what it was.” It is to be feared there were a great many more here at the same time in a similar predicament, or equally ignorant. Yet, if we are not misinformed, a motion made, about that period, to establish here a school for the instruction of poor children, was actually negatived, as a needless and useless measure, and what might prove inimical to social order, and destructive of all intellectual distinction between rich and poor, gentlemen and plebeians. It is pleasing to contemplate that our higher powers were actuated by better and nobler ideas latterly, when the Lancasterian school was proposed and established. May this prove the dawn of a more liberal and brighter day.
In 1768, during the mayoralty of Charles Turner, which commenced the preceding year, the town was much agitated by a very violent contested election, chiefly between Sir John Turner bart. and Crisp Molineaux Esq; for the honourable Thomas Walpole Esq. the other candidate, was apparently pretty sure of gaining his election. He was accordingly returned, and Sir John along with him, owing, as one of our MS. narratives suggests, to the bribing exertions of a certain eminent merchant, who expended 7000_l._ and upwards on the occasion. It was, however, the last time Sir John was returned for this town: Molineaux was returned along with Walpole at the next general election. After all, it seems to have been a very foolish business; for this same candidate does not appear to have been a person of any character, or who was endowed with such talents or qualifications as could recommend him for a senator in preference to Turner. Such has been, however, too often the case in our contested elections.
This is supposed to have been the greatest of all our Contested Elections, except that very memorable one in 1747, which probably far exceeded every thing of the kind ever known here. As the particulars of it were little known to the present writer, till his observations on the preceding reign had been printed off, he hopes the reader will excuse his giving some account of it here, though somewhat out of place. The opposition was chiefly aimed against Sir John Turner, the same, seemingly, that was opposed in the last mentioned contest, and father of the present Lady Folkes. His opponent was William Folkes Esq. father of the present Sir Martin. He is said to have been a very respectable man, though he was charged on this occasion with breach of a promise made to Lord Orford, not to stand candidate at that time for this town. What foundation there was for such a charge, or how the case really stood, it may be now difficult, or, perhaps, impossible to determine.
Though the prejudice against Turner was strong and extensive, and the opposition fierce and violent, yet he gained his election; but he was thought to owe it less to his own interest and management than to the favour and influence of the Walpoles, who were supposed to have greatly befriended him in that instance. At the close of the poll the numbers were—for _Walpole_ 199; for _Turner_ 184; for _Folkes_ 131. The following Extract of a Letter written at that very time by a person of much wit and shrewdness, and who was an eye witness of the whole scene, will give the reader a striking, and we presume a just idea of the state of this town during that turbulent contest. Whether or not we are still capable of the like excesses, or extravagances, is a question that may not be unworthy of very serious consideration. It is to be wished it might he answered in the _negative_.
“Since you left us,” (says the Letter-writer alluded to,) “we’ve had a Contested Election, and perhaps as violent an one as any in England where the affair was not carried to bloodshed. I will be very particular in my account of it because ’twill amuse you.—The sudden bringing on the Elections all over England was a wise thing. As soon as ’twas known here that members were to be elected in about 3 weeks time, people of the lower sort got together in the Evenings in clusters, talking, how little good *** did to the town, &c.—This set a spirit agoing, and in 2 or 3 nights, they met about xxxv of ’em, at an alehouse, with C— P—t drunk at the head of them, whom they would fain have for a m—r of p—t. C—s treated the company, and the next morning gave them a whet, met ’em again in the evening, and the next evening, and then had shewn spite enough to *** whom he hates, to make it necessary for them to look about ’em. But where should they look? *** was in Gl—rshire with his wife, who was every moment expecting to cry out, and had sent a Letter, hoping to be chosen without coming at all. L—d O. was at H—n and his cousin H—’s son being the person that was to stand with S—r J—, my L—d was applied to, by our gentlemen, to let him know that the people grew rude and clamorous, and that unless somebody appeared, and care was taken of them, they feared Mr. F—s might be induced to give ’em some trouble, by becoming a candidate. My L—d told them there was no fear of that, for he had a Letter from Mr. F—s the post before, utterly disclaiming any design of that sort, which Letter he shewed them. So they all came away satisfied. Notwithstanding their satisfaction, and the good grounds any body would have thought they had for it, within 4 days after this F—s came down, and was introduced by A. T—, Dr. B—, H. F—, J. F—, J—n M—r, and several more, in coaches, chaises, &c. several 100 horsemen, Flags, Guns, Drums, and all the Racket that could possibly be made. Neither T— nor W— were here, and all were in distraction. Expresses were sent. L—d O. got here that night. S— J— could not possibly get here of two days and half. So on the Saturday night he came, and the Election was to be on the Monday. From the time of F—s setting out from London, the Public Houses were opened, and continued so; so that here was nothing but men and women and children drunk, old women especially, wallowing about the streets, and half of ’em with their backsides exposed to public view, and fellows a clapping of ’em.”
By this time every one must clearly see what a Bedlam of a place Lynn was, during this electioneering bustle. Our Letter-writer, no doubt, gives a pretty faithful and correct picture of what then occurred; on which account some of our readers will be desirous of hearing him further: but as his description now occasionally becomes somewhat coarse, if not indelicate, we shall place the remainder of the extract below, that those who wish to see more of it may have an opportunity to gratify themselves. {950} We shall now return from this digression, and resume the thread of our history.
Though Sir John Turner gained his election, as one of our parliamentary representatives, in his contest with Molineaux, and was sometime after chosen mayor of this town; yet his influence here soon appeared to be fast declining. His friends in the Hall resigned and withdrew, one after another, till the interest of that family became at last quite annihilated, after having been very great, and almost unrivalled, for a whole century. But there is nothing strange or wonderful in this. It is the usual course of things in this world. Families, as well as nations and empires, have their day, beyond which they cannot extend their power, or their greatness.
About the year 1769 our corporation had a great lawsuit with a Mr. Carr of Massingham, father of our late merchant of that name. But they lost their cause; owing, as it has been suggested, to the perjury of one of Carr’s principal witnesses. The suit is said to have been brought on to oblige the corporation to open and scour the Fleet from Salter’s Sluice to Littleport-bridge, which was necessary for the accommodation of the plaintiff, who had granaries contiguous to that fleet. The corporation, on their part, pleaded that the flood-door of the bridge had been put down a hundred years before, and therefore that the requisition could not be binding upon them. But the said witness, who was only 56 years old, swore that he had in his youth, for the sake of robbing an orchard, swam over, near Salter’s clough, when the water there was ten feet deep. This satisfied the jury, and determined them to give their verdict against the corporation. They were consequently obliged to clear and open the said fleet; and it has been kept so ever since; which seems very proper and necessary. But supposing it really true, that the work had been neglected, and the fleet suffered to silt and fill up for a whole century; still, even that very neglect must have been the fault of the corporation, who are bound to keep the fleets open; so that they could not be justified in resisting Mr. Carr’s requisition. To have removed the nuisance, at once, instead of going to law, had been far more creditable.
About the year 1770, a very unusual and marvellous phenomenon appeared here; which was no other than a violent patriotic spirit, or what in more recent times, or modern cant, would have been denominated _Jacobinism_. Our Gentlemen seemed then, all of a sudden, to have become mighty admirers of liberty, and of _John Wilkes_. That redoubted champion of freedom was soon invited to this town, and actually honoured it with his patriotic presence in February 1771, to the no small joy of our body corporate, who received him with open arms, entertained him most sumptuously, and conferred upon him the freedom of this ancient borough. All this was very well. We do not mean to blame them for it. But it was very different from the treatment, or reception, which another patriot, of no less virtue and respectability, met with here at a subsequent period. We mean _Thelwall_, who visited us some years ago, for the purpose of promulgating the principles of political liberty and genuine patriotism. But those principles, by that time, were become so very unfashionable and disreputable here, that the patriotic lecturer could get no hearing; and he was glad to escape with a whole skin and unbroken bones. The politicks of _William Pitt_ had now completely superseded those of _John Wilkes_. So the world goes: what is sound doctrine, at one time, is heresy and sedition, and even blasphemy and treason, at another.
At the time of which we have been last speaking, our dispute with the American patriots had made considerable progress: and it might be supposed that as this town appeared so decidedly and warmly in favour of Wilkes, it would have appeared no less so in favour of the Americans. But it happened far otherwise. We eagerly caressed Wilkes, and openly espoused his cause, but towards the oppressed and much injured Americans we appeared very differently affected. During that long and unhappy dispute, and the unjust and bloody war that ensued, no measure was here adopted expressive of abhorrence, or even of disapprobation of the course taken by our government; or yet of concern and commiseration for the unmerited sufferings of our transatlantic brethren. How much more honourable and dignified had it been to have acted differently, and boldly borne our testimony against the injustice and folly of our own government, and in behalf of the reasonable and well-founded claims of the colonists? How respectable, in that case, would Lynn have now appeared among its sister boroughs, when the whole reasonable and enlightened world, with one voice, is reprobating that dispute, and that war, as the undoubted offspring of the most tyrannic disposition, or the most perfect insanity? {955} Nor is it at all improbable that impartial posterity will consider our subsequent wars, and not a few of our public transactions, as having actually sprung from the same parentage.
Soon after the commencement of the American War the great maritime powers discovered a strong disposition to favour the resistance of the colonists, which gave us no small offence; so that by degrees things came to an open rupture between this country and those powers. France, Spain, and Holland, accordingly, became parties in the contest; and the northern armed neutrality, with the general aspect of all other nations, pretty plainly shewed that there was scarcely a single state throughout Christendom, but what decidedly and heartily reprobated the part we were acting. It was therefore no wonder that the American war did prove unsuccessful, and eventually terminate in the discomfiture and disgrace of this country; and even stamp upon our counsels indelible and eternal infamy.
The effect of the war with America, and with the European powers before mentioned, was severely felt at Lynn. Our trade was much cramped, many of our ships were captured, our sailors were reduced mostly to old men and lads, by those guardians of the constitution, and demonstrators of the unalienableness of our rights, and reality of our freedom, the _press gangs_. These myrmidons, when any of our young and best sailors fell in their way, if they did not tamely submit to be taken, would pursue them like wild beasts, and, when they came up with them, would knock them on the head, like dogs, with their bludgeons, and then drag them with the utmost indignity to the house of rendezvous, or on board the tender. There the poor fellows were left to cool, and compose themselves: and the very next day, perhaps, would be heard singing, in the house of their captivity, “Rule Britannia;” and “Britons never will be slaves.” It may be well for the nation, or, at least, for its rulers, that the ideas of our sea-faring people, respecting liberty and thraldom, are considerably different from those of some other people.—Being now come to the end of the first twenty years of this reign, we shall here close the present section.
SECTION IX.
_Lynn armed Association—termination of the American War—independence of the United States acknowledged and confirmed—peace restored and established among all the belligerent powers—King’s illness and recovery_—_View of the state of this town from that period to the present time_.
The situation of this country, engaged in a foolish, fruitless, ruinous, and infamous war with its own colonies, at the distance of more than a thousand leagues, and involved afterwards in a desperate struggle with its great maritime neighbours, became very critical, and excited considerable alarm throughout the kingdom. Great fears were entertained of an invasion, and means of defence against such an attempt were resorted to. The Irish, deprived of the military force that used to be stationed in their country, armed themselves for their own protection, at their own expense. The like was done in many parts of England; and Lynn adopted the same measure. The Lynn Volunteers, or armed association, amounted to about 120, {957} and were commanded in chief by _Captain Thomas Day_, whose name we have had occasion to mention more than once in some of the preceding pages.
This gentleman’s military knowledge and talents were generally allowed to be superior to those of any other of our townsmen, and his unassuming demeanor, and conciliating manners eminently fitted him for the chief command of this corps. The officers and men, accordingly, became greatly attached to him, and the utmost harmony subsisted among them, to the very last. During the whole time they were imbodied, the behaviour of the men, in the town, was very proper and commendable, and quite to the satisfaction of the inhabitants; which redounded much to the credit of the officers, and particularly the commandant, whose orders and example would not fail to contribute largely to the regularity or correctness of their deportment. This respectable and memorable little band was formed and organized in 1779, and continued till sometime after the expiration of the war; for it was not disbanded till 1785, when its constituents, relinquishing the military character, mixed once more with the great mass of unarmed citizens; conscious, it may be presumed, of having so acquitted themselves as to merit the approbation and applause of their contemporaries, and of posterity.—Of these patriot-soldiers some further notice may be taken when we shall have to notice our more recent and more numerous volunteer armaments.
Peace was restored among all the belligerent powers in 1783, when the independence of the resisting colonies, now called the _United States_ of America, was acknowledged and confirmed. The American war ended, as all such unjust wars ought to end, in the disappointment and discomfiture of the aggressors. But had our government, and our nation possessed a proper degree of virtue, or conscience, they would certainly have expressed both shame and remorse, after the contest was over, and when they had time calmly to reflect upon the part they had acted in that most unjustifiable and detestable business. Nothing however of that kind did appear. On the contrary we sat down very demurely and composedly, without the least apparent feeling of contrition, sorrow, or self-reproach; like _Solomon’s adulterous woman_, who eat, and wiped her mouth, and said, “I have done no wickedness.” {959}
The impenitent spirit which our government and nation manifested at the close of the American war, could furnish no reason to hope that it was the last scene of folly and iniquity in which our rulers would engage: and if any did actually cherish such a hope, they must long ago have been convinced that it was altogether vain and groundless. All our subsequent wars, state policy, and maxims of government have but too plainly indicated that we have acted ever since, almost invariably, under the guidance of that same Evil Genius that so eggregiously misled, befooled, and governed us, during the whole American dispute and war, and which had before involved us in the guilt of exterminating the poor hapless Caribbs, as well as in that of other unjustifiable and criminal deeds previously to those events.
Some of our pretended longsighted, as well as long-headed politicians affected to foresee and foretell a very long season of uninterrupted tranquillity succeeding the peace of 1783. But it proved all a dream: for we have been most of the time since at war; and such a war too as we never experienced before. It has proved most miserably unsuccessful and disastrous; and is now in a fair way of saddling upon us at last an unexampled debt of _a thousand millions_! {960a}—Such an enormous sum as the whole coinage of the universe could not discharge.—This is a frightful prospect; but we will now turn to other objects.—But before we quit the year 1783 we may just observe that a most atrocious robbery was then committed on a Jew lad, about 16 years old, of the name of _Isaac Levi_, on the road between Lynn and Westwinch, by one _Robert Fox_, whoso ill treated the poor Jew as to leave him apparently dead; for which the robber was sometime after, (September 7th.) hanged on Hardwick common, near the place where the villanous and shocking deed had been perpetrated. {960b}
In 1784 we had here another contested Election, which, however, in point of violence was much inferior to those of 1768 and 1747. Mr. Fountaine of Narford was now the new candidate, whose character, certainly, was no way inferior to that of either of his opponents. But he lost his election, though he had a respectable number of voters, and the old members, Walpole and Molineux were again returned, than whom no two men had perhaps less distinguished themselves in the preceding parliament, or appeared less worthy to be re-elected. But they suited the taste and humour of the majority of their constituents, and especially of some two or three or few men who had the chief share or influence in their appointment. Our parliamentary representation is a very fine thing in theory, but in practice it is often found far otherwise.
But though this Election was conducted with decency and moderation, in comparison with those of 1768 and 47, yet it was attended with circumstances not a little disgraceful to the dispositions and characters of some of the leading actors, particularly on the victorious side. The aristocratic spirit and malignant passions were but too apparent; and not a few of the minor or unsuccessful party were made long to feel the resentment and vindictiveness of their powerful opponents, who were not much disposed to suffer the infallibility of their judgment to be questioned, or allow any with impunity to disapprove the objects of their choice or nomination. But this intolerance, and especially resentment and vindictiveness, must, most assuredly, be highly criminal and iniquitous on such occasions, since every voter, even the very poorest, has an undoubted right to give his voice freely for the candidate or candidates whom he deems most worthy of his suffrage. Whoever deprives a freeman of this privilege uses him worse than a highwayman.
Not only the electors of the poorer sort, who had voted for Mr. Fountaine, and lived in the town, suffered in consequence of having exercised their just rights on that occasion, but even the richer ones did not entirely escape: for those of them who held lands of the corporation were now deprived of the same, as well as of every other privilege which lay in the power of their revengeful opponents. This was carrying things with a high hand. After all, it may be no great wonder that our corporation should be still tenacious of having the representatives of their town to be men of their own nomination and choosing, considering that no one formerly, or till within these 170 years, _except those of the Hall_, appear to have had any share or concern in the appointment or election of those who represented this borough in parliament. {962}
It is, indeed generally supposed that matters are now here on a much fairer and more rational footing; but that, perhaps, will not appear very clearly when we advert to the well known truth and fact, that out modern members for the most part, owe their senatorial honour and elevation solely to the will and pleasure, or power and influence of some two or three families or individuals. Such, however, is but two often the practical character of our boasted system of parliamentary representation.