Part 22

The year 1799 was rendered somewhat remarkable here by an attempt to establish a Newspaper, under the name of the _Lynn and Wisbech Packet_; but it did not finally succeed, though persevered in for several years. Lynn seems not favourably situated for the success of such an undertaking, placed as it is in a corner of the country, and the adjacent parts well supplied with provincial papers of established repute and extensive circulation. It was therefore, perhaps, a rash and hopeless attempt, so that its relinquishment at last need not to excite any great surprise. The projector hoped, when he resolved to try this experiment, that it would prove a source of much gain, but he found in the end that what he gained by it was only a pretty heavy loss, which placed him in the list of unfortunate adventurers. {982}

But what rendered this year still more remarkable and memorable, both here and throughout the kingdom, was the origination, introduction, and operation of the _income tax_, which now took place and will not be soon forgotten. In former times this odious tax would have been very unwelcome in this country, and probably deemed intolerable by the whole nation. The people would have thought themselves degraded to the lowest degree, in being obliged to appear before certain of their own neighbours, in the character of commissioners, and there disclose upon oath the amount of their property and means of subsistence, in order to empower the tax-gatherers to take from them a tenth part of their yearly income, for the purpose of supporting and pursuing measures which many of them utterly disapproved. This vile impost was indeed doubly detestable, as it not only sunk the subjects below the rank of freemen, but also laid before them a strong incitement to falshood and perjury, and was, in all probability, the means of greatly increasing our national guilt and depravity. But these were considerations that weighed but little with the minister and his associates. An increasing revenue was with them of infinitely greater importance.—On the 2nd. of June this year, a pleasure boat going off from _Heacham_ to a vessel lying in Lynn channel overset, and out of fourteen persons, who were on board, men women and children, twelve unfortunately perished.—This year also, from continued rains, the harvest was not got in, in some parts of Norfolk till the beginning of November; and in some parts of the kingdom some corn lay rotting in the fields at the beginning of December: a like instance had not occurred before for 40 or 50 years.

[Picture: East Gate Lynn: taken down in 1800]

One of the most memorable of the Lynn occurrences in 1800, was the taking down the _East-gates_, which had stood many centuries, and made a somewhat venerable appearance. They had been for sometime a subject of complaint on account of the difficulty of entrance for highloaded waggons, by reason of the lowness of the arch. This act of dilapidation therefore was a case of necessity, and the removal of a nuisance, and it rendered that entrance into the town much pleasanter than before.—But an occurrence of this year which far more affected the public mind, in this town, as well as throughout the kingdom, was the regicide attempt of the maniac Hadfield on the evening of the 15th. of May, at Drury Lane theatre. The poor insane wretch fired a horse-pistol towards the king’s box just as his majesty entered it, but fortunately missed him, owing it seems to a person near him, with great presence of mind, raising his arm when in the act of firing, and so directing the contents of the pistol to the roof of the house. This shocking deed occasioned no small consternation in the house; but it soon subsided, and the play went on to the entire satisfaction and amusement of the whole company, the royal family not excepted.

The news of this horrid attempt upon the king’s life, and of his happy escape, deeply affected the minds of his Lynn subjects, from whom no less than two addresses were soon after presented to his majesty on the occasion; one from the mayor and _corporation_, and the other from the mayor and the _inhabitants_. {984} Both of them were penned in a language perfectly dutiful and loyal, which, without doubt, was expressed with the utmost truth and sincerity. The same may also be said of all the numerous addresses which then reached the throne, from all quarters; which proves the sovereign’s great popularity, and how high he stood in the estimation of his addressing subjects. His successor it is to be hoped will prove himself no less deserving of his people’s attachment.

Since the year 1800, and the commencement of the present century, nothing more remarkable is known to have occurred here than what has been produced by the operation of new taxes and new laws—especially our _poor_ and _paving_ laws. {985} These certainly have borne and are still bearing hard upon a large portion of the industrious inhabitants. Of these matters some notice has been taken already, and they will probably be further noticed when we come to give a view of the _present state_ of the town. Such remarkable occurrences as the author may be able to recollect, or any one else may put him in mind of, as having been overlooked in the preceding pages, shall be carefully inserted in a _Chronological Table_ at the end of the work.—Having now brought this history down to _the present time_, we shall here close this section.

SECTION X.

_Biographical sketches of some of the most eminent or distinguished personages among the natives or inhabitants of Lynn_, _from the reformation to the present day—Watts—Arrowsmith—Goodwin—Horne—Phelpes—Falkner—Goddard_.

In the list of persons of real note, or memorable distinction who appeared since the reformation among the natives or inhabitants of this town, the first place, in order of time, seems to belong to _William Watts_, said to have been a native of this borough, or its vicinity. The time of his birth is not recorded, but is supposed to have been about the close of the reign of Elizabeth. He probably received the rudiments of his education in the Grammar school of this town, which was from 1597 to 1608 under the care of _Mr. John Man_, afterwards minister of South Lynn, and from 1608 to 1612 or 13, under that of _Mr. Henry Allston_. He was afterwards sent to Caius College in Cambridge, where he appears to have made great proficiency, and to have finished his academical education. He then went and made some stay at Oxford; after which he travelled, as Anthony Wood says, into several countries, and became master of divers languages. In his travels he is supposed to have made his chief stay in Holland, where he became acquainted with the celebrated _John Gerard Vossius_, who entertained a very favourable and high opinion of him, and spoke of him as _doctissimus et clarissimus Watsius_, _qui optime de historia meruit_. At his return, after the accession of Charles I, he was made one of the king’s chaplains, and preferred successively to livings and dignities in the church. Being, as might be expected, a zealous royalist, and adhering firmly to the king’s cause, he was sequestered, plundered, and left without a shelter for his wife and children. He was carried by his courage and resentment into the field with prince Rupert, during the hardiest of his exploits; and died, in 1649, on board his fleet, in the harbour of Kinsale. He had an especial hand, says Wood, in Sir Henry Spelman’s Glossary; he edited Matthew Paris, and, exclusively of other treatises, he published, before the civil war of England began, several numbers of new books, in the English tongue, (more than forty,) containing the occurrences in the wars between the king of Sweden and the Germans. When he returned from his travels, Newspapers were very little known in this country. They had first appeared in the reign of Elizabeth, under the sage direction of Burleigh; but they were published only occasionally, and were all extraordinary gazettes. They appeared frequently about the time of the armada, and are supposed to have then answered very important purposes. Being no longer deemed necessary when that danger was past, they were discontinued. The public curiosity having been much gratified by these publications, the people would be no longer satisfied without a newspaper. It was therefore not long before publications of that kind began to make their appearance. They were at first occasional, and afterwards weekly. “_Nathaniel Butter_, at the Pyde-Bull, St. Augustin’s gate,” established a weekly newspaper, in August 1622, entitled “The certain news of the present week.” How long he continued his hebdomadal intelligences does not appear. He is said to have laid little before his readers, which could enlarge knowledge, or excite risibility; though his battles may have surprised and elevated, and his sieges may have alternately agitated the hopes and fears of his countrymen. He had, however, competitors and imitators. In February 1635–6 was first published a fresh paper of Weekly Newes. The foreign intelligence of May 22, was conveyed in number 13. This too was a small quarto of 14 pages; and it was printed in London, for Mercurius Britannicus; which proves sufficiently that that well known title had a more early origin than has been generally supposed. Similar papers were continued, though they assumed different names. Butter, who appears to have been the most active and enterprising newsmonger of his time, was influenced by his interest to tell—

“News, old news, and such news as you never heard of.”

He was thus induced to convert his Weekly News into _half-yearly news_, (two of which making a kind of _annual register_) which shews that he was a person of no common enterprize. In order to insure success to so novel an undertaking, an able compiler seemed absolutely necessary; and Butter very judiciously fixed upon Watts for that department. He accordingly complied with the projector’s proposal, and so became the precursor of _Johnson_, _Burke_, _Kippis_, _Southey_, and the rest of our distinguished literary characters, who have been since employed in similar departments. How long he continued thus employed we have not been able to discover; but it is probably it might be till near the commencement of the civil wars: and as he was likely to have distinguished himself, in the mean time, as a warm, and perhaps violent advocate for the measures of the court, it may in some measure account for the hardship and severity which he and his family afterwards experienced from the opposite party, by the hands of the sequestrators. Be that as it might, William Watts was certainly a person so distinguished in his day, as to deserve to have his name preserved among the most eminent characters that sprung up here during the period we are now reviewing.

2. _John Arrowsmith_ M.A. Fellow of Catherine Hall, in Cambridge, afterwards D.D., Master of St. John’s College, and member of the Westminster Assembly of Divines. Where he was born we have not been able to learn; but he came to this town about Michaelmas 1630, being then chosen minister of St. Nicholas’ chapel, in which capacity he continued during the whole time of his residence here, which was fourteen years. The town allowed him a salary of 100_l._ a year, which must have been equal to 6 or 700_l._ of our money. He was also allowed a house to live in, or 5_l._ a year in lieu of it, which would pay a house-rent now of between 30 and 40_l._ a year. It appears that he was treated here, during the whole of his residence, with singular and universal respect; from which it may be inferred that he came well recommended, conducted himself with great prudence and propriety, and that his ministerial labours were highly acceptable. Yet Arrowsmith evidently belonged to the puritans, a party for which Lynn was never understood to entertain any particular predilection. How far his ministry contributed to prepare the town for the new order of things which took place in consequence of the siege, and with which the generality of the inhabitants appeared very compliable, we have not the means of ascertaining. But whatever might be the political tendency of his public labours here, their being highly acceptable to his hearers seems very clear and undeniable. For though he and the principal cotemporary minister of St. Margaret’s had several assistants, {990a} who performed the parts assigned to them on Sundays and week days with good acceptance, yet the present writer has in his hands sufficient documents {990b} to prove that he stood above them all in the public estimation. It is therefore presumed that we are fully warranted in placing him among the most eminent of the inhabitants of this town during the said period. The historian Neal speaks of him as a person “of unexceptionable character for learning and piety;” and further says, that “he was an accute disputant, and a judicious divine, as appears by his _Tactica Sacra_, a book of great reputation in those times.” He died before the restoration, and therefore his name does not appear in _Calamy_ and _Rastrick’s lists of ejected ministers_.

Before we take our final leave of Dr. Arrowsmith, it may not be improper to apprize the reader of two persons whom the town successively fixed upon to occupy the vacant place of principal minister of St. Nicholas, immediately previous to their making choice of him. These, as appears to the present writer, were no other than the two _Goodwins_, _Thomas_ and _John_, who became so famous and distinguished afterwards among the English nonconformists. In a document or record above alluded to, and extracted probably from the Hall-Books, the following passage occurs.—“1629, 12 June; Mr. Mayor and Mr. Tho. Gurlyn, aldn. travel to Cambridge to move Mr. Tho. Goodwin A.M. to come hither to (be) preacher in ys town, and Mr. M. A. CC elected sd. Mr. G. if he will accept thereof.” But he did not accept of their invitation, owing probably to his having been previously chosen lecturer of Trinity church in Cambridge, of which he afterwards became vicar. {993}

Having failed in their application to him, their next choice fell on John Goodwin, afterwards, if we are not mistaken, the noted minister of Coleman street, and the far-famed champion of arminianism and republicanism. He also was a Cambridge man, and had been Fellow of Queen’s College ever since 1617. He and Tho. Goodwin were both Norfolk men, and also near relations, if the present writer is not misinformed. But surely no two relations—not even Herbert Marsh and William Frend, could be more unlike one another. Thomas was a high supralapsarian Calvinist, and, of course, mortally hated Arminianism: John, on the other hand, was a decided Arminian, and one of its most redoubtable champions; and therefore held Calvinism in the utmost abhorrence. His firm and successful opposition to that system is said to have saved him at the restoration from utter ruin, in which his antimonarchical and republican productions would have inevitably involved him, when one or more of his books, together with some of _Milton’s_, were burnt by the common hangman:—a poor way, by the bye, to refute their contents, or arguments.

3. _John Goodwin_ when invited to Lynn held the living of _Rainham_ in the same county: yet he accepted that invitation, took up his residence here, and became the successor of Mr. Nic. Price, as chief minister of St. Nicholas’ chapel. But his settlement here was not long, scarcely exceeding one year; for he was chosen July 31. 1629—acceded to that choice on the 10th of the next month, and within a year, or very little more, from that period, he was, as the MS. says, _inhibited for preaching here_, [by the _bishop_ we presume; but _on_ what account does not appear;] and Dr. Arrowsmith was appointed to succeed him, at the michaelmas following, i.e. 1630, for further particulars concerning him, the reader is referred to the historians of the succeeding period, and to our general biographers. {994} With all his singularities and imperfections, he must have been in his day a very considerable and highly distinguished character.

4. _John Horne_—was another of our townsmen of former times, whose name deserves to be rescued from oblivion, and retained in the memory of the inhabitants. He was born at _Long Sutton_, _Lincolnshire_, in 1615; and educated at Trinity College in Cambridge, where he had Henry Hall B.D. for his tutor. He probably went into orders before 1640; and we are told that he _preached first at Sutton St. James_, in his native neighbourhood. It has been also supposed that he had afterwards a curacy at or near _Bullingbrook_, in the same county, and it seems somewhat probable that he married during his residence at that place. {995} Be that as it might, it is certain that his stay there was not very long, for he took up his residence at Lynn in 1646, {996} where he continued ever after to the day of his death, which was full thirty years. His coming hither was in consequence of having obtained the living or vicarage of Allhallows, or All-saints, in South Lynn, where he succeeded Mr. _John Man_, whom we noticed before, at p. 702 of this work, and who had resided here, first as _usher_, then _master_ of the Grammar School, and afterwards as _vicar of South Lynn_, for the long space of between 50 and 60 years. {997a}

Having obtained the vicarage of South Lynn Allhallows, in 1646, Mr. H. continued in the faithful and diligent discharge of his duty there till 1662, when the _act of uniformity_, which took effect on _Bartholomew day_ that year, {997b} rendered his situation there no longer tenable. He was then ejected from his vicarage of Allhallows in this town, as were also above 2000 worthy clergymen in different parts of the kingdom, to the great discouragement of integrity and piety, and the eternal disgrace of the rulers in church and state. A very respectable biographer and memorialist speaks of Mr. Horne as follows—“He was an _Arminian_ in the point of redemption, and contended earnestly for the universality of it; but did not either believe or teach, that men may therefore live as they list, because Christ died for them; but taught that Christ therefore ‘died for all, that they which live should no longer live unto themselves, but unto him that died for them and rose again.’ 2 Cor. v. 14, 15. He was a man of most exemplary and primitive piety, and blameless conversation; very ready in the scriptures; excellently skilled in the oriental tongues, and very laborious in his private capacity after he was cast out of his living. He went constantly to church, and yet preached _thrice_ at his own house every Lord’s day; first, in the morning before sermon; then after dinner, before church-time; and again in the evening. On the other days of the week, beside lecture-sermons, he constantly expounded the scriptures in order twice a day, to all that would come to hear him, as some always did. {998} He was a man of great charity, commonly emptying his pocket of what money he had in it amongst the poor, when he went into the town. He was of great compassion and tenderheartedness towards such as were in any affliction; a man of wonderfull meekness, patience, and dispassionateness; and was generally very much honoured and esteemed for his goodness, both in town and country.” We need no further proof of his being held here in high and general esteem, than that he was suffered to live in the town, and exercise his ministry, for the whole fourteen years he resided here after his ejection, and which was perhaps the very worst part of the persecuting and detestable reign of Charles II. Some old people used to say some years ago, that his lecturing or preaching place was in some obscure alley about Black-goose Street. However that was, Mr. Horne may justly be considered as the _father of the Lynn Dissenters_: nor need they be ashamed to own him as such. Beside his other labours, which were so very abundant, his labours as a _writer_ were by no means inconsiderable. Mr. _Palmer_ has preserved the titles of _near thirty publications_, of different sizes, of which he was the author; {999} which shews how active he was in employing his pen, as well as his tongue, in promoting what he deemed useful and profitable instruction. On the whole, it may be pretty safely concluded that such a union of laboriousness, conscientiousness, and piety, as appeared in the person of Mr. Horne, was scarce ever witnessed in any minister of this town, either before or since his time. His memory therefore ought to be very highly honoured. He died here on the 14th of December 1676, aged 61. His wife survived him near ten years. She died May 24. 1686, aged 73. What family they had we are unable to say. One Son, named _Thomas_, died about two years before the father, at the age of 28: and we are inclined to think there was another son, of both the father’s names, who long survived his parents, and that this son was no other than the afterwards famous master of the Lynn grammar school, who may be justly called _the Dr. Busby of this town_. That he exercised over his pupils so severe a discipline as that of the celebrated master of Westminster School, is what we will not take upon us to affirm—nor yet that he educated an equal number of eminent men; but in the assiduity with which he executed his charge there must have been a strong resemblance, and especially in the length of time he continued at the head of his seminary, for he held the mastership of the Lynn grammar school upwards of fifty years. He must therefore have been notable and eminent in his day among the inhabitants of this town. On which account, whether he was the son of the former John Horne, or not, he is entitled to some notice in the present list.

5. _John Horne junr._ A.M. (of the University of Cambridge, as it is supposed) was born in 1644. So that in case he was the son of the former, he must have been born about two years before his father settled in this town, which will very well agree with the former supposition, of his being previously married, while he resided at, or near Bullingbrook. After he left the university, the subject of the present article was for some time _usher_ of the Grammar School at Norwich, whence he was invited to become _master_ of that at Lynn. This was in 1678: whereupon he removed hither, and continued at the head of this school above 50 years; so that it may pretty safely be concluded that he educated a far greater number of pupils than any other master in this town. He died in 1732. aged 88, and was buried in St. Nicholas’ chapel, close to the grave of the other John Horne; which, together with his refraining from going into orders, may corroborate the opinion of his being the son of that worthy and memorable man. {1001a} However that was, he appears to have been a person of a very respectable character, who faithfully served his generation, and deserved well of his cotemporaries and of posterity; {1001b} which, it is to be feared, is more than can be said of all, or every one of his successors.