The Castle, Cathedral, and churches
already described are the chief antiquities of the city, but
other remains are worthy of notice, and have been described by
Blomefield, Kirkpatrick, Taylor, Harrod, S. Woodward, B. B.
Woodward, the Rev. R. Hart of Catton, R. Fitch, Esq., and other
antiquaries, who have explored every part of the old city.
They nearly all agree in their accounts of the rise and progress
of Norwich, and of its condition at different periods.
THE
ANCIENT CITY.
B. B. Woodward, Esq., F.S.A., delivered two lectures on
“Norwich in the Olden Time,” to the members of the
Church of England Young Men’s Society, at the Assembly
Rooms, some years since. He showed a thorough knowledge of
all the previous authorities, with whom he sometimes
differed. He exhibited four large maps, presenting views of
the Old City at different periods, from A.D. 400 to A.D. 1400. He stated that he had
derived the greater part of his materials for them from the
series of maps of ancient Norwich made by his father, the late
Mr. S. Woodward, but he had corrected and completed them from the
publications of various Archæological Societies since they
had been constructed, and he hoped that they would serve to
illustrate the growth and progress of the ancient city with
general fidelity to facts. Directing attention to the first
map, which represented the condition of the Venta
Icenorum, A.D. 400, Mr.
Woodward pointed out the purely fictitious character of the
earliest accounts of Norwich to be found in the older historians,
who drew, in all good faith, on their fertile imaginations, and
both persuaded themselves that they were writing history, and
that they were believed to be doing so by others.
The old-established tradition, that the sea came up to
Norwich, he stated, was undoubtedly to be accepted, but not as
having occurred within the historic period. From various
facts, and particularly from the occurrence of a Roman road at
Wangford, near Bungay, near the edge of the present stream,
he concluded that in the times of the Romans, the valleys of the
Eastern Counties did not present a very different aspect from
their present one, though of course where there was now meadow,
marsh existed formerly, and many small streams have
disappeared. Mr. Woodward, on this point, differed entirely
from all the local historians and antiquarians, and his opinion
is not supported by any evidence. The existence of a Roman
road at Wangford, near Bungay, if such there be, has nothing to
do with the river Yare. Mr. Woodward offered no proof that
it is a Roman road. All the local historians state that a
broad arm of the sea flowed up to Norwich till the 11th century,
when Sweyn came up with a great fleet and landed an army
here. Parochial records prove that the river came up to St.
Lawrence Steps at a later period. We may therefore dismiss
this singular opinion as untenable.
Mr. Woodward regarded Norwich as the Venta Icenorum of
the Romans for several reasons, and particularly because it was
plain from the occurrence of these Ventas in Britain, and none in
any other part of the Roman world, that this was the name of a
British town, which its being called the Venta of the Iceni
strongly confirmed—even, in fact, a British stronghold,
constructed according to the custom of that people in parts of
the country without hills. In hilly countries the
strongholds were entrenchments round the summits of the hills,
but then there were small tracts of land surrounded by
marshes. Such were the British strongholds on Bungay
Common, and that at Horning, and such he believed was
the Venta Icenorum. They were not intended for
permanent occupation, but as places of safety for their wives and
children, and for their cattle, in case of the attack of another
tribe; and they could rarely be held against the enemy for any
length of time. In this instance, the trench was drawn in a
horse-shoe form, from the eastern slope of the ground on which
the Castle now stands to the western side, the steep bank of the
little stream, called the Cockey, being rendered more steep by
art, whilst the Wensum and marshes protected the other
sides. The position of the Roman camp, as the map showed,
was determined by its being the fittest for keeping in check the
Iceni of Venta, and preventing them from marching
against the southern part of the island; and it might probably
have been placed there after the disastrous experiment of what
the Iceni could do under such a leader as their famous
Queen Boadicea. In the latter part of the Roman period it
would seem that the conquerors had less occasion for mere
military force here, for the remains of a Roman villa had been
found in the northern side of the camp at Caister.
Mr. Woodward said the Map of Norfolk still showed traces of
Roman roads radiating from Norwich. The principal roads
were—one entering the stronghold in the western side, now
St. Stephen’s Street; another entering it on the east, now
known as King Street. This last crossed the river by a ford
at Fyebridge, and was the origin of Magdalen Street and St.
Augustine’s Street; another road left the fortress on the
western side, near the river, and was called St. Benedict’s
Street;
and the last crossed the river at Bishopbridge by another ford,
and sent off branches to the north-east and east of
Norfolk. He believed that nearly all the main lines of road
originated with the Romans, but this is at least doubtful.
Norwich must then have been a very large town to have required so
many main lines of roads; but its very existence as a town is
uncertain during the Roman period.
Mr. Woodward’s second map exhibited the entrenchments
round the fortress as already described, at the time of the
Conquest. Map the third exhibited the condition of the city
in the time of the Domesday Survey, or about A.D. 1100, when 54 churches and chapels
existed. Map the fourth showed the state of the city A.D. 1400, when Norwich was described as
at the acme of its splendour and importance, and second only to
Bristol, after London. This arose from its being the
capital of East Anglia, and the residence of so many of the
clergy and gentry. Mr. Woodward pointed out the sites of
some of the old monasteries in this period. The
Bishop’s palace was then within the precincts of the
close. Besides the monastery there, and that of St.
Leonard’s, there were then several others in Norwich.
In King Street, to the south of St. Faith’s Lane, were the
Austin Friars, and to the north of Rose Lane the Grey
Friars. Both these monastic communities were said to have
encroached on the adjacent streets, churchyards, &c., by
extending their precincts; which accounted for the changes around
them. The Carmelites occupied the whole angle of the city
between the river, the walls, and Bargate Street. But few
traces of these establishments now remain. The case of the
Black Friars was very different. Their magnificent church
is still almost entire; much of the convent is still standing in
St. Andrew’s Hall, and the Dutch or Walloon Church, and the
oldest parts of the former Workhouse. In addition to these,
there had been several smaller monastic orders which were merged
in the others before the 15th century. In this period, most
of the streets on the north side of the town were in existence,
and some on the south side.
Formerly, as already intimated, some of our streets were named
from the trades of those who occupied them. Thus there were
Saddlers’ Gate, now White Lion Street; Wastelgate, now Red
Lion Street; Cordwainers’ Row, now part of the Walk;
Goldsmiths’ Row, north side of the Market; Hosiers’
Row, in part of London Street; Cutlers’ Row, in part of
London Street; Hatters’ Row, now St. Giles’ Street;
Dyers’ Row, in St. Lawrence Street; and Pottergate Street,
still so called. The Cloth Hall stood in the Haymarket; and
on the west side were the Butchery, the Fishmarket, and various
other rows, where articles of food were sold.
OLD WALLS AND GATES.
R. Fitch, Esq., is the very best authority respecting
the old walls and gates, of which he made a study for many years;
and in 1861 he published a very handsome illustrated volume
entitled, “Views of the Gates of Norwich made in the years
1792–3, by the late John Ninham; with an Historical
Introduction, Extracts from the Corporation Records, and Papers
by the late John Kirkpatrick, contributed to the Transactions of
the Norfolk and Norwich Archæological Society, by Robert
Fitch, F.S.A., F.G.S.” The author says:—
“The history of the walls of Norwich is a
history of the gate houses, and in speaking of the origin of the
first we include that of the second. In 1294, being the
23rd Edward I., the first mural tax was granted, and continued
three years. A second tax succeeded this, and in 1304 a
third tax was imposed, to continue in operation for five
years. In the 11th of Edward II., a fourth tax of the like
nature was allowed; and in two years after, namely in 1319, the
walls of Norwich were completed.”
“When the thickness and extent of the fortifications of
this city are considered, it cannot be thought surprising that a
period of 25 years elapsed before these mural defences were
finished, so far as to render no additional tax necessary.
It must not, however, be considered that no other pecuniary
assistance was required towards the work. The citizens
themselves manifested the greatest interest in the subject; and
the ancient books of account contain not only entries of money
expended on the walls and gates, but also register the private
contributions of persons towards the same object and for
necessary reparation.”
“It has been previously observed, that in 1319 the walls
of the city were said to have been completed; but something more
was required to render them adequate to the purpose for which
they were designed. Neither towers nor gates could be of
use unless properly furnished with munitions of war and the
implements then in use for their projection. This does not
appear to have taken place until 23 years after completion,
namely in 1342, in 16th Edward III., when a patriotic citizen,
Richard Spynk, for the honour of the monarch and the safety of
his fellow citizens, gave thirty espringolds to cast stones with,
to be kept at divers gates and towers; 100 gogions, or balls of
stone, locked up in a box; a box with ropes and accoutrements;
four great arblasters, or crossbows, and 100 gogions for each
arblaster; two pairs of grapples, to bring the bows to the
requisite tension for discharge; also other gogions, and some
armour.”
After stating other acts of this citizen, Mr. Fitch
proceeds:—
“From this long recital of gifts, it must be
concluded that Richard Spynk was virtually the fortifier of the
city; for it is clear that until his munificence made the gates
and walls complete, they were imperfect. Nor did he suffer
his work to fall into decay; but by the adoption of rules and
regulations, he preserved to the city the full benefit of what he
had done.”
“Before proceeding further with an outline of the
history of the Walls and Gates, it should be stated that Norwich
had been previously surrounded by a ditch and bank for
protection.” * * * * *
“One benefit produces another, and to Richard Spynk was
the City not only indebted for its safety from aggression, but
also for an extension of its liberties.
“It is recorded that Queen Isabella induced the king,
her son, in consideration of the costs and charges for the Walls
which had been raised without call on the Government, to grant a
charter to the Citizens, that they, and their heirs and
successors, dwelling in the said City, should for ever be free
from jurisdiction of the Clerk of the Market and of the household
of the King, and his heirs, so that the said Clerk or his
officers should not enter the City, or fee or make assay of any
measures or weights, or to exercise or do anything belonging to
the said office of the Clerk of the Market.
“In this King’s reign, according to the
Customs’ Book, there is an account of the battlements on
the various gates, towers, and walls. These were numbered,
in order that each parish might be made acquainted with its
responsibilities of repairs in this respect. Beginning from
the river to Coslany Gate, there were 112 battlements, and 10 on
the gate itself. From that point to St. Augustine’s
Gate, were 69 battlements, and on the gate, 12. Thence to
Fibrigge Gate—on the walls and towers were 153 battlements,
and on the gate, 13; thence to Pockthorpe Gate—on the walls
and towers were 178, and on the gate, 10; and from this gate to
the river were about 40. From this point to the tower of
Conisford Gate, the river chiefly protects the city, but the
tower bore 12 battlements; and from the tower on the city side of
the water to Conisford Gate, were 26 battlements with 14 on the
gate. Thence to Ber Street Gate, were 150; on the gate and
its wicket were 27; and from thence to St. Stephen’s Gate
were 307 (here were some strong towers); and on this gate and
wicket were 28.
“From St. Stephen’s to St. Giles’ Gate were
229 (here again were several strong towers), and on the gate and
wicket were 15; and from St. Giles’ to St. Benedict’s
Gate were 100, and on the gate itself and wicket were 16; thence
to Heigham Gate 79, and on the gate 4—and from this gate to
the tower and wall on the river were 16 battlements; in all,
1630. At this period (1345, according to the Domesday Book of the
City) there was a tax called ‘Fossage,’ to defray the
great charges of the walls and ditches.” * *
“In 1385 a general survey was made, and all the walls
and gates were placed in good repair, with a sufficient number of
men appointed to guard them. It was also agreed that
churchwards should be chosen annually, whose duty it should be to
prevent any decay or permanent injury to the fortifications by
timely repair or by reconstruction. In 1386, the expectancy
of invasion caused general fear throughout the realm, and
particularly in the eastern counties. The king sent nearly
a thousand men to Yarmouth for the defence of the coast; and so
imminent was the peril, that the king commanded the authorities
of Norwich to place the walls, towers, and gates in full and able
condition to repel all who might appear in opposition to the
king’s authority, or crush a design to injure the
city. The towers were therefore filled with engines of
defence, the walls rendered perfect, and the ditches made as wide
and as deep as the necessities of the case demanded.” * * *
*
The author proceeds to show the anxious attention which was
paid to the preservation of the walls and gates, by copious
extracts from a roll, dated 1386. He then gives a full
history of the fortifications, from which we shall make some
extracts in our narrative of events at different periods.
He thus concludes his historical sketch:—
“Not a fragment of the gates now exists, but
the certain indications of where, in some instances, they once
stood, are yet accidentally preserved.”
With a short notice of these, the account is
concluded:—
“Conisford Gate.
A fragment of the wall of the east side of this gate still
exists, attached to the west of the ‘Cinder Ovens’
public house at the south end of King Street, and also on the
opposite side of the street.
“Ber Street Gate. No
portion of this gate remains; but where the structure stood is
sufficiently evident by the high wall on the west side of the
upper end of Ber Street.
“Brazen Doors. Not a
fragment remains.
“St. Stephen’s
Gate. No portion left.
“St. Giles’ Gate.
The house against which the south side of this gate abutted still
stands, and part of the lower walls of the building can be seen.
[126]
“St. Benedict’s
Gate. Here a corresponding house or abuttal of this
gate stands perfect, with one of the strong iron staples, on
which hung one of the doors, projecting from the wall.
“Heigham Gate. Very
slight remains left.
“St. Martin’s
Gate. A portion of the north side of this gate is
left erect and firm, with small tenements abutting against it
“St. Augustine’s
Gate. No fragment is left. A large portion of
the ditch between this gate and St. Martin’s is clearly
seen, very few buildings having been erected on its site.
“Magdalen Gate. No
portion left, but the form and interior of the city wall is well
seen at this point.
“Barre or Pockthorpe Gate. Indications are left
of where the gate stood, with fragments of the wall on the right
and left
“Bishop’s Gate.
Nothing of the gate exists, but the exact site may be seen by the
necessary increased width of the bridge.
“The precise spot where each gate stood may be found by
tracing a line of the city wall, where it crossed a street; the
gates being of course integral portions of the wall perforated
for traffic and fortified with extra work for adequate
defence.”
The Rev. Francis Blomefield, of Fersfield, who flourished in
the first half of the last century, was the chief of Norfolk
historians and antiquarians. He was great in genealogy and
heraldry, and very elaborate on monuments and epitaphs, while he
altogether passed over more important matters. We might
almost wish that he had known less of heraldry and more of
history; but his great work must ever be the foundation of local
history in Norwich and Norfolk. A perfect copy of his work,
being very scarce, is now worth at least £20. It
contains most of the documentary antiquities of the city, such as
charters, acts of parliaments, proceedings of public bodies, and
other official sources of information, of which he has made a
good use. He has given full details from the records of
every parish, and of the old corporation. He states the
great changes which took place in the city and county at the time
of the Reformation, and the dissolution of the monasteries, when
nineteen of those institutions existed in Norwich.
Blomefield notices several large conventual churches, which
were desecrated at the Reformation, and many parish churches
which have been demolished, their parishes being incorporated
with those now existing.
All Saints’, situated in
Fyebridge Street, was at the north corner of the street called
Cowgate, at its entrance into Magdalen Street, and was built
before the Conquest. At the foundation of the cathedral it
was appropriated to the convent, and at the Reformation to the
dean and chapter. It was said to have had a very fine font,
erected in 1477. In 1550 the church was taken down, and the
parish, with that of St. Margaret, was annexed to St.
Paul’s.
St. Bartholomew’s, in Ber
Street, was in the patronage of the prior of Wymondham, and at
the Dissolution was consolidated with St. John’s Sepulchre,
and the church taken down.
St. Bittulph’s stood in
Magdalen Street, a little north of Stump Cross. It was
founded before 1300 and was taken down in 1548, and the parish
united to St. Saviour’s.
St. Christopher’s stood on
the east side of St. Andrew’s Hill, and was one of the
oldest churches in the city. It was burnt down in the reign of Henry
III. The greater portion of the parish was united to St.
Andrew’s and a smaller part to St. Michael’s at
Plea.
St. Crucis, or St. Crowches, stood
in Broad Street, St. Andrew’s. It was dedicated to
the honour of the holy cross, and was erected before the year
1272. In 1551 it was desecrated, and the parish united to
St. John’s Maddermarket.
St. Clement’s, in Conisford,
situated in King Street, was a very ancient church, founded long
before the Conquest. It was united with St. Julian’s
in 1482.
St. Cuthbert’s was situated
at the north end of King Street, near Tombland. About 1492
it was united to the church of St. Mary the Less at the monastery
gates, and was demolished in 1530.
St. Edward’s stood on the
west side of King Street, near St. Etheldred’s
church. About the end of the 13th century it was united to
St. Julian’s. All along King Street there are many
vaults and crypts, which seem to have formed the foundations of
old churches and monasteries.
St. Faith’s or St. Vedast’s was situated near the
place where Cooke’s hospital now stands, in Rose
Lane. It was founded before the Conquest and was taken down
in 1540, the parish being united with that of St. Peter
per Mountergate. The latter is a corruption of the old name
“Parmenter Gate,” which should be restored by
authority. It was the old Tailor Street.
St. Francis’ belonged to the
Grey Friars, whose convent stood near the site of Cooke’s
hospital. It was a noble church, 300 feet in length and 80
feet in breadth, with cloisters and a large chapter house.
At the Dissolution it was, with the convent, granted to the Duke
of Norfolk.
St. James’, Carrow, belonged to the nunnery there, and
with it became private property at the Dissolution, the parish
being united to Lakenham.
St. John’s in Southgate stood
at the north corner of Rose Lane, and about 1300 was annexed to
St. Peter Parmenter Gate. The Grey Friars pulled it down
and annexed the site of it to their convent.
St. John the Baptist’s stood
on the site of the present Octagon chapel. It was
originally a parish church; but when the Dominicans, or
Friars’ Preachers, settled here in 1226, it was given to
them, and the parish was united to St. George’s at
Colegate. They immediately built a convent in this place
and the church was used by them as a chapel, till they removed to
their new convent in St. Andrew’s, where they dedicated
their church also to St. John the Baptist. The church is
now St. Andrew’s Hall, and the chancel (formerly
the Dutch church) is now the place of worship of the Free Christian Church.
St. Margaret’s, in Fyebridge, was a church of ancient
foundation, situated on the west side of Magdalen Street, near
the gate. There is no account how long it has been
dissolved. The parish is now united with St.
Paul’s.
St. Margaret’s at Newbridge,
anciently called St. Margaret’s at Colegate, was situated
near Blackfriars’ bridge, on the west side of the
street. The parish was depopulated by the great pestilence,
in 1349, when the church ceased to be parochial, and the parish
was annexed to that of St. George’s Colegate. The
church occupied the site of Weston’s brewery, now
demolished.
St. Martin’s in Balliva was situated near the spot where,
until lately, the Golden Ball tavern stood, on the south side of
the Castle Hill. The church was on the right hand of the
entrance into Golden Ball Lane. In 1562, this church was
demolished and the parish united to St. Michael’s at
Thorn. Formerly all persons dying in the castle, and all
criminals executed, were buried in this churchyard, but this
right, after the desecration of the church, was conferred upon
St. Michael’s at Thorn.
St. Mary the Virgin’s was
situated in Conisford, and belonged to the Augustine Friars,
being also dedicated to St. Augustine. It was a noble
structure, 450 feet long and 90 feet wide, with cloisters on the
north and south sides. After the Dissolution it became
private property in 1547, when the church and conventual
buildings were demolished.
St. Mary Unbrent stood on the west
side of Magdalen Street, near Golden Dog Lane. The church
was demolished at the dissolution, and the parish united to St.
Saviour’s. “Unbrent” means unburnt.
The church was called St. Mary in combusto loco, or in
that part of the city burnt in the great fire in the time of
William I. Blomefield thinks that the church was then
consumed, and afterwards rebuilt; and that it was erroneously
written in ancient documents uncombusto, instead of in
combusto.
St. Matthew’s, near the
palace, was a small church. The parish has, since the great
pestilence of 1349, been united with that of St. Martin’s
at Palace.
St. Michael’s in Coslany was
sold to the Austin Friars in 1360, and shortly afterwards the
parish was united to that of St. Peter Parmenter Gate, when the
church was demolished and a cloister erected on its site.
St. Olave’s, or St. Tooley’s, stood on the east side of
Tooley Street, next to the corner of Cherry Lane. It was
demolished in 1546, and the parish consolidated with St.
George’s Colegate.
St. Catherine’s in Newgate was situated on St.
Catherine’s Hill. In 1349 the whole parish was almost
depopulated by the pestilence, after which the church was
deserted and converted into a chapel, the parish being united
with that of All Saints. At the Dissolution the chapel was
granted to Sir John Milton, and in 1567 conveyed to the city for
the use of St. Giles’ hospital. Thus a large amount
of Church property was applied to secular purposes.
Blomefield gives an account of different chapels dedicated to
various purposes, most of which were destroyed at the
Dissolution.
St. Catherine’s Chapel stood
upon Mousehold, about a mile north-east of the barracks, was
founded about the time of the Conquest, and was deemed a
parochial chapel while it was standing. At the Dissolution
this chapel was demolished and the parish united with that of St.
James.
The Chapel of St. Thomas a Becket,
which was not parochial, stood near the same place. No
traces of the building can now be discovered.
The College of St. Mary in the
Fields, originally called the Chapel in the Fields (whence
the present name of Chapel Field was derived), was a chapel
dedicated to Mary the Virgin. It was founded about the
year 1250, by John Le Brun, as an
hospital, but its benefactors were so numerous and munificent
that in a very short time it became a noble college, consisting
of a dean, chancellor, precentor, treasurer, and seven other
prebendaries. Six chaplains or chantry priests were
afterwards added. The dean was collated by the bishop in
right of the see, or by the king during a vacancy. The
premises were very extensive, and were granted at the dissolution
to Miles Spencer, LL.D., the last dean. After passing
through many hands the property came into possession of
shareholders, who built Assembly Rooms on the site of the
college. Bond Cabbell, Esq. subsequently bought the whole
building for a Freemasons’ Hall.
Guildhall Chapel adjoined the south
side of the hall, and was dedicated to St. Barbara. It
served as a chapel for the prisoners as well as for the Court to
attend divine service when they assembled on public
business. It was pulled down long since, and the present
porch was erected on its site.
St. Michael’s Chapel, Tombland, stood on the site of the obelisk,
and was one of the most ancient religious buildings in
Norwich. It was founded by the Earl of the East Angles long
before the Conquest and prior to the building of the Cathedral;
served as a chapel for the use of their palace, which stood
facing the south side of the chapel-yard; and occupied the south
end of Tombland, from the monastery gate to the chapel
ditch. Bishop Herbert demolished it, and the whole
site was laid open for the improvement of the monastery, and a
stone cross was erected on the spot. Instead of this, the
Bishop built another chapel on the summit of the hill outside of
Bishopgate, and dedicated it to St. Michael.
St. Nicholas’ Chapel,
Bracondale, was situated at the corner of the road now leading to
Carrow Bridge. It was much frequented by fishermen and
watermen, who were then numerous, and who made offerings there to
St. Nicholas, their patron saint. It was founded before the
Conquest and was parochial; but in the time of Edward II. the
parish was returned as belonging to Lakenham, with which it is
now united.
St. Olave’s Chapel, near King
Street Gates, was a parochial chapel long before the Conquest,
and in the reign of Edward III. the parish was united to that of
St. Peter Southgate. The chapel was demolished before
1345.
Mr. Taylor’s Index Monasticus contains the
fullest account of the old monasteries which, at one period, were
very numerous in the city. Many of them possessed large
churches, great wealth, and considerable power. They
comprised Priories, Friaries, and Nunneries, which were situated
in or near King Street, or St. Faith’s Lane, or the
Cowgate. Formerly all the west side of the river was called
the Cow-holm, where cows fed on the meadows, and Cowgate
consisted of open fields.
The Benedictine Priory at the cathedral was founded by Bishop
Herbert as already noticed. The Priory of St.
Leonard’s was founded by Bishop Herbert before he built the
cathedral, and here he placed the monks while the priory was
being built. It was situated on Mousehold Heath, opposite
Bishop’s Bridge, and served as a cell to the cathedral
priory till the Dissolution. At the Dissolution it was
granted by Henry VIII. to Thomas, Duke of Norfolk, whose son
Henry, Earl of Surrey, erected on its site a splendid house,
called Surrey house, which has long since fallen into
decay. St. Michael’s Chapel, built by Bishop Herbert,
was near the priory, and served by monks. It was demolished
by the rebel Kett, who, with his followers, encamped near it, so
that it has since been called Kett’s Castle. Near the
remains of this chapel, in the valley beneath, was
Lollard’s Pit, the spot where many of the early Reformers
were burned.
This class of monastic institutions consisted of houses
erected for the Friars, of orders grey, or white, or black.
The monasteries were seldom endowed, because the Friars were, by
profession, beggars, and lived on what they could get. They
obtained a great deal of money in the ages of superstition.
Many of their buildings were large and stately, and connected
with noble churches in which great personages were frequently
interred. Most of the monasteries were houses of refuge for
the destitute poor in the middle ages.
The Grey or Franciscan Friars seem
to have been the first who settled here near the site of
Cooke’s Hospital about 1226. This convent was a place
of great resort, and the church, as already stated in our notice
of the Desecrated Churches, was a large building 300 feet in
length, and 80 feet in breadth, with spacious cloisters and
conventual buildings; not a stone of which now remains. One
of the cloisters of this convent was called “Pardon
Cloister,” on account of the pope granting indulgences to
all who were buried there, a source of revenue to the
monks. At the Dissolution the possessions were granted to
the Duke of Norfolk.
The White Friars or Carmelites had a flourishing convent near
White Friars’ Bridge, which was founded by Philip de
Cowgate in 1256. He assumed the name from his estates,
being the principal person in those parts of the city. The
monks were called White Friars from their dress, and Carmelites
from the monastery of Mount Carmel in Palestine, the place of
their first residence, from which they were driven by
the Saracens about the year 1238, after which they settled in
different parts of Europe. The monastery has been long
demolished, and the site built upon.
The Black Friars, sometimes called
the Dominican Friars or Friars’ Preachers, settled here
about 1226, in the church of St. John the Baptist, which formerly
stood in Colegate Street, on the site of the Octagon
Chapel. They afterwards removed into the parish of St.
Andrew, where they built a large monastery. The name of the
church is now St. Andrew’s Hall.
Austin Friary. The
possessions of this convent were bounded on the north by St.
Faith’s Lane, and extended as far as the river. At
the Dissolution they were granted to Sir Thomas Heneage.
The Friars De Domina arose in 1288,
and in 1290 were introduced here. They had a house on the
south side of St. Julian’s Churchyard, where they continued
till the reign of Edward III., when, all the brethren dying of
the great pestilence of 1348, their convent became private
property.
The Friars of St. Mary occupied a
house situated in the yard of the desecrated church of St. Martin
in Balliva, where the Golden Ball Tavern stood. They joined
the order of White Friars.
The Friars De Pica or Pied Friars, so called from their
black and white garments, lived in a college at the corner of the
churchyard of St. Peter Parmentergate. They joined one of
the other orders.
The Friars De Sacco, or Brethren of the Sac, settled here about 1250 in a house
opposite to the church of St. Peter’s Hungate. The
whole premises, bounded by Bridge Street on the west, by the
river on the north, and by the street leading to Hungate on the
south, were settled on them, where they built a church, dedicated
to the Virgin Mary, on the site of which St. Andrew’s Hall
now stands. The Black Friars were united with them in 1307,
when the convent was greatly enlarged, extending to the river on
the north side, and to Elm Hill on the east side.
A nunnery formerly existed at
Carrow Abbey, dedicated to St. Mary and St. John. It was
founded in the year 1146 by two ladies named Leftelina and
Seyna. It was richly endowed by King Stephen, and consisted
of a Prioress and nine Benedictine Nuns, which number was
afterwards increased to twelve. The site within the walls
contained about ten acres of land, and the revenues and
possessions were great. At the Dissolution the abbey and
lands became private property.
Anchorages or Hermitages were connected with several of
the monastic institutions in the city, and even inhabited by
recluses. Anchorets were a sort of monks, so
called from their shutting themselves up in anchorages or
cells. Of these there were male and female, the eremite or
hermit, who pretended to follow the example of John the Baptist,
and the anchoress, who professed to imitate the conduct of
Judith. All these anchorages were abolished at the
Dissolution or at the Reformation.
To Archæologists, and particularly to those directing
their attention to Monumental Brasses, the following list of
Brasses in Norwich and the principal villages in the
neighbourhood, may be considered useful. They are
classified under their distinctive characters, namely—1st,
Ecclesiastics; 2nd, knights; 3rd, civilians and ladies; 4th,
miscellaneous. The list specifies those consisting of
effigies generally perfect, with their inscriptions, unless
otherwise mentioned.
An alphabetical list of the churches, with the various brasses
in each, is also appended.
ECCLESIASTICS.
|
1389.
|
Richardus Thaseburgh, rector of Hellesdon.
|
Hellesdon.
|
1437.
|
Galfridus Langley, installed Prior of Saint Faith the
Virgin, at Horsham, 1401.
|
St. Lawrence.
|
1450.
|
John Alnwik, in academic costume.
|
Surlingham.
|
1487.
|
Roger Clarke, priest.
|
St. Peter at
Southgate.
|
1497.
|
Walter Goos, priest.
|
St. Swithin.
|
1499.
|
John Smyth, priest—chalice.
|
St. Giles.
|
|
Henry Alikok—chalice.
|
Colney.
|
|
Thome Coke, rector of Bodham—chalice lost,
inscription only remaining.
|
St. Michael at
Coslany.
|
|
An individual unknown—chalice.
|
Poringland Magna.
|
|
Randulphus Pulvertoft—inscription only.
|
The Cathedral
(Jesus’ Chapel).
|
1531.
|
William Richies, vicar of Bawburgh.
|
Bawburgh.
|
1545.
|
Thome Capp, vicar.
|
St. Stephen.
|
KNIGHTS.
|
c1460.
|
John Toddenham. A small figure, with scroll from the
mouth.
|
St. John in Maddermarket,
Norwich.
|
1499.
|
Thome Heveningham, and Anne, his wife. This is a
beautifully executed brass, and is placed under a canopy upon an
altar tomb. He died 1499. The blank intended for the
date of the death of his wife still remains.
|
Ketteringham.
|
1559.
|
John Corbet, and Jane, his wife. He died 1470.
The blank left for the date of her death still remains.
|
Sprowston.
|
1565.
|
Sir Edward Warner.
|
Plumstead Parva.
|
1568.
|
Sir Peter Rede. Discovered to be a Palimpsest, in
1851.
|
St. Peter Mancroft,
Norwich.
|
|
|
c1380.
|
Richard de Heylesdone, and Beatrice, his wife.
|
Hellesdon.
|
1384.
|
John de Heylesdone, and Johanna, his wife. An
inscription only.
|
Hellesdon.
|
1412.
|
Walter Moneslee, and Isabella, his wife.
|
St. John in
Maddermarket.
|
1432.
|
Robert Baxter, and Christiana, his wife.
|
St. Giles.
|
1435.
|
Robert Brasyer, and Christiana, his wife. A
celebrated bell-founder.
|
St. Stephen.
|
|
Roberti Brasyer (mutilated).
|
St. Stephen.
|
1436.
|
Richard Purdaunce, and Margaret, his wife.
|
St. Giles.
|
1436.
|
John Asgar, the younger.
|
St. Lawrence.
|
c1445.
|
Alice Thorndon.
|
Frettenham.
|
1460.
|
Thomas Bokenham, and wife.
|
St. Stephen.
|
c1460.
|
A Lady (unknown).
|
Frettenham.
|
1470.
|
Jane Corbet, in Brass, of John Corbet, and Jane, his
wife—see “Knights.”
|
Sprowston.
|
1475.
|
William Pepyr, and Joan, his wife. Inscription and
four shields lost
|
St. John in
Maddermarket.
|
1475.
|
William Norwiche, and Alicia, his wife. A Bracket
Brass. Canopy mutilated.
|
St. George at
Colegate.
|
1495.
|
John Horslee, and Agnes, his wife.
|
St. Swithin.
|
1499.
|
Anne Heveningham, in Brass, of Thome Heveningham, and
Anne, his wife—see “Knights.”
|
Ketteringham.
|
|
A Lady (unknown). There are two Inscriptions, with a
figure of a Child, inserted with this Brass, in the wall of the
church, which do not relate to it.
|
Ketteringham.
|
1591.
|
Richard Ferrers, Mayor of Norwich, in the years 1473,
1478, 1483, 1493, 1498. Merchant’s mark and
inscription only remaining.
|
St. Michael at
Coslany.
|
1502.
|
Thomas Cook.
|
St. Gregory.
|
1503.
|
Edward Ward.
|
Bixley.
|
1505.
|
William Dussing, and Katherine, his wife. In winding
sheets.
|
Kirby Bedon.
|
1505.
|
Thome Tyard. In winding sheets.
|
Bawburgh.
|
c1510.
|
Juliane Anyell.
|
Witton.
|
1514.
|
Margaret Pettwode.
|
St. Clement.
|
1515.
|
Henrici Scolows, and Alicia, his wife. In winding
sheets, with four evangelical emblems.
|
St. Michael at
Coslany.
|
1524.
|
John Terri, and Lettys, his wife. An elaborate
Brass, with twenty lines of English verse.
|
St. John in
Maddermarket.
|
c1527.
|
John Gilbert. Fragments of canopy and inscription
only remaining.
|
St. Andrew.
|
1528.
|
Edwardus Whyte, and Elizabeth, his wife.
|
Shottisham St. Mary.
|
c1538.
|
William Layer, and wife. Inscription lost.
|
St. Andrew.
|
1540.
|
Nicholas Suttherton. An inscription and
shield. A palimpsest, now in the church chest, formerly at
east end of nave.
|
St. John in
Maddermarket.
|
1546.
|
Bel Buttry.
|
St. Stephen.
|
1558.
|
Robarte Rugge, Mayor of Norwich, and Elizabeth, his
wife.
|
St. John in
Maddermarket.
|
1560.
|
Helen Caus, wife of Thomas Caus, Mayor of Norwich.
This is one of three effigies which represented Thomas Caus,
Mayor in 1495 and 1503, and Johanna and Helen, his wives, and is
a late example of the pedimental head dress. The other
effigies are lost.
|
St. John in
Maddermarket.
|
|
A Mayor of Norwich, and his Wife. Name and date
unknown. Inscription lost.
|
St. John in
Maddermarket.
|
1577.
|
Anne Rede, wife of Sir Peter Rede (whose Brass lies in St.
Peter of Mancroft Church).
|
St. Margaret.
|
1600.
|
Mary Bussie. Lost since 1850; formerly in the church
of
|
St. Peter of
Mancroft.
|
1605.
|
Mis Anē Claxton; an inscription and shield.
|
St. Mary at Coslany.
|
1649.
|
Clere Talbot, and his Wives.
|
Dunston.
|
1818.
|
Mary Elizabeth, wife of Edward South Thurlow. A
cross, brass, with a border inscription; laid down within the
last few years.
|
The Cathedral (north
side of Choir).
|
|
|
1452.
|
Thomas Childes. A skeleton figure, inscription
lost.
|
St. Lawrence,
Norwich.
|
|
An individual unknown. A heart with three
scrolls.
|
Kirby Bedon.
|
|
A small figure in winding sheet; comparatively modern.
|
Bawburgh.
|
St. Andrew, Norwich.
|
|
John Gilbert
|
1527
|
|
William Layer, and wife
|
1538
|
The Cathedral, Jesus’
Chapel, Norwich.
|
|
Randulphus Pulvertoft
|
1499
|
|
Mary Elizabeth, wife of Edward South Thurlow
|
1818
|
St. Clement, Norwich.
|
|
Margaret Pettwode
|
1514
|
St. George at Colegate, Norwich.
|
|
William Norwiche
|
1475
|
St. Giles, Norwich.
|
|
Robert Baxter, and Christiana, his wife
|
1432
|
|
Richard Purdaunce, and Margaret, his wife
|
1436
|
|
John Smyth, priest
|
1499
|
St. Gregory, Norwich.
|
|
Thomas Cok
|
1502
|
St. John in Maddermarket.
|
|
Walter Moneslee, and Isabella, his wife
|
1412
|
|
John Toddenham
|
c1460
|
|
William Pepyr, and Joan, his wife
|
1476
|
|
A Mayor of Norwich, name unknown
|
|
|
John Terri, and Lettys, his wife
|
1524
|
|
Nicholas Suttherton
|
1540
|
|
Robarte Rugge, and Elizabeth, his wife
|
1558
|
|
Helen Caus
|
1560
|
St. Lawrence, Norwich.
|
|
John Asgar, the younger
|
1436
|
|
Galfridus Langley
|
1437
|
|
Thomas Childes
|
1452
|
St. Margaret, Norwich.
|
|
Anne Rede
|
1577
|
St. Mary at Coslany,
Norwich.
|
|
Mis Anē Claxton
|
1605
|
St. Michael at Coslany,
Norwich.
|
|
Richard Ferrers
|
1501
|
|
Henrici Scolows, and Alicia, his wife
|
1515
|
|
Thome Coke
|
|
St. Peter of Mancroft,
Norwich.
|
|
Sir Peter Rede
|
1568
|
|
The Brass of Mary Bussie, date 1600, has been lost since
1850
|
|
St. Peter at Southgate,
Norwich.
|
|
Roger Clarke
|
1487
|
St. Stephen, Norwich.
|
|
Robert Brasyer, and Christiana, his wife
|
1435
|
|
Thomas Bokenham and wife
|
1460
|
|
Roberti Brasyer
|
|
|
Thome Capp, vicar
|
1545
|
|
Bel Buttry
|
1546
|
St. Swithin, Norwich.
|
|
John Horslee, and Agnes, his wife
|
1495
|
|
Walter Goos, priest
|
1497
|
Bawburgh.
|
|
Thome Tyard
|
1505
|
|
William Richies—chalice
|
1531
|
|
A small figure, in winding sheet
|
|
Bixley.
|
|
Edward Ward
|
1503
|
Colney.
|
|
Henry Alikok
|
|
Dunston.
|
|
Clare Talbot, and his wives
|
1649
|
Frettenham.
|
|
Alice Thorndon
|
c1445
|
|
Lady (unknown)
|
c1460
|
Hellesdon.
|
|
Richard de Heylesdone, and Beatrice, his wife
|
1380
|
|
John de Heylesdone, and Johanna, his wife
|
1384
|
|
Richardus Thaseburgh
|
1389
|
Ketteringham.
|
|
Thome Heveningham, and Anne, his wife
|
1499
|
|
Lady (unknown)
|
|
Kirby Bedon.
|
|
William Dussing, and Katherine, his wife
|
1505
|
|
An individual unknown. A heart with three
scrolls
|
|
Plumstead Parva.
|
|
Sir Edward Warner
|
1565
|
Poringland Magna.
|
|
An individual unknown—chalice
|
|
Shottisham St. Mary.
|
|
Edwardus Whyte, and Elizabeth, his wife
|
1528
|
Surlingham.
|
|
John Alnwick
|
1450
|
Sprowston.
|
|
John Corbet, and Jane, his wife
|
1470
|
Witton.
|
|
Juliana Anyell
|
c1505
|
Norwich is very remarkable for its
antiquities, its historical associations, its manufactures, and
its trade; and also for the eminent men who have flourished at
various periods in the city. It was the scene of many
important events in the times of the Iceni, the Romans, the
Angles, Saxons, Jutes, Danes, and Normans. It was the royal
seat of Anglo-Saxon princes. It was the Hierapolis
Monachopolis of the middle ages; famous for its churches and
convents; and in later times, celebrated for its Norman castle
and cathedral.
The first foundations of history are very often mere
traditions, which are transmitted from parents to their children,
from one generation to another. Probable only in their
origin, they become less probable in every succeeding age.
In process of time fable gains and truth loses ground.
Hence it is almost impossible to ascertain the origin of any
place claiming a high antiquity. The early writers
could not divest their minds of the fascinating fables of
Geoffrey of Monmouth. In former times, when the power of
imagination prevailed, the distinction between legend and history
was scarcely recognised. For centuries there are not even
legendary accounts of East Anglia or of its capital. But
instead of legends, there are permanent memorials of the past;
great earthworks, fortifications, camps, strongholds, buildings,
churches, ruins of monasteries and abbeys. The soil has
yielded up relics of the dead—weapons, utensils, coins,
ornaments, and sepulchral urns, showing the presence of the
Iceni, the Romans, the Angles, Saxons, Jutes, Danes, and Normans,
at different periods. All these energetic nations were
concerned in events that took place in Norfolk and Norwich.
The Iceni appear to have been politically independent up to
the period of the Roman invasion, B.C. 55. Their alarm in consequence
of that invasion led them to negociate an alliance, but we have
no reason to suppose that it was ever carried into effect.
They took the lead in a rebellion which the Roman General
Ostorius was barely able to quell; and Roman historians bear
testimony to the valour with which they struggled to maintain
their liberty. The superior discipline of the Roman
soldiers enabled them, however, to triumph over a semi-barbarous
people, unprotected by body armour and unused to military
tactics; but it was no easy victory. For about 600 years
after the defeat of the Iceni, no reliable information respecting
that people is to be found in any history. Indeed they
disappear from history altogether, and we can only infer what
advances they made in civilization from the scattered remains
that have been found in the eastern counties. These remains
prove that the Iceni were not semi-savages, but that they had
made some progress in useful arts, that they built houses, and
wore woven garments.
There are no remains in the eastern counties of cairns,
cromlechs, Druidical circles, or other memorials of ancient
perseverance and mechanical skill, nature having interposed an
absolute veto. But there are remains of earth works and
tumuli, burrows or artificial mounds in which were deposited the
urns or ashes of the dead. There are thousands of pits in
many places, and these are supposed to have been the foundations
of Icenian houses. Remarkable excavations are thickly
clustered all over Weybourne Heath, varying from 8 to 20 feet in
diameter, and from 2 to 6 feet in depth.
The Norwich Museum contains some remains of articles made by
the Iceni, amongst which may be mentioned sepulchral urns,
varying from the most primitive simplicity, up to forms and
patterns worthy of any age. The chevron ornament,
which is by far the most usual style of decoration, has been
traced not merely in India, Egypt, Etruria, and Nineveh, as well
as in Saxon and Norman work, but even among the works of ancient
American settlers in Yucatan! The Museum also contains
specimens of Icenic Celts or javelin heads, made of flints, which
appear to have been originally fitted on a wooden shaft or
handle, with a provision for drawing it back after the infliction of
the wound, by means of a cord passing through the ring, as in the
metal specimens. It is probable that these flint specimens
were in use long anterior to the Roman invasion.
About 1844 or 1845, some discoveries were made in Norfolk of
gold torques and coins of the Iceni. In March 1855, at
Weston in Norfolk, 300 coins of the Iceni were found. The
most ordinary type is the rude representation of a horse on each
side; others have two crescents placed back to back; and on some
(in about the proportion of one in twenty,) is a rude profile of
a human head, while in a few instances there is a figure of a
wild boar. Beneath the horse in some cases are the letters
E C E or E C N, (supposed to be a contraction of Iceni,) also C E
A, T, A T D, A T E D, or A N T D, which antiquarians are as yet
unable to explain. Probably all the coins, like a single
coin which has been found of Boadicea, the unfortunate Queen of
the Iceni, were subsequent to the Roman invasion, for Cæsar
expressly tells us that the Britons in his time used metal rings
instead of money, the value being determined by their weight; and
Camden, with great probability, supposes that most of the British
coins must have been struck as a sort of poll tax or tribute
money to the Romans.
Generally speaking, the antiquities of the British period are
articles of the most urgent necessity, and of the rudest possible
form; but a long interval of tranquillity brought even luxuries
in its train, and it is a very remarkable fact that even the
lapse of 1800 years has scarcely effected any change in
some articles of general utility. The discoveries made at
Herculaneum and Pompeii have led to a revival of the classical
forms, both in porcelain and in plate, the greatest practical
compliment that could be paid to the taste of the Roman
artists.
Among the objects which have been found at different places
may be mentioned sepulchral vases, varying, of course, in style
and taste, but in some instances most beautifully formed; funeral
lamps, lacrymatories, (or phials supposed to have contained the
tears of the sorrowing relations,) fibulæ (or
brooches), gold rings, gold seals, steelyards, weights, tweezers,
a curiously formed brass lamp for three lights, a patera of
Samian ware, and coins of the Roman emperors. All these may
be seen in the Norwich Museum.
There is no evidence of the existence of Norwich as a city for
400 years after the Christian era. The whole island was a
howling wilderness, and Norfolk was a vast common, like Roudham
Heath. The natives lived by hunting or fishing, and
sheltered themselves in the woods, or in caves, or huts.
Water covered nearly all the area in which the city is now built,
and filled all the valley of the Yare. The aborigines,
called the Iceni, probably lived in huts near the banks of the
river, as it afforded a good supply of fish; but there is no
proof that they lived in any place that could be called a town or
even a village. There is in fact, no reliable account
whatever of the natives, how they lived, or where they lived in
this district; for they have not even left any names of places,
and very few traces of any progress in the useful arts, and
certainly none of any buildings. On Mousehold Heath, near
the city, and at various places in the county, there are hollows
supposed to have been made by the Iceni as the foundation of
huts, or of houses of wicker work, or some other perishable
material, with a conical thatching at the top. Externally
they must have looked like very low bastions, having doorways,
but apparently neither chimneys nor windows.
When Julius Cæsar invaded the
island, B.C. 55, he found seventeen
tribes of the ancient Britons or Celts, and the Iceni, inhabiting
this eastern district. They belonged to a very old family
of mankind, of whose beginning there is no record, and their end
is still more remote in the future. They first planted this
island and gave to the seas, rivers, lakes, and mountains names
which are poems, imitating the pure voices of nature.
Julius Cæsar only made an inroad into the country through a
part of Kent, and gained no permanent hold of the island.
The Rev. Scott F. Surtees, in a recent work, maintains (and some
persons think successfully) that Julius Cæsar effected his
first landing on the coast of Norfolk.
The Romans, under Claudius, landed on the eastern coast; and
established his power in this part of the country. He built
strongholds at Gorleston and camps at Caister, near the present
site of Yarmouth, and on the opposite shore at Burgh Castle,
where extensive ruins yet remain. Advancing up the arm of the sea,
the Romans built a camp at Reedham; and sailing yet higher up
they built camps on the southern side of Norwich, at Caistor and
Tasburgh. Historians for a long time believed that Caistor
was the Venta Icenorum of the Romans, and preserved a very
ancient tradition, that Norwich was built of Caistor stone out of
the ruins of the Roman camp.
The late Hudson Gurney, Esq., collected ample materials for a
full history of Norwich, but the only result of his researches
seems to have been a letter to the late Dawson Turner, Esq., on
the question of the Venta Icenorum mentioned by the Roman
writers, whether it was Elmham, as Blomefield supposed, or
Caistor, as later historians believed, or Norwich, as most
antiquarians now think. The question is of some importance
as regards the antiquity of the city; for supposing it to have
been the Venta Icenorum of the Romans, with all the Roman
roads radiating from it, the Venta must have been a large
place. Main roads were of course made for traffic and for
means of communication, which imply the existence of many people
living in settled habitations.
Main roads prove a certain advance in civilization; but the
question is, whether the Romans really made all the roads
attributed to them, in Norfolk and Suffolk, during the four
hundred years of their occupation. Main roads might have
radiated from Caistor originally, and afterwards might
have been diverted to Norwich.
Mr. Hudson Gurney adduced some proofs that Norwich and not
Caistor was the Venta Icenorum. He says—
“The first question to examine, on the view
of Norwich, Norwich Castle, and the Roman Camp at Caistor, may
be, whether Norwich or Caistor be the ‘Venta
Icenorum’ of the Romans; Norwich standing on the Wensum,
and Caistor on the Taes, on the opposite side of what was the
great estuary.”
“To begin, then, with Camden. In his accounts of
Norwich and of Caistor he falls into the most extraordinary
errors, confounding the courses of the three rivers, the Wensum,
the Taes, and the Yare. He places Norwich upon the Yare
instead of the Wensum, and gives the Wensum the course of the
Taes as ‘flowing from the south;’ and still more
strangely, as a king-at-arms, he attributes the erection of the
present Castle of Norwich to Hugh Bygod, ‘from the lions
salient carved in stone on it, which were the old arms of the
Bygods on their seals, though one of them bore a cross for his
seal.’”
Mr. Hudson Gurney remarks on this error—
“Now the lions were two lions passant
regardant, very rudely carved, one on each side of the arch of
the great entrance, and the Bygods, whose original arms were or,
a cross gules, never bore the lion till assumed by Roger Bygod in
the reign of Henry III., who took the arms of his mother, the
heiress of William Marshall, Earl of Pembroke, in whose light he
became Earl Marshal of England.”
Thus
Camden is disposed of, and other authorities are quoted in the
letter in favour of Norwich being the Venta Icenorum.
“Horsley, in his Britannia Romani,
states that Venta was the capital of the Iceni, situated
on the Wentfar, and thence deriving its name; and misled by and
quoting Camden, he places Venta at Caistor.”
“King, who, born in Norwich, might have been supposed to
have been better informed, in his Munimenta Antiqua
follows Camden, and turns the Taes into the Wensum; and in his
paper in the fourth volume of the Archæologia, he
pronounces the existing Castle of Norwich to be ‘the very
tower which was erected about the time of King
Canute.’”
Mr. Hudson Gurney, after setting aside Wilkins as an
authority, proceeds—
“In 1834, I went over the Camp at Caistor
and the country adjacent, with Colonel Leake, who may be
considered the greatest living authority for the sites of ancient
cities and fortified camps, and he at once said that he was
convinced that Norwich was the Venta Icenorum, and capital
of the Iceni, and Caistor the fortified camp planted by the
Romans over against it, on the other side of the estuary, to
bridle, as was their custom, a hostile population.”
After quoting a letter to the same effect, Mr. Hudson Gurney
continues—
“In the Roman Itineraries you have three
Ventas; Venta Bulgarum, Winchester; Venta Silurum, Caer Went, in
Monmouthshire; and Venta Icenorum; and of these Ventas, the
confusion between Winchester and the Venta Icenorum seems to have
been begun very early, both with the chroniclers and romancers,
probably from the one having retained the rudiments of the name,
and the other becoming known as Northwic.”
“Sir Francis Palgrave, in the researches which he has
made for his forthcoming history of ‘England under the
Normans,’ being led to the examination of all contemporary
authors, in order to clear up points which he found otherwise
inexplicable, has referred me to the two following passages,
which would seem to prove that Norwich was the Venta Icenorum
almost beyond dispute.”
Here follow Latin quotations from the life of William the
Conqueror by William of Poictiers and from Ordericus Vitalis
under the year 1067.
William of Poictiers says:—
“Gwenta urbs est nobilis atque valens, cives
ac finitimos habet divites, infidos, et audaces: Danos in
auxilium ceteris recipere potest: a mari quod Anglos a Danis
separat millia passuum quatuor-decim distat. Hujus quoque
urbis intra mœnia, munitionem construxit, ibidem Gulielmum
reliquit Osberni filium præcipuum in exercito suo, et in
vice sua interim toti regno Aquilonem versus
præesset.”
And Ordericus Vitalis states:—
“Intra mænia Gwentæ, opibus et
munimine nobilis urbis, et mari contiguæ, validem arcem
construxit, ibique Gulielmum Osberni filium in exercitu suo
præcipuum reliquit, eumque vice sua toti Regno versus
Aquilonem præesse constituit.”
And
Mr. Gurney proceeds:—
“Taking, then, Norwich for the Venta
Icenorum of the Romans—called Caer Guntum by the British,
and Northwic by the Saxons and Danes—you find the Capital
of the Iceni, founded on the shoulder of the promontory
overlooking the Wensum, towards the great estuary, which formed a
natural stronghold for successive races of inhabitants.
Whilst the Romans, fixing their permanent camp at Caistor, on the
Taes, where that river joined the estuary, into which the Wensum,
the Taes, and the Yare, all discharged themselves, would command
the passage into the interior of the country; and taking Caistor
for the ‘Ad Taum,’ you will find the distances
sufficiently to agree with the Roman Itineraries.”
“The Camp at Caistor contains an area of about
thirty-five acres, and the Roman station at Taesborough, on
another promontory higher up upon the stream, has an area of
about twenty-four acres.”
Another strong point in favour of Norwich having been the
Venta Icenorum is, that all the roads radiated from the city to
all parts of East Anglia.
In tracing the rise and progress of the city we must remember
that it was in the centre of a vast common, and that it was the
nucleus of an agricultural community, at first without any trade
or any kind of manufactures. It was merely a collection of
huts or a fishing station, near the banks of a river or arm of
the sea. The social state of the place should be considered
with reference to the progress of agriculture at different
periods in the surrounding district. Norwich was for ages
only a small market town, with a very small number of
inhabitants.
The destruction of all documents
relating to East Anglia, during the irruptions of the Danes, has
rendered this period the most obscure of any period of our
history. The Angles, Saxons, and Jutes having subjugated
the fair territory of England, they divided it into seven
kingdoms, called the Heptarchy, in which Norfolk formed a part of
East Anglia. The Anglo-Saxon leader, Uffa, established
himself in this part of the island, in 575; and assumed dominion
over that portion of the eastern district now divided into
Norfolk, Suffolk, and Cambridgeshire, giving it the name of East
Anglia, of which Norwich was made the metropolis. Norwich
was, therefore, a royal city, and the residence of the
kings. Uffa, the first king, is supposed to have formed
here a strong entrenchment of earth on the site of the present
castle, encircled by broad ramparts and a ditch, as under the
present Saxon arch. Uffa, who died A.D. 578, was succeeded by his son Titul;
on whose demise, in 599, his son Redwald assumed the reins of
government and embraced Christianity, but by the influence of his
wife renounced it again. He was succeeded, A.D. 624, by his son Erpenwald, who was
killed by a relation named Richbert, A.D. 633. His half brother
Sigebert, who succeeded to the crown, established the bishopric
of Dunwich, in Suffolk, and formed the first seminary for
religious instruction, which led to the establishment of the
university in Cambridge. Fatigued with the crown and its
cares, he resigned it, A.D. 644, to
his kinsman Egric, and retired into the famous monastery at Bury
St. Edmund’s.
Norwich then became one of the chief seats of Anna, king of
the East Angles, who gave the castle, with the lands belonging to
it, to his daughter Ethelfrida on her marriage with Tombert, a
prince of the Gyrvii or Fenmen, who inhabited the fens of
Lincolnshire and the adjacent parts of Norfolk. At the same
time Tombert granted to Ethelfrida, as a marriage settlement, the
isle of Ely, which for greater security was to be held by castle
guard service to the castle of Norwich.
From the time of Anna till the reign of Alfred the Great there
are few events on record except the frequent incursions of the
piratical Danes, who at last over-ran East Anglia, and had their
head quarters at Thetford in 870. But the reign of the
Great Alfred was distinguished by his decisive victories over
those Northern marauders. One of his chief objects was to
fortify the principal parts of his kingdom against hostile
attacks. Finding the walls or ramparts of Norwich Castle
too weak for repelling the attacks of the Danes, he caused others
to be erected with the most durable materials. That
it was a noted military station, and a royal castle in his time,
is evident from a coin struck here in the year 872, having round
the head AElfred Rex, and on the reverse
Northwic. After making peace with the Danes in 878,
he assigned to them, for their residence, the whole of East
Anglia, and their leader Guthrum fixed his seat at Norwich; but,
breaking his faith, the city and county were wrested from him,
and reverted again to the Angles under six successive
sovereigns.
Edward the Elder succeeded his father, the illustrious Alfred,
in the year 901, and kept the Danes at bay. Ericke, one of
their chiefs, held East Anglia under the king, till he rebelled
in 913, when he was overthrown and slain. Athelstan, who
succeeded Edward, totally expelled the Danes, and reduced the
whole kingdom under his government. In his reign Norwich
flourished, and it is probable that he was here in 925, for a
coin still extant has on the obverse Ethalstan, and on the
reverse “Barbe Mon Northwic,” that is
“Barbe, mint master of Norwich.” Among the
other East Anglian coins struck here, the following may be
mentioned; one of Edmund, the successor of Athelstan, inscribed
round the head Edmund Rex, and on the reverse Edgar Mon
Northwic; several of Edred, coined about 946, and inscribed
round the head Eadred Rex, and on the reverse Hanne Mo
Northwic; two of Edward the Martyr, having on the obverse
Edward Rex. Angl. and on the reverse Leofwine Mon
Nor.; and three of Ethelred the Unready, having on the
obverse Edelred Rex.
There
is no account of the castle after the time of Anna till the
Danish wars; and then it was often won and lost by the contending
powers.
Blomefield, in his History of Norfolk, vol. II. p. 4, notices
the coins of several Anglo-Saxon princes, Alfred, Athelstan,
Edmund I., Edred, Edward the Martyr, and Ethelred II. The
circumstance of Alfred coining money here is remarkable, as at
the date of this coinage, (872) the government of East Anglia
could only have just come into his hands, upon the extinction of
the East Anglian dynasty in the person of St. Edmund, and the
country either was or had just been in the military possession of
the Danes.
During the reign of Athelstan the city appears to have been in
a flourishing state. In the reign of Edward, 941, and his
successor Edred, 945, it greatly increased in wealth and
extent. The greater part of the city was then built on the
north side of the river Wensum, with a small population.
The city is certainly of Anglo-Saxon origin, but as an
Anglo-Saxon city it was destroyed by the Danes, and no vestiges
remain of its Anglo-Saxon buildings, excepting, perhaps, one or
two round towers of churches.
The Danes became settled in the
city, and fortified themselves against all enemies, about 1011;
and the next year, Turkil or Turketel, a Danish earl, took
possession of all Norfolk, having expelled the English Earl
Ulfketel, and held it under Sweyn till his death, which happened
in 1014. Then the Danish army chose Canute his son for
their king: but upon Sweyn’s death the English took courage
and sent for Ethelred out of Normandy, who returned and drove
Canute out of the country. Turkel, however, continued
governor of the East Angles, and he persuaded Canute to return;
and he became king of England in 1017. That monarch
assigned all Norfolk to Earl Turkel; and according to the old
author of an Essay on the Antiquity of the Castle:—
“Committed to him the custody of Norwich,
which his father Sweyn burnt and destroyed; and to keep the East
Angles secure to him, he (Canute) was most like to be the builder
of the present stone Castle of Norwich. For when by compact
with the English nobles, the law called Engleshire was
made by universal consent, for the safety of the Danes that were
by agreement to remain in England, Canute sent home to Denmark
his mercenary army of Danes, but in great caution built several
strong forts and castles, garrisoning them with such Danes as had
been settled in England before his time, intermixed with such
English as he had confidence in.”
The author of this ingenious Essay produces sufficient
arguments to show that there was a building in the fortifications
in the reign of Canute, and that there had been one since the
time of King Alfred, and that Canute might have repaired or even
rebuilt it. Indeed, there must have been a castle before
the Conquest, as in Domesday Book a number of tenements are
stated to have belonged to the castle. The present building
was probably reared after the Conquest, it being so like Rising
Castle and others. Roger Bigot very likely built it, and
Thomas Brotherton repaired it in the reign of Edward I., as
proved by his arms still in the stone work. Certain it is,
from the time of Sweyn’s settling in the city in 1010, and
the Danes swarming hither in large numbers, it rose almost at
once to great importance, as appears from the Survey in the reign
of Edward the Confessor. This is highly probable if we
believe the best authority on the subject, namely the Saxon
Chronicle, which states that the city rose from desolation,
in 50 years, to be a place of great magnitude, far exceeding its
former size. The Danes came hither in such numbers that
they became the parent stock of the people of Norwich and
Norfolk; and this is proved by the names of many places in
Norfolk.
Edward the Confessor began his reign in 1041, and the
Earldom of Norfolk was given to Harold, son of Earl Godwin, who
was afterwards king of England, and on his rebellion was seized
by the king and given to Algar, son of Leofric, Earl of Chester,
who resigned it again to Harold at his return; and in 1052, on
the death of Earl Godwin, Harold, in recompense for his
generosity, gave Algar his earldom again; but he being banished
in 1055, it came to the king, who pardoned him at Harold’s
request, so that he enjoyed it till his death, when it came again
to the king.
The Norman Conquest of England
caused many changes in Norfolk and Norwich. One of the
immediate results of the invasion, in 1066, was a vast influx of
foreigners into the county and city; and the pressure of the
Norman yoke was felt as much in Norwich as in any part of the
kingdom. It was about the same period that Jews began to
settle here for the first time, enriched by the extortions
incident to a conquest, and, as Fuller says, “buying such
oppressed Englishmen’s goods as Christians did not care to
meddle with.”
William the Conqueror caused a survey to be made of all the
lands in the country, the register of which is called the Domesday Book, and was finished in
1081. It is written in Roman with a mixture of Saxon, and
is still preserved in the chapter-house at Westminster, amongst
the national archives. It was printed in the 40th of George
III. for the use of the members of both houses of parliament, and
the public libraries of the kingdom. It specifies the
extent of the land in each district; the state it was in, whether
meadow,
pasture, wood, or arable; the name of the proprietor; the value,
&c. Domesday Book, p. 13, states:—
“In Norwic, in the time of King Edward, were
1320 burgesses, of whom one was so much the king’s vassal,
that he might not depart or do homage (to any other) without his
licence. His name was Edstan; he possessed 18 acres of land
and 12 of meadow, and two churches in the burgh and a sixth part
of a third, and to one of these churches there belonged one
mansion in the burgh and six acres of meadow: these six acres
Roger Bigod holds by the king’s gift. And of 1238 (of
the said burgesses) the king and the earl had soc, sac, and
custom; and of 50 Stigand had the soc, sac, and patronage; and of
32 Harold had the soc, sac, and patronage,” &c.,
&c.
Soc, sac, and custom was the entire jurisdiction, for
soc is the power that any man had to hold courts, wherein
all that dwell on his land, or in his jurisdiction are answerable
to do suit and service; sac is the right of having all the
amerciaments and forfeitures of such suitors; and custom
includes all other profits. At this time, also, there were
no fewer than 136 burgesses who were Frenchmen, and only six who
were English in the new burgh, which comprised the parishes of
St. Giles’ and St. Peter’s Mancroft. The Dutch
and the Flemings, about this time, came over the sea and located
themselves in the city and county, and introduced the worsted and
other manufactures.
William I. gave the Earldom of the city of Norwich to Ralph de
Guader, who designed to wed the daughter of one William
Fitz-Osbern, sister of Roger Earl of Hereford, and a
relative of the king. This matrimonial scheme not pleasing
the king, it was prohibited, but barons in those days would
sometimes have a will of their own, and the fair affianced was
made a bride within the castle walls, whose doorway in an angle
marks the site of the act of disobedience to the sovereign.
After the sumptuous feast, with its attendant libations, a
rebellion was planned by Waltheof, Earl of Northumberland,
Huntingdon, and Northampton, and Roger, Earl of Hereford.
Having carried the forbidden marriage into effect, they became
bold in their language and designs, until a chorus of excited
voices joined them in oaths as conspirators against their lord
the king. Treachery revealed the plot, and the church lent
its aid to the crown to crush the rebels. Lanfranc, then
the primate and archbishop, sent out troops, headed by bishops
and justiciaries, the highest dignitaries of church and law, to
oppose and besiege them. The bridegroom fled for succour to
his native Brittany, leaving his bride for three months to defend
the garrison with her retainers, at the end of which time the
brave Emma was forced to capitulate, but upon mild terms,
obtaining leave for herself and her followers to flee to
Brittany. Her husband became an outlaw, her brother was
slain, and scarcely one guest present at that ill-fated marriage
feast escaped an untimely end.
Nor did the city go unscathed. The devastation carried
into its midst was heavy; many houses were burnt, many were
deserted by those who had joined the earl, and it is curious to
read in the valuation of land and property, taken soon after
this event, how many houses are recorded as void, both in the
burgh or that part of the city under the jurisdiction of the king
and earl, and in other portions, subject to other lords; for it
would seem that the landlords of the soil on which the city stood
were the king or earl of the castle, the bishop, and the Harold
family. Clusters of huts were then built round the base of
the hill, and constituted the feudal village; its inhabitants
consisting of villains, of which there were two classes, the
husbandmen or peasants annexed to the manor or land, and a lower
rank described as villains in gross, or absolute slaves,
transferable by deed from one owner to another, the lives of
these slaves being a continual state of toil, degradation and
suffering.
After the banishment of Earl Ralph, the king, having obtained
possession of the castle, appointed Roger Bigod constable, with a
limited power as bailiff, he having to collect the rents and
revenues belonging to the crown. He retained these honours
during the reign of the succeeding monarch, William Rufus, though
he joined in the fruitless attempt to place that king’s
elder brother, Robert Curthose, on the throne. These
troubles were not ended till 1091, when the king made peace with
his brother Robert, agreeing that the lands of those who had
assisted him should be restored to them.
About the commencement of this
century, a considerable addition was made to the population of
the city by a vast influx of Jews, who originally came from
Normandy, and were allowed to settle in England as chapmen for
the sale of confiscated goods. They afterwards became
numerous, and were so much in favour with William Rufus that he
is said to have sworn, by St. Luke’s face, his usual oath,
that “If the Jews should overcome the Christians, he
himself would become of their sect.” In his reign the
present castle is supposed to have been built.
Henry I., on his accession to the crown, met with great
opposition from many of the nobles who were in the interest of
his elder brother, Robert, Duke of Normandy; but Roger Bigod
strongly espousing his cause, became a great favourite. In
the first part of his reign, the king gave him Framlingham in
Suffolk, and continued him Constable of the Castle till his
death. He was succeeded by his son William Bigod, on whose
decease Hugh Bigod, his brother, who inherited his estate, was
appointed Governor of the Castle. In 1122, the king kept
his Christmas in Norwich, when, being pleased with the reception he met
with, he severed the government of the city from that of the
castle, the constable of which had been heretofore the sole
governor. Henry I. granted the city a charter containing
the same franchises as the city of London then enjoyed, and the
government of the city was then separated from that of the
castle, the chief officer being styled Propositus or
Provost. The liberties of the city from the time of Henry
I. to Edward III., were often suspended and gradually
enlarged. In 1403 the city was separated entirely from the
county of Norfolk, under the name of the county and city of
Norwich; and the first Mayor was then elected by the
citizens. The old corporation generally comprised a
dignified body of men, who maintained the hospitalities of the
city. Under the ancient charter the corporation of Norwich
consisted of a mayor, recorder, steward, two sheriffs,
twenty-four aldermen, including the mayor, and sixty common
councilmen. The Municipal Reform Act transferred its
government into the hands of a mayor, a sheriff, and a town
council consisting of forty-eight councillors, and sixteen
aldermen elected by the council, who unitedly elect the mayor and
sheriff. To these, and to a recorder, with an indefinite
number of magistrates appointed by the crown, the government of
the city is entrusted.
King Stephen, on his accession, granted the custody of the
castle to his favourite, Hugh Bigod, who was a principal
instrument in advancing him to the crown, by coming directly from
Normandy where Henry I. died, and averring that he on his
deathbed had disinherited his daughter Maud, the empress, and
appointed Stephen, Earl of Bolyne, his heir. The citizens,
therefore, taking this opportunity, used what interest they could
with the king to obtain a new charter, vesting the government of
the city in coroners and bailiffs instead of provosts; but the
affair took a different turn to what they expected, for the king,
upon a distrust of Bigod favouring the cause of the Empress Maud,
seized the castle and all the liberties of the city into his own
hands, and soon afterwards granted to his natural son William,
for an appanage or increase of inheritance, the town and burgh of
the city of Norwich, in which were 1238 burgesses who held of the
king in burgage tenure; and also the castle and burgh thereof, in
which were 123 burgesses that held of the king in burgage, and
also the royal revenue of the whole county of Norfolk, excepting
what belonged to the bishopric, &c. The whole rent of
the city, including the fee farm, was then about £700 per
annum. The king restored the city liberties for a fine in
1139.
During the reign of King Stephen more Flemings came over; and
these successive immigrations were a real blessing to the
land. England had not been a manufacturing country at all
till the arrival of the Flemings, who introduced the preparation
and weaving of wool, so that, in process of time, not only the
home market was abundantly supplied with woollen cloth, but a
large surplus was made for exportation. The Flemings were
kinsmen of the Anglo-Saxon race, and were distinguished for that probity
in their commercial dealings which afterwards became the
characteristic of the English merchants at large.
Henry II., in the first year of his reign, 1155, took the
city, castle, and liberties from William, the natural son of
Stephen; but, as a recompense, restored to him all those lands
which his father held in the reign of Henry I. He also
prevailed upon Hugh Bigod to yield up all his castles, whereby
the whole right became vested in the crown; the king governing
the city by the sheriff, who paid the profits arising therefrom
into the exchequer. About the year 1163 Hugh Bigod was
restored to the title of the Earl of Norfolk, and at the same
time appointed Constable of Norwich Castle, by which means he
became sole governor of the city. In 1182, the citizens
recovered the liberties of the city on paying a fine of 80 marks
to the king.
Richard I. was crowned September 4th, 1189, and a riot
happened on account of a Jew attempting to enter Westminster Hall
contrary to the king’s express command. Many of the
Jews were killed, and their houses plundered and burnt. A
rumour was thereupon spread throughout the nation that the king
did not favour them, on which the people of Bury, Lynn, and
Norwich, took occasion to rise and rob great numbers of
them. On November 27th following, Roger, son of Hugh Bigod,
was created Earl of Norfolk, and steward of the king’s
household. By his means the city regained as ample a
charter as London then possessed, for in 1193, the king granted
the city in fee farm to the citizens and their heirs, for a fee
farm rent of £180 yearly.
King John ascended the throne in
1193, and in a few years afterwards the barons rebelled against
him. In 1215, Roger Bigod, Earl of Norfolk, joined the
insurgent barons. The king seized the castle, expelled the
earl, and appointed the Earl of Pembroke and John Fitz-Herbert
Constables of the Castle. Lewis, the Dauphin of France,
having obtained a grant of the kingdom from the pope, brought
over a large force, ravaged the counties of Norfolk and Suffolk,
took the castle, and reduced the city. He made William de
Bellomonte his marshal and constable, and placed him with a
garrison within the castle walls.
King John granted two charters to the citizens, bestowing
certain privileges; and he came to the city in 1256, as is
evident from the Charter of Liberties granted to the port of
Yarmouth, it being dated March 25, 1256, by the king at
Norwich. On the same day he likewise granted his third
Charter to the city, bestowing certain commercial
privileges. In 1265 Simon Montfort and his adherents seized
all the king’s castles and committed the custody of them to
their
own friends, and having also gotten the king’s person into
their power, they obliged him to send letters to the sheriffs of
counties, including Norfolk, commanding them to oppose all
attempts in favour of the king. But the king having routed
the barons at Eversham, removed all the constables which the
confederates had appointed, and amongst the rest Roger Bigod; in
whose stead, John de Vallibus, or Vaux, was made Constable of
this Castle, and Sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk, and soon
afterwards, in consequence of great disturbances in the city, he
was ordered to enter it, and did so, notwithstanding its
liberties. In December, 1266, the displaced barons, headed
by Sir John de Evile, entered the city and killed many persons,
imprisoned more, plundered the town, and carried away the
wealthiest of the inhabitants.
According to Blomefield, about this time, on a Good Friday,
the Jews were accused of having crucified a boy, twelve years of
age, named William; and the date of his alleged death, March
24th, was marked as a holiday. No evidence is adduced that
the crime was committed, and no motive is assigned for it.
The date of the year is not given, and the boy’s name
besides William is not stated. The Jews denied the charge,
but it was generally believed, and they were terribly
persecuted. The people then seized upon every pretence for
robbing and plundering the poor Jews. It is said that the
crime was discovered by Erlward, a burgess, as they were going to
bury the body in Thorpe Wood. On this the Jews applied to
the
sheriff, and promised him 100 marks if he would free them from
this charge. The sheriff sending for Erlward obliged him to
swear that so long as he lived he would never accuse the Jews nor
discover the fact. About five years afterwards, Erlward, on
his deathbed, made known the whole affair, and the body, it is
said, having been found in the wood, was taken and buried in the
churchyard of the monks. They alleged that many miracles
were there wrought by it which occasioned its being removed into
the church and enshrined in the year 1150.
Edward I. succeeded to the throne in 1272, and in the next
year the king appointed Roger Bigod, Earl of Norfolk, to be
Constable of the Castle. The interdict, which was removed
on Christmas eve, was renewed on the day after Epiphany, but was
taken off till Easter, when it was renewed the third time.
In 1274, the affair between the monks and citizens continuing
unsettled, it was referred to the pope, who left it to the
decision of the king, who adjudged the citizens to pay 500 marks
yearly for six years, and to give the church a cup of the value
of £100, and weighing 10 lbs. in gold. The monks were
to repair their gates and to have access to all parts of the
city, and some of the chief citizens were to go to Rome to beg
the pope’s pardon. These conditions being agreed to,
the king restored to the city all its ancient privileges on
payment of a fine of 40s. yearly, besides the old fee farm.
The interdict was also removed on November 1st, 1275. The
king kept his Easter in the city in 1277, and he granted a new
charter in 1285. In 1289 the liberties were seized,
but were restored again at the end of the year. Soon
afterwards the king, while on a pilgrimage to Walsingham, granted
a new charter. In 1296, the city first sent representatives
to parliament, originally four in number, who were paid for their
services, but on account of the expense the number was reduced to
two members.
In this century this city and other
towns began to obtain political privileges. The kings of
the middle ages found themselves obliged to summon burgesses to
parliament in order to obtain supplies. The early
parliaments appear to have been convened chiefly for this
purpose, and were constantly dissolved as soon as the business
for which they met was transacted. Formerly the burgesses
returned were always citizens, who really were representatives of
the city and its interests, and not merely supporters of the
ministry of the day. There is no record of the early local
elections, but lists will be given of the burgesses returned.
Edward II. began his reign on July 7th, 1307, and he reigned
nineteen years. Walter de Norwich, son of Jeffry de
Norwich, was so much in favour with the king as to be one of the
Barons of the Exchequer in 1311, and in 1314 was summoned as a
parliamentary baron, and afterwards made the Treasurer of the
Exchequer, which office he held several years. He obtained
liberty for free warren in all his demean lands, and a fair to
the manor of Ling in Norfolk, on July 20th, and two days
following. He continued in favour till his death.
In the reign of Edward III., A.D. 1328, the king, by a statute, made
Norwich a staple town for the counties of Norfolk and Suffolk, by
which the trade of the city was much increased. In the
“Paston Letters” we find the following reference to
articles of Norfolk manufacture:
“I pray that you will send me hither two
ells of worsted for doublets, to happen me this cold winter, and
that ye enquire where William Paston bought his tippet of fine
worsted which is almost like silk, and if that be much finer that
ye sh’d buy me, after seven or eight shillings, then buy me
a quarter and the nail thereof for collars, though it be dearer
than the other, for I would make my doublet all worsted for the
honour of Norfolk.”
In 1340, Norwich Castle was made the public prison for the
county of Norfolk, and the custody thereof was committed to the
sheriff. A great tournament was held in Norwich, at which
the king, with his queen Phillippa, was present; and they kept
their court at the bishop’s palace. In 1342 the king
and queen honoured the city with another visit.
In 1344 a new charter was granted, by which the liberty of the
castle was reduced to the outward limits of the present ditch,
and so continues. By this charter, the citizens became
proprietor’s of the ancient fee of the castle, that is, the
castle ditches, and the great croft, now the market place.
In the reign of Richard II., A.D. 1381, Wat Tyler’s rebellion
broke out in London. Insurrection became prevalent
in many parts of the kingdom, manufactures declined, and
discontent became general. Norwich and Norfolk shared in
the general plunder at the hands of armed bands. Under John
Lyster, Litister, or Linster, a dyer, 50,000 men attacked the
city and committed great depredations. They were, however,
pursued to North Walsham by the king’s troops under the
command of Henry Le Spencer, Bishop of Norwich, and
defeated. Their leader and many of his adherents were taken
and executed for high treason. They were hung, drawn, and
quartered, according to the barbarous usage of the times.
In 1399, the bailiffs having put the city into a proper posture
of defence, openly declared for Henry Duke of Lancaster, son and
heir of John of Gaunt, the late deceased duke, their especial
friend. On this declaration, Henry gave them strong
assurances that, whenever it was in his power, the charter which
they so earnestly desired for electing a mayor, &c., should
be granted them, and he was afterwards as good as his word.
The great connection there was between John of Gaunt and this
city, arose through William Norwich, a knight, who was a friend
of the Duke’s, and who frequently visited the town, for
which he always expressed great regard. In 1389, the great
John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, visited this city, and was
honourably received.
In the first year of Henry IV., Sir Thomas Erpingham, knight,
a Norfolk man, Warden of the Cinque Ports, and Lord Chamberlain,
obtained the King’s Charter, dated at Westminster, February
6th, 1399, confirming all the former charters ever granted to the
city. In 1409, through the interest of Sir Thomas, a grant
was made to the city for a certain term of years of the alnage
and survey of all manner of worsteds made in Norwich and
Norfolk.
St. George’s Company took its
rise in the second half of the fourteenth century, and consisted
of a society of brethren and sisters associated in honour of the
Martyr St. George, who by voluntary contributions supported a
chaplain to celebrate service every day in the cathedral before
the altar, for the welfare of the brethren and sisters of the
Guild, whilst living, and of their souls when dead. In this
state they continued till the fourth year of Henry V., when that
prince granted them a charter dated at Reading, incorporating
them by the name of the Aldermen, Masters, Brethren, and Sisters
of the Fraternity and Guild of St. George in Norwich; and
empowering them to choose yearly, one Alderman and two Masters,
and to make all reasonable orders and constitutions for their own
government; to have a common seal; to sue and be sued; and to
maintain a chaplain to pray daily for the health of the king, the
alderman, masters, and sisters whilst alive, and their souls when
dead; and lastly to purchase £10 per annum in
mortmain. The prior, mayor, sheriffs, and aldermen of the
Guild, had power to expel or remove any member for bad
behaviour. In consequence of this charter, ordinances were
made for the well-governing of the society, and for yearly
choosing one alderman, four masters, and twenty-four
brethren, for the Assembly or Common Council. In 1451, by
the mediation of Judge Yelverton, the disputes between the Guild
and the city were settled; when it was agreed that the mayor for
the time being should yearly, on the day after the Guild, be
chosen Alderman of the Guild for the year following his
mayoralty, that the Assembly of the Guild should consist of
twenty persons, and that the common council of the city should be
eligible for admission into the company, but be liable to the
charge of the feast. Indeed, the chief object of the Guild
was feasting. Every brother took an oath on
admission. The Aldermen and Common Council of the Guild had
power to choose such men and women, inhabitants of the city, to
be brethren and sisters of the Guild, as they might think
fit. But no man living out of the city could be chosen
unless he was a knight, esquire, or gentleman of note. Many
other orders were made in regard to their procession, which was
always very grand. This Guild, with the other ancient
crafts or companies of the city, made a very splendid appearance
on all public occasions. The companies were then on the
same footing as those of the city of London now are, and some of
the trades long continued as a fraternity, and chose wardens
among themselves. From the Friday after May day, to the
Friday before the Guild day, the members of St. George’s
Company used to meet every evening at the Guildhall in the Market
Place, where they refreshed themselves with as much sack and
sugar rolls as they pleased, besides two penny cakes from the
baker’s. Being thus assembled they sent for
the last chosen feast-makers, and asked them whether they
intended to bear the charges of the feast, “which”
(said they) “will cost you more than you
think.” By this they so terrified timorous, wary
people, that they were persuaded to buy it off, though, had they
agreed to make the feast, it would not have cost them much more
than £6 or £7, which sum they were glad to
save. The Company continued till February 24th, 1731, when
the committee appointed for the purpose reported to an assembly
held that day, that they had treated with St. George’s
Company, who had agreed to deliver up their charters, books, and
records, into the hands of the corporation, provided the latter
would pay their debts, amounting to £236 15s. 1d., which,
being agreed to, they were accordingly delivered up and deposited
with the city records in the Guildhall. Thus terminated
this ancient feasting company by the surrender of all their goods
to the corporation.
At the commencement of this century
(in 1402) the grand affair of obtaining a new charter occupied
the greater part of the time of the citizens, but as nothing
could be done without the concurrence of Bishop Spencer, they at
last found means to soften him, and to obtain his promise that he
would not oppose them in this their favourite object. All
obstacles being now removed, they offered to lend Henry 1000
marks, which so far obliged the king that he was willing to give
them as full a charter as they could desire. This was
accordingly done, and the new charter was granted on January
28th, 1403. By this charter the city obtained a full power
of local self-government.
Henry V. began his reign on March 20th, 1412, in which year
the city was in great disorder, occasioned by the disputes
between the Mayor and the Commons, respecting the election of
mayors, sheriffs, and other officers of the corporation, and the
powers granted by the charter, concerning which they could not
agree. These contentions exhausted the city
treasury, and at length they were settled by the mediation of Sir
Robert Berney, John Lancaster, William Paston, and others.
The burgesses who served in Parliament in this reign were R.
Brasier, R. Dunston, W. Sedman, J. Biskelee, H. Rufman, W. Eton,
J. Alderfold, W. Appleyard, R. Baxter, and Henry Peking.
In 1422 the doctrines of the Reformation were introduced into
the city, and several persons were executed as Wickliffites or
Lollards. A large chalk pit, in Thorpe Hamlet, on the
outskirts of the city, is to this day called
“Lollards’ Pit.”
Henry VI., when only nine months old, was proclaimed king on
August 31st, 1422, and in his reign a general persecution of the
Lollards broke out in this diocese. The Lollards were men
who earnestly desired the reformation of the church, and they
were followers of that great and good man John Wickliffe, but
they were called Lollards as a name of infamy. They were so
zealous for the truth that they chose rather to suffer grievous
torments and death than forsake their faith. On this
account about 120 persons were persecuted for their profession of
the pure gospel of Christ.
On June 6th, 1448, the king paid a royal visit to the city,
and among other preparations the gates were decorated, and the
King’s arms, and the arms of St. George, were painted and
raised on six of the gates. In 1449, his Majesty paid
another visit, after a sojourn with the Earl of Suffolk at
Costessey. The king entered Norwich by St. Benedict’s
Gate, which was especially ornamented for the occasion. These
peaceable entries, with the picturesque pomp of a royal
procession, always pleased the loyal citizens.
In 1452, it being rumoured that Edward earl of March, son to
the duke of York, was advancing towards London, the queen, much
terrified thereat, tried to make as many friends as she could,
and for that purpose came to this city, when, in full assembly,
the Commons resolved to advance 100 marks as a loan to the king;
and the aldermen at the same time presented the queen with 60
marks, to which the Commons added 40 more, so that the king had
now 200 marks of the city. The citizens then obtained a new
charter, dated March 17th, and consented to in full
parliament. It contained a restitution of all liberties, a
general pardon of all past offences, and a confirmation of all
former charters.
In 1460, during the contest between the houses of York and
Lancaster, the mayor and aldermen raised forty armed men and the
Commons eighty, and appointed Wm. Rookwood, Esq., their captain,
with whom they agreed for six weeks’ pay, at six-pence a
day for each soldier, and sent them to the assistance of the
king, who wrote them a letter of thanks, with a request that they
would maintain the soldiers for one month longer, which was
readily complied with. In 1474, the king visited the city,
and was presented with a sum of money by way of benevolence; but
in the following year the city had to pay £80 6s. 11d. for
the forces employed in France.
In July 1469, Elizabeth Woodville, the queen of Edward IV.,
visited Norwich and remained here several days. Her
majesty, with a great retinue, entered the city through
“Westwyk Gate,” which was decorated for the
occasion. John Parnell was brought from Ipswich to exercise
his skill in ornamentation; and under his superintendence, a
stage covered with red-and-green worsted was erected, adorned
with figures of angels, escutcheons, and banners of the royal
lady and the king, with a profusion of crowns, roses,
fleur-de-lys, &c. Gilbert Spurling exhibited a fragment
of the salutation of Mary and Elizabeth, which required from him
a speech in explanation.
In 1486, being the 1st Henry VII., on the rebellion of Lambert
Simnel, who assumed the name of Edward Plantagenet, the king,
expecting an invasion of the eastern parts of his kingdom, made a
progress through Norfolk and Suffolk to confirm the inhabitants
in their loyalty, and spent his Christmas at Norwich, when the
city made him a handsome present. Hence he went a
pilgrimage to Walsingham, so famous for its pretended miracles,
where he made his vows; and after he returned victorious, he sent
his banner to be offered there as an acknowledgment of his
prayers having been heard.
The monastic institutions of this city might claim the honour
of having some learned men connected with them in the 15th
century. Thomas Brinton, or Brampton, a monk of Norwich,
attained to such an eminence in the schools of England that his
fame was spread abroad, and he was sent for by the pope to
Rome. He often preached before the pope in Latin, and being
first made his penitentiary was afterwards raised to the see of
Rochester. His sermons preached before the pope were
published, with some others. John Stow, who flourished in
1440, was a Benedictine monk of the monastery of St. Saviour, in
Norwich, and doctor of divinity of Oxford. It appears, by
his works, that he was at the council of Basil. His works
were The Acts of the Council at Basil; various
Collections; and Solemn Disputations, &c.
John Mear, a monk of Norwich, and D.D. of Oxford, was a person of
subtle art for explaining difficulties. He was divinity
reader at several monasteries, and the author of several works,
which have all been lost.
At the commencement of this century
most of the houses in the city were built of wood with thatched
roofs. This accounts for the number of fires which broke
out at different times, and which, in 1507 and 1509, reduced a
large portion of the city to ashes, no fewer than 718 houses
being consumed in the latter year. These conflagrations
induced the corporation, in 1509, to issue an order that no
newly-erected buildings in the city should be covered with
thatch, but this injunction not extending to those previously
erected, some few still retain this dangerous covering.
In 1501, John Rightwise, then mayor, began building the cross
in the Market Place, and finished it in 1503. It was a
commodious and handsome pile, but falling into decay, it was sold
by the Tonnage Committee in 1732 for £125, and soon
afterwards it was taken down. About 1506, St.
Andrew’s Church was built, near the site of the old church
of St. Christopher.
Henry VIII. began his reign on April 22nd, 1509, when the city
was in a state of great distraction, on account of
the terrible fires which caused much destruction of
property. In that year a great part of the cathedral, with
its vestry, and all the ornaments and books were destroyed by a
fire, which broke out on St. Thomas’ night. In 1515,
the Lady Mary, sister to the king, and her consort the Duke of
Suffolk, visited the city on their return from France, and were
nobly entertained. Henry VIII., while he continued a
papist, burned the reformers; and when in a fit of anger he
disowned the pope and assumed the English tiara, he was no less
zealous against both Papist and Puritan, who would not bind their
consciences to his royal decrees. During the prelacy of
Richard Nykke or Nix, the bigotted bishop of Norwich, several
church reformers were burnt here and at other places.
In 1517, Cardinal Wolsey visited the city to mediate between
the citizens and the monks, but their disputes were not finally
settled till 1524, when the jurisdiction of the convent was
ascertained and separated from that of the corporation until
1538, when they were converted into a dean and chapter.
On March 2nd, 1520, Queen Catherine and Cardinal Wolsey
visited the city, and all the city companies went to meet the
queen “in Puke and Dirke Tawney Liveries,” and the
city presented her with 100 marks.
In 1522, in consequence of the many vexatious suits in the
Sheriff’s Court for words and trifling debts, it was agreed
that four aldermen be named, one out of each of the great wards,
to sit in person, or by deputies, every Wednesday, from eight
till nine in the morning, to adjust all debts under two
shillings, and all actions on words, for the ease and peace of
the city. This institution was of great benefit, and in
some measure answered the purpose of the old Court of
Conscience.
In 1524, on September 2nd, through the mediation of Cardinal
Wolsey, a composition and final agreement was sealed between the
prior and the city at the Guildhall, by which the city resigned
all jurisdiction within the walls of the priory, the whole site
thereof being hereby acknowledged to be part of the County of
Norfolk and in the Hundred of Blofield; and the church gave up
all right of jurisdiction in every place without their walls and
within the walls of the city; so that now, Tombland, with the
fairs kept thereon, and all things belonging to those
fairs—and Holmstrete, Spytelond, and Ratten Row, with their
letes—were adjudged to belong to the city, and to be part
of the county thereof. The prior and convent and their
successors were also exempted from all tolls, customs, and
exactions whatever, by land or water in the whole city, or county
of the city and its liberties, for goods or chattels bought or
sold for the use of the prior and convent, their households, or
families.
In 1525 the king granted the city another charter, confirmed
likewise by parliament, in which the late composition and
agreement between the city and prior was fully recited and
established, and new privileges were granted.
In 1530 the king was declared supreme head of the church of
England; and was acknowledged so by act of parliament in
1535. In the latter year an act was passed for
recontinuing liberties in the crown, by which all cities,
boroughs, and towns corporate, had their liberties and privileges
fully confirmed.
A short account of the martyrdom of Thomas Bilney, in 1531,
may serve to illustrate the persecuting spirit of the age.
He had renounced the tenets of the Church of Rome, and was
condemned on the following passages extracted from two sermons
which he had preached in 1527, at Ipswich.
“Our Saviour Christ is our Mediator between
us and the Father; what need have we therefore for any remedy
from saints? It is a great injury to the blood of Christ to
make such petitions, and blasphemeth our Saviour.”
“Man is so imperfect by himself, that he can in no wise
merit by his own deeds.”
“The coming of Christ was long prophesied before, and
desired by the prophets; but John Baptist, being more than a
prophet, did not only prophesy, but with his finger shewed Him,
saying, ‘Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh
away the sins of the world.’ Then, if this was
the very Lamb which John did demonstrate, that taketh away the
sins of the world, what injury is it to our Saviour Christ, that
to be buried in St. Francis’ cowl should remit four parts
of penance? What is then left to our Saviour Christ, which
taketh away the sins of the world? This I will justify to
be a great blasphemy to the blood of Christ.”
“It is great folly to go on pilgrimages; and preachers
in times past have been antichrists; and now it hath pleased God
somewhat to shew forth their falsehoods and errors.”
“The miracles done at Walsingham, Canterbury, and
Ipswich, were done by the devil through the sufferance of God, to
blind the poor people; and the Pope hath not the keys that St.
Peter had, except he followeth Peter in his living.”
“Christian people should set up no lights before images
of saints, for saints in heaven need no lights, and images have
no eyes to see; and, therefore, as Ezechias destroyed the brazen
serpent that Moses made by the commandment of God, even so should
the kings and princes of these times destroy and burn the images
of saints set up in churches.”
It was further deposed against Bilney, that he was notoriously
suspected to be a heretic, and that in his sermons he had
exhorted the people to put away their gods of silver and gold,
and to desist from offering to them either candle, wax, money, or
any other thing; and that in rehearsing the litany he said,
“pray you only to God and no saints;” and when he
came to that part, Sancta Maria, &c., or, O Saint Mary pray
for us, he called out, “stop there.”
These and many other articles of the like nature being proved,
he was exhorted to recant and abjure them; and upon his refusing
to do so, the Bishop of London, having pulled off his cap, and
made the sign of the cross on his forehead and breast, pronounced
the following sentence:—
“I, by the counsel and consent of my
brethren here present, do pronounce thee, Thomas Bilney, who has
been accused of divers articles, to be convicted of heresy; and
for the rest of the sentence we will deliberate till
to-morrow.”
The
next day Bilney was again asked whether he would recant and
return to the unity of the church; when he desired a day or two
for consideration and to consult his friends. In fear of a
dreadful death at the expiration of the time, he subscribed his
abjuration; and being absolved, he had the following penance
enjoined him; to bear a faggot at the procession at St.
Paul’s, bareheaded, and to stand before the preacher during
the sermon there, and to remain in prison till he should be
released by Cardinal Wolsey. When in prison, the reflection
on what he had done drove Bilney almost to despair, and he
suffered all the agonies of remorse for more than twelve
months.
At length he resolved to seal that truth which he had so
shamefully abjured, with his blood. For this purpose he
travelled to Norwich, and on his way to the city he openly
preached those doctrines for which he had been condemned; and
being apprehended, was confined in one of the cells under the
Guildhall. On August 19th, he was taken to Lollards’
pit, outside of Bishopsgate, and burnt there in the presence of a
crowd of horrified spectators.
This and many other instances may serve to show the
persecuting spirit of a church which had arrogated to itself a
dominion over the consciences of men, and dared to propagate a
religion of fear as the religion of Christ. After the
Reformation, which had now begun, the same persecuting spirit was
manifested by the Church of England; and many suffered here for
their nonconformity to the Establishment. Several other
martyrs were burnt in Norwich during the same reign, and in
1539, one William Leyton, a monk of Eye, in Suffolk, was burnt
here, for speaking against a certain idol which used to be
carried about in procession at Eye; and for asserting that the
sacrament ought to be administered in both kinds.
In the same year peace and amity were settled between the
church and the city on a much more stable foundation than had
been previously effected, by an arrangement as to jurisdictions
of the authorities.
In 1534 an act was passed for rebuilding those parts of the
city which were laid waste by the late fires; by which it was
enacted that if the owners of such void grounds should, by the
space of two years after proclamation made by the mayor for all
persons to rebuild or enclose their grounds, neglect to rebuild
on such ground, or sufficiently enclose the same with mortar and
stone, then it should be lawful for the mayor, etc., to enter on
such vacant grounds, and hold and retain them to their own use
and their successors’ use for ever, discharged of all rents
and outgoings whatsoever, provided that, within two years after
such entry made, they either rebuild or enclose them as
aforesaid.
If, in giving an account of the state of society in the middle
ages, we were to omit from our enumeration of causes the vast
influence of the clergy of the church of Rome, we should present
a very imperfect view of the subject. The priests dominated
over the minds of men for many centuries, and their influence
either for good or evil pervaded all classes of society.
This influence caused the erection of monasteries, nunneries,
priories, and friaries, nineteen in number, in Norwich before the
16th century. Monastic institutions were originally
beneficial to society. In the dark ages, they preserved
learning to some extent, and were houses of refuge for the
destitute. No doubt there were many good self-denying men
and women amongst the monks and nuns, who did some service to the
poor who then abounded in the land. But in time the
monasteries sunk for the most part into dissolute
confraternities; stupid and sleepy, where not vicious; and banded
together against the liberties of the nation; and there were
constant broils between the monks and the citizens in
Norwich.
The king having entirely renounced the authority of the church
of Rome, and assumed the title of Head of the Church of England,
caused a very strict inquiry to be instituted into the state of
all monastic institutions. This inquiry resulted in their
suppression, more for the gratification of the monarch’s
avarice than from his desire to benefit his subjects; and most of
the monks in Norwich and Norfolk, as well as in other parts of
England, were sent adrift with small pensions. The king,
indeed—in revenge for being excommunicated by the
pope—suppressed 1148 monasteries in England, whose revenues
amounted to £183,707 yearly. He either seized the
property for himself or divided it amongst his favourites, and
the Duke of Norfolk obtained a great part of it in Norwich.
The dissolution of those ancient institutions caused a great deal of
poverty; the priests were driven out homeless over the land, and
the poor had no houses of refuge and no means of relief.
In 1538, Thomas Cromwell, lord privy seal, the king’s
vicegerent, sent injunctions to all bishops and curates, charging
them to take care that an English bible of the largest size be
placed open in each parish church, for every one to have recourse
to. The open bible was generally read in this city and
elsewhere, and this, no doubt, promoted the reformation of
religion. In spite of the tyranny of kings, the domination
of priests, and the superstition of the people, the Reformation
still advanced, and the national mind was emancipated by degrees
from ancient thraldom.
In 1545, one Rogers, of Norfolk, was condemned and suffered
martyrdom, for opposing the six articles of an act passed for
abolishing diversity of opinions in religion. This act
inflicted the penalty of death upon those—1st, who by word
or writing denied transubstantiation; 2nd, who maintained that
communion in both kinds was necessary; 3rd, or asserted that it
was lawful for priests to marry; 4th, or that vows of chastity
might be broken; 5th, or that private masses are profitable; 6th,
or that auricular confession is not necessary to salvation.
The king died on the 28th January, 1546; and his exequies were
celebrated here with great pomp, as appears from the
chamberlain’s account; though what good he ever did for the
city it would be hard to say. He was a king who spared no man in
his anger and no woman in his lust. In his reign, 72,000
persons were hung for political offences or for the crime of
poverty as a warning to others. The “Merry
England” of those days was in fact a terrible country to
live in. Men were beaten, scourged, branded with hot irons,
and killed without mercy or limit.
Edward VI. was proclaimed king on January 28th, 1546; and on
February 25th, his coronation was celebrated with much pomp in
Norwich, where great rejoicings took place. Six large guns
were fired on Tombland; the populace were treated with plenty of
beer; and bonfires were lighted in several of the streets.
There was a grand procession with a pageant, in which the king
was represented by an effigy of king Solomon.
On March 8th, 1546, Edward VI., and the executors of his
deceased father, granted to the mayor, sheriffs, citizens, and
commonalty, the hospital of St. Giles’ in this city, now
called the Old Men’s hospital, with all the revenues
belonging thereto for the maintenance of poor people dwelling
therein, all which the late king had promised to give them at the
request of the citizens, a short time before his death.
Norwich has always been noted for its civic feasts and good
cheer; and Bale, writing at this time (1549), in his
“Continuation of Leland’s Antiquities,”
says:—
“Oh, cytie of England, whose glory standeth
more in belly chere than in the searche of wisdome godlye, how
cometh it that neither you nor yet your ydell masmongers have
regarded this most worthy commodytie of your countrye? I
mean the conservacyon of your antiquyties, and of the
worthy labours of your learned men. I thynke the renowne of
such a notable act would have much longer endured than of all
your belly banquettes and table triumphes, either yet of your
newly purchased hawles, to keep St. George’s feast
in.”
And again he says:—
“I have been also at Norwyche, our second
cytie of name, and there all the library monuments are turned to
the use of their grossers, candelmakers, sope sellers,
&c.”
Small credit is here given to the city for the patronage and
promotion of intellectual pursuits.
In 1549 the city was the scene of an insurrection resembling
that of the Jacquerie in France, and the War of the Peasants in
Germany. The facts of this local rebellion were simple
enough. The poor people objected to the enclosure of waste
lands, in the neighbourhood of Attleborough and Wymondham, by the
nobility and gentry, who had been put in possession of the abbey
lands, which had been previously appropriated for the use of the
poor, who still considered that they had a right of commonage on
the waste lands and open pastures. The rebellion commenced
at Eccles, Wilby, Attleborough, and the neighbouring villages,
the inhabitants of which were enraged at Mr. John Green, lord of
the manor of Wilby, who had enclosed that part of the common
belonging to his manor, which had from time immemorial been open
to the adjoining commons of Hargham and Attleborough, and in
which the people had enjoyed all rights of intercommoning with
each other. The people continued quiet till Wymondham fair,
on July 7th, when they collected in large numbers. The
leaders of the movement, accompanied by a large number of others,
went to Morley, about a mile from Wymondham, and laid open the
new enclosures; and on returning to Wymondham, they destroyed all
the fences by which the commons and wastes were enclosed.
John Flowerdew, of Hethersett, incensed at the destruction of his
fences, gave forty pence to a number of the country people to
throw down the fences of Robert Kett, alias Knight, whose pasture
lay near Wymondham Fairstead. They carried out his wishes
to the full, and on the following morning returned to Hethersett,
where, at Kett’s instigation, they laid open other
enclosures of Flowerdew’s. After this, the rioters
appointed Robert Kett and his brother William, a butcher, to be
their captains, and the movement soon assumed the form of an
organized rebellion. The numbers of the rebels quickly
increased, and marching on Mousehold Heath, they took possession
of the mansion of the Earl of Surrey; and thence proceeded to lay
siege to the city. They held courts of justice under a
large tree, called the “Oak of Reformation:” and
having augmented their numbers to 16,000 from the citizens, and
strongly fortified their camp, they summoned the city to
surrender. For months they maintained hostilities, and the
country round was pillaged and laid waste, until at length they
gained an entrance to the city, and took the mayor and
several councillors prisoners to their camp. A strong force
was thereupon sent down for the defence of the city, under the
Marquis of Northampton, and a regular battle was fought at the
base of the hill on St. Martin’s Palace Plain. In
this engagement Lord Sheffield was slain; and the rebels, having
forced the Marquis to retreat, plundered the city, and set fire
to it in many parts. In short, all attempts to quell this
violent insurrection were ineffectual, till a large army, which
had been raised to proceed against the Scots, was ordered to
march to the relief of Norwich, under the command of the Earl of
Warwick, who arrived under the city walls on the 23rd of
August. On the following day, after making an ineffectual
offer of pardon to the insurgents, on the condition that they
should lay down their arms, the king’s troops commenced
their attack; and having made several breaches in the walls, and
forced open some of the gates, they soon entered the city, and
took possession of the Market Place. In the midst of this
scene of blood, the king’s ammunition carriages, having
entered apart from the main body of the army, were captured by
the enemy, but were soon retaken by a detachment from the Market
Place. A large body of the rebels still remaining in the
city now made a lodgement on Tombland, and through their superior
local knowledge, greatly annoyed the soldiers by posting small
parties at the angles of the different streets leading to the
Market. The Earl of Warwick, however, brought out his whole
force to scour the city, and the rebels, after setting fire to
their camp, were obliged to quit their post on the hill and retreat to
Dussyn’s Dale, on Mousehold, resolving to finish the
business by a general engagement in the valley.
On August 27th, being re-enforced by a newly-arrived
detachment of troops, the Earl marched out of the city to attack
the rebels, to whom he again offered pardon, provided they would
quietly lay down their arms; but, confident in their numbers,
they refused to capitulate. A bloody conflict ensued, but
the rebels, being unaccustomed to the discharge of artillery,
were soon in confusion. Of this the Light Horse took
advantage, and advancing to the charge, drove the rebels from the
field and pursued them with great slaughter. Over 3000 were
killed, and about 300 of the ringleaders were afterwards
executed. The gates of the city suffered much damage during
this insurrection. The rebels set Bishop’s gate on
fire, with some of the houses in the street, and those belonging
to the Great Hospital. Pockthorpe, Magdalen, St. Augustine,
Coslany, and Ber Street gates, shared the same fate. When
the disturbances ceased, the repair of the city generally was
commenced, and especially of the gates. Outside Magdalen
Gates a gallows was erected, at which place and at the cross in
the Market Place 300 rebels were executed. Two, styled
prophets, were hanged, drawn, and quartered, their heads being
placed on the towers, and their quarters on the gates.
Robert and William Kett were tried in London for high treason
and rebellion, and convicted. On November 29th, they were
delivered to Sir Edmund Windham, High Sheriff of the counties of
Norfolk and Suffolk, to receive punishment. Robert was
conveyed to Norwich, and being brought to the foot of the castle,
was drawn up to a gibbet erected at the top, and there left
hanging alive till he died by famine; and his body, being
entirely wasted, at length fell down. A similar sentence
was executed upon William, who was suspended alive upon the top
of Wymondham steeple. This fearful rebellion having been
thus brought to an end, the citizens, after the departure of the
kings troops, began to repair the damages to the walls and
gates. Unhappily, however, their trials were not yet over,
for the late disastrous occurrences were followed by such a
scarcity and dearness of provisions, that the corporation issued
an edict, requiring all the wealthier inhabitants to find corn
for their own households elsewhere, so that their poorer
neighbours might have the exclusive benefit of the city
markets.
The Princess Mary was proclaimed here on July 18th, 1553, and
was the first English Queen in her own right, and the people of
Norwich and Norfolk rushed to her standard, impelled by the
memory of Kett’s rebellion. The queen was a bigoted
Roman Catholic, and in her reign popery was revived in its worst
form, associated with all the atrocities of the most sanguinary
persecution. Protestants were gathered like fuel for
burning; and as for the Puritans, no fate could be too severe for
them.
In March, 1556, William Carman, of Hingham, was burnt in
Lollards’ pit, outside of Bishop’s Gate. He was
charged with being an obstinate heretic, and actually having in
his possession a bible, a testament, and three psalters in the
English tongue.
On July 13th, of the same year, Simon Miller, merchant of
Lynn, and Elizabeth Cooper, a pewterer’s wife, of the
parish of St. Andrew, were burnt together in Lollards’
pit. On August 5th, Richard Crashfield, of Wymondham,
Thomas Carman, William Seaman, and Thomas Hudson, were burnt for
heresy in the same place.
On July 10th, 1557, Richard Yolman, a devout old minister,
seventy years of age, was burnt for heresy. He had been
curate to that learned and pious martyr, Mr. Taylor, of
Hadleigh.
As if a judgment had come on the country for such atrocities,
the quartan ague and a new sickness soon afterwards raged so
violently, that it was said that “fire, sword, and
pestilence,” had swept away a third part of the men of
England; and it is recorded that ten of the Norwich aldermen fell
victims to the latter scourge.
During this short reign, the city was afflicted by the
presence of those merciless persecutors, Bishop Hopton and
Chancellor Dunnings, at whose instigation several martyrs to the
reformed religion were burnt here in 1557 and 1558. Happily
the career of this bigoted, blood-thirsty, priest-ridden queen,
was cut short, and a new and brighter era dawned upon the
nation.
This queen ascended the throne on Nov. 7th, 1558, and was
proclaimed here on the 17th of the same month. She was a
zealous promoter of the Reformation. The form of worship
used in the churches was similar to that in the time of Edward
VI.; but the protestants were almost as intolerant in this reign
as the Romanists had been before, though they claimed the right
of private judgment; and the principle of toleration was not
recognised for centuries by any church, or sect, or party.
In 1561, on the Guild day, the Duke of Norfolk, and the Earls
of Northumberland and Huntingdon, with many other nobility and
gentry, dined with the Mayor, William Mingay, Esq., in St.
Andrew’s Hall, which could scarcely contain the company and
their retinue. The entertainment is said to have been very
magnificent, and the expense of the feast amounted to 32s.
9d.
In 1565, the prosperity of the city, which had begun to
decline, was again revived by the settling here of 330 Flemings
and Walloons, who had fled from the Netherlands, from the rigid
persecution under the sanguinary Duke of Alva. In 1570, by
the fostering encouragement of Queen Elizabeth, the number of
these foreign settlers had increased to 3925, and by the
introduction of bombazine, and other manufactures, they
contributed much to the wealth and prosperity of Norwich.
During the long reign of Elizabeth, numerous
conspiracies were formed for the re-establishment of Popery, and
in 1570, John Throgmorton, Thomas Brooke, and G. Redman, were
hanged and quartered here for having joined in these traitorous
enterprises. In 1572, the Duke of Norfolk and several other
noblemen were attainted and beheaded for similar offences, at
London, York, and other places. The Duke not only espoused
the cause of Mary, Queen of Scots, but even offered to marry that
Roman Catholic Princess.
In 1574, a rumour was spread of invasion by the so-called
invincible Armada. Norwich, towards the general defence,
exhibited on its muster roll 2120 able men, of whom 400 were
armed; the total number enrolled in the whole county of Norfolk,
being at the same time, 6120 able men, of whom 3630 were
armed. Happily there was no occasion for their services,
the Armada being destroyed by a storm at sea.
Queen Elizabeth made a progress through Suffolk and Norfolk,
from the 16th to the 22nd August, 1578. She came on
horseback from Ipswich to Norwich, though she had several coaches
in her train; and she lodged in the Bishop’s Palace.
For several days she was entertained by splendid pageantries,
principally allusive to the trade and manufactures of the
city. Whilst here she dined publicly in the North Alley of
the Cathedral Cloister, and often went a hunting on horseback,
and to witness wrestling and shooting on Mousehold heath.
The city records contain full details of the pageantries on the
occasion of the royal visit. In no other city was the Queen
received with greater cordiality and pageantry than in
Norwich. The corporation, the inhabitants, the clergy, with
the nobility and gentry of the county, contributed largely to
afford the royal lady as pleasant and costly a reception as
should be pleasing to her as a spectacle, and demonstrative of
exuberant loyalty. This joy was soon turned into mourning;
for, says a record known as the Norwich Roll, “The
trains of Her Majesty’s carriage being many of them
infected, left the plague behind them, which afterwards increased
and contynued, as it raged about a year and three
quarters.” Nearly 5000 fell victims to this dreadful
malady.
In 1578, Matthew Hamond, of Hethersett, wheelwright, a heretic
and blasphemer, being convicted of reviling the queen and of
denying the authority of the Scriptures, the Godhead, the
atonement of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the existence of the Holy
Ghost, was set in the pillory on May 13th, and both his ears were
nailed. Afterwards, on May 20th, he was burnt in the castle
ditch. In 1587 and 1588 Francis Knight and Peter Cole, of
Ipswich, were burnt in the same place for their deistical
sentiments.
The Reformation was not only stayed, but thrown backward by
this arbitrary, despotic queen. Though she was well
disposed to reformation in the abstract, yet the fear of popish
influence and a jealousy for her ecclesiastical authority over
the church, made her act in the spirit of the worst excesses of
popery. She persecuted all who disputed her authority in
religious matters. In vain did the exiles return, hoping
for peace and “freedom to worship God.” The
expulsion of a multitude of clergy, who refused to conform to
many impositions, and the many hardships suffered by the
puritans, especially in Norfolk and Suffolk, evinced that no
concession was to be expected from her. Her great idol was
perfect uniformity. To enforce it, she passed many laws,
which made nonconformity worse than felony, and she treated the
Puritan as a rebel against all authority, both human and
divine. A beautiful “Memorial” of the ministers
of Norfolk is still preserved in vindication of their loyalty,
and in advocacy of greater liberty of conscience. The
result of it, however, was that seven or eight of them were
suspended in Norwich. But instead of this being the means
of stopping the progress of Puritanism, the sincere inquirers
after truth were incited by such harsh measures to fresh
investigations, and more emboldened to declare their views.
In 1582, on a second return made of the strangers settled
here, they were found to be 1128 men; 1358 women; 815 children,
strangers born; 1378 children, English born; in all 4679.
The whole population was about 15,000, and the citizens continued
to return burgesses to parliament from time to time, but not so
frequently as in former reigns. During this reign William
Kemp, a comic actor of high reputation, and greatly applauded for
his buffoonery, danced a morris dance all the way from London to
Norwich in nine days, and was accompanied by crowds of people as
he passed on from town to town. When he arrived in Norwich
he was very kindly treated by the citizens, who turned out to
meet him in large numbers.
Norwich Pageants were celebrated during the
middle ages, and occupy a large space in the records of the
corporation. Books of the several companies relating to the
pageants have been lost except that of St. George, but some
additional information has come to light on the subject. A
series of extracts were made early in the last century from the
Grocers’ book, showing the proceedings and expenditure of
that company in regard to their pageants from 1534 to 1570, and
also the versions of the plays in 1533 and in 1563. All the
plays of that period were called mysteries or miracle plays, and
were founded on bible history. The play was performed in a
carriage called a “House of Waynscott, painted and builded
on a cart with fowre whelys.” Painted cloths were
hung about it, and it was drawn by four horses, “having
head stalls of brode inkle with knoppes and tassels.”
The vehicle had a square top with a large vane in the midst, and
one for the end, and a large number of smaller ones. The
company was evidently unable to afford the cost of four horses in
1534; only one was hired, and four men attended on the pageant
with “Lewers.” One of the plays was called
“Paradyse,” and was performed by the Grocers and
Raffmen. It begins much in the same manner as the Coventry
play, with God the Father relating the planting of the garden of
Eden, the creation of man and placing him there, and God’s
intention to create woman. The other characters are
Lucifer, Adam, and Eve, who exhibit the incidents related in
Genesis. Of the good taste or propriety of these
entertainments any observation is needless. They formed a remarkable
feature in the life of the middle ages, and show the childishness
of the people. The dialogues in all these plays are puerile
doggerel.
Dr. Legge.
Few of the citizens of Norwich could make any pretensions as
to birth, whatever they might say about their birth-place.
Among the natives of this city of obscure parentage may be
mentioned Thomas Legge, LL.D., who was educated in Trinity
College, where he was fellow, as also at Jesus College, till he
was chosen by Dr. Kaye as second master of Kaye’s
College. He was Dean of the Arches, one of the Masters of
Chancery, twice Vice-Chancellor of the University of Cambridge,
and thirty-four years Master of Kaye’s College.
Justus Lipsius eulogised him as a very excellent antiquary, and
as an oracle of learning. He was a great benefactor to this
college, bequeathing £600 for the building of the east part
thereof, besides several lesser liberalities. Thomas Bacon,
the fifteenth Master of Gonville Hall, had done great damage to
it, and left it in debt; but Dr. Legge and his two successors
repaired all losses, acting not so much like the masters as the
stewards of the house. Dr. Legge was the author of two
tragedies, namely, “The Destruction of Jerusalem,”
and “The Life of King Richard III.,” which last was
performed before Queen Elizabeth, with great applause, in
St. John’s College Hall. The doctor died July 12th,
1607, leaving the college his heir, and he was buried in it, so
that he left his native city only the barren honour of his
name.
John Kaye.
John Kaye, or as he is sometimes called, Caius, was born at
Norwich in 1510, and studied in Gonville Hall, Cambridge, from
which he removed to travel abroad. He took his degree of
M.D. in the University of Padua. In the reign of Edward VI.
he was appointed principal physician at court, a place which he
enjoyed under both the Queens Mary and Elizabeth. The
College of Physicians of London elected him one of their Fellows,
and he presided over that body several years. Being very
rich and desirous to promote learning, he procured a charter from
Queen Elizabeth dated 1565, to turn Gonville Hall into a College;
and he endowed it with the greater part of his estate. He
lived as an ornament to his profession till July, 1573, when he
died, aged 63, at Cambridge. He wrote the
“Antiquities of Cambridge,” an excellent book; and he
presented it to James I. as he passed through his college.
The King said, “Give me rather Caius de
Canibus,” a work of his as much admired, but hard to be
got. He was master of his college for some time, but in his
old age he resigned that office to Dr. Legge, a fellow commoner
in his college, and a native of Norwich.
Archbishop Parker.
Archbishop Parker, a native of Norwich, flourished in this
reign, and was a great benefactor to the city. He was born
August 6th, 1504, being the son of William Parker, a wealthy
citizen. He was educated at the Grammar School here, and in
1520 he was sent to Corpus Christi College, where he took his
degrees of B.A., M.A., and D.D., before 1538. The Queen
afterwards appointed him Archbishop of Canterbury, and he was
very active in persecuting the Puritans here. He was the
author of many works which showed much learning. He died on
May 17th, 1575, and was buried in Lambeth Chapel.
This was a very eventful period in
the annals of the city. The century opened with storms and
inundations in the physical world, heralding commotions in the
political world. On April 9th, 1601, a sudden storm of hail
and rain passed over the city, whereby the upper part of the
Cathedral spire, which had been lately repaired, was beaten
down. It fell on the roof of the church, which it broke
through, doing great damage to it as well as to the walls of the
choir. The spire was split on the south-east side from top
to bottom.
James I. was proclaimed king on March 24th, 1602; and soon
after he was seated on the throne he granted a general pardon to
the mayor, sheriffs, and commons of this city, for all past
offences. The local occurrences were not very important
during this reign of 23 years. There were, however, great
disturbances between the citizens and Dutch strangers respecting
trade rights and privileges.
In
1602, the plague raged with unusual fury in this country.
As many as 30,578 persons died in London, and 3076 in
Norwich. This visitation was attended with so great a
scarcity of food, that wheat sold for ten, rye for six, and
barley for five shillings per bushel. In the summer of
1609, the city was again visited by the plague, though but few
died of it.
At the assizes held August, 1617, a dispute arose between Sir
Henry Montague, Lord Chief Justice of the Court of Queen’s
Bench, and John Mingay, Esq., then Mayor, concerning
precedence. This was occasioned by the indiscretion of Sir
Augustine Palgrave, Sheriff of Norfolk, who had imprudently
informed the Chief Justice that it was his right to sit in the
chair at the preaching place in the Green yard, with the Mayor on
his left hand. This the Mayor opposed, resolutely asserting
his right to the chair; and the Chief Justice as resolutely
insisted, being misled by the information of the sheriff.
But this matter was afterwards set right, and the sheriff was
obliged to acknowledge his error, after having been severely
reprimanded by the Judge for misleading him. On the next
day, a contest of the same kind happened between the High Sheriff
and the Sheriffs of Norwich; when, to prevent any disputes of the
like nature in future, it was determined that only the High
Sheriff should attend the Judges when they are upon the county
business, and only the Sheriffs of Norwich when they are on the
city business.
Charles I. was proclaimed king, on March 1st, 1625. The
mayor of Norwich, stewards, justices, sheriffs, and aldermen,
were present at the ceremony.
On
March 31st, 1625, Charles I. was proclaimed in Norwich, and on
May 13th following, Thomas, Earl of Arundel and Surrey,
Earl-Marshal of England, was appointed Lord-Lieutenant of the
county of Norfolk, and of the city of Norwich, and county of the
same.
On October 19th, 1625, the citizens petitioned the king to be
released of taxes, on account of their poverty and the ravages of
the plague; and in 1641, the citizens petitioned Parliament, to
be discharged from paying £2500 assessed upon them, on
account of their great poverty and the impossibility of raising
the money.
In 1626, writs of quo warranto were brought against the mayor,
&c., for refusing to furnish two ships of war demanded of
them; and the corporation, on the trial, which took place in
1629, obtained a verdict in their favor, having proved that they
neither used nor usurped any privileges but what their charters
warranted. During this contest the city raised a sum of
money, and presented to the king by way of loan, as settled by
the lord keeper, lord treasurer, comptroller, and chancellor of
the duchy of Lancaster, who came hither for that purpose.
In 1627, an order arrived for levying 250 foot soldiers in the
city of Norwich and county of Norfolk, of which number the
citizens were ordered to furnish 25; but they would raise no more
than 17, that being their full proportion.
During this reign the plague raged with great violence in the
city and county. On July 12th, 1625, the king issued a
commission to the mayor, &c., to scour the city ditches, to remove
all nuisances in and about the city, to repair the walls and
turrets, and to tax all residing in the several wards, according
to their ability, toward the work; it being thought very
necessary, in order to stop the plague which had been brought
from Yarmouth, and begun to spread here. The mayor had
previously requested the bailiffs at Yarmouth to order all the
wherrymen to carry no infected persons dwelling in their town to
the city. Constables of every ward gave notice that no
person coming from London should be entertained without notice
given to the aldermen of their ward; and watch was set at every
gate, day and night, to hinder all persons coming from infected
places entering the city, and the carriers were commanded to
bring no such persons, nor any wool whatever.
Notwithstanding all this caution, the plague began to spread, so
that on July 23rd, the aldermen of every ward appointed
“Searchers” in each ward, to be keepers of such
persons as were suspected of being infected. The bellman
warned all the citizens to take their dogs and swine outside of
the walls, on pain of being killed. On July 30th, the watch
of the gates ceased, it being known that the plague raged within
the city. Twenty-six persons died of it in that week; and
before August 11th, it had so much increased, that it was
resolved that every alderman should have power to send his
warrants to the city treasurers to relieve the infected persons;
and the plague abated that very week. Orders were issued
that the doors of all persons who died of the disease should be
nailed up and watched. Every one who begged about the
streets was whipped, because all the poor were then relieved, so
that no one had any excuse for begging for food.
In 1634, under date of March 23rd, a letter signed by the
king, was directed to the mayor, sheriff, and aldermen, requiring
their constant attendance at the sermon preached every Sunday
morning, either in the Cathedral or Green yard, and that they
would be there at the beginning of the service, after the manner
observed in the city of London; and that none be absent without
the consent of the bishop. On this point a court was held,
and it was ordered that the mayor and court should constantly
meet at the Free School, and thence proceed to church agreeably
to his majesty’s instructions; the king having great regard
for their spiritual welfare.
The first parliament of the reign of Charles I., in 1625, has
been severely censured on account of the penurious supply which
it doled out for the exigencies of a war in which its
predecessors had involved the king. Nor is the reproach
wholly unfounded. A more liberal proceeding, if it did not
obtain a reciprocal concession from the king, would have put him
more in the wrong. But the Puritans in parliament formed a
majority, and were determined not to vote money without a redress
of what they deemed to be grievances. The king finding he
could not obtain the supplies he required from the House of
Commons, determined to rule without a parliament, and to
raise money by some other means. Hence the contests between
the king and the parliaments, which were often called and soon
dissolved. This served only to aggravate the embarrassments
of the crown. Every successive House of Commons inherited
the feelings of its predecessor, otherwise it would not have
represented the people. The same men, for the most part,
came again to parliament more irritated and difficult of
reconciliation with the sovereign than before. Even the
politic measure, as it was fancied to be, of excluding some of
the most active members from seats, by nominating them sheriffs
for the year, failed of the expected success because all ranks
partook of a common enthusiasm.
In 1642, July 12th, the parliament voted and declared the
necessity of recourse to arms, and on the 29th of the same month,
Moses Treswell was apprehended for attempting to enlist men into
the king’s service, after having been forbidden to do so by
the corporation. The citizens supposing that this act would
be deemed a declaration against their sovereign, ordered a double
watch to be set in every ward, and a provision of all military
stores to be made. They received a letter from the
parliament thanking them for their great services in sending up
Captain Treswell, and exhorting them to raise the militia, and to
prevent anyone from levying troops within their jurisdiction
without consent of parliament. Soon afterwards, the king
issued proclamations requiring the assistance of his subjects
against the rebels, but no regard was paid to them in Norwich. On
the other hand, the magistrates ordered a general muster of the
trained bands and volunteers, and put the city into the best
state of defence, fearing an attack from the gentlemen of Norfolk
and Suffolk who had declared for the king. As a further
proof of their zeal they sent fifty Dragoons for Colonel
Cromwell’s regiment, which composed part of the troops
under Lord Grey of Wark, raised for the preservation of the peace
in the associated counties of Norfolk, Suffolk, Essex,
Cambridgeshire, Hertfordshire, and Huntingdonshire. As soon
as these had marched, the magistrates raised a hundred more
dragoons, and to mount them, gave orders for seizing the horses
of those citizens who favoured the cause of the king, and who
were called malignants. On March 13th, the city raised
fifty more Dragoons, and on March 26th, 1643, a hundred men were
ordered to be raised and sent to Cambridge to re-enforce the
associated army. The weekly contribution levied by
parliament on the county was £1250 in the following
proportions: Norfolk £1129, Norwich £53, Lynn
£27, Yarmouth £34 16s. 5d., Thetford £5 11s.
9d. On April 2nd, being Easter day, Captain Sherwood
marched to Lynn with a hundred volunteers to secure that town
from any sudden surprise by the king’s forces. On
August 12th, a meeting of the associated counties was appointed
on account of the danger with which the city was threatened by
the approach of the enemy, and the castle was ordered to be
fortified. Lincolnshire was also admitted amongst the
associated counties. Lynn was garrisoned by the forces of
the parliament, and fortified at the expense of the
Association. On November 18th, four of the Court,
representing the Association, were fined £10 each for want
of expedition in collecting the proposition money, and the Earl
of Manchester ordered the immediate assessing and levying of such
sums of money as should have been raised by any edict of
parliament. This stringent commission was carried out by
force of arms.
In 1643, it having been agreed between the English and Scotch
commissioners that £100,000 should be immediately advanced
to the Scots, to enable them to put their army in march for
England, an order was sent down to Norwich for levying
£6000, part of the said sum in the following proportions;
in Norwich, £265; in Yarmouth, £174; in Lynn,
£132; in Thetford, £27 18s. 9d., and the remainder in
the county of Norfolk.
By order of the Court, on March 9th, 1644, seven pictures,
taken from St. Swithin’s Church, the Angel and Four
Evangelists from St. Peter’s, Moses and Aaron and the Four
Evangelists from the Cathedral, and other paintings, were
publicly burnt in the Market Place. A committee was
appointed to “view the churches for pictures and
crucifixes,” in consequence of which, these over-zealous
Reformers committed all kinds of outrages and excesses by
destroying monuments in the churches, and burning valuable
paintings, as stated by Bishop Hall in his “Hard
Measure,” a pamphlet on the proceedings of the
Puritans. On Christmas eve, 1645, the mayor issued orders to
all the city clergy commanding them neither to preach, nor to
administer the sacrament, in their respective churches on the day
following, and to the inhabitants, charging them to open their
shops as on other days; so little did the Puritans in that age
understand the principles of toleration.
In 1648, a petition was presented to the mayor, &c.,
signed by 150 persons, praying for a more speedy and effectual
reformation, and complaining that their faithful ministers were
discouraged and slighted; the ejected ministers countenanced and
preferred; old ceremonies, and the service book constantly used,
and the directory for worship almost totally neglected; and
further praying, that the ordinances against superstition and
idolatry might be put in strict execution; “so, shall the
crucifix on the cathedral gate be defaced, and another on the
roof of the cathedral neere the west door in the inside, and one
upon the free school, and the image of Christ on the parish house
of St. George at Tombland be taken down, and many parish churches
more decently made for the congregations to meet in.”
The mayor, John Utting, paying little regard to this petition,
was sent for to London, and Mr. Alderman Baret put in his
place. After he was gone, the common people, having a great
affection for the mayor, went to the committee house, then on the
site of the present Bethel, where the gunpowder was kept, and set
fire to ninety-five barrels, which killed and wounded about one
hundred persons and greatly damaged the adjacent buildings.
For this outrage six of the perpetrators were hanged in the
Market Place.
On January 30th, 1649, King Charles was beheaded at
Whitehall. Soon after the death of the king the House of
Commons published a decree to forbid the proclaiming of Charles
Stuart, eldest son of the late king, or of any person whatsoever,
on pain of high treason; and afterwards enacted that the kingly
office should be abolished as unnecessary, burdensome, and
dangerous; and that the state should be governed by the
representatives of the people without king or lords, and under
the form of a Commonwealth.
In 1650, on discovery of an intended insurrection in Norfolk
in favour of King Charles, which was to have broken out on
October 7th, several of the conspirators were apprehended and
tried at the new hall, in Norwich, before three judges,
commissioned by the parliament for that purpose. Their
sitting continued from December 20th to December 30th, and they
condemned twenty-five persons, who were all executed, some of
them at Norwich and others in different parts of Norfolk.
On June 24th, 1654, an ordinance was published for the six
months’ assessment for the maintenance of the armies and
fleets of the Commonwealth, at the rate of £120,000 per
month for the first three months, and £90,000 per month for
the rest. Towards each monthly payment of the last sum,
Norwich raised £240 and Norfolk £4660. On
August 29th, an ordinance was issued for ejecting scandalous and
insufficient ministers and schoolmasters; whose qualifications were to be
tried by commissioners appointed for that purpose in every
county. In consequence of this ordinance many able divines
in the kingdom were ejected from their livings, and their places
filled by such as best suited the views of the ruling
party. During the Commonwealth, the city was put in defence
against the royalists, the castle was fortified for the service
of Cromwell, the goods of the bishops and clergy were
sequestrated, the bishops palace was sacked, the cathedral and
churches were plundered and defaced, and Bishop Hall was turned
out and driven into retirement at his palace in Heigham, which is
still in existence, being used as a tavern called the
Dolphin. He died there and was buried in the old church in
Heigham. We shall speak more at length of this
distinguished prelate in our notice of “The Eminent
Citizens” of the 17th century.
On the death of Oliver Cromwell, which happened on September
3rd, 1658, the mayor of Norwich, like the mayors of other towns,
received letters from the privy council, notifying that event and
the election of his son Richard Cromwell to the dignity of
Protector, and commanding him to proclaim the said Richard
protector of the three kingdoms, which was done accordingly on
the seventh of that month. The new protector’s
honours were, however, but of short continuance; for in the month
of April, 1659, the army obliged him to dissolve the parliament
which he had convoked, and soon afterwards deposed him from his
high office. During the fatal contentions respecting the
prerogatives of the crown and the privileges of parliament,
the city suffered less than might have been expected, and Norfolk
less than many other counties.
The citizens, tired of strife and commotion, were among the
first to hail the return of monarchy in the person of Charles
II., who was proclaimed here on May 10th, 1660, and the sum of
£1000 was presented to His Majesty, on behalf of the city,
by the mayor, who received the honour of knighthood. In
1663 the king granted to the city the charter by which, with
little interruption, it was governed till 1835, when the
municipal act came into force. In 1670, Lord Howard
presented the corporation with a noble mace of silver gilt, and a
gown of crimson velvet for the mayor. In 1671, the king and
queen and many nobles visited the city, and were entertained in
grand style at the palaces of the bishop and the Duke of
Norfolk.
In 1682, a majority of the corporation surrendered to the king
the charter which he had granted them nine years before, and in
lieu of it a new one was substituted not so favourable to the
city; the king having reserved the right of removing magistrates
of whom he did not approve.
In 1687, by the mandate of James II., ten aldermen and
nineteen councillors were displaced; but the arbitrary conduct of
that monarch soon brought about his ruin, and when Henry, Duke of
Norfolk, rode into the Market Place at the head of 300 knights
and gentlemen and declared for a free parliament, the
corporation and citizens responded with loud acclamations.
After the glorious revolution of 1688, the first charter of
Charles II. was restored to the city, and the aldermen who had
been removed were reinstated in their offices.
William and Mary, king and queen of England, began their reign
on February 13th, 1688, and during their reign the city
flourished exceedingly, and the country in general was
prosperous.
In 1697 the coin was regulated afresh, the old money being
called in and recoined, for which purpose, mints were established
in various places, among others one in this city, which coined
£259,371. The quantity of coin and plate brought in
here to be coined was 17,709 ounces.
We may here give the statements of two eminent writers
respecting Norwich and Norfolk in this century. Sir Thomas
Browne, jun., in 1662, wrote as follows about the city and
county:—
“Let any stranger find me out so pleasant a
county, such good ways, large heaths, three such places as
Norwich, Yarmouth, and Lynn, in any county of England, and
I’ll be once again a vagabond and visit to them.”
And he wrote so with good reason. Few, if any, of the
cities of England then contained more handsome buildings, or
presented so good an appearance as did the old city of Norwich,
while only London and Bristol surpassed her in the extent and
importance of their commerce. Lord Macaulay, in his graphic
History of England thus describes the state of the city in the
17th century:—
“Norwich was the capital of a large and fruitful
province. It was the residence of a bishop and of a
chapter. It was the seat of the manufacture of the
realm. Some even distinguished by learning and science had
recently dwelt there, and no place in the kingdom, except the
capital and the universities, had more attractions to the
curious. The library, the museum, the aviary, and the
botanical gardens of Sir Thomas Browne were thought by the
Fellows of the Royal Society well worthy of a long
pilgrimage. Norwich had also a court in miniature. In
the heart of the city stood an old palace of the Duke of Norfolk,
said to be the largest town house in the kingdom out of
London. In this mansion, to which were annexed a tennis
court, a bowling green, and a wilderness extending along the
banks of the Wensum, the noble family of Howard frequently
resided. Drink was served to the guests in goblets of pure
gold; the very tongs and shovels were of silver; pictures of
Italian masters adorned the walls; the cabinets were filled with
a fine collection of gems purchased by the Earl of Arundel, whose
marbles are now among the ornaments of Oxford. Here, in the
year 1671, Charles and his court were sumptuously entertained;
here, too, all comers were annually welcomed from Christmas to
Twelfthnight; ale flowed in oceans for the populace. Three
coaches, one of which had been built at a cost of £500 to
contain fourteen persons, were sent every afternoon round the
city to bring ladies to the festivities, and the dances were
always followed by a luxurious banquet. When the Duke of
Norfolk came to Norwich he was greeted like a king returning to
his capital; the bells of St. Peter’s Mancroft were rung,
the guns of the castle were fired, and the mayor and aldermen
waited on their illustrious citizen with complimentary
addresses.”
Bishop Hall.
Dr. Hall, Bishop of Norwich, the first English Satirist, was a
noted character in this century. He was born July 1st,
1574, in Bristow Park, within the parish of Ashby de la Zouch, in
Leicestershire. He was educated by a private tutor till he
was fifteen years of age, when he removed to Cambridge, and was
admitted to Emmanuel College, of which he was a chosen scholar,
and took the degree of Bachelor of Arts. His satires were
published in 1597, 1598, and 1599, and added greatly to his
reputation by their pungency and classical style. They
equal the satires of Juvenal and Persius on similar themes, and
in lashing the vices of the age.
Dr. Hall, in 1624, refused the bishopric of Gloucester, but in
1627 he accepted that of Exeter, holding with it in
commendam the rectory of St. Breock in Cornwall. At
this time he seems to have been suspected of a leaning to the
Puritans, and it must be allowed that his religious views were
more consonant with theirs than with the lax Arminianism of
Laud. But at the same time, Dr. Hall was a zealous
supporter of the church.
On November 15th, 1641, he was translated, by the little power
left to the king, to be Bishop of Norwich, but having joined with
the Archbishop of York and eleven other prelates, in a protest
against the validity of such laws as should be made during their
compulsory absence from parliament, he was ordered to be sent to
the tower, with his brethren, on the 30th of January
following. Shortly afterwards they were impeached by the
Commons for high treason, and on their appearance in parliament
were treated with the utmost rudeness and contempt. The
Commons, however, did not think fit to prosecute the charge of
high treason, having gained their purpose by driving them from
the House of Lords, and Hall and his brethren were ordered to be
dismissed; but upon another pretext they were again sent to the
tower. In June following, Hall was finally released on
giving bail for £5000! He returned to Norwich, and
being received with rather more respect than he hoped for, in the
then state of public opinion, he resumed his duties, frequently
preaching to large congregations, and enjoying the forbearance of
the predominant Puritan party till April, 1643, when the
destruction of the church was contemplated. About this
time, the ordinance for sequestrating notorious delinquents
having passed, and our prelate being included by name, all his
rents were stopped, his palace was entered, and all his property
was seized. A friend, however, gave bond for the whole
amount of the valuation, and the bishop was allowed to remain a
short time in his palace. While he remained there, he was
continually exposed to the insolence of the soldiery and mob, who
demolished the windows and monuments of the cathedral. At
length he was ordered to leave his palace, and would have been
exposed to the utmost extremity, if a neighbour had not offered him
the shelter of his humble roof. Some time afterwards, but
by what interest we are not told, the sequestration was taken off
a small estate which he rented at Heigham, to which he
retired. The house in which he lived, now called the
Dolphin Inn, is still standing, and should be carefully preserved
as a memorial of a great and good man.
Bishop Hall, in his tract Hard Measure, has given a
most touching account of the treatment he experienced. He
says in his tract “The Shaking of the Olive
Tree:”—
“It is no other than tragical to relate the
carnage of that furious sacrilege whereof our eyes and ears were
the sad witnesses, under the authority and presence of Linsey,
Tofts the sheriff, and Greenwood. Lord, what work was here;
what clattering of glasses, what beating down of walls, what
tearing up of monuments, what pulling down of seates, what
wresting out of irons and brass from the windows and graves, what
defacing of armes, what demolishing of curious stone work which
had not any representation in the world, but only of the cast of
the founder, and skill of the mason; what toting and piping upon
the destroyed organ pipes, and what a hideous triumph on the
market day, before all the country, when, in a sacrilegious and
profane procession, all the organ pipes, vestments, both copes
and surplices, together with the leaden crosse which had been
newly sawn down from over the green yard pulpit, and the service
book and singing books that could be had, were carried to a fire
in the public Market-place; a lewd wretch walking before the
train in his cope trailing in the dirt, with a service book in
his hand, imitating in an impious scorne the tune and usurping
the words of the litany formerly used in the church. Neer
the publick crosse all these monuments of idolatry must be
sacrificed to the fire, not without much ostentation of a zealous
joy in discharging ordinance to the cost of some who professed
how much they longed to see that day.”
The good bishop’s sufferings did not damp his courage,
for in 1644, we find him preaching in Norwich whenever he could
obtain the use of a pulpit; and with yet more boldness, in the
same year he sent A modest offer of some meet considerations
in favour of Episcopacy addressed to the Assembly of
Divines. During the rest of his life he appears to have
remained at Heigham, unmolested, performing the duties of a
faithful pastor, and exercising such hospitality and charity as
his scanty means permitted. He died, September 8th, 1656,
in the 82nd year of his age, and was buried in the church of St.
Bartholomew, in Heigham. In his will, he says:—
“I leave my body to be buried without any
funeral pomp, at the discretion of my executors, with the only
monition that I do not hold God’s house a meet repository
for the dead bodies of the greatest saints.”
He left a family behind, according to Lloyd, of whom Robert,
the eldest son, was afterwards a clergyman, and D.D. His
wife died in 1647. His prose works were published at
various periods in folio, quarto, and duodecimo. They were
collected in a handsome edition of 10 vols., octavo, by the Rev.
Josiah Pratt, and are his best memorials. The
“Meditations” have been often reprinted. As a
moralist, he has been called the British Seneca.
Sir Thomas Browne.
Sir Thomas Browne flourished in this century in Norwich, as a
Physician. Dr. Johnson wrote a memoir of him, from which we
learn the following particulars. He was born in London, in
the parish of St. Michael, in Cheapside, on October 19th,
1605. Of his childhood or youth there is little known,
except that he lost his father very early; that he was, according
to the common fate of orphans, defrauded by one of his guardians;
and that he was placed for his education at the School of
Winchester. He was removed in 1623 from Winchester to
Oxford, and entered a gentleman commoner of Broadgate Hall, which
was soon afterwards endowed and took the name of Pembroke
College, from the Earl of Pembroke, the Chancellor of the
University. He was admitted to the degree of B.A., January
31st, 1626–7, being the first man of eminence who graduated
from the new college, to which the zeal or gratitude of those
that love it most can wish little better than that it may long
proceed as it began. Having afterwards taken his degree of
M.A., he turned his attention to physic. He practised it
for some time in Oxfordshire, but soon afterwards, either induced
by curiosity or invited by promises, he quitted his settlement
and accompanied his father-in-law, who had some employment in
Ireland in the visitation of the forts and castles, which the
state of Ireland then made necessary. He left Ireland and
travelled on the Continent, and was created an M.D. at
Leyden. About the year 1634 he is supposed to have returned
to London; and the next year to have written his
celebrated treatise, called Religio Medici, or, “The
Religion of a Physician,” which excited the attention of
the public by the novelty of paradoxes, the dignity of sentiment,
the quick succession of images, the multitude of abstruse
allusions, the subtlety of disquisition, and the strength of
language. At the time when this book was published the
author resided at Norwich, where he had settled in 1636, by the
persuasion of Dr. Lushington, his tutor, who was then rector of
Burnham Westgate, in West Norfolk. His practice became very
extensive, and in 1637 he was incorporated Doctor of Physic, in
Oxford. He married in 1641, Mrs. Mileham, of a good family
in Norfolk. He had ten children by her, of whom one son and
three daughters survived their parents. In 1646, Sir Thomas
Browne published his “Enquiries into Vulgar and Common
Errors,” which passed through many editions. In 1658,
the discovery of some ancient urns in Norfolk, gave him occasion
to write “Hydriotaphia, Urn-burial, or, a Discourse of
Sepulchral Urns;” in which he treats with his usual
learning on the funeral rites of ancient nations, exhibits their
various treatment of the dead, and examines the substances found
in the Norfolcian urns. To this treatise on Urn-burial was
added the “Garden of Cyrus; or, the Quincuxial Lozenge, or
Network Plantation of the Ancients, Artificially, Naturally,
Mystically Considered.” He doubted the Copernican
hypothesis, on the same ground as some divines distrust the
Cuvierian system of Geology, as opposed to Genesis. These
were all the tracts which he published, but many papers were
found in his closet. Of these, two collections were
published in 1722, and all his works were issued in a cheap form
by G. H. Bohn, and are in the Norwich Free Library. To the
life of this learned man there remains little to be added, but
that in 1665 he was chosen Honorary Fellow of the College of
Physicians, as a man “Virtute et literis
ornatissimus,” eminently embellished with literature
and virtue. In 1671, he received at Norwich, the honour of
Knighthood from Charles II., a prince, who, with many frailties
and vices, had yet skill to discover excellence and virtue, to
reward it with such honorary distinctions, at least, as cost him
nothing.
Sir Thomas Browne, in 1680, wrote a Repertorium, or
Account of the Tombs and Monuments in the Cathedral Church of
Norwich. The basis of the work was a sketch hastily drawn
up twenty years previously on the information of “an
understanding singing man,” ninety-one years old, in order
to preserve the remembrance of some of the monumental antiquities
which barbarous zeal had destroyed. The reckless character
of these ravages has thus been exhibited in a description made on
the spot and at the moment, by one who suffered in his person,
property, and health.
Thus the knight lived in high reputation, till he was seized
with a colic, which, after having tortured him for about a week,
put an end to his life at Norwich, on his birthday, October 19th,
1682, having completed his 77th year. Some of his last
words were expressions of submission to the will of God,
and fearlessness of death. He lies buried in the Church of
St. Peter Mancroft, within the rails at the east end of the
chancel, with this inscription on a mural monument, placed in the
south pillar of the altar:—
M. S.
HIC SITUS EST
THOMAS BROWNE, M.D.
ET MILES.
Ao 1605. LONDONI NATUS
GENEROSA FAMILIA APUD UPTON IN AGRO CESTRIENSI ORIUNDUS.
SCHOLA PRIMUM WINTONIENSI, POSTEA
IN COLL. PEMBR.
APUN OXONIENSES BONIS LITERIS
HAUD LEVITER IMBUTUS.
IN URBE HAC NORDOVICENSI MEDICINAM
ARTE EGREGIA, ET FŒLICI SUCCESSU PROFESSUS,
SCRIPTIS, QUIBUS TITULI, RELIGIO MEDICI
ET PSEUDODOXIA EPIDEMICA ALIISQUE
PER ORBEM NOTISSIMUS
VIR PIENTISSIMUS, INTEGERRIMUS, DOCTISSIMUS;
OBIIT OCTOBR. 19, 1682.
PIE POSUIT MŒSTISSIMA CONJUX
Da DOROTH. BR.
Mr. Simon Wilkin, F.L.S., in a supplementary memoir, states
that Dr. Browne steadily adhered to the royal cause in perilous
times. He was one of the 432 principal citizens, who, in
1643, refused to subscribe towards a fund for regaining the town
of Newcastle. Charles II. was not likely to have been
ignorant of this, and he had, no doubt, the good feeling to
express his sense of it by a distinction which was, no doubt,
gratifying to Sir Thomas Browne. Sir Thomas is supposed to
have lived in the last house at the south end of the
Gentleman’s Walk, where the Savings’ Bank now
stands. Blomefield asserts that he lived where Dr. Howman
then lived, (1760) and that he succeeded Alderman Anguish in that
house; and Mr. Simon Wilkin says that he ascertained by reference
to title deeds, that the last house at the southern extremity of
the Gentleman’s Walk, Haymarket, belonged, in
Blomefield’s time, to Dr. Howman. This house was for
many years a china and glass warehouse, and tradition has always
asserted it to be Dr. Browne’s residence. The last
occupier was Mr. Swan, and the house was pulled down to make room
for the Savings’ Bank. It contained some spacious
rooms. In the drawing room there was, over the mantel-piece
and occupying the entire space of the ceiling, a most elaborate
and richly ornamented carving of the royal arms of Charles II.,
no doubt placed there by Sir Thomas to express his loyalty, and
to commemorate his knighthood. In Matthew Stevenson’s
poems, 12mo, 1673, there is a long poem on the progress of
Charles II. into Norfolk, in which the honour conferred on Browne
is thus noticed:—
“There the king knighted the so famous
Browne,
Whose worth and learning to the world are known.”
Early in October, 1673, Evelyn went down to the Earl of
Arlington’s, at Euston, in company with Sir Thomas
Clifford, to join the royal party. Lord Henry Howard
arrived soon afterward, and prevailed on Mr. Evelyn to accompany
him to Norwich, promising to convey him back after a day or
two. “This,” he says, “as I
could not refuse I was not hard to be persuaded to, having a
desire to see that famous scholar and physician, Dr. T. Browne,
author of the Religio Medici, and Vulgar Errors,
&c., now lately knighted.” After arriving in
Norwich, Evelyn says:—
“Next morning I went to see Sir Thomas
Browne, with whom I had some time corresponded by letter, though
I had never seen him before. His whole house and garden
being a paradise and cabinet of rarities, and that of the best
collections, especially medails, books, plants, and natural
things. Amongst other curiosities, Sir Thomas had a
collection of the eggs of all the foule and birds he could
procure, that country (especially the promontory of Norfolk)
being frequented, as he said, by severall kinds, which seldome or
never go further into the land, as cranes, storkes, eagles, and a
variety of water foule. He led me to see all the remarkable
places in this ancient city, being one of the largest, and
certainly, after London, one of the noblest in England for its
venerable Cathedralle, number of stately churches, cleanesse of
the streets, and buildings of flints so exquistely headed and
squared, as I was much astonished at; but he told me they had
lost the art of squaring the flints in which they once so much
excelled, and of which the churches, best houses, and walls are
built. The Castle is an antique extent of ground which now
they call Marsfield, and would have been a fitting area to have
placed the ducal palace in. The suburbs are large, the
prospects are sweete, with other amenities, not omitting the
flower gardens, in which all the inhabitants excel.”
At that time the hamlets of Thorpe, Lakenham, and Heigham,
were all fields or cultivated grounds and gardens, and the city
was interspersed with gardens.
Dr. Samuel Clarke.
Samuel Clarke, D.D., was the son of Edward Clarke, one of the
Aldermen of Norwich, where he was born in 1675, and where he was
educated at the Grammar School, his father being at that time one
of the representatives of the city in parliament. In 1691,
he was entered as a student in Caius College, Cambridge, where
his great capacity for learning was soon developed, and where he
became distinguished as a metaphysician, mathematician, and
divine. He was the author of many works, the chief of which
was a “Demonstration of the Being and Attributes of
God.” Upon his entering into holy orders, he became
Chaplain to the learned Dr. Moore, Bishop of Norwich, with whom
he lived in great esteem, having the advantage of the fine
library of that prelate. In 1704, he was called to an
office worthy of all his learning, namely, that of lecturer on
Mr. Boyle’s foundation. He preached sermons
concerning the Evidences of Natural and Revealed Religion, which
will always be highly esteemed. Soon afterwards, he was
presented to the living of St. Bennet’s, near Paul’s
Wharf, London, and where he constantly preached without
notes. In the same year he translated the Optics of Sir
Isaac Newton into elegant Latin, which was so acceptable to
that great philosopher, that he presented £500 to the
divine, being £100 for each of his children. He was
soon after made one of the Chaplains in Ordinary, and in 1709,
Queen Anne presented him to the Rectory of St. James’,
Westminster, when he went to Cambridge and took
his degree of Doctor of Divinity. He died on May 17th,
1729, aged 54 years.
Robert, Viscount of Yarmouth.
In 1683 died the Rt. Hon. Robert, Viscount of Yarmouth, Baron
of Paston, Lord Lieutenant of Norfolk and Norwich. He was
buried at Oxnead. His funeral sermon was preached by the
Rev. John Hildeyard, LL.D., then rector of Cawston, and it was
afterwards published. At page 27 there is the following
passage, referring to the deceased viscount:
“Great was his love to the ancient, loyal,
and honourable corporation of Norwich, because the members of
that body, generally speaking, loved the king; they found him
their friend and, maugre the blast of calumny, the new
charter shall remain a token of it. He spared no cost
nor pains, as themselves can witness, to make the world believe
that he loved them. Most of the tables of his house were
spread together for their entertainment, and all his friends
employed to bid them welcome; nay, his very sleep was ofttimes
broken to find out ways how best to serve them, and he commended
the care of the city with his last breath, to all his best
friends, and the blessing of God.”
Happy corporation, that had such a friend; but Blomefield
says,
“Whatever the Dr. (Hildeyard) might think of
it, the effects of the new charter now began to be too visible,
for Mr. Nic Helwys was chosen mayor, and eleven common council in
room of those eleven of the sixty common council appointed by the
charter, which were not qualified; but such choice was
of no force till confirmed by the king, who sent a letter under
the privy seal, dated at Windsor, May 17th, signifying by the
Earl of Arundel that he approved of them, and the names of the
two elected sheriffs were signified to the Lord Lieutenant, and
that they were persons of loyalty, and therefore they desired his
lordship to give his gracious Majesty information thereof in
order to his approbation.”
Dr. John Cosin.
John Cosin, D.D., was born in this city in 1594, and finished
his studies in Caius College, Cambridge, where he took his last
degrees. When he entered into holy orders he was presented
to a Prebendary in the Cathedral Church of Durham, and appointed
Archdeacon of the East Riding of Yorkshire. But the civil
wars breaking out, and he being an active Papist, he was obliged
to seek refuge abroad till the Restoration in 1660, when he
returned, and was promoted first to the Deanery of Peterborough,
and then to the Bishopric of Durham. He died at Durham,
aged 78, in 1672.
Dr. John Pearson.
John Pearson, D.D., was the son of a Clergyman in Norwich,
where he was born in 1613. He received the first rudiments
of learning at Eton, whence he was removed to King’s
College, Cambridge, where he finished his studies, and took his
degrees. His first ecclesiastical preferment was a
Prebendary of Salisbury; and soon afterwards he was chosen Rector
of St.
Clements, East Cheap, where he remained till 1660, and where he
wrote his learned explanation of the Creed. At the
Restoration, he was appointed Archdeacon of Surrey, and
afterwards he was promoted to the See of Chester, where he
continued till his death, in 1686.
John Goslin.
John Goslin, a native of Norwich, flourished in the 17th
century. He was first Fellow and then Master of Caius
College, in Cambridge, Proctor of that University, and thrice
Vice Chancellor thereof, a general scholar, eloquent Latinist,
and a rare physician, in which faculty he was Regius
Professor. He was a great benefactor to Catherine’s
Hall, but left his native city only the honour of his name.
He died in 1625.
The Rev. John Carter.
The Rev. John Carter was an eccentric character in the city
during this century. He was born at Bramford, in Suffolk,
in 1594, and became upper minister of St. Peter Mancroft,
Norwich, which position he held from 1638 to 1653. He
preached three extraordinary sermons before the corporation,
preparatory to the guild day festival in 1644, 1647, and
1650. The title of the first is “The Nail Hit on the
Head, and Driven into the City and Cathedral Wall of
Norwich;” of the second, “The Wheel Turned by a Voice
from the Throne of Glory;” and the third, “A Rare
Sight; or, the Lyon Sent from a Far Country, and Presented to the
City of Norwich in a Sermon upon the Solemne Guild Day, June
18th, 1650.” The third sermon fills 150 pages, is the
length of several modern sermons, and must have occupied two
hours and a half in the delivery; a terrible long grace to a
guild day dinner. It is ornamented with many wood cuts,
among which is the lion in various attitudes, couchant, guardant,
rampant, passant, &c., giving the preacher opportunities of
displaying his knowledge of, at least, the terms of heraldry, and
sarcastically to apply them to the magistracy. He
says:—
“In one respect, your city arms do very well
befit you. It is a lion with a castle over it. Many
of you can be like lions, very courageous, so long as you have a
castle over you for protection and countenance; but take away the
castle, and who will expose himself to danger? What a
sordid thing is this! There is a lion couchant, but never
did I hear of a lion crouchant, or current, a fearful and
dastardly lion. Who among you will strike down a disorderly
ale-house, if the brewer that serves it be an alderman, a rich
man, or a friend?”
The rest of the discourse is replete with coarse expressions,
biting sarcasms, and party prejudices, not likely to have
edified, and much less to have pleased the congregation.
The Church of Rome reigned supreme
over all Europe for a thousand years, but in the 15th century,
reason revolted against her authority. Lutheranism and
Calvinism were the first forms of the revolt on the Continent,
and they assumed the names of Presbyterianism and Puritanism in
England and Scotland. Norwich, in common with Norfolk and
Suffolk, eventually took up the cause of the Reformation with a
zeal and vehemence which make them stand alone in the annals of
history.
Norwich Nonconformists, in times of the fiercest persecution,
held many prohibited meetings, which were sometimes discovered in
different parts of the city. Norfolk, situated as it is in
the eastern coast, was the refuge of many protestants, who fled
from the Netherlands to escape from the severe persecutions of
the infamous Duke of Alva. Even before this time, there
were many in the county and city who objected to the new service
book, or English liturgy, published by the authority of Edward
VI.
The
Reformation made much progress here in the reign of this young
and pious king; but even then a disposition lingered to retain
and enforce some of the Romanist rites and ceremonies. The
excellent Bishop Hooper, who after all became a martyr, would
probably have lost his life simply for refusing to wear the
priestly vestments, through the rigour of Bishop Ridley (who
himself afterwards suffered martyrdom) had he not at length
consented to wear them at his consecration. The Baptists,
the Unitarians, and all who went beyond the new state model were
consigned to the flames.
Bishop Hooper was born in the year 1495, and was burnt in the
reign of Queen Mary. The sixty years of his life formed the
most important period of English history. When he was born,
the Reformation had just begun; when he died it had struck such
deep roots amongst the people, especially of Norwich and Norfolk,
that neither force, nor persecution, nor argument could stop its
progress. In Bishop Hooper’s time, and in his diocese
of Gloucester, the ignorance of the clergy was amazing. Out
of 311 of his clergy he found 168 unable to repeat the ten
commandments; 31 out of the 168 could not tell in what part of
the Bible the ten commandments were to be found; 40 could not
tell where the Lord’s prayer was given, and 31 did not know
who was the author of it. In Norfolk and Norwich the clergy
were quite as ignorant of Scripture. They practised all
kinds of impositions on the people who were debased by
superstition, immorality, and vice. There was over all the
land a darkness which might be felt. The people had no
bibles nor testaments, and the prayers of the church were all in
Latin, and of course the people could not understand them.
There was scarcely any preaching at all, but instead thereof
profane miracle plays were performed in the cathedral, and were
paid for like any other dramatic performance.
In 1574, so notorious was the city for the nonconformity of
many of the ministers, that when orders were given to Archbishop
Parker “to punish the Puritan ministers, and put down the
prophecyings, and readings, and commenting on the Scriptures,
which had been introduced into the church,” the queen gave
him private orders to begin with Norwich. Accordingly, in
1576, many of the Norwich ministers were suspended and treated so
severely, that even the Norfolk justices presented a petition to
Her Majesty, praying for lenity towards them.
Robert Brown, a clergyman of Norwich, originated the sect of
the Brownists, afterwards called the Independents. He was
at one time a zealous promoter of that system, but English
societies existed before him, holding similar views.
According to Sir Walter Raleigh, 20,000 persons at least held
independent principles of ecclesiastical polity. Amongst
these were many men of great learning and distinction, all of
whom were commanded to quit the realm. Wherever found, they
were imprisoned, with or without law, for life. Elias
Thacker and John Copping suffered death at Bury St.
Edmund’s. John Lewis was burnt at Norwich.
Francis Kett, M.A., for holding “detestable opinions,” was also burnt alive in Norwich.
William Dennys was a martyr in the same cause, at Thetford.
Greenwood, Barrow, and Penry fell as martyrs of conscience.
Johnson, Smith, Answorth, Canne, Robinson, and Jacob, only
escaped by flight to Holland, and found liberty there to form
several churches, and to compose an elaborate account of their
doctrines and principles, a fact which testifies to their
enlightened piety and superior learning.
In the reign of James I. no favour was shown to the Puritans,
but on the contrary, severities were continued. The king
amply fulfilled his threat to the Puritans at the Hampton Court
conference;—“If this be all your party has to
say, I will make them conform or harrie them out of the
land, or else do worse.” By these
proceedings the country was rendered almost destitute of
preachers, and scandalous men undertook the care of souls in
place of the zealous refugees. This King James published
the “Book of Sports,” in vindication of the
encouragement of various games on the sabbath day. Bishop
Kennett styles it “A trap to catch tender
consciences,” and a means of promoting the ease, wealth,
and grandeur of the bishops. This book was, in the next
reign, (Charles I.) republished by the bigotted Archbishop Laud;
and it was ordered to be read in every church throughout the
kingdom. The bishop of Norwich, then Bishop Wren, was very
peremptory on this and other points. He is said to have
driven upwards of 3000 persons to seek bread in a foreign
land. The woollen trade of Norwich, which had been created
by the Flemish refugees, was mostly in the hands of the Puritans,
and the rigorous measures of this prelate nearly destroyed it by
banishing them.
Mr. W. Bridge, M.A., was the lecturer of St. George Tombland,
Norwich, up to the year 1637. He was a pious and learned
man, who held other livings and performed his duties well.
To him, on a certain day, came Bishop Wren’s order to read
the “Book of Sports” on the next Sunday in
church. He sat in dejection, with the odious volume before
him, abhorring the profaneness of its contents and its daring
contradiction of Scripture. He resolved not to read
it. He took counsel of his brethren, and several of them
together refused compliance, fled to Yarmouth, and thence with
sad hearts embarked for Holland, where they spent many anxious
years, hoping to be allowed to return. Laud informed King
Charles I. that Bridge had left two livings and a lectureship and
had fled to Holland; and the king wrote against his name this
bitter sentence: “We are well rid of
him.” It was an expression worthy of a bigoted
and worldly mind. Thus it appears that the reformation was
not the work of kings or bishops, or the great and learned.
The history of those times is the history of persecuting power in
opposition to the progress of the Gospel—an opposition the
more dreadful inasmuch as it was carried on under the pretence of
doing service to religion.
The Reformed Church of England acknowledged the right of
private judgment in theory, but ignored it in practice. The
Puritans, on the other hand, carried it out to its legitimate
consequences; and Milton, their great champion, advocated
absolute freedom of thought and speech as the birthright of every
man. No doubt Puritanism ran into some excesses of bigotry
and intolerance, but it was an intolerant age. Puritanism,
however, preserved civil and religious liberty and the right of
private judgment, and perpetuated that right to all sects and
classes of the nation. Puritanism has been charged with the
sin of schism, but the early reformers were forced into it by
persecution for conscientious scruples respecting points of
doctrine and discipline. William Bridge, Asty, Allen,
Cromwell, and Fynch, all were thrown out of their livings by the
Act of Uniformity, and became Nonconformist ministers in
Norwich. Without any conference the question put to them
was, “Will you upon oath conform?” The
answer was, “We cannot.” Immediate expulsion
followed. Where, then, was the sin of schism? Their
sin would have been in conformity. They would have proved
to the world that they were mere hirelings, like the “Vicar
of Bray,” who changed his religion to please the reigning
sovereign of the day. Bridge, returning with some others to
his native county, founded the first Independent church at
Yarmouth about 1642. A year later the church at Norwich was
formed into a distinct body. They met at first in a
brew-house in St. Edmund’s, afterwards in the refectory
over the cloisters in the convent formerly belonging to the Black
Friars.
We shall now briefly advert to the rise of the Nonconformist
religious denominations in this city, and quote a passage from a
discourse by the Rev. A. Reed, delivered at the Old Meeting
House, Norwich, on February 27th, 1842, on the occasion of the
second centenary. He said,—
“There is no doubt that in or about 1641
many refugees returned to their homes in Norwich, Yarmouth, and
other places. Those who returned to the two former
localities had been united together in fellowship with the church
at Rotterdam. They earnestly desired that, as they had been
companions in suffering, they might not cease to form one
church. The difficulty was where to fix the joint
society. Norwich offered liberty and opportunity. But
the proximity of Yarmouth to the sea was desirable for
safety. Early in 1642 they met, probably in Norwich, to
discuss the point; and agreed to send to Rotterdam for leave to
gather in fellowship here. The assent reached them in the
autumn, authorizing them to form a church at Norwich or other
place. On November 23rd, 1642, they met to form a
church. Most of the members’ names, twelve in all, we
find afterwards attached to the Norwich covenant. They did
not settle the question of place at this meeting. The
Yarmouth church book records a resolution to fix the church at
Norwich for the present. They met again for this purpose,
and the brethren at Norwich, out of an earnest desire to finish
the work of incorporating a church, yielded that the church
meetings (i.e. ordinances and meetings for admission of members)
should be for the present at Yarmouth. The church was to settle
with all convenient speed where most liberty and opportunity
appeared, and wherever the increase of the church was greatest;
but none of them were required to remove their habitations at
present. Soon after this agreement, however, the Norwich
brethren find these concessions too inconvenient; they beg that
the church may be settled at Norwich, and that the Yarmouth
people would remove to the city. At length they consent
reluctantly to part company, and a separate church is formed at
Norwich. But the materials for the society already existed,
and owing to these facts, the early date of 1642 appears to me to
belong as much to us as to our sister society at
Yarmouth.”
The records of the congregational church at Beccles contain
information of much historic value to all the congregational
churches in Norwich, Norfolk, and Suffolk, and from those records
the following particulars are derived. On June 10th, 1644,
the Church at Norwich in the Old Meeting House was regularly
formed. Mr. Oxenbridge, assistant pastor at Yarmouth, and
several of the Yarmouth brethren were present, when the covenant
was adopted and signed afresh. On July 26th, 1647, Mr.
Timothy Armitage was unanimously chosen pastor. The members
were 32 in number.
After the death of Mr. Armitage, in 1655, Mr. Thomas Allen,
M.A., gave up the station he held of “Preacher to the
City” in January, 1656, to become pastor of the Old
Meeting. During his long ministry of 17 years, the cause
continued to flourish, the congregation being large. He
died September 21, 1673.
On
October 9th, 1675, Mr. John Cromwell was ordained pastor, and Mr.
Robert Asty an assistant pastor. Mr. Asty was an ejected
minister of Suffolk, an author, and a useful, devout
preacher. Still the church grew, and was the centre of much
good to the city and county, for many congregations were
established in Norfolk and Suffolk, at Wymondham, North Walsham,
Guestwick, Tunstead, Stalham, Edgefield, and other places.
Then followed, about 1685, Mr. Martin Fynch, who was an
ejected clergyman of Totney, in Lincolnshire. An elaborate
inscription yet remains on his tombstone, to record his worth and
usefulness. He was carried to his grave on the shoulders of
his deacons, amidst great lamentations of the whole church and
congregation. About two or three years before his death, a
handsome and spacious brick edifice was erected, which is the
present Old Meeting House. In 1688, the Revolution promoted
the cause of religious liberty. Many distinguished
residents in the city now joined the nonconformists, and the
resources of the society were increased by endowments left for
the benefit of the poor, and other purposes.
Mr. John Stackhouse succeeded Mr. Fynch in 1690, and continued
pastor for 17 years. Towards the close of his pastorate,
the church began to suffer from its altered circumstances.
It had become far too worldly for its spiritual welfare.
The bonds of unity, so long preserved by Christian charity, grew
weak. The members divided in reference to the choice of a
co-pastor, and the dispute ran so high, that the minister and most of
the congregation were actually driven out of their place of
worship, and were obliged to fit up a meeting house in the ruins
of the Black Friars’ convent. Mr. Stackhouse died
without witnessing a reconciliation between the mutually offended
parties.
Mr. Thomas Scott left the pastorate of the church of Hitchin,
in Herts, and settled in Norwich in 1709. The two parties
were reconciled under his ministry, and he returned to the Old
Meeting House about 1717, under very favorable auspices.
His son, Mr. Nichol Scott, became his assistant, and a most
unhappy difference on a point of doctrine once more kindled the
flame of discord. The son was dismissed in 1737, and
numbers of his hearers left with him. For a time he
lectured in the French Church, but finding little encouragement,
he became a doctor of physic, and practised in the city.
The father’s mind was so shattered by the dispute, that he
became almost unfit for ministerial work. He died in
1746.
Mr. Scott was, in his latter years, assisted by Mr. Abraham
Tozer, who now succeeded to the charge at Norwich. Dr.
Doddridge assisted at his ordination, and Mr. Samuel Wood was
chosen co-pastor with Mr. Tozer. On the removal of the
latter to Exeter, Mr. Wood, afterwards Dr. Wood, held the
pastoral office for twenty years. The church enjoyed, under
his care, a season of prosperity and peace, and the meeting house
was densely crowded. He died, November 2nd, 1767, much
lamented.
Mr. Samuel Newton, who had been assistant preacher, was
ordained pastor February 16th, 1768, and continued in the office
fifty-six years. He gave the second list of the whole
number of members, which had increased to 108. He had five
assistants in succession. Mr. Hull was the last assistant,
and on the death of Mr. Newton, June 29th, 1809, succeeded him in
the pastoral office. The number of members increased to 112
in 1811, and to 156 in 1820. Mr. Hull officiated fourteen
years, and then resigned in consequence of a disagreement with
the deacons. He became a church clergyman and perpetual
curate of St. Gregory’s in this city.
The Rev. Stephen Morell removed from Exeter and was chosen
pastor in June 17th, 1824, and he died in October of the same
year. The church next invited the services of the Rev. J.
B. Innes, of Weymouth, in 1825, and being chosen pastor, he
continued in the office twelve years. He died in April,
1837. He was greatly beloved by his personal friends, and
his character and talents were held in general esteem.
The vacant office was next filled by the Rev. J. H. Godwin,
who was ordained to it on December 6th, 1837. After
fulfilling the pastoral duties for two years, he became resident
tutor of Highbury College. The Rev. A. Reed was then
invited to fill the office, and became pastor over a church of
190 members. He continued till 1855, and then removed to a
wider sphere of labour. The Rev. John Hallett was invited
in the following year, and is now the esteemed minister of the
church. Mr. Hallett, in a recent contribution to the pages
of the Evangelical Magazine on the history of the Old
Meeting House, says:—
“The Rev. A. Reed, B.A., now of St.
Leonard’s, was Mr. Godwin’s successor till
1855. Under his superintendence, bicentenary services,
commemorating the foundation of the church, were held, which,
judging from published and oral reports, must have been of a
stirring and deeply interesting character. Spacious
school-rooms were erected, and large day-schools
established. Many still live in our midst who gratefully
attest the faithfulness and success of Mr. Reed’s
pastorate.
“In April, 1856, the writer was, he believes, divinely
led to occupy the vacant post. For obvious reasons, the
history of the last twelve years must remain untold. It
may, however, be stated that the present pastor, like his
predecessor, has had the privilege of celebrating a
bicentenary. For reasons before assigned, it will probably
be conceded that nowhere was it more proper that a bicentenary
commemoration of the ejectment of 1662 should be held than in
this Old Meeting House, and that a more fitting way of
commemorating it could not be devised than that of enfranchising
the building in which some of them laboured, and the
‘yard’ in which they sleep. This was
accordingly done. The premises, which were leasehold, and
the lease of which was nearly expired, were purchased and
repaired at a large outlay, and then put in trust for the
denomination. ‘Thus, for nearly two centuries, has
the Lord preserved to Himself a worshipping people in this
place. Thousands have found this ancient sanctuary the very
‘House of God,’ and, literally, ‘the gate of
Heaven,’ and are now enjoying the full glory they
anticipated here. And,’ adds my predecessor, with a
thankfulness and faith in which I fully share, ‘still the
waters flow strong and deep, and the banks are green with
promise, and through future ages the brook shall not be dried up,
but with purer, wider, stronger, and more fertilizing
current, shall form one of those millennial streams wherewith the
whole earth shall be watered as a fruitful garden of the
Lord.’”
Mr. Martin Hood Wilkin, in his life of Joseph Kinghorn, gives
the following account of the origin of the Baptist
denomination. A General (Arminian) Baptist Church was
formed in Norwich in 1686 by the learned and zealous Thomas
Grantham. They purchased a part of the White Friars’
Priory in St. James’s, on the site of which they built the
Meeting House now known as the Priory Yard Chapel. From
this Church several members separated at a very early period and
formed the Particular (Calvinistic) Baptist Church, over which
Mr. Kinghorn afterwards presided. Of its history he has
left a somewhat elaborate sketch in the notes of the last sermon
he preached in the Meeting House, in St. Mary’s, before it
was taken down in 1811. He says,
“Of the origin of this Church I find no
record. The first date in our old Church book is
1691. In 1693, we find an account of admonition given to a
brother who had, ‘for several years past,’ withdrawn
himself from the Communion of the Church. * * * I find a
statement of the sentiments of the Church in that time, entitled,
‘The several articles of our faith, in which with one
accord we agree.’ Of the state of the Church I can
say but little. A list of 55 members follows, which appears
to have been the number at that time. Of their minister I
can say still less, except that the second and third articles
in the book are drawn up with that precision which marks the
junction of talent and education, especially at a time when few
had any claim to the advantages of a classical education.
One of these is signed ‘Edward Williams, pastor.’ * *
* * At this time our ancestors met for the worship of God in the
‘Granary,’ in St. Michael’s Coslany.
Their baptisms were performed in the river. At one period,
a friend had premises convenient, and in the memory of some now
alive, they were used for that purpose; but such is the effect of
habit, that the prejudice in favour of a mode so primitive
continued some time after better conveniences were
obtained. From this period nothing of importance is to be
discovered till 1745. Then the premises which stood on this
spot were purchased and the Meeting (house) was erected, which
was nearly two-thirds the size of the present building.
When it was finished I do not find, but from a private record I
am informed, that Mr. Lindoe, who for many years was an
honourable and valued deacon, was the first person baptised in
this house, and this was on March 15th, 1746. From this
period, for some time, the Church seems to have worn a
flourishing appearance on the whole. They had a minister,
Mr. John Stearne, who was evidently a superior man. He died
in July, 1755. Rev. George Simson, M.A., from Cambridge,
accepted a call from Mr. Stearne’s Church, went to Norwich,
in 1758, continued there two or three years, and then removed to
Warwick, where he had formerly been pastor, and where, weighed
down by age and infirmities, he died suddenly in 1763.
After this period there was an evident decline for some years,
though to what extent I am not able to say. Afterwards
there was an appearance of prosperity. In 1766 I find a
list of members again, amounting to 59, the largest number
hitherto met with, but alas! after that period, there was much to
be lamented. There was the evil conduct of some, and a
spirit of division in others, which all tended to mischief. * * *
* But we are now approaching a period within the remembrance of
many of you, in which it will be useless to attempt to trace the
history of events which you know. Suffice it then, to say
that causes already mentioned brought the Church and congregation
down to a very low ebb, when Mr. David, whose name I have heard
so many of you repeat with esteem and affection, first came
here. On his ordination, the list of members that appeared
in the Church book, and which included all the members as they
stood at that time, was only 31; and now events took a
turn. The short period of his life was distinguished by its
utility. The Meeting House became too small for the
congregation, and in 1783, it was enlarged to its present
size.”
Such is Mr. Kinghorn’s account (condensed) of the early
Baptist Churches. After a visit to the North, he returned
to Norwich in July, 1789, and then commenced the long career of
his ministry at St. Mary’s Chapel, though the invitation to
the pastoral office was not received till some months
afterwards. He rigidly adhered to what is called
“strict communion” in his Church, admitting only
those who had been immersed to the Lord’s supper; and on
this point he maintained a long controversy with Mr. Robert Hall,
of Bristol, who advocated “free communion” with all
believers in a Work published in 1815. The Rev. J. Kinghorn
was much esteemed by his numerous friends, including Mrs. Opie,
J. J. Gurney, Esq., Rev. J. Alexander, Bishop Bathurst, Mr. W.
Wilkin, Mr. W. Taylor, and others, of Norwich, and many more men
of learning all over the country. He took rank among the
Nonconformists with Mr. R. Hall of Bristol, Mr. Foster, the
author of Essays on Decision of Character, Mr. Innes, and
Mr. James A. Haldane, of Edinburgh.
The following Tributary Lines are
by Mrs. Opie, on hearing it said that
J. Kinghorn “was fit to die.”
“Hail! words of truth, that Christian
comfort give!
But then the ‘fit to die,’ how fit to live!
To live a bright example to mankind,
‘Feet to the lame and eyesight to the blind!’
To lift the lamp, the word of God, on high;
To point to Calvary’s mount the sinner’s eye;
To tread the path the first Apostles trod,
And earn that precious name, ‘a man of God.’
He lived whom Christian hearts deplore,
And hence the grief—he lives for us no more.
But faith exulting joins the general cry,
He, fit to live, was greatly fit to die!”
Mr. Kinghorn was succeeded by the Rev. W. Brock, who was the
esteemed pastor for many years, and is now the minister of
Bloomsbury Chapel, London. He was followed by the present
minister, the Rev. G. Gould.
The Calvinistic Methodists in Norwich seem to have been
originated by Mr. James Wheatley, who came to the city about
1750, and preached at first in the open-air, on Tombland and the
Castle Hill. Great excitement was produced, and a temporary
building was soon erected, and called the Tabernacle. The
site has been changed, but the name is still retained. The
present Tabernacle was built in 1784.
The
Wesleyan Methodists first appeared in Norwich in 1754, when the
Revs. John and Charles Wesley visited the city, and the Rev. J.
Wesley preached here for some time, and on leaving, appointed Mr.
T. Oliver in his room. One of his successors was the Rev.
R. Robinson, afterwards at Cambridge, who also preached for some
time at the Tabernacle; and another was Dr. Adam Clarke, the
learned Commentator, who was appointed in 1783, but left in
1785. Their first chapel was built in 1769, in Cherry
Lane.
Before we proceed to chronicle the
leading local events of the 18th century, it may not be
altogether unprofitable to review briefly the social state of the
city during some 300 or 400 years preceding. In doing this
we may now and then have to advert to matters to which we have
alluded already; but at the risk even of an occasional
repetition, it will be worth while—in order to help our
readers to appreciate subsequent improvements at their proper
worth—to consider a little more minutely than we have yet
done, the physical circumstances under which the citizens have
lived in former centuries, and the various influences to which
they have been subject.
A “Chapter of Horrors” might be written,
descriptive of the plagues, pestilences, famines, floods, and
fires, which devastated the city and county for 300 years. It would seem as if the darkness and gloom
of the physical world corresponded at times with the
superstitions and vices of the people. The dark ages were
ages of terrible calamities, and England was then a terrible
country to live in. Plagues and pestilences now and again
desolated the whole land, and Norfolk and Norwich did not escape
the ravages of diseases emphatically named the “Black
Death.” Exaggerated accounts must have been given of
the desolations caused by these various scourges, or else both
city and county must have more than once lost the great part of
their inhabitants.
Blomefield is responsible for very dark pictures indeed; but
his statements, right or wrong, have been endorsed by later
compilers of local history. We are told, by one writer, for
instance, that:—
“In 1348, the plague, which had lately
ravaged the greatest part of the known world, broke out in this
city; wherein there died, according to the most credible
accounts, within the space of twelve months, upwards of 57,000
persons, besides religious and beggars; and this will not appear
very surprising, when we consider that in some places not
one-fifth part of the people were left alive, and that Norwich
was more populous at that time than it has ever been since.
It then contained sixty churches, besides conventual ones, within
the walls; and the large parishes of Heigham and Pockthorpe, and
the large chapel of St. Mary Magdalene without them.”
Such is the astounding statement in a local history printed by
John Crouse, in 1768. Where he got his “credible accounts” he does not say, and he
moreover gives the statement of the Domesday Book, that in 1086,
the city contained only 1565 burgesses; so that the population
must have increased in 250 years to a most fabulous extent, for
57,000 persons to have died of the plague in 1348. In 1377,
a census was taken of some large towns, and Norwich was then
found to contain 5300 people. But in truth the number,
57,000, very probably applied to the whole diocese, for the same
local history states:—
“This severe visitation was not confined to
the city alone, but cruelly extended itself all over the diocese;
so that in many monasteries and religious houses, there were
scarce two out of twenty left alive. From the register book
it appears that in the course of the year there were 863
institutions. The clergy dying so fast, that they were
obliged to induct into livings numbers of youths who had but just
received the tonsure.”
The register in question was, no doubt, one of the whole
diocese.
In 1361 there happened a great dearth, attended by the plague;
this was called the second pestilence. And on January 15th,
in the same year, there arose so furious a storm of wind from the
south west, as to throw down the tower of the cathedral, which
falling on the choir demolished a great part of it. The
storm raged violently for six or seven days, and was succeeded by
a prodigious fall of rain, which occasioned incredible damage by
inundations. Where the inundations occurred is not stated
in the local history, but if in the city the damage must
have been great indeed.
In 1369, the plague broke out afresh and carried off great
numbers of people very suddenly. Yet in 1371, the citizens
were commanded to furnish the king with a good barge,
sufficiently equipped for war to serve against his enemies, the
French and Spaniards. This does not indicate that the city
had been almost depopulated only a few years before.
Indeed, during all this time the citizens had been doing their
best by legal contests to hinder Yarmouth being made a staple
town, though they did not succeed.
About 1390 a great mortality broke out in the city, occasioned
by the people eating unwholesome food; and this not so much from
a scarcity of corn as of money to purchase it. The plague
raged greatly in Norfolk and in many other counties, and was
nearly equal in severity to the first great pestilence. So
states the local narrative which we have just quoted; and yet,
according to the census of 1377, as already stated, the
population was only 5300! What reliance then can be placed
on such accounts? The calamities recorded were, no doubt,
sufficiently awful without the aid of exaggeration.
In 1578, the plague again broke out, and continued to rage
nearly two years; destroying 2335 natives and 2482
strangers. During the infection, it was ordered that every
person coming from an infected house, should carry in his hand a
small wand two feet in length; and that no such person should
appear at any court or public place, or be present at any sermon; and
that the inscription, “Lord have mercy on us,” should
be placed over the door of every infected house, and there remain
until the house had been clear of the infection for one month at
least.
In 1583, the plague broke out once more, and 800 or 900
persons died of it, chiefly “strangers;” and in 1588,
the same disease again raged in the city, but not very
violently. Notwithstanding all these awful visitations, no
proper sanitary measures appear to have been adopted.
In 1593, there happened so great a drought, that many cattle
perished for want of water; but it is stated that in the year
following it scarcely ceased raining, day or night, from June
21st to the end of July.
In 1602, the plague again raged with almost unprecedented
fury, there dying thereof 30,578 in London, and 3076 in
Norwich. This visitation, moreover, was attended with so
great a scarcity, that wheat sold for ten, rye for six, and
barley for five shillings a bushel—a very high price in
those days; and the poor in the city must then have been in a
dreadful state of destitution. Again, in the summer of
1609, the city was visited by its former scourge, though but few
died of it. The mayor received a letter from the privy
council to keep up the ancient strictness and severity of lent,
as if the poor had not fasted long enough!
In 1625, we find that something like sanitary measures were
begun. On July 12th of that year, the mayor received a
commission authorising the body corporate to levy a tax on all the
inhabitants, to be applied towards scouring the ditches, and the
removal of all nuisances in and about the city, the better to
prevent the spreading of the plague which had lately broken out
in Yarmouth, having been occasioned by the arrival there of some
infected persons. These precautions not having the desired
effect, the Black Tower, then on Butter Hills, was fitted up for
the reception of the afflicted poor. In September, about 40
died in a week, and the plague raged till May, 1626, when it
began to abate. As many as 1431 persons died while the
disease continued.
In 1646, the plague again made its appearance in Norwich, but
its effects were not very fatal. In 1665, however, it broke
out once more, and made dreadful ravages; carrying off 2251
persons. During its continuance, at the instance of the
County Magistrates, the Market was held in the Town Close, and
the City was not quite cleared of the disease till the end of
1667. The Bishop then ordered September 19th to be observed
as a day of general thanksgiving to God for His great mercy in
putting a stop to the pestilence. All quite right and
proper, but had there been more cleansing as well as praying, the
city might not have suffered so severely. The Corporation
had utterly and entirely ignored its chief duty in regard to all
sanitary rules and regulations. There was scarcely an
apology for a system of drainage, and never a sufficient supply
of water. The poor people were cooped up in narrow yards,
courts, and streets, and, on account of high prices, could seldom
obtain wholesome food. They had a terrible revenge in these
direful plagues, which destroyed the rich in their fine houses,
as well as the poor in their hovels.
Some idea of the social state of the city during this period
may be formed from a few gleanings from the City Records, from
which it will appear, that from the 14th till the 18th century,
though the authorities neglected to improve the sanitary
condition of the city, they took great care to protect the people
from frauds of brewers, traders, and manufacturers, who were at
least strongly suspected of being addicted to dishonest
practices. Mr. R. Fitch, of this city, has published some
interesting notices of “Brewers’ Marks and Trade
Regulations.” These are of great historical interest,
and we therefore make no apology to our readers for reproducing
the following extracts:—
“Scarcely a trade was exempt from these
regulations, some of which were attended with espionage so
peculiar and strict as to lead us to wonder why public opinion,
although in those days admittedly weak, was not so far aroused
as, by its own voice, to free the community from some of the
petty, if not the heavier restrictions.
“Brewers, we discover, had especial symbols of their
own, which they registered when licensed to follow their
occupations, and it was also found that these marks were borne by
successive followers of the same trade, until the business of
succeeding firms became extinguished by the death or retirement
of the last of a long line of brewers, and then only did the
particular symbol fall into disuse.
“From the year 1606 to 1725, no less than fifty separate
marks have been found in the City of Norwich, some of them being
borne as symbolical of a particular brew-house, by eight or nine
persons, who followed each other in one and the same
occupation. These marks were noted in a variety of
documents, belonging to the Corporation, one preserved in their
muniment room. They appeared, for instance, in a
‘Brewer’s book,’ or the book of the
‘Clarke of the Market,’ and in books recording the
proceeding of city courts and assemblies. The following
extracts taken from the ‘Brewers’ Book’ relate
to the government of all brewers’ houses and tippling
houses, fully bearing out the opinion previously expressed as
regards the strictness of the laws by which such places were
regulated.
“‘The enquirie for Brewers to ye Booke of ye
Clarke of ye Market, and is taken out of his booke:—
“‘Items, to be enquired of Ale brewers; whether
they brewe their ale of anie maner of fustie, dustie, or wealved
maulte, mixed or mingled with any hoppes, roson, chalke, or any
other noisome or unwholesome corn or liquor.
“‘And yt they make noe rawe ale or long roping
ale, keeping their Ale fixed, yt is to say, twelve pence highning
and twelve pence lowning in a quarter of maulte. For when
ye mace buy a quart of maulte for two shillings, then ye may sell
a gallon of ye best ale for an halfe penny; three shillings,
three farthings; foure shillings, foure farthings; five
shillings, five farthings; six shillings, six farthings; seven
shillings, seven farthings; eight shillings, eight farthings;
nine shillings, nine farthings; and so forth and no further.
“‘And to sell a quarte of the best ale for a halfe
penny, with measures true sized, and sealed according to the
King’s standard, and doing the contrarie to be
punished.
“Thus it appears that brewing was a very ancient
business in this city in the 16th century, and the best ale was
sold for a half penny per quart before the iniquitous malt-tax
was imposed.
“The following are extracts from the statutes,
&c.
“‘Statute 23, Henry 8. That no Brewer shall
hence forth occupie ye misterie or craft of coupers, no make any
barrells, &c., wherein they shall put their beer or
ale. Penalty 3d. 4d. for every vessell.
“‘Every vessell to be made of seasonable wood, and
marked with ye coupers’ mark, ye contents of every vessell
for Beer, as above said or more.
“‘Coupers not to inhance ye prices of vessells,
but keepe this rate, on forfeit of 3d. 4d. for every vessell,
defective or enhanced, viz. Barrell for beer, ixd.;
Kynderkyn, vd.; Ferkyn, iijd.; Ale Barrell,
xvjd.; Kynderkyn, ixd.; Ferkyn,
vd. Brewers not to put Beer or Ale to sale but
in Barrells, &c., conteyning as above said. And to sell
at such prices as affixed by ye Justices of ye Peace of ye
County, or Maior, Sheriff, or other head officers of City,
Borough, and Town Corporate, under forfeiture as above, under
Beere brewers out of Clarke of Markets book, half to ye king, and
half to him who will sue.’”
“No doubt other traders, as well as brewers and keepers
of tippling houses, were regulated by corresponding laws.
Indeed this appears from the records and orders in the books of
the corporate assembly. In the 8th year of Edward IV., the
mayor issued an order in the name of the king, that brewers were
not to sell yeast, but to give it away to whoever wanted it, as
it had been freely given away time out of mind. By the 4th
and 5th of Philip and Mary, it was enacted
that:—”
“No bere bruer to brewe nor sell to any typpler, or
other person, any bere called doble doble bere, but only two
sorts of bere, viz., best bere and small bere, upon forfeit of ye
beer and cask.”
“According to the Brewers’ Assembly book, 30th
July, 1657, the brewers agreed, by reason of 2/6 excise per
barrel, that they would not sell any strong beer to any ale-house
keeper,
under 12/- per barrel of beer, and excise. It was also
agreed in August, 1657, that ale-house keepers might sell one
wine quart of strong beer for a penny. There were three
sorts of beer of different prices, viz., 4/-, 6/-, and 10/- per
barrel, beside excise. The brewers of beer petitioned
strongly against the tax of 2/6 per barrel, as a great hardship
and injustice. The names of 40 brewers are recorded in this
city, from 1600 to 1725.”
“Brewers’ marks are entered as early as 1606, and
as late as 1725. The mark, No. 1, John Boyce, was first
borne by Henry Woodes, in 1606, and after him by five successive
brewers, ending with this John Boyce, in 1725. As yet, the
regulations relating to trade marks generally are very
imperfectly known, leaving a wide field of research to those who
desire further information. The same marks passed from one
brewer to his successors, and they were held in all their
integrity, till within a century and a half of our own
time. It would be an important contribution to local
history, if all the rules relating to trade could be collected
and elucidated.”
The Reformation had now become an
established fact in the Churches of England and Scotland; the
glorious Revolution of 1688 had been accomplished; the civil wars
were over, and the country enjoyed a long period of repose.
Local events had, it is true, become of less importance, because
less connected with general history; but the narrative will not
be the less interesting to local readers. Walls and gates
still surrounded the old city, and confined it within narrow
limits. All the principal streets within the walls were now
built. The population had increased to 28,000, the working
classes being chiefly employed in textile manufactures, which
were in great demand all over Europe. The operatives were
well employed and well paid during the greater part of this
century. It was, in short, a flourishing period in the
history of Norwich, as regards its manufactures and its
trade.
Queen Anne was proclaimed here on March 12th, 1701, and was
crowned on April 3rd, 1702, with extraordinary exhibitions of
joy. In this year, too, the art of printing, which had been
for some time discontinued here, was revived, and Francis Burgess
soon afterwards opened a printing office near the Red Well.
In 1701, the first newspaper, called the Norwich Gazette, was
published by Henry Cosgrove, he being assisted in the undertaking
by the celebrated Edward Cave, the original planner and founder
of the Gentleman’s Magazine, which was first
published in 1731. The Gazette was subsequently enlarged,
and called the Norfolk Chronicle and Norwich Gazette,
published by Messrs. Stevenson and Matchett. The former
gentleman was a learned antiquarian, and published “The
Antiquities of Ely.”
In 1705, the Weavers’ Hall was broken open, and the
books were destroyed, since which time the custom of sealing
stuffs has been disused. What was the cause of the tumult
does not appear.
In 1706, a great part of the city was laid under water by two
violent floods, both of which happened in the month of
November.
In 1711, the first act was passed for erecting workhouses,
&c., in this city; by which it was provided—
“That from and after the first day of May,
1712, there shall be a corporation to continue for ever, within
the said city of Norwich and county of the same, and liberties
thereof, consisting of mayor, recorder, and steward, justices of
the peace, sheriffs, and aldermen of the said city for the time
being, and of thirty-two other persons of the most honest,
discreet, and charitable inhabitants of the said city and county,
in the four great wards of the said city, and the towns, and out
parishes in the county of the said city, in such manner
as is hereinafter expressed, and the said thirty-two persons
shall be elected on the third day of May next ensuing, or within
three days after, at an assembly of the said city, for that
purpose to be held, by the votes of the mayor, sheriffs,
citizens, and commonalty, in common council assembled, or of the
major part of them present.”
Then follow the provisions of the act by which all the
parishes in the city were incorporated for the relief of the
poor. The Court of Guardians was constituted, and empowered
to assess to the poor rates all lands, houses, tenements, tithes,
stock, and personal estates. The assessment of stock and
personal estate, as may be easily imagined, caused great
dissatisfaction amongst the rate-payers possessed of property,
and was abolished in 1827, when a new act was obtained which
considerably altered the constitution of the court. This
act was further amended by another passed in 1831, and that was
superseded in 1863, by the act at this time in force.
In 1712, the steeple of the new Hall, now St. Andrew’s
Hall, fell down and was never rebuilt.
In 1713, the Duke of Ormond was appointed Lord-Lieutenant of
Norfolk and Norwich, in the room of Lord Townshend.
George I. was proclaimed here on the 3rd of August, 1714, two
days after Queen Anne died.
In 1714 a Bethel was built for the reception of poor lunatics
by Mrs. Mary Chapman—one of the first charitable
foundations in this country for those unhappy persons. In
1717 she endowed the same by her will, in which is the following
pious clause:—
“Whereas it has pleased Almighty God to visit and
afflict some of my nearest relations with lunacy, but has blessed
me with the use of my reason and understanding; as a monument of
my thankfulnesss for this invaluable mercy, I settle Bethel,
&c., for this purpose.”
She was the widow of the Rev. Mr. Chapman, minister of St.
Lawrence.
In 1715, in consequence of the rebellion in the north, an
artillery company of 100 men was first raised in Norwich.
William Hall, Esq., was their captain.
On January 8th of the same year, Sir Peter Seaman, an
Alderman, died and left provision for binding out two poor city
boys yearly. On December 17th of the same year, Thomas
Hall, Esq., merchant, died. He founded a monthly
sacramental lecture; bequeathed several legacies to charities,
and left £100 for a gold chain to be worn by the Mayor of
Norwich, and which is the same as is now worn by the deputy
mayor. It weighs 23 ozs. 6 dwts. Mr. Hall was
interred with great funeral pomp at St. George’s
Colegate. His portrait was presented by John and Edward
Taylor, Esqs., to the corporation, and was placed in the common
council chamber, May, 1821.
An act was passed in 1722 for the better qualifying of the
manufacturers of stuffs and yarns to act as magistrates, and for
regulating the elections of such officers.
About this time another act was passed for clearing,
deepening, extending, maintaining, and improving the haven and
piers of Great Yarmouth, and for deepening the rivers flowing
into the harbour; and also for preserving ships wintering in the
haven from accidents by fire. For these purposes certain
duties were to be paid for 21 years after Lady day, 1723, on all
goods unladen in the haven of Yarmouth, or in the sea called
Yarmouth roads. This act was very important to the
navigation between Yarmouth and Norwich.
In 1724 the Sheriff’s Office was rebuilt, and the statue
of Justice placed on the Guildhall. Alderman Norman died
the same year, and left an estate in Norwich for charitable
purposes.
About this time the society of “Free and Accepted
Masons” appeared publicly in this city. Mr. Prideaux,
son of the Rev. Dr. Prideaux, Dean of Norwich, author of
“The Connection between the Old and New Testaments,”
was the first Master here. Their lodge was at the
Maid’s Head Inn. B. Bond Cabbell, Esq., has within
the last few years bought the old Assembly Rooms in Theatre
Street for the Order.
On September 28th, 1725, a petition was presented to the mayor
and corporation, signed by the principal traders in Norwich,
requesting the use of the New Hall in St. Andrew’s for an
Exchange, which was immediately granted. On October 4th of
the same year, the court, attended by nearly 200 gentlemen and
principal tradesmen, came to the New Hall in St. Andrew’s,
which was then opened and solemnly proclaimed to be an exchange,
on which occasion the Recorder (Stephen Gardiner, Esq.) delivered
the following address:—
“Gentlemen,—This place is now opened with
an intent to promote traffic and commerce. Here, formerly,
God was worshipped, though in a corrupt manner; and may the
consideration of the sacred use this building has been put to so
far influence all that shall resort hither, that nothing in the
course of business may be here transacted but with great justice
and honesty. I wish success to this undertaking, and the
prosperity of the city in every respect.”
The hall continued open as an exchange only one year, and it
was open every day in the week except Saturdays and Sundays,
which proves that a considerable mercantile trade must have been
carried on in the city at that time. Soon afterwards was
begun the impolitic system of local taxation in trade, which has
almost ruined Lynn and Yarmouth, and which greatly retarded the
prosperity of Norwich. In 1725 the corporation obtained an
act, which came into operation on May 1st, 1726, for levying
tolls upon all goods or merchandise brought up the river higher
than Thorpe Hall. The dues were to be applied towards
rebuilding the walls and bridges, &c., but this was done to a
very small extent.
On February 24th, 1726, in consequence of the proceedings of
the Pretender, Charles Stuart, who endeavoured to secure the
crown of England, a loyal address of the corporation was
presented to King George I. by the city members. That
monarch died at the palace of the Bishop of Osnaburgh, on his way
to Hanover, on June 11th, 1727.
George II. and his Queen Caroline were crowned on October
11th, 1727, and there was a grand illumination and bonfire here
in honour of the event.
In
1729 an act was passed for the better regulating the city
elections, and for preserving the peace, good order, and
government of the city; and at an assembly on the Guild eve, the
mayor and aldermen of Norwich first sat in the council chamber,
and the common council in their own room; for by that act a
majority of each body was required to a corporate order, whilst,
before it passed, the two bodies sat, debated, and voted
together. In 1730, under this act, three nominees for each
of the four great wards were first elected, who returned the
remaining number of common councilmen, sixty in the whole.
In 1730, the Norwich Mercury was first issued by
William Chase. It was afterwards published for many years
by the late Mr. Richard Mackenzie Bacon and Mr. Kinnebrook.
Mr. R. M. Bacon was the editor, and one of the most talented men
who ever appeared in this city as a political writer and
critic. He was the author of “The Elements of Vocal
Science,” and other works.
At the quarterly assembly held in 1730, on St. Matthias’
day, 161 freemen were admitted and sworn, and afterwards it was
reported by the committee, appointed for that purpose, that they
had treated with St. George’s Company, who had agreed to
resign their books, charters, and records, into the hands of the
corporation, which was done accordingly, and the power of the
company ceased. In consequence of this, the form of a
procession was arranged for the Guild day instead of that
formerly exhibited, by the St. George’s Company. It
was further ordered that, for the future, every mayor shall be
excused making a Guild breakfast, or holding any mayor’s
feasts in May or August, as heretofore, and that, in lieu
thereof, the new mayor shall make a feast, on the day on which he
is sworn, at the New Hall, and there entertain the recorder,
steward, sheriffs, justices, aldermen, and their ladles, and the
common councilmen; and every mayor who makes such a feast shall
be entitled to the sum of £100, to be paid by the
chamberlain immediately after the said feast.
In 1732, Sherers’ Cross, commonly called Charing Cross,
a neat ancient stone pillar, was taken down. The cross was
so called from the sheermen or cloth cutters, who principally
dwelt in this part of the city. The corner house, in the
reign of Edward II., belonged to Christopher Shere-hill, or at
Sherers’ hill. In the same year the old Market Cross
was demolished, being sadly out of repair.
In 1733, July 11th, the Rt. Hon. Sir Robert Walpole, of
Houghton in Norfolk, was, in person, sworn a freeman of the
corporation, and presented by the mayor with a copy of his
freedom in a gold box.
In 1734, Sir Robert Walpole presented the city with a gilt
mace, beautifully enchased, weighing 168 ounces. On the cup
part are the arms of Sir Robert and of the city. A new
damask gown was also bought by the corporation, to be worn by the
Speaker on all public occasions.
On October 30th, 1739, being the king’s birthday, war
was proclaimed here against Spain. The mayor and aldermen
attended on horseback in their scarlet gowns, with
the two sheriffs, who appeared for the first time in the gold
chains given by Thomas Emerson, Esq., of London, a native of this
city, to be worn by the sheriffs of Norwich for the time
being. A portrait of him was placed in St. Andrew’s
Hall at the expense of the corporation, and the honorary freedom
of the city was afterwards presented to him.
In 1740, the cathedral was cleaned and repaired. It was
again repaired and beautified in 1763, in Bishop Younge’s
time; and in 1777 and 1780, two painted windows, representing the
Transfiguration and the twelve Apostles (finely executed by the
Lady of the late Dean Lloyd), were placed in the east end of the
choir. Subsequently, these windows were removed to another
part of the cathedral.
In 1741, April 4th, it was ordered by the corporation of
Norwich, that no stranger should exercise any trade in the city
more than six months without taking up his freedom.
In 1744, May 3rd, war was proclaimed here against France, by
the mayor and corporation, on horseback.
In September, 1745, the magistrates and principal inhabitants
associated in support of the government and in defence of the
liberties of the land, in consequence of the rebellion in
Scotland. An artillery company, of about 100 men, was
raised in Norwich, and Lord Hobart appointed commander.
In 1746, October 9th, there was a general thanksgiving on the
suppression of the Rebellion in Scotland. A magnificent
arch was erected in Norwich Market Place, which, with the whole
city, was illuminated.
In
1747, an act was passed for holding the county summer assizes and
sessions in the city, till a new Shirehall could be built.
On February 7th, 1748, peace with France and Spain was
proclaimed here, the mayor and corporation attending on
horseback, preceded by a party of dragoons and the artillery
company.
On October 22nd, 1751, a fire broke out, which destroyed the
bridewell and several adjoining houses. That extraordinary
man, “Peter, the Wild Youth,” was confined there at
the time. When a child, he was lost in a wood in Germany,
and was found, at the age of 12, naked and wild. This
bridewell house was built about the year 1370, by Bartholomew
Appleyard, whose son William was, in 1403, the first Mayor of
Norwich. There are some fine arched vaults under the
premises, and the wall next St. Andrew’s church, built with
flint, is well worthy the observation of the curious.
An act was passed this year (1751) to open the Port of
Yarmouth for the importation of wool and woollen yarn from
Ireland, which was very beneficial to the city.
The number of houses and inhabitants, in the city precincts
and hamlets, in 1752, was as follows:—7139 houses, 36,169
souls, being an increase of 7288 inhabitants since 1693, when the
population was only 28,881.
In 1755, a table was drawn up settling the habits to be worn
by the mayor and corporation at public meetings.
A
slight shock of an earthquake was felt here on January 10th,
1756. On May 3rd of the same year, the freedom of the city
was voted to the Right Hon. Wm. Pitt, and Henry B. Legge (the
former being late secretary of state, and the latter, chancellor
of the exchequer), for their conduct during their honourable but
short administration. The freedom of the city, and thanks
of the corporation, were also voted to Matthew Goss, Esq., for
his present of the gold chain which has ever since been worn by
the mayors. A public subscription was made for the poor, in
consequence of the high price of wheat, and scarcity of work, and
12,000 persons in Norwich were supplied with household bread at
half-price for some time.
On July 12th, 1756, the Earl of Orford put the act for the
better regulating the Militia in execution. This act fixed
the number of men to be raised for Norfolk and Norwich at 960, of
which the city furnished 151.
On June 21st, 1759, there was a most violent storm here, some
of the hailstones being two inches long, and weighing
three-quarters of an ounce. On July 4th and 5th, the
Norfolk Militia, commanded by Lord Orford, marched from Norwich
to Portsmouth, and passed in review before His Majesty George
II., at Kensington.
In digging under the rampart of the Castle Hill in 1760, two
very curious bones were discovered, supposed by some to be
amulets, which the Druids wore at their sacrifices.
In
1760, King George II. died at Kensington, on October 25th, and
his grandson, George III. was proclaimed king, in Norwich, on the
29th, by the mayor and corporation, preceded by the four Norwich
companies of militia, with flags, banners, and music. On
September 22nd, 1761, the coronation of their Majesties was
celebrated with great splendour in Norfolk, and in Norwich there
was a general illumination, and a grand display of fireworks from
a triumphal arch erected in the Market Place.
On October 27th, 1762, there was a sudden flood in the city,
which laid near 300 houses and 8 parish churches under
water. It rose 12 feet perpendicular in 24 hours, being 15
inches higher than St. Faith’s flood in 1696.
In 1763, January 3rd, John Spurrell, Esq., died, leaving
£1355 to the corporation, the interest to be applied for
the benefit of the poor in the Great Hospital, and for other
charitable purposes. The Earl of Buckinghamshire, alderman
Thomas Harvey, and Mr. Robert Page, gave £100 each to
Doughty’s Hospital.
In the same year Sir Armine Wodehouse, Bart.,
gave a valuable volume to the corporation containing some old
statutes, in which the prescriptive right of the corporation to
its present legal name is supported. It had been the
property of the Wodehouse family for 200 years. A vote of
thanks was passed to Sir Armine Wodehouse for his present.
He was a member of parliament for Norfolk from 1736 to 1768 (32
years), and died in 1777. His death was occasioned by a
herring-bone sticking in his throat.
On January 7th, 1769, the church belonging to the Dutch
congregation was opened for the poor of the workhouses. The
poor continued to attend till the New Workhouse was built in
Heigham, after which they attended divine service in the chapel
there.
On November 19th, 1770, there was a great flood in Norwich,
four inches higher than that of 1762. The sufferers were
relieved, by a subscription, with money, coals, and bread.
On December 19th, of the same year, there was a violent storm of
wind and rain, such as had not been remembered since 1741.
Happisburgh, Postwick, and Strumpshaw windmills were blown down,
and much damage was done in the city and county; many ships with
their crews were lost on the Norfolk coast. In the same
year the following turnpike roads were made and opened, from St.
Stephen’s Gates to Trowse, from St. Stephen’s Gates
to Watton, from St. Benedict’s Gates to Swaffham, from
Bishop Bridge to Caister near Yarmouth, and from Norwich to
Dereham, Swaffham, and Mattishall.
On March 1st, 1771, the names of the streets and highways in
the city were ordered to be fixed up for the first time; but this
order appears to have been very imperfectly carried out. In
the same year the foundation stone of the Norfolk and Norwich
Hospital was laid by Wm. Fellowes, Esq., who was a great promoter
of that benevolent institution. It was erected by a public
subscription in the city and county; and it was opened on July
11th, 1772, for out-patients; and on November 7th, in that year, for
in-patients. It has been of great benefit to the poor, who
have always been attended by the principal physicians and
surgeons in the city.
In 1774, St. Andrew’s Hall underwent a complete
alteration. The old gateway and wall next Bridge Street
were taken down, part of the green yard was taken in, and the old
city library room was rebuilt over the gateway, thus defacing all
that part of the hall. At the last restoration the old city
library room was pulled down, and a new porch was erected, with
many other improvements.
In 1779, the new year was ushered in with a most terrible
storm of wind and rain, accompanied with thunder and
lightning. The lead on St. Andrew’s Church was rolled
up, and great damage was done in several parts of the city.
In October of this year, the navigation from Coltishall to
Aylsham was completed for boats of thirteen tons burthen, at a
cost of £6000. About this time smuggling was carried
to a great height, even in broad day.
On January 20th, 1780, at a numerous meeting of citizens and
county gentlemen, a petition was agreed to and signed, praying
the house of commons to guard against all unnecessary
expenditure, to abolish sinecure places and pensions, and to
resist the increasing influence of the crown. A strong
protest was afterwards signed against the proceedings of this
meeting. Mr. Coke presented the petition. Armed
associations were formed against the government at Yarmouth,
Lynn, Holt, and other places.
On
March 24th, 1783, manufactures of textile fabrics in the city
being very prosperous, the pageant of the Golden Fleece, or what
is called Bishop Blaize, was exhibited by the wool combers, in a
style far surpassing all former processions of the kind in
Norwich. The procession began to move at 10 a.m. from St.
Martin’s at Oak, and thence passed through the principal
streets of the city. On December 3rd, of the same year, the
Black Friars’ Bridge was opened.
In January, 1784, the Amicable Society of Attorneys, in
Norwich, was instituted. On May 1st, at an assembly of the
corporation, the freedom of the city was voted to be presented to
Mr. S. Harvey, Mr. Windham, and Mr. Pitt. On December 13th,
the Norwich Public Library was first opened and located in the
old library room, formerly over the entrance to St.
Andrew’s Hall.
On March 25th, 1785, mail coaches, between Norwich and London,
were established, performing a journey of 108 miles in fifteen
hours, by which alteration in the post, letters arrived from
London a day sooner. This was considered a great
improvement. Subsequently, half a dozen stage coaches ran
between Norwich and London daily. In July, after various
ascents by several persons, Major (afterwards General) Money, at
4.25 p.m., ascended with a balloon from Quantrell’s
gardens, and at 6 p.m. the car touched the surface of the
sea. During five hours the major remained in this perilous
situation, and at 11.30 p.m. was taken up by the Argus revenue
cutter, eighteen miles off Southwold, bearing west by
north, and he landed at Lowestoft on the following morning.
On October 18th, of the same year, the “Friars’
Society for the Participation of Useful Knowledge” was
instituted. This society first suggested the scheme of the
association for the relief of decayed tradesmen, their widows,
and orphans. With them also originated the Soup Charity in
this city, and it was long supported and conducted by them, but
of late years it has been a separate charity.
On April 26th, 1786, the Norwich and Norfolk Benevolent
Medical Society was instituted. In May, an exact account of
the inhabitants of Norwich was taken from house to house, and the
population was ascertained to be 40,051 souls, exclusive of those
living in the precincts of the Cathedral, being an increase of
nearly 4000 since 1752. This entirely contradicts the
statement of Mr. Arthur Young, in his Tour of England, published
in 1770, to the effect that 72,000 persons were then employed in
manufactures in this city.
On November 5th, 1788, the centenary of the glorious
Revolution of 1688 was celebrated in this city and county by
illuminations, bonfires, public dinners, &c., but more
particularly at Holkham, where Mr. Coke, the late Earl of
Leicester, gave a grand fête, ball, and supper, and a
display of fireworks, &c. The citizens appear to have
been more sensible then than they are now of the immense benefits
they derived from that great change in the British constitution
and government.
Next
year (1789) a revolution broke out in France and astounded all
Europe. It caused a mighty commotion and a general war,
which lasted many years, and destroyed millions of men.
Norwich, like every other city in England, was affected by it,
and lost nearly all its foreign trade during the terrible
conflict. On July 14th, the Revolution was commemorated by
republicans at the Maid’s Head Inn, in this city.
Among the toasts of the day after a dinner were “The
Revolutionary Societies in England,” “The Rights of
Man,” and “The Philosophers of France.”
The Revolution, however, had not advanced very far in its
atrocities when most people regarded it in a very different
light, and associations were formed here against
“Levellers” and “Revolutionists.”
On December 5th, 1792, the mayor, sheriffs, and seventeen
aldermen of Norwich, pledged themselves to support the
constitution of Kings, Lords, and Commons, as established in
1688. Meetings of the inhabitants were also held in this
city, and in Yarmouth, Lynn, &c., and declarations of loyalty
and attachment to the constitution were unanimously agreed to and
signed; for men had begun to be alarmed by the “Reign of
Terror” in France.
In 1793 a petition for parliamentary reform, signed by 3741
inhabitants of Norwich, was presented to the House of Commons by
the Hon. H. Hobart, but was not received, it having been printed
previous to presentation. This indicated a great advance in
liberal opinions towards the end of the last century, chiefly
amongst the Nonconformists, who had greatly increased in numbers,
whilst the church was asleep. The vast expenditure in the
long war against France caused a great increase in taxation.
On April 12th, 1794, a great county meeting was held at the
Shirehall, to consider the exertions which should be made at that
crisis for the internal defence and security of the
kingdom. The High Sheriff, T. R. Dashwood, Esq.,
presided. The Honble. C. Townshend moved resolutions,
supported by the Marquis Townshend, Lord Walsingham, Mr. Buxton,
Mr. Windham, and Mr. Joddrell, for forming volunteer corps of
cavalry, and for entering into subscriptions to maintain the
same. Mr. Coke condemned the war in toto, and
insisted that it might have been avoided, or at the least brought
to a conclusion, by a negociation for peace, and he moved as an
amendment:
“That it is our duty to refuse any private
subscriptions for public purposes and unconstitutional
benevolences.”
So much altercation and confusion ensued, that when the High
Sheriff put the question, it was impossible to tell which party
had the majority; and a division being deemed impracticable, the
chairman proposed that such gentlemen as chose to subscribe would
retire with him to the Grand Jury Room, which was agreed
to. Nearly £6,000 was subscribed, and the amount was
afterwards increased to £11,000!
On October 21st, 1795, a memorial was transmitted from the
court of mayoralty of Norwich to the representatives of the city
on the high prices of every necessary of life, requesting them to
support such measures as might have a tendency to reduce them, and
to facilitate the restoration of peace. Prices of corn and
provisions had risen to an alarming height; wheat to 100s.,
barley to 30s., and oats to 30s. per quarter, and symptoms of
rioting had in consequence appeared in Norwich market.
At a county meeting held on July 20th, 1796, in the Angel Inn
(now the Royal Hotel) it was resolved to petition parliament for
the removal of the Lent assizes from Thetford to Norwich, and a
petition was presented accordingly. The bill brought for
this object into the House of Commons was strongly opposed, and
finally rejected; but afterwards the assizes were removed to the
city, and have been held there ever since. This year the
sum of £24,000 was collected for the maintenance of the
poor in Norwich, while the population was under 40,000, or half
the present number.
In 1797, February 14th, the Norwich Light Horse Volunteers
were organized, of which John Harvey, Esq., was afterwards
appointed captain and major. On February 22nd, the Norwich
Loyal Military Association was formed, of which John Patteson,
Esq., was appointed captain, and afterwards major; and R. J.
Browne, C. Harvey, and A. Sieley, Esqs., were appointed
captains. Military matters then occupied a great deal of
the attention of the citizens.
On March 4th, intelligence was received here of the defeat of
the Spanish fleet by Admiral Jervis, and served in some measure
to dissipate the general gloom which at this time pervaded the
public mind.
On
April 25th, a great county meeting was held in the open air on
the Castle Hill, and a petition was almost unanimously adopted,
praying His Majesty to dismiss his ministers, as the most
effectual means of reviving the national credit and restoring
peace. This was moved by Mr. Fellowes, seconded by Mr.
Rolfe, supported by Lord Albemarle, Mr. Coke, Mr. Mingay, Mr.
Plumptre, Mr. Trafford, and others. On April 28th a counter
county meeting was held, and an address to the king was adopted,
expressing confidence in the ministry of the day.
On May 16th the citizens followed suit. At a numerously
attended common hall a petition to His Majesty, praying him to
dismiss his administration, was carried unanimously, with the
exception of one spirited Tory, who had nearly fallen a victim to
popular vengeance on the spot. A counter address of the
citizens was afterwards signed and presented to the King, who
must have been a good deal bothered at the time by such evidences
of the violent agitation of his subjects.
On May 26th, attempts were made here to seduce the military
from their allegiance; and on the following day the republican
orator, Thelwall, arrived in this city, which caused a great
commotion. On the 29th, a party of the Inniskilling
Dragoons proceeded to his lecture room, opposite Gurney’s
bank, drove out the persons assembled, destroyed the tribune and
benches, and then attacked the Shakespear Tavern adjoining, in
which a disturbance had taken place. After destroying the
furniture and partly demolishing the house, and also breaking the
windows and destroying the furniture of the Rose Tavern, in which
they supposed the lecturer had concealed himself, the dragoons,
on the appearance of their officers and the magistrates, retired
to their barracks. Thelwall, in this affray, fortunately
for him, escaped and fled to London. Davey, the landlord of
the Shakespear Tavern, on being pursued by the soldiers, threw
himself from the garret into the street, and was much
injured. At the subsequent assizes, Luke Rice, a tailor of
this city, was indicted capitally for aiding and abetting the
soldiers in this outrage; but as the offence charged in the
indictment did not come within the meaning of the statute, he was
acquitted. He had, however, a very narrow escape. On
June 1st of the same year, (1797) a mutiny broke out on board the
fleet at Yarmouth, and several sail of the line hoisted the red
flag of defiance.
In January, 1798, the sword of the Spanish Admiral Don
Francisco Winthuysen, presented by Admiral Nelson to the
corporation of Norwich, was placed in the Council Chamber of the
Guildhall, with an appropriate device and inscription.
On February 28th, at a general meeting of the inhabitants of
this city, more than £2,200 were immediately subscribed as
voluntary contributions towards the defence of the kingdom.
In a few weeks afterwards, the whole subscription amounted to
more than £8000, a proof of the loyalty as well as
liberality of the well-to-do citizens. In May, the
following Loyal Volunteer Corps were formed for the purpose of
preserving internal tranquillity, and supporting the police of
this city, viz., the Mancroft Volunteers, Capt. John Browne; St.
Stephen’s Volunteers, Capt. Hardy; St. Peter per
Mountergate, &c., Capt. Herring; St. Saviour’s and St.
Clement’s, Capt. Fiske; St. Andrew’s, Capt. T. A.
Murray.
On June 19th, the Norwich Light Horse Volunteers and Loyal
Military Association attended J. Browne, Esq., to the cathedral,
previous to his being sworn into the office of mayor; afterwards
the Association fired a feu de joie in the Market
Place.
On October 11th, at a meeting of the wealthy inhabitants of
the city, a subscription was entered into for the relief of the
orphans of those brave seamen who fell on August 1st in the ever
memorable battle of the Nile; and on the 24th of the same month,
at a special assembly of the corporation, an address of
congratulation was adopted to his Majesty on the late victory;
and it was agreed that a request should be made to Lord Nelson to
sit for his portrait, to be placed in St. Andrew’s
Hall. His Lordship assented and the portrait was painted by
Beechey and placed in the hall, where it may still be seen.
November 29th was appointed as a day of a public thanksgiving
for the late naval victories, and was celebrated as such in
Norwich with the greatest festivity. In the morning the
mayor and corporation, accompanied by the Light Horse Volunteers
and the Parochial Associations, attended divine service at the
cathedral, where an excellent sermon was preached by the Rev. T.
F. Middleton, afterwards Bishop of Calcutta. The sword, taken by
Lord Nelson was borne in the procession. On their return to
the Market Place there was a feast, and in the evening an
illumination.
In 1799, October 28th, the Guards and several other regiments,
to the number of 25,000 cavalry and infantry, landed at Yarmouth
from Holland. Next night the Grenadier Brigade of Guards,
commanded by Col. Wynward, marched into Norwich by torchlight,
and were soon afterwards followed by upwards of 20,000 more
troops. Through the exertions of John Herring, Esq., mayor,
and the attention of the citizens in general, these brave men
received every accommodation that their situation demanded.
The mayor soon afterwards received a letter from the Duke of
Portland expressive of the high appreciation by the government of
the mayor’s loyalty and activity on this occasion, and of
the humanity of the citizens who supplied the wants of the
soldiers. The mayor was afterwards presented to his Majesty
at St. James’, and offered the honour of knighthood, which
he declined. The Duke of York, Prince William of
Gloucester, and several other officers employed in this
unsuccessful expedition, also passed through the city on their
way to London. The sum of £18,000 was raised this
year for the maintenance of the poor of the city.
On January 23rd, 1800, John Herring, Esq., then mayor,
summoned a general meeting of the inhabitants at the Guildhall,
to consider the propriety of applying to parliament for an act
for the better paving, lighting, and watching of the city, for
removing and preventing annoyances and obstructions, and for
regulating hackney coaches. At this meeting a committee was
appointed to consider the plan proposed, and to report to a
future general meeting. This committee held several
meetings, and at length made a report, which was laid before a
general meeting of the citizens on March 3rd. The estimated
cost of lighting, watching, paving, &c., was only
£2770. The produce of the tolls was estimated at
£1715, and of a rate of 6d. in the pound at £3000;
making the total receipts £4715, and leaving a balance of
£1945 for the commencement of the work, which sum would
have been increased by some annual payments. The general
meeting adopted the report, and a petition was signed by most of
the inhabitants of the city in favour of a bill to carry out the
improvements. Unfortunately, however, the petition could
not, from some unforeseen circumstances, be presented that
session. The project was, for a time, postponed; but an act
was obtained in 1806 to carry out the object, and commissioners
were appointed for the purpose. This body consisted of the
dean and prebend, the recorder, 28 members of the corporation,
and 24 parochial commissioners, annually elected, in all
136. This heterogeneous body continued for about forty
years, and after spending over £300,000, left Norwich the
worst paved town in England, and also left a debt of
£17,000, which still remains as a legacy to the city!
Before the end of the 18th century, various improvements were
made, among which may be mentioned, the demolition of the old
gates, the widening and opening of several streets, and the
erection of a new flour mill, worked by steam power, near Black
Friars Bridge, for better supplying the people with flour.
Still, large numbers of the poor appear to have been for a long
time in a very destitute condition. Famines were of
frequent occurrence, and riots often took place on account of the
high prices of every kind of food. In 1720, on September
20th, a dangerous riot broke out, and rose to such a height, as
to oblige the sheriffs to call in the aid of the Artillery
Company, at whose approach the rioters instantly dispersed.
Again, in 1740, riots occurred in several parts of the country,
and in most of the towns in Norfolk. The magistrates of
this city called the military to their aid, and six or seven
lives were lost before the rioters could be quelled. Again,
in 1766, in consequence of the great scarcity and advanced price
of provisions of every sort, some dangerous riots broke out in
several places. In this city the poor people collected on
September 27th, about noon, and in the course of that day and the
next, committed many outrages by attacking the houses of bakers,
pulling down part of the New Mills, destroying large quantities
of flour, and burning to the ground a large malthouse outside of
Conisford gate. Every lenient measure was tried by the city
magistrates to pacify the poor starving people, but to no
effect. The magistrates therefore were compelled to repel
force by force. On Sunday afternoon they, with the
principal inhabitants, attacked the rioters with such vigour,
while they were demolishing a house on Tombland, that they were
dispersed. About thirty of the ringleaders were taken and
tried, and eight of them were sentenced to death, but only two
were executed. They suffered the extreme penalty on January
10th, 1767.
Strange as it may seem, Norwich was, at this time, in a more
flourishing state as regards trade than it has ever since been
known. Wages were not high, but employment was
universal. On April 25th, 1796, fine flour having risen to
70s. a sack, a mob attacked several bakers’ shops in the
city. The magistrates and inhabitants assembled and
proceeded to the places against which the attacks of the populace
were directed, but the mob did not disperse till after the riot
act had been read and three persons apprehended. On May
17th, a dreadful affray took place near Bishop Bridge, between
the soldiers of the Northumberland and Warwickshire regiments of
Militia. Several were terribly bruised and others wounded
with bayonets before their officers could part them.
Education was, at this time, at a very low ebb, and the clergy
neglected the poor. Few schools were yet opened for their
children, who grew up in ignorance and vice. Working-men
spent their hard-earned money in drunkenness, or indulged in the
most brutal sports, such as prize-fighting or cock-fighting.
They were also demoralised by bribery and treating at contested
elections. In fact, ward elections were so frequent that
the city was kept in a perpetual state of agitation and
turmoil. We can now form no notion of the misery, poverty,
and vice, which these local elections inflicted on the
city. It was often said that a single ward election did
more harm than all the sermons in all the churches and chapels
did good. These local contests at length prevented capital
being employed in manufacturers, and made politics the first
object of all the influential citizens, who, if they were not,
strove to become, members of the old corporation, not from any
consideration of public duty, not to promote the welfare of the
citizens, but to serve their own political or personal
interests. There is abundant evidence that the prosperity
of the city, and private friendships, were alike poisoned by the
party spirit, engendered by frequent ward elections; at the same
time the moral character of the whole working population was
greatly deteriorated, and the working classes themselves greatly
depraved.
During this 18th century the Nonconformists became very
numerous and powerful in the city and county. Methodism
imparted a healthful stimulus to the revival of religion.
It aroused the church and all denominations. Besides the
very flourishing bodies of Wesleyans and Baptists, the
Independents made great progress. Within two centuries, in place of
one, several chapels arose; and throughout all England, few towns
exhibited a greater increase of Nonconformists than
Norwich. We have already given an account of their rise and
progress in the 17th century, but we have not yet noticed the
Unitarians. A history of the Octagon chapel in Norwich, by
Mr. John Taylor, formerly of this city, and continued by his son,
Mr. Edward Taylor, contains a full account of the rise and
progress of the Unitarians here. They were at first called
Presbyterians, but that name was inappropriate, as they never had
the Presbyterian polity nor doctrine. Mr. John Taylor says,
the first Presbyterian chapel was built in 1687, on a piece of
ground, formerly part of the great garden or orchard,
“sometime belonging to the prior and convent of the late
friars’ preachers,” of whose deserted walls the
Dissenters took possession. The building was so constructed
that it might be converted into dwelling houses in case their
preachers were compelled to abandon it.
Blomefield, in his History of the City, says:—
“In 1687, the Presbyterians built a meeting
house from the ground, over against the Black Boys; and at the
same time the Independents repaired a house in St. Edmund’s
formerly a brew house.”
After the passing of the Toleration Act, in 1689, this meeting
house, which, had not been long finished, was duly
licensed. Dr. Collinges, a learned Presbyterian minister,
was the first pastor appointed to preach by the
congregation. He had a considerable hand in the
“Annotations to the Bible,” which were begun and
carried on by Mr. Matthew Poole, and which go under his name.
Dr. Collinges died in January, 1690, and was probably
succeeded soon after by Mr. Josiah Chorley, who was not a native
of Norwich, but came from Lancashire. He officiated about
thirty years, and was succeeded by the Rev. Peter Finch, a highly
esteemed preacher for many years. After he died his funeral
sermon was preached by Mr. Taylor, who said:—
“Surely the character of Mr. Finch, drawn
out so even and clear without any remarkable spot or flaw,
through the long course of sixty-three years in this city, must
be deserving of remembrance and imitation, since it must be the
result of a steady integrity and solid wisdom.”
The Rev. Mr. Finch was one of the first pupils who entered
into the first dissenting academy, erected after the Reformation,
by the Rev. Mr. Frankland; and he survived almost all the 300
gentlemen who, in the space of thirty years, were educated in
that academy. He died October 6th, 1754, on his 93rd
birthday, and was buried in St. Peter’s Church, in this
city. His descendents were residents here till 1847.
His son was many years clerk of the peace for the county of
Norfolk.
Mr. John Brooke was invited to take his place towards the end
of the year 1718. This minister was born in or near
Yarmouth, where some of his descendants have generally
resided. He resigned in 1733, and removed to York, where he
died. Dr. John Taylor was elected to the vacant office in
1733, and continued till 1757, when he resigned. He was the
author of many works of a religious character. In 1753 the
old chapel was pulled down, and a subscription was raised of
nearly £4000 for a new one. The first stone of the
new building was laid on February 25th, 1754, by Dr. Taylor; and
within three years the present elegant chapel was completed at a
cost of £5174.
Mr. Samuel Bourn, son of Mr. Bourn of Birmingham, was ordained
co-pastor with Dr. John Taylor, and he published volumes of
sermons which established his reputation in that kind of
composition. He resigned in 1775, and retired to a village
near Norwich. Several gentlemen, who afterwards attained
considerable eminence in science, were brought up under Mr.
Bourn’s ministry, viz., Sir James Edward Smith, so long
president of the Linnean Society; Mr. Robert Woodhouse, the
eminent mathematician and professor of astronomy at Cambridge;
and Dr. Edward Maltby, afterwards bishop of Durham. Mr.
Bourn removed to Norwich not many months before his death, and
died in the 83rd year of his age; he was interred in the burying
ground of the Octagon Chapel. Mr. Bourn was succeeded by
the Rev. John Hoyle, who was minister for seventeen years.
He died in the 51st year of his age, on November 29th, 1775, and
was interred in the Octagon burying ground.
On December 15th, 1776, Mr. Alderson was chosen minister, and
soon afterwards Mr. George Cadogan Morgan became co-pastor. He
had been educated under the inspection of his uncle, the
celebrated Dr. Richard Price, so that great expectations were
formed of his abilities, and the congregation were not
disappointed. He soon, however, resigned and went to
Yarmouth; and in 1755, Dr. William Enfield was invited to become
co-pastor with Mr. Alderson, and he accepted the office. In
1786, Mr. Alderson resigned; and in 1787 was succeeded by Mr. P.
Houghton.
In 1784, Mr. P. M. Martineau projected the establishment of
the Public Library at Norwich, in which he was cordially seconded
by Dr. Enfield, who was one of the earliest presidents of an
institution, which for the extent and variety of its catalogue
surpasses most provincial libraries. In the early periods
of the first French Revolution, a periodical work was established
by the liberal party in Norwich, entitled “The
Cabinet;” to which the principal contributors were Mr. John
Pitchford, Mr. Wm. Youngman, Mr. Norgate, Mr. C. Marsh
(afterwards M.P. for Retford), Mrs. Opie (then Miss Alderson),
Mr. John Taylor, and Dr. Enfield. After publishing many
learned works, Dr. Enfield died in the 57th year of his age, on
November 3rd, 1797. After his death, three volumes of his
sermons were published by subscription; and among the subscribers
were persons of almost every sect in Norwich, from the cathedral
prebendary to the independent minister. More than twenty
beneficed clergymen’s names appear in the list, and it is
very well known that Dr. Enfield’s sermons have been heard
from many pulpits of the established church. Professor
Taylor, late of Gresham college, thus wrote in a supplementary
memoir:—
“With his dissenting brethren Dr. Enfield was
always on the best terms, especially with Mr. Newton and Mr.
Kinghorn, the ministers of the Independent and Baptist
congregations. The Presbyterian congregation, comprising
many individuals of station and influence in the city, took the
lead in every movement of the dissenting body, who never appeared
in a more united and honourable position than when Dr. Enfield
was their acknowledged head. The state of society during
his residence in Norwich, was eminently suited to his habits and
tastes. Parr, Peel, Walker, Howes, and Smyth were his
contemporaries. Parr was the head master of the grammar
school, Potter was a prebendary of the Cathedral, and Porson was
occasional resident at the house of his brother-in-law, Mr. Hawes
of Coltishall, a village a few miles from Norwich. Dr.
Enfield was a welcome visitor at the bishop’s palace; for
though Dr. Bagot had no political or religious sympathy with the
minister of the Presbyterian congregation, he knew how to
estimate his talents, his manners, and his admirable
conversational powers. Among the residents in Norwich at
this time, with whom Dr. Enfield associated, were Dr. Sayers, Mr.
William Taylor, Mr. Hudson Gurney (afterwards M.P. for Newport
and a vice-president of the Society of Antiquaries), Dr. Rigby,
Dr. Lubbock, Sir James Edward Smith, the Rev. John Walker (an
accomplished scholar and one of the minor canons of the
Cathedral), Mrs. Opie (then Miss Alderson), Mr. Bruckner, the
minister of the Dutch and French protestant congregations at
Norwich, and others, who though unknown to the world as authors,
were yet worthy associates in such a society.”
Dr. Enfield’s estimate of the character of society at
Norwich, is thus expressed in a letter from Liverpool to
Professor Taylor’s father:—
“You will easily imagine the pleasure I feel in
enjoying the society of my old friends here, especially that of
Mr. Roscoe and Dr. Currie; but with these and a few other
exceptions, I find more congenial associates at Norwich.
For a man of literary tastes and pursuits, I can truly say that I
know of no town which offers so eligible a residence.”
Mr. Roscoe and Dr. Currie, referred to above, were then in
high reputation in Liverpool.
The altered state of society in Norwich, about the end of the
18th century is thus depicted in a paper in the Monthly Magazine
for March, 1808, under the title of “Fanaticism—a
Vision,” which was generally attributed to the pen of Sir
James Edward Smith:—
“You know the flourishing and happy state of
this ancient city in the early part of your life, and
particularly how peaceably and even harmoniously its inhabitants
lived together on the score of religion. Christians of
various denominations had each their churches, their chapels, or
their meeting houses, and in the common intercourse of life all
conducted themselves as brethren. The interests of humanity
would even frequently bring them together on particular occasions
to pay their devotions in the same temple. The bishop
(Bathurst) treated as his children all who, though they disowned
his spiritual authority, obeyed his Divine Master; while the
Presbyterian, the Independent, the Catholic, and the Quaker,
partook of his hospitality and repaid his benevolence with
gratitude and respect. This state of society, worthy of
real Christians, was broken up by those who wore that character
only as a mask. A set of men, interested in promoting
dissensions, by which villany and rapacity might profit, and in
decrying those genuine fruits of religion, that salutary
faith and pure morals, which by comparison shamed their own
characters, after long in vain attempting to exalt blind belief
in general, and their particular dogmas, in preference to a
useful and virtuous life, but too successfully obtained their
end. On all the great truths of revealed religion, honest
men could never be long at variance. On disputable points
they had learned a salutary forbearance, which enabled them,
while they thought for themselves, to let others do the
same. The only resources of those who wish to stir up
religious animosity, is to bring forward something that no one
can determine. The less mankind understand a subject, the
more warmly do they debate and strive to enforce the belief of
it.”
Merchants and Manufacturers.
Among the eminent citizens of this century may be first
mentioned the chief merchants and manufacturers, who were very
intelligent, wealthy, and enterprising. They were also
benevolent, and the founders of various charitable
institutions. Many of them were Nonconformists, and active
supporters of their chapels, while they carried on a great
foreign trade. The correspondence which they had begun on
the continent they extended in every direction. By sending
their sons to be educated in Germany, Italy, and Spain, they
cultivated a more familiar connection with those countries.
Their travellers also were acquainted with various languages, and
went all over Europe, exhibiting their pattern cards in every
town on the continent. Norwich could then boast of rich,
energetic, enterprising, and intelligent men, who made the city
what it was in their day. Lest their very names should be
forgotten, we shall place them in this record. Amongst the
manufacturers were
Messrs. Robert and John Harvey,
Messrs. Starling Day and Son,
Messrs. Watson, Firth, and Co.,
Messrs. John Barnard and Angier,
Messrs. Thomas Paul and Flindt,
Messrs. J. Tuthill and Sons,
Messrs. William Barnard and Sons,
Messrs. Edward Marsh and Son,
Messrs. Bream and King,
Messrs. Martin and Williment,
Messrs. Peter Colombine and Son,
Messrs. James Buttivant and William
White,
Messrs. W. and W. Taylor,
Messrs. J. Scott and Sons,
Messrs. E. Gurney and Ellington,
Messrs. Patteson and Iselin,
Messrs. Booth and Theobald,
Messrs. George Maltby and Son,
Messrs. William and Robert Herring,
Messrs. Worth and Carter,
Messrs. Bacon and Marshall,
Messrs. Ives and Robberds,
Messrs. J. and J. Ives, Son, and
Baseley,
Mr. Robert Partridge,
Mr. Bartholomew Sewell,
Mr. John Robinson,
Mr. Robert Wright,
Mr. John Wright,
Mr. Robert Tillyard,
Mr. Daniel Fromantiel,
Mr. J. C. Hampp,
Mr. John Herring,
Mr. Joseph Cliver, Jun.,
Mr. Oxley,
and others, all of whom have passed away.
Mr. John Kirkpatrick.
Mr. John Kirkpatrick, a linen merchant, who lived in St.
Andrew’s, was a learned antiquarian of this period, to whom
the city is greatly indebted for his researches and documents
respecting the antiquities of Norwich, but only fragments have
been published. The late Mr. Hudson Gurney obtained
possession of most of his manuscripts, and published his account
of the “Religious Orders in Norwich,” in 1845.
This work was compiled from a manuscript quarto volume of 258
pages, in the handwriting of the author. Mr. Dawson Turner,
the editor, says, in the preface:—
“Mr. Kirkpatrick’s father was a native
of the village of Closeburn, in Dumfriesshire, a fact recorded by
his son in his will, and further proved by the arms on his tomb
(in St. Helen’s church) which are those of the
baronet’s family of Kirkpatrick, of Closeburn. From
Scotland he removed to Norwich, where he resided in the parish of
St. Stephen. His son John was apprenticed in that of St. Clement,
and subsequently established himself in business as a linen
merchant, in St. Andrew’s, in premises opposite Bridewell
Alley. He was there in partnership with Mr. John Custance,
who was mayor in 1726, and was the founder of the family of that
name at Weston. In the year of his partner’s
mayoralty, Mr. Kirkpatrick was appointed treasurer to the Great
Hospital, in St. Helen’s, an office which his premature
decease allowed him to occupy only for two years. He
married the youngest daughter of Mr. John Harvey,
great-grandfather of the late Lieut.-Colonel Harvey, of Thorpe
Lodge, where his portrait was preserved during the lifetime of
that gentleman. It has since been engraved in the very
interesting series of portraits of the more eminent inhabitants
of Norfolk, of whom no likenesses have yet appeared, a work now
in course of publication, under the superintendence of Mr.
Ewing. With such, Kirkpatrick is deservedly
associated. He died childless. Of his family, nothing
more is known than that he had a brother of the name of Thomas,
who is mentioned by Blomefield as being chamberlain of Norwich at
the time he wrote. The account books of the corporation
contain several entries in reference to both the one and the
other, but not of sufficient interest to warrant the quoting of
them at length. Of the latter, they shew that he was
elected chamberlain with a salary of thirty pounds per annum, in
the room of Matthew King, in 1732; that in the same year, the
freedom of the city was conferred upon him; and that twelve years
subsequently he was removed from his office, by reason of
irregularity of his accounts. To the antiquary, their
testimony is invariably honourable; the most frequent notices
being, votes of money for the service he had rendered in
adjusting the different accounts of the city.”
Mr.
Dawson Turner further states:—
“Mr. Kirkpatrick was one of the most able,
laborious, learned, and useful antiquaries whom the county has
produced. He was especially an indefatigable searcher into
local antiquities, and had his life been spared to the term
allotted by the holy Psalmist to man, it were impossible to say
how much of what is now irretrievably lost to us might have been
rescued from oblivion. He had accumulated copious
materials, but his early death prevented him from digesting and
publishing them. Better far had he contented himself with
amassing less, and turning what he had got to account; a lesson
hard to learn, but most important to be borne in mind and acted
upon. As it was, he was obliged to leave the fulfilment of
his task to others; taking all possible care for the safety of
his collections, and not doubting that those who came after him,
seeing what was prepared for their hands, would cheerfully
undertake the office, perhaps with a praiseworthy zeal for
communicating information, perhaps with the not less natural
desire of building their own fame upon the labours of their
predecessors. But in his expectations he was sadly
mistaken, and has but furnished an additional proof how difficult
it is for any one to enter completely into the objects and ideas
of another, and consequently how imperative it is upon all,
ourselves to finish the web we have begun, if we wish to see it
come perfect and uniform from the loom.”
Blomefield, who was a contemporary, acknowledges his great
obligations to the learned Norwich antiquary, and recorded the
death of his friend and his being buried in St. Helen’s
Church, Norwich. The tomb, a black marble monument, by the
steps of the altar, bears the following arms and
inscription:—
“Argent, a saltier and on a chief,
Azure, three woolpacks of the field,
Crest, a hand holding a dagger proper,
Motto—I make sure.
“Here resteth in hope of a joyful resurrection, the body
of John Kirkpatrick of this city, Merchant, and Treasurer to this
Hospital. He was a man of sound judgment, good
understanding and extensive knowledge; industrious in his
business, and indefatigable in that of the Corporation in which
he was constantly employed. He died, very much lamented by
all that knew him, on the 20th day of August, in the year of our
Lord, 1728, aged 42.”
The Rev. F. Blomefield.
The Rev. Francis Blomefield, rector of Fersfield, lived some
time in this city, compiling his history of Norwich, which he
brought down to the year 1742. He was born at Fersfield,
July 23rd, 1705. He was installed rector of that parish in
1729, when he almost immediately commenced collecting materials
for a history of his native county, but his work is more a
topographical survey than a history. He did not live to
complete it, having caught the small-pox when in London, of which
he died, in the 46th year of his age, on January 15th,
1751. He began printing his great work in 1736. In
1769 it was continued (but not completed) in five folio volumes
by the Rev. Charles Parker, M.A., rector of Oxburgh.
William Anderson, F.R.S., came to Norwich
as an excise officer, and his great talents introduced him to the
most scientific characters of this city. He obtained the
situation of clerk to the New Mills, in Heigham, and was a
considerable contributor to Mr. Baker’s works on the
Microscope. Many of his papers on Natural History are
published in the transactions of the Royal Society. He died
in 1767, and was buried in Heigham churchyard.
Anna Letitia Barbauld, sister of Dr. Aikin, of
Yarmouth, resided at Norwich. She was the authoress of
“Evenings at Home,” and other valuable works for
children, and died in 1825.
Peter Barlow, the celebrated mathematician, and author
of many of the articles in Rees’ Encyclopædia, and
the Encyclopædia Metropolitana, was the son of a warper of
this city. He was born October, 1766, in the parish of St.
Simon and Jude.
Sir William Beechey, the eminent painter, resided in
this city in the early part of his life, and executed several of
the paintings in St. Andrew’s Hall, particularly the
celebrated portrait of Lord Nelson. He was knighted by
George III., and appointed portrait painter to his majesty.
Hancock Blythe, schoolmaster, mathematician, and
teacher of languages, resided in Timberhill, and was the author
of several small works on astronomy. He died in 1795, aged
73 years.
John Brand, B.A., was a native of this
city. His father was a saddler in London Lane. Young
Brand, having a turn for study, went for some years to the continent,
where he acquired the languages and customs of the people so
strongly, that on his return to England he received the
soubriquêt of Abbè Brand. In 1744 he was
reader at St. Peter’s Mancroft. He was the author of
several articles in the British Critic. He was
rector of St. George’s, Southwark, and of Wickham Skeith,
in Suffolk. He died in February, 1809.
Henry Cooper, barrister at law, was born in the parish
of St. Peter’s Mancroft. He was sent to sea in the
early part of his life, but was afterwards called to the bar, and
was made attorney general of the Bermudas. After a
brilliant career, in which he rapidly became one of the leaders
of the Norfolk circuit, he died, after being twelve years at the
bar, in 1825.
Mr. Reuben Deave was a large manufacturer in this city,
who, in December, 1769, became the fortunate possessor of a prize
in a lottery worth £20,000. The number was
42,903. It came into his possession in the following
singular manner. His foreman, who was in a confidential
position, had bought two tickets in a lottery, and after some
time thought he had speculated too far, and told his employer
that he feared he had done a very foolish thing. Mr. Deave,
being informed of the circumstance, thought so too, but offered
to buy one of the tickets. His foreman took them out of his
pocket and gave Mr. Deave his choice. Mr. Deave, however,
said he would make no choice, and bought the one offered to
him. Shortly afterwards the lottery was drawn, and this
ticket proved to be a fortunate number for £20,000, while
the
other was a blank. Mr. Deave, who had paid for the ticket,
gave his foreman a cheque for £500, but the poor man was so
vexed at losing the prize that he hung himself on the next
day. Mr. Deave was much grieved at this, and often said
afterwards that the prize never did him any good, for he gave a
power of attorney to a man to draw the money in London, and that
man bolted with it, and was never heard of afterwards.
William Enfield, LL.D. an eminent literary
character, was for many years the minister at the Octagon Chapel
here. He was much beloved by his congregation, and died
November 2nd, 1797, aged 57, and was buried in the chapel, where
there is a monument to his memory.
Sir John Fenn, the editor of the “Paston
Letters,” was born here in 1739; on presenting the first
two volumes of these letters to George III. in 1787, he was
knighted. He died October 14th, 1796.
John Fransham, the Norwich Polytheist, a very eccentric
character, was born in St. George’s Colegate. He was
an excellent mathematician, and was a great admirer of the
ancient writers on this science. He frequently took rapid
solitary walks, with a broad brimmed hat slouched over his eyes,
and a plaid on his shoulders, and was supposed to sleep often on
Mousehold Heath. He died on February 1st, 1810. His
biography was written by his pupil, Mr. Saint.
Thomas Hall, Esq., a merchant, lived in the
early part of this period. He founded a monthly sacramental
lecture, left several legacies to the charities, and £100
for a gold chain to be worn by the Mayor of Norwich, and which is
now worn by the Deputy Mayor. He died on December 17th,
1715, and was buried with great funeral pomp at St.
George’s Colegate. A portrait of this pious and
liberal benefactor was presented by John and Edward Taylor,
Esqs., to the corporation, and placed in the council chamber,
May, 1821.
John Hobart, Earl of Buckinghamshire, sat as member of
parliament for this city from 1747 to 1756, when he succeeded to
the peerage. He was a liberal benefactor to the city.
He was born August 17th, 1723, and died September 3rd, 1793.
James Hooke, a celebrated musician, author of more than
2400 songs, 140 complete works or operas, one oratorio, and many
odes, anthems, &c., was born in this city. At the early
age of four years he was capable of playing many pieces, and at
six he performed in public. He died in 1813, leaving two
sons by his first wife. One of them was Dr. James Hooke,
Dean of Worcester, who died in 1828. The other was the
celebrated author of “Sayings and Doings.”
David Kinnebrook, an eminent mathematician, was born
here. He was master of one of the charity schools for forty
years, and never absented himself a single day until his last
illness. He died March 23rd, 1810, aged 72.
John Lens, Esq., M.A., ancient sergeant
at law, is believed to have been born in the parish of St.
Andrew’s, and was educated here. In 1781, he was
called to the bar. He first practised in the Courts of King’s Bench, but being made a sergeant, confined
himself chiefly to the common pleas. He was afterwards made
King’s and next King’s Ancient Sergeant. On
more than one occasion he declined the offer of the bench.
He died August 6th, 1825, in his 69th year.
Richard Lubbock, M.D., was born here in 1759,
and was educated at the Free Grammar School. He obtained
his degree at Edinburgh in 1784. On his return to Norwich
he practised with great success. He died September 1st,
1808, and was buried at Earlham church.
The Right Rev. Jacob Mountain, D.D., was the
first protestant bishop in the Canadas. He was born in the
parish of St. Andrew. He presided over the church in the
two Canadas for thirty-two years, and died June 16th, 1825, in
the seventy-fifth year of his age.
Samuel Parr, LL.D., was master of the Free
Grammar School from 1778 to 1792, when he resigned on being
presented to the rectory of Buckden, in Lincolnshire.
Edward Rigby, M.D., was born at Chawbent, in
Lancashire, December 9th, 1749. He was under the tuition of
Dr. Priestley until he was fourteen, when he was apprenticed to
Mr. David Martineau of this city. In 1805 he was elected
mayor, and died Oct. 27th, 1822. In August, 1818, the
corporation voted him and his lady a piece of plate of the value
of twenty-five guineas, as a memento of the memorable birth of
their four children at one time, and the event was
recorded in the city books. Two of the children lived to be
nearly twelve weeks old, and the other two not quite seven
weeks.
William Saint, one of the mathematical masters of the
Royal Military Academy, at Woolwich, was a native of St.
Mary’s Coslany. He wrote the “Life of
Fransham,” and was a contributor to the “Lady’s
Diary.” He died July 9th, 1819.
George Sandby, D.D., chancellor of the diocese
of Norwich, personally presided in the consistorial court of the
Lord Bishop of Norwich for nearly thirty years, during the whole
of which time no decree of his was reversed by a superior
court. He died March 17th, 1807, aged ninety-one.
William Say, an eminent mezzotinto engraver, was born
at Lakenham in 1768.
Frank Sayers, M.D., an eminent physician and
literary character, who for many years resided in this city, was
born in London, March 3rd, 1763. He was the author of
“Dramatic Sketches of the Ancient Northern
Mythology,” “Poems,” “Disquisitious,
Metaphysical and Literary,” “Nugæ
Poeticæ,” and “Miscellanies, Antiquarian and
Historical.” He died August 16th, 1817, and a mural
monument is erected to his memory in the Cathedral, with a Latin
inscription by the Rev. F. Howes. His works were collected
and edited by the late William Taylor of this city.
Sir James Edward Smith, M.D., F.R.S.,
president of the Linnæan Society, London, and of the
Norwich Museum, and member of several foreign academies, was born in
St. Peter’s Mancroft, December 2nd, 1759. He received
his education here, and graduated as a physician at Leyden, in
1786. He assisted materially in the establishment of the
Linnæan Society, in 1788, of which he was the first
president, and he continued to preside over the society until his
death, March 15th, 1828. He was the author of several
admirable botanical works.
William Stevenson, F.S.A., who was for many
years proprietor of the “Norfolk Chronicle,” and who
edited a new edition of “Bentham’s History of Ely
Cathedral,” was born at East Retford, in 1750, and died at
his house in Surrey Street in this city, May 13th, 1821, aged
seventy-one. He was, in the early part of his life, an
artist of no mean pretension; and was esteemed an antiquarian and
numismatist of considerable knowledge and research.
John Taylor, D.D., was a native of
Lancaster. He came to Norwich in 1733, and was a minister
to the Presbyterian dissenters in 1757. He was the author
of several theological works, and died at Warrington, March 5th,
1761, aged sixty-six.
William Taylor, a celebrated German scholar, and a very
eccentric character, author of an “Historical Survey of
German Poetry,” and a translator of several German works,
was born in this city, and resided for many years in Upper King
Street. He died in 1836, aged sixty-nine.
Edward Baron Thurlow was born at Bracon Ash, in this
county. He received the rudiments of his education at the
Free Grammar School here. He rose successively to be appointed solicitor general,
attorney general, master of the rolls, and lord high chancellor
of Great Britain, and was created Lord Thurlow in 1778. In
1793 he resigned the seals. He died at Brighton, September
12th, 1806.
William Wilkins, sen., architect, was born in
the parish of St. Benedict, about the year 1744 or 1747. He
received but a limited education, but possessed an admirable
taste for design, and his plans and drawings were very
beautiful. He was the author of a clever essay in Vol. xii.
of the “Archæologia,” on the Venta
Icenorum.
William Wilkins, M.A., son of the above, was
born in St. Giles’ parish. He was educated at the
Free Grammar School here. He was employed in the erection
of several public buildings in London, and numerous private
mansions. His literary labours were confined to the subject
of architecture, and his “Magna Græcia” is
considered to be an excellent work.
William Windham. This eminent statesman
represented the city in several parliaments. He was born in
London in 1750, and first sat for Norwich in 1780. In 1783
he was appointed secretary to the lord lieutenant of Ireland, and
made his first speech in parliament in 1785. He died in
1806.
Sir Benjamin Wrench, an eminent physician, who
practised here for sixty years, lived in St.
Andrew’s. His house occupied the site of the present
Corn Exchange. He was lord of the manor of Little Melton in
Blomefield’s time.
We have now arrived at the present age of political progress,
and material prosperity; the age of inventions, railways,
newspapers, and telegraphs; the age of expansion and general
intelligence. George III., George IV., and William IV.,
have reigned in this century, and have been succeeded by our
beloved Queen Victoria. Under her benign sway the old
semi-barbarous state of society has passed away like a dream, and
we live in a new social era, the result of the progress of
education, of the march of improvement, and of the spread of true
religion.
As it has been often stated by local historians that Norwich
formerly contained a very large population, and as this statement
is very generally believed, we may here correct the mistake by
giving the returns, which show a very gradual, and very slow
increase from the earliest period to the present time. The
parochial returns show that in 1693 the population was only
28,881; in 1752 it had increased to 36,169; and in 1786 to
40,051. This was the greatest number up to the end of the
last century. In 1801 it was 36,832, not including 6,000
recruits for the army, navy, and militia; making the total number
42,832. This indicates a very slow increase of
population. The following are the returns for the present
century: 1801, 36,832; 1811, 37,256; 1821, 50,288; 1831, 61,116;
1841, 62,294; 1851, 68,713; 1861, 74,414, being an increase of
about 500 yearly. Norwich in 1752 contained only 7131 houses, and
in 1801 8763, of which 1747 were returned as empty. In 1831
the number was 14,201, of which 13,132 were inhabited. Now
the number is over 21,000, and the rateable value is
£178,882.
We must now leave the stately march of history for a more
broken and interrupted step. There is some difficulty in
detailing the events of this period, for every reader is more or
less acquainted with it, and has viewed it in relation to his own
interests and prejudices. The records of facts are so
voluminous, that every reader may think that there is something
omitted, or misrepresented, or exaggerated. It is
impossible, however, to mention every local occurrence which some
one may think important, every accident, or fire, or crime, or
every grand concert or entertainment. We have to deal with
events more connected with general history; and we shall first
state the more remarkable occurrences of a civil or municipal
character, reserving political matters for a subsequent
chapter. But in order to render our narrative of local
events, and especially local elections, more intelligible, it
will be necessary to give a brief account of the old corporation,
whose proceedings occupy so large a part of our records.
This body claims a prescriptive origin. Certain
privileges were granted to the city by the charters of different
sovereigns, the first being that of Henry I., which was
annulled and again renewed by Stephen. The particular
privileges conceded by it cannot now be ascertained. The
next charter is that of the 5th Henry II., but this is only
confirmatory of former grants, and the original is still
preserved in the Guildhall. One granted by Richard I.
contains some estimable clauses. The most prominent are,
that no citizen shall be forced to answer any plea or action in
any but the city courts, except for those concerning possessions
out of the city; that the citizens should have acquittance
of murder, which is equivalent to granting them a coroner;
that they should not be forced to duel, that is, should be
exempt from the general law which was then in force, of deciding
causes by single combat; that they should be free from toll
throughout all England; and that they should have other
liberties, all highly important, and no doubt justly appreciated
by the citizens of that period. King John’s charter
is similar to the preceding, and that of Henry II., with the
addition that all persons living in the city, and participating
in the liberties of the citizens, shall be talliated or taxed,
and pay as the aforesaid citizens of Norwich do, when tollages
and aid shall be laid upon them. It is probable that the
principal authority was invested in bailiffs, instead of a
provost, in 1223, as there is no evidence of the existence of
such officers before that time.
Two deeds of Henry III., and several of succeeding kings, all
either confirmed or enlarged the privileges granted to the city;
but our attention is most attracted by the concessions of Henry
IV., which established the constitution of a mayor,
sheriffs, &c. The original charter is lost, but those
of his son and more modern princes have sufficiently preserved
the spirit of it. The charter of Henry V. made the
extensive territory within the corporation limits a county of
itself, excepting only the castle, which belonged to
Norfolk. This territory was, by the boundary act, included
for the purposes of representation. Twenty-five charters,
the latest by James II., are known to have been granted, and
probably others existed and have been lost. When the
innovations, made in old establishments during the Commonwealth,
were gradually reformed, the citizens petitioned for a renewal of
their rights. The charter of 15th Charles II. was obtained,
and under it the city was governed till the passing of the
Municipal Reform Act. Most of the old charters were granted
in consideration for sums of money given or lent to kings to
enable them to carry on wars. Many of the charters were
more injurious than beneficial to the city, as they created
monopolies of one kind or other, or gave powers to the old
corporation which were frequently abused. Those who wish to
study those old documents more minutely may find them in
Blomefield’s history.
The old corporation was more ornamental than useful to the
city for 400 years. Under it the sanitary state of the city
was so bad, the drainage of the city so defective, and the supply
of water so insufficient, that plagues and pestilences, which
carried off thousands of the citizens, were of frequent
occurrence. Ward elections were so often contested, that bribery,
treating, and intimidation, were quite common, and the corruption
of the freemen and lower classes was universal. Physically
and morally the city was for centuries in the worst possible
condition. The ward elections were carried on with a spirit
which was surpassed in no other place. They were considered
as trials of strength between different parties; and if they
happened at a period when a general election was anticipated, an
enormous sum of money was spent in treating and bribery.
Indeed, it has been asserted on good authority that no less a sum
than £16,000 was wasted in the contest for a single ward in
1818! The city was divided into four great wards, each of
which was subdivided into three small wards. The mayor was
elected by the freemen on May 1st, and sworn into his office on
the Guild day, which was always the Tuesday before Midsummer
day. He was chosen from the aldermen, and afterwards he was
a magistrate for life. One of the sheriffs was chosen by
the court of aldermen, the other by the freemen on the last
Tuesday in August. The twenty-four aldermen were chosen for
the twelve smaller wards, two for each ward, whose office was to
keep the peace in their several divisions. When anyone of
them died, the freemen of that great ward in which the lesser
ward was included, for which he was to serve, elected another in
his place within five days. The common councilmen were
elected by the freemen dwelling in each of the four great wards
separately; for Conisford great ward on the Monday; Mancroft on
the Tuesday; Wymer on the Wednesday; and the Northern ward on the
Thursday in Passion week, thence called “cleansing”
week. They chose a speaker yearly, who was called speaker
of the commons. The old freemen therefore formed the whole
of the local constituency for municipal purposes.
Memoirs are often the best sources of information respecting
public matters, as they let us behind the scenes and show us what
the actors really thought and did. A good memoir of the
late Professor Taylor, which appeared in the Norfolk News,
of March 28th and April 4th, 1863, contained the following,
“So far back as 1808 we find Mr. Taylor recording that he
was ‘elected a common councilman for the fourth
time.’” He also states that the contest for
nominees in the Long ward was “the severest ever
remembered.” Few people now-a-days could realize the
import of those few words. Few understand how much was
implied by the once common phrase “a battle for the Long
ward.” The combatants would have scorned such
mealy-mouthed appellations, as “conservative” and
“liberal,” or indeed any name but that of the colors
under which they fought. They were
“blue-and-whites,” or
“orange-and-purples;” the former being what would now
be called the “liberal,” and the latter the
“conservative,” party. To be a blue-and-white
or an orange-and-purple, was to be an angel or a devil, as the
case might be; the angels being of course those of your own side,
to whichever you belonged. Great was the potency of colors:
though not supposed to be worn at municipal elections, they were
a rallying cry, and they were always at hand to be flouted, like
a red
rag at a turkey, in the face of the enemy. Even housemaids
and children concealed them about their persons, in readiness to
show them slyly from some window, both to encourage their friends
and exasperate their enemies, whenever a procession passed.
Great were the preparations for the contest. A sort of
civic press-gang prowled the streets by night for the purpose of
“cooping chickens,” which, being done into English,
means carrying men off by force, and keeping them drunk and in
confinement, so that if they could not be got to vote
“for” it would be impossible for them to vote
“against.” If they could not be safely secured
in the city, they were “cribbed, cabined, and
confined” in wherries on the river, or the broads, or even
taken to Yarmouth and carried out to sea. When the day of
battle came, great was the shouting, the drinking, the betting,
the bribing, and the fighting, till the longest purse contrived
to win the day. Of course, the dirty work was done by dirty
men. But leading men on both sides were so used to see this
sort of thing, that they considered it only as a necessary part
and parcel of an election. It was regarded rather as a limb
which could not be safely severed from the body, than as a shabby
coat which disgraced the wearer. Besides, palliating
rhetoric was not absent. Better do a little evil than
surrender a cause essential to the welfare of the state!
“What we did,” we honest orange-and-purples, or we
pure blue-and-whites, “was done in mere
self-defence.”
1801. January 1st, 1801, being the first day of
the nineteenth century, and the day on which the Union of Great
Britain and Ireland took place, the 13th Regiment of Light
Dragoons dismounted, and the Militia fired a feu de joie
in the Market Place.
January 3rd. The old Theatre (built in 1757) was
re-opened after extensive improvements. The alterations
were executed after the designs of William Wilkins, Esq., the
patentee. This theatre was formerly a good school for young
actors, and many promising performers have first appeared on
these boards. Of late, operatic performances appear to be
most in favour with the gentry.
February 24th. Charles Harvey, Esq., the steward, was
unanimously elected Recorder of Norwich, vice Henry Partridge,
Esq., resigned.
April 4th. Mrs. Lloyd, widow of the Rev. Dean Lloyd,
died at Cambridge, aged 79. This lady painted the
Transfiguration, and other figures in the eastern windows of the
Cathedral.
In April, the ward elections were the causes of great
contention. In consequence of objections being made to the
elections of two nominees of the Wymer ward, and three of the
Northern ward, on the ground of their being ineligible under the
corporation act, having omitted to receive the sacrament within a
year previous to the election of the common council, the mayor
did not make the returns till several days after the usual time.
At a court held April 4th, after the objections had been fully
heard by counsel, the recorder (Mr. Harvey) declared that the
persons objected to who had the majority of votes, having omitted
to come into court according to summons, were not duly elected,
but as no regular notice had been given previous to the election,
the candidates in the minority could not be returned. A new
election for the above wards accordingly took place on May 25th
and 26th.
June 16th. Jeremiah Ives, Esq., of Catton, was elected
mayor a second time. There was no guild feast this year at
St. Andrew’s Hall.
June 25th. An awful fire, which lasted two hours, broke
out on the roof of the Cathedral, and in less than an hour, 45
feet of the leaded roof, towards the western end of the nave,
were consumed. Some plumbers had been at work repairing the
roof, and set fire to it either accidentally or
intentionally. The damage was about £500. The
Lord Bishop (Dr. Sutton) was present, and distributed refreshment
to the soldiers and people who assisted in arresting the progress
of the conflagration.
1802. Peace was proclaimed throughout the city on
May the 4th, in due form; and the mayor and corporation went in
procession from the hall through the principal streets.
There was a general illumination at night. At a quarterly
assembly of the council, a congratulatory address to his majesty
on the restoration of peace, was voted unanimously.
On May 21st, the city address was presented to the king, at
the levee at St. James’ Palace, by Jeremiah
Ives, Esq., Junr., the mayor, and Sir Roger Kerrison.
On May 29th, a county meeting was held, when a similar address
was adopted.
October 4th to 7th. A grand musical festival was held in
Norwich, under the direction of Messrs. Beckwith and Sharp of
this city, and Mr. Ashley of London. Mrs. Billington, Mr.
Bartleman, and Mr. Braham, were the principal performers.
October 21st. There was a severe contest for the
election of an alderman in the great northern ward, in the room
of Francis Colombine, Esq., resigned. The numbers
were—for E. Rigby, Esq., 261; Jonathan Davey, Esq.,
259.
1803. February 8th. At a full meeting held
at the Guildhall, a committee was appointed to prepare a bill to
be laid before a future meeting, for better paving, lighting,
watching, and cleansing the city. A petition to the house
of commons for leave to bring in a bill, was afterwards
presented, but it was strongly opposed as not being then
expedient. An act was, however, ultimately carried.
March 7th. At a special assembly of the corporation, an
address of congratulation was adopted, to be presented to his
majesty, on the providential discovery of the late traitorous
conspiracy against his royal person and government, entered into
by Colonel Despard and six other persons, who were executed on
the top of the New Surrey prison, in Horsemonger Lane. The
high sheriff and grand jury of Norfolk, at Thetford,
also voted an address of congratulation to the king, and a
similar address was adopted at a county meeting held at the
Shirehall.
March 21st. The portrait of Captain John Harvey, of the
Norwich Light Horse volunteers, painted by Mr. Opie, at the
request of the troop, was placed in St. Andrew’s Hall.
April 27th. A public dispensary was established in
Norwich, and has been a great benefit to the poor people of the
city.
August 16th. France having again threatened to invade
this kingdom, a meeting of the inhabitants of the city was held
at the Guildhall, for the purpose of forming a regiment of
volunteer infantry under the regulations of the Acts for the
defence of the realm, when resolutions to that effect were
adopted, and upwards of £6400 subscribed, and 1400 citizens
enrolled themselves under the command of Lieut.-Colonel
Harvey. A rifle corps was also formed, of which R. M.
Bacon, Esq., then editor of the Mercury, was appointed
Captain. Both parties manifested the greatest enthusiasm,
but fortunately the services of the local warriors were not
required. On September 29th, a new telegraph was erected on
the top of Norwich Castle, to communicate with Strumpshaw Mill,
Filby Church, and Yarmouth, so as to give notice of any
danger. In October, the Norfolk and Norwich volunteer
regiments agreed to perform permanent duty at Yarmouth in case of
invasion, and many of them were stationed in the port during the
succeeding two months. The victory of the Norfolk hero,
Lord Nelson, at Trafalgar in 1805, discouraged Napoleon I., and he
relinquished his intention to invade this land of freedom.
In July 1806, the local militia act was passed, and many of the
volunteers transferred their services to that body. The
volunteer corps of Norwich and Norfolk were disbanded on March
24th, 1813. The West Norfolk militia returned to Norwich
from Ireland, on May 11th, 1816, and were disembodied on June
17th in that year. A long peace of 40 years ensued, but the
old trade of Norwich destroyed by the war, never revived.
In January, 1817, upwards of £3000 were contributed to
relieve the poor, many of whom were employed in making a new road
to Carrow, and in other public works, the trade of the city being
in a state of stagnation.
1804. January 18th. The city of Norwich
Regiment of Volunteer Infantry, 600 strong, commanded by Lieut.
Col. Harvey, received their colours. The banners, given by
the mayor and corporation, were first consecrated in the Market
Place, by the Rev. E. S. Thurlow, prebendary of Norwich, with a
suitable address and prayer, and were afterwards presented by the
mayor, John Morse, Esq., to the colonel in due form. The
king’s and regimental standards were then delivered to the
ensigns. The Artillery, under Capt. Fyers, stationed on the
Castle Hill, fired salutes; the Regiment fired three vollies; and
St. Peter’s bells rang merry peals.
June 1st. The city of Norwich (or 7th) Regiment of
Norfolk Volunteer Infantry, commanded by Lieut. Colonel
Harvey, entered on one month’s permanent duty in
Norwich. The Regiment mustered 500 strong, exclusive of
officers.
June 4th. The anniversary of His Majesty’s
birthday was celebrated in Norwich by the grandest military
spectacle ever witnessed here. Upwards of 1700 men of the
Royal Artillery, 24th Regiment of Foot, and the Norwich Volunteer
Corps, assembled on the Castle Hill and fired a feu de
joie with fine effect. During this year the citizens
were often entertained with military displays. June 18th,
Major General Money was appointed to the staff of the eastern
district; in which a force of 32,000 men was now fully completed
for the reception of any invading enemy.
June 18th. The corporation granted the site of the
Blackfriars, in St. Andrew’s, to the court of guardians,
for 200 years at their old rent for the purpose of improving the
same, and repairing the Old Workhouse for the poor, the plan of
erecting a New Workhouse having been abandoned.
Subsequently, large sums of money were wasted in repairing the
old house, sufficient to build a new one, and ultimately it was
found to be absolutely necessary to build a new house, which was
done at a cost of £30,000.
1805. January 17th. At a public meeting
held at the Guildhall, it was resolved to establish an hospital
and school for the indigent blind, in Norwich and Norfolk.
Towards the foundation of this admirable institution, Thomas
Tawell, Esq., contributed a house and three and-a-half acres of
land in Magdalen Street, valued at £1050. Mr.
Tawell, who was unfortunately blind, introduced his humane
proposal in an able speech, appealing for subscriptions. A
large sum was at once subscribed. The hospital was opened
on the 14th October following.
February 2nd. Dr. Charles Manners Sutton, bishop of
Norwich, was nominated by the king, and chosen, February 12th,
archbishop of Canterbury. On the 13th, His Grace arrived at
the palace, Norwich, from London. On the 15th, the mayor
and court of aldermen proceeded in state from the Guildhall to
the Bishop’s Palace, where the recorder, Mr. Harvey,
delivered an address of congratulation to the archbishop on his
translation, to which His Grace returned a dignified
answer. Next day, the clergy of Norwich waited on His
Grace, when the Rev. Dr. Pretyman, prebendary, addressed the
archbishop in an appropriate speech, to which His Grace made an
impressive reply. On the 17th His Grace preached his
farewell sermon in the Cathedral.
February 24th. The clergy of Norwich having intimated an
intention of applying to Parliament for an increase of their
incomes, then very small, by assessment, the council, at a
quarterly assembly, resolved to oppose the application; the
citizens, in vestry meetings, being unanimous against the
measure, which was never carried out.
March 18th. Dr. Henry Bathurst (one of the prebendaries
of Durham) was elected bishop of Norwich by the dean and
chapter. He soon made himself universally beloved by the
clergy and the citizens. Professor Taylor gave the following
account of the late and also of the newly appointed
bishop:—
“In 1805, Dr. Bathurst succeeded Dr. Sutton
as bishop of Norwich. The latter, who had been translated
to the See of Canterbury, was a man of polished manners,
extravagant habits, and courtier-like address. He was too
polite to quarrel with anybody and too prudent to provoke
controversy. He neither felt nor affected to feel any
horror of Unitarians. He invited them to his table, and at
the request of the mayor, he preached a charity sermon at St.
George’s Colegate, knowing that my father had been asked
and had consented to write the hymns.”
“Dr. Bathurst removed from Durham to Norwich, and as he
was a stranger in his new residence, never having taken any
prominent part as a public man, little expectation was excited as
to his future conduct. He was known to owe his elevation to
his relation, Lord Bathurst; and it was generally taken for
granted that his views on public affairs were similar to those of
the administration of which that noble lord was a member.
Curiosity led me to the Cathedral to hear the new bishop’s
primary charge, and I soon found the spirit it breathed to
resemble the benevolence that beamed from his
countenance.”
“What the bishop preached he also practised. He
never shrunk from appearing to be what he really was, nor while
he received a dissenter in his study with politeness would he
pass him unnoticed in the street. He was to be seen walking
arm-in-arm with persons, of all persuasions, whom he respected,
in the streets of Norwich. He was not afraid of shaking
‘brother Madge,’ as he called him, by the hand, nor
of welcoming Unitarians to his table. What he was as a
member of the house of peers, on all occasions in which the great
principles of religious liberty were concerned, is well
known. I have only here to speak of his conduct as a
resident in Norwich.”
Sept 3rd. The committee of the court of guardians
appointed to examine the poor rates of the city and hamlets, for
the purpose of obtaining a more equal assessment, made their
report, in which they stated that an increase of £16,000
stock and £1800 rent, calculating on the half rental only,
might be made, and recommended a general survey and new valuation
to be taken, in consequence of the great alteration which had
taken place in property since 1786, when the previous survey was
taken.
December 17th. There was a grand entertainment at the
Assembly Rooms, in honour of Lord Nelson’s glorious victory
off Cape Trafalgar; more than 450 ladies and gentlemen of the
city and county were present. The rooms were decorated with
transparencies and brilliantly illuminated for a grand ball and
supper. The victory so celebrated, and which had been won
on October 21st, was dearly purchased by the death of Viscount
Nelson. The last order given before the action began, was
by the newly-invented telegraph:—“England expects
every man to do his duty.”
1806. January 9th. This day the great bells
of the several churches in the city were tolled from twelve till
two o’clock, it being the day on which the remains of the
immortal Lord Nelson were interred under the dome of St.
Paul’s Cathedral. The body, after lying in state in
the hall of Greenwich Hospital, was brought thence on
January 8th by water to Whitehall stairs, and carried on a bier
to the Admiralty Office, and deposited in the Captain’s
room for the night. Next day the corpse was removed on a
funeral car, drawn by six horses, to St. Paul’s. The
Duke of York headed the procession, the grandest ever witnessed;
500 persons of distinction attended at the funeral.
February 24th. At a quarterly assembly of the
corporation, a loyal address was unanimously adopted, to be
presented to His Majesty, “expressive of their gratitude
for the paternal affection which he has shown to his subjects, by
waiving every consideration, but the public good, in the
appointment of men of the first abilities in the country to the
high offices of state!”
1807. March 4th. A committee of the House
of Commons declared Mr. Windham and Mr. Coke not duly elected,
and another election took place for two members for the
county. Sir J. H. Astley, Bart., and Edward Coke, Esq., (of
Derby) were returned without opposition. Mr. Windham
afterwards took his seat for New Romney, and Mr. Coke was
returned for Derby vice his brother, who had previously
accepted the Chiltern Hundreds.
May 14th. The anniversary of the birthday of that
illustrious statesman, the Right Hon. Wm. Windham, was celebrated
at the Angel Inn (now Royal Hotel) by a large party of his
numerous friends. William Smith, Esq., M.P., presided.
June 16th. Robert Herring, Esq., was sworn into the office
of mayor of Norwich; and he afterwards gave a dinner to 150
gentlemen at Chapel-field house.
October 6th. The first meeting was held of the revived
Norfolk Club at the Angel Inn, Norwich. Sir John Lombe,
Bart., was in the chair. The Hon. Colonel Fitzroy, Mr. W.
Smith, and Mr. Windham were also present.
1808. January. By the telegraph, orders
from the Admiralty Office were received at Yarmouth, in 17
minutes. The chain of communication was by Strumpshaw,
Thorpe Hills, Honingham, Carlton, and Harling, and from thence
proceeded between Thetford and Bury, over Newmarket Heath to
London.
Captain Manby’s invention for rescuing persons stranded
on a lee shore, was approved by the Lords of the Admiralty.
Parliament rewarded Captain Manby at different times with grants
amounting to £6000, and adopted his apparatus at many parts
of the coast.
July 29th. At a special assembly of the corporation of
Norwich, an address to his majesty was agreed to unanimously, on
the subject of the noble struggle of the patriots of Spain and
Portugal against the Ruler of France, and of the generous aid
given to their endeavours by the government.
1809. January. In consequence of Colonel
Robert Harvey not being joined by a sufficient number of the
Volunteers under his command to become a local Militia Battalion,
he resigned the command of the Norwich Volunteer Regiment, and was
succeeded by Colonel De Hague.
May 9th. The six Regiments of Norfolk Local Militia
first assembled to perform 28 days’ exercise. They
were stationed at Norwich, Yarmouth, Swaffham, and Lynn.
October 15th. The Norwich corn merchants demanded of the
farmers a month’s credit, instead of paying ready money for
their corn as heretofore, but it was resisted by the growers, and
ultimately abandoned by the merchants.
November 2nd. After an interval of seven years, there
was a grand musical festival here, combining oratorios at St.
Peter’s Church, and concerts at the Theatre, under the
direction of Mr. Beckwith, eldest son of the late Dr.
Beckwith. Professor Hague, of Cambridge, led the band.
1810. January 20th. The disputes between
the corn growers and buyers in the city and county, having been
amicably adjusted, a reconciliation dinner took place at the
Maid’s Head Inn. Amongst the toasts was, “Fair
Play—ready money on both sides, or ready money on
neither.”
February 4th. Died at Gunton, in his 77th year, the Rt.
Hon. Harbord Lord Suffield. He represented Norwich from
1756 to 1786. He was much respected by his
constituents.
April 26th. The first stone of the new bridge at Carrow
was laid by the mayor, T. Back, Esq., in due form.
August 6th. The first stone of the Norwich
Foundry Bridge was laid by Alderman Jonathan Davey, the projector
of the undertaking.
September 27th. A contest took place for the office of
alderman of the great Northern ward, in the room of John Herring,
Esq., who died on the 23rd, aged 61. The poll closed as
follows—for William Hankes, Esq., 258; N. Bolingbroke,
Esq., 229. The former was declared duly elected.
December 8th. The Rev. Edward Valpy, B.D., was elected
by the aldermen, master of the Free Grammar School, Norwich, in
the room of the Rev. Dr. S. Forster, resigned. Under Mr.
Valpy, the school attained great celebrity, and here Rajah Brooke
and other eminent men were educated.
1811. January 15th. Mr. Thomas Roope was
convicted at the sessions of having sent a challenge to Mr.
Robert Alderson, Steward of the Corporation, to provoke him to
fight a duel; and was sentenced to pay a fine of 40/- to the
king, and to be imprisoned for one month.
June 29th. Mr. Thomas Roope was sentenced in the Court
of King’s Bench, to be committed to the custody of the
marshal for three months, and to find sureties afterwards, for a
libel on Thomas Back, Esq., late mayor of Norwich.
August 6th. A portrait of Thomas Back, Esq., was placed
in St. Andrew’s Hall. It was painted by Mr. Clover, a
native of the city.
September 11th. A numerous meeting was held in St.
Andrew’s Hall, with the mayor, J. H. Cole, Esq., in the
chair, when the Norfolk and Norwich Auxiliary Bible Society was
instituted. The Bishop of Norwich (who was present) was
appointed president, and the three secretaries of the British and
Foreign Bible Society also attended. Annual meetings have
been held ever since.
1812. June 16th. Starling Day, Esq., was
sworn in Mayor of Norwich for the second time; but in consequence
of his advanced age and infirmities, there was no dinner in St.
Andrew’s Hall, on the guild-day. Mr. Alderman Davey
(who was one of the unsuccessful candidates for the office of
mayor on May 1st and 2nd) gave a dinner under the trees adjoining
his house at Eaton, to about 500 freemen of the liberal
interest. Strange as it may seem now, contests often took
place for the office of mayor, during the old corporation.
July 17th. At a meeting of noblemen, gentry, and clergy,
held at the Shirehall, (Lord Viscount Primrose in the chair,) the
Norfolk and Norwich Society for the education of the poor in the
principles of the Church of England, was established.
Upwards of £3000 was subscribed for the object. The
Lord Bishop of Norwich was elected patron, and Lord Suffield,
president.
1813. May 1st. A contested election for the
office of Mayor of Norwich came on, and was not finished till
next morning, when Alderman Davey and J. Harvey were returned as
the two highest; but on May 3rd, an objection was made to
Alderman J. Harvey, as being ineligible, from his not
being a resident inhabitant of the city, as required by
charter. Counsel’s opinion was obtained in favour of
that objection, and another election took place on June 7th, when
another contest ensued, and after a spirited poll the numbers
were—for Alderman Leman, 797; Alderman Davey, 801.
The Court of Aldermen elected the former gentleman.
July 4th. Great rejoicings took place here on the
arrival of the news of the great victory obtained by the British
army commanded by the Marquis of Wellington, over the French
army, under Joseph Buonaparte, at Vittoria in Spain, on June
21st, when the enemy lost 151 pieces of cannon, 415 waggons, all
his baggage, and many prisoners. The Marquis of Wellington
was promoted to be a Field-Marshal. A form of prayer and
thanksgiving for this victory was used in all the churches on
August 1st.
1814. May 1st. An election took place for
the office of Mayor of Norwich, and the contest lasted two
days. Aldermen Back and Robberds being the highest on the
poll, a scrutiny was demanded on behalf of Alderman Davey.
The scrutiny commenced on the 12th, and continued till the 19th,
when Alderman Davey declined proceeding further. Aldermen
Robberds and Back were then returned to the Court of Aldermen,
who elected J. W. Robberds, Esq., to serve the office of
Mayor.
June 3rd. The Expedition coach being the first to arrive
in Norwich with the news of the definitive treaty of
peace, (signed at Paris on the 30th ult.,) was drawn by the
people four times round the Market Place, and through the
principal streets.
June 8th. The Newmarket mail arrived in Norwich with
news of the Corn Importation Bill having been thrown out of the
House of Commons by a majority of 10, and was dragged by the
excited people for hours through the streets. At night a
great bonfire was made.
June 27th. Peace with France was proclaimed. The
mayor and corporation went in a procession of carriages from the
Guildhall through the principal streets, preceded by trumpets,
and accompanied by thousands of people.
July 7th. The thanksgiving day for the happy restoration
of peace. The mayor and corporation attended divine service
at the Cathedral. About 700 children from the church
schools went in procession to St. Andrew’s Hall, where a
plentiful dinner of roast beef and plum pudding was provided for
them by the treasurers of the charity schools. The poor in
their several parishes participated in the general joy, and were
regaled with plentiful dinners, paid for by subscriptions.
1815. March 4th. The late Professor Taylor
stood a contest, for the third time, for nominee of St.
Peter’s Mancroft ward. Of course he was beaten, this
being an orange-and-purple ward, but he polled 107 votes.
However, he was soon afterwards elected a common councilman,
without difficulty, in the Northern ward, where the
blue-and-whites had always a large majority. This was on
March 16th, and on May 3rd he was elected a member of the court
of guardians. He took a very active part in local politics,
and was the first man who ever reported and published the
proceedings of the common council.
June 23rd. The glorious news was received in Norwich,
with triumphant rejoicings, of the ever memorable victory
obtained by the Duke of Wellington over the French army,
commanded by Buonaparte in person, at Waterloo, near Brussels, on
the 18th. Buonaparte fled to Paris, leaving upwards of 200
pieces of cannon in the hands of the allied armies.
June 27th. Rejoicings were renewed here on the news
being received of the second abdication of Buonaparte, the
immediate consequence of the grand victory of La Belle
Alliance.
1816. January 18th. This day was appointed
a thanksgiving day for the restoration of peace, and it was
solemnly observed. The mayor and corporation of Norwich
attended divine service at the Cathedral. Sermons were
preached at the different places of worship, and collections were
made for the poor.
January 25th. At the 51st anniversary of the Castle
corporation, Thomas Back, Esq., alderman, presented two medals to
be worn by the recorder and steward of the society. Each
medal bore a good likeness of Mr. Pitt, on a beautiful cameo; the
motto round which was Non Sibi sed Patriæ
Vixit. On the reverse were the words, “Presented
by Thomas Back, Junior, Esq., to the Castle Corporation, Norwich, in
commemoration of the great victory of Waterloo, obtained on the
18th June, 1815, by the Allied Armies under the command of Field
Marshal the Duke of Wellington;” and around this was the
motto, “In memory of the Right Hon. William Pitt; died the
23rd January, 1806, aged 47.”
January 29th. Died, aged 86, Robert Harvey, Esq., called
the Father of the City of Norwich, for his great benevolence and
liberality and promotion of trade.
February 20th. A numerous meeting was held at the
Guildhall, Norwich, with the mayor, J. H. Yallop, Esq., in the
chair, when resolutions against the property tax, and a petition
founded thereon, were passed unanimously. Similar petitions
were sent from Lynn, Yarmouth, and other towns. County
meetings were also held to petition against the tax.
March 29th. At a public meeting held at the Guildhall,
Norwich, with the mayor in the chair, it was resolved to
establish a bank for savings, where servants and others might
deposit a portion of their earnings. It was opened on April
29th, and has continued to be very prosperous.
April 3rd. A meeting of merchants, manufacturers, and
others, was held at the Guildhall, Norwich, John Harvey, Esq.,
presiding, when resolutions were passed to instruct the city
members to watch and oppose the intended measure for allowing the
exportation of wool free of all restrictions. This measure
was for the time relinquished.
April 4th. At a public meeting held under the presidency
of the mayor, a petition to parliament was adopted for the repeal
of the Insolvent Debtors’ act as being injurious to trade
and commerce. It was not repealed for a long time.
May 11th. The West Norfolk militia returned to Norwich
from Ireland, and were disembodied on the 17th of June.
May 16th. A number of riotous persons, chiefly youths,
broke into the New Mills, in Norwich, threw some of the flour
into the mill pool, and committed several outrages on persons and
dwellings before they dispersed. The pretext for the
disturbance was the want of employment. They assembled
again on the next evening, but were dispersed by the magistrates
and military, and several of the rioters were taken into
custody. Similar proceedings took place at Downham and
other places in Norfolk.
June 17th. At a quarterly assembly of the corporation,
an address of congratulation to the Prince Regent was voted, to
be presented to his Royal Highness, on the occasion of the
marriage of the Princess Charlotte of Wales, and Prince Leopold
of Saxe Coburg. The address was presented by the city
members. The marriage took place on May 2nd.
June 18th. This day being the anniversary of the
glorious victory of Waterloo, the non-commissioned officers and
privates of the First Royal Dragoons, and other soldiers
quartered in Norwich, were treated with a handsome dinner in the
cavalry riding school, several gentlemen having entered into a
subscription for that purpose, the corporation adding the sum of
£10. Robert Hawkes, Esq., first suggested the
entertainment.
July 10th. An address of congratulation was voted by the
court of mayoralty of Norwich, to be presented to the Princess
Charlotte and Prince Leopold on their marriage.
October 14th. A public meeting was held in St.
Andrew’s Hall (Mr. Sheriff Bolingbroke in the chair), when
certain resolutions, and a petition to parliament founded
thereon, were agreed to. The petition was for the greatest
possible retrenchment of the public expenditure, and for a Reform
of the House of Commons. Thus early began the Reform
movement, and it continued to extend all over the country.
It became stronger and stronger, till at last it overcame all
opposition.
1817. January 1st. At a public meeting in
the Guildhall, with the mayor, William Hankes, Esq., presiding, a
subscription was commenced to relieve the labouring poor, which
amounted to £3050. The poor people were employed on
works of public improvement, and were supplied with soup,
&c. Upwards of £1000 was also raised at Yarmouth
for the same laudable purpose, and 460 men were employed in
forming roads to the Bath House, Jetty, &c. The
committee in Norwich granted £270 to be expended for labour
on cutting a road through Butter Hills to Carrow Bridge, which
was effected in the course of the summer.
March 26th. The severest contest took place ever known for
nominees of Wymer, or the Long ward, very few votes remaining
unpolled. Some of the freemen came in post-chaises from
Thetford to poll. The numbers were, Messrs. S. Mitchell,
306; J. Reynolds, 305; A. Thwaites, 292; Messrs. W. Foster, 297;
R. Purland, 288; C. Higgen, 283. Mr. Foster was successful,
having five votes above Mr. Thwaites, one of the old
nominees.
April 4th. On Good Friday morning, Wright’s
Norwich and Yarmouth steam packet had just started from the
Foundry Bridge, when the boiler of the engine burst with a
tremendous explosion, by which the vessel was blown to atoms, and
of 22 persons on board, five men three women, and one child were
instantly killed. Six women with fractured arms and legs
were conveyed to the hospital, where one died. The
remaining seven escaped without much injury. A subscription
amounting to £350 was raised for the sufferers. Soon
afterwards, a packet was introduced on the river, worked by four
horses, as in a thrashing machine; the animals walking in a path
18 feet in diameter. The vessel was propelled from six to
seven miles an hour, as wind and tide favoured. This packet
did not long run, and steam packets were again introduced, which
went from Norwich to Yarmouth daily.
September 26th. A meeting was held in St. Andrew’s
Hall, when an auxiliary association to the London Society for
Promoting Christianity amongst the Jews was established.
The Lord Bishop of Norwich was appointed president. Annual
meetings have been held ever since to promote the objects of the
society.
December 3rd. At a special meeting of the corporation,
two addresses of condolence, one to the Prince Regent, and the
other to Prince Leopold, of Saxe Coburg, were voted, expressive
of the grief of the citizens on the death of the Princess
Charlotte.
1818. January 5th. The court of guardians
having determined to proceed in the valuation of the property in
the city and hamlets, Messrs. Rook, Athow, and Stannard were
appointed to make such valuation. They were to be paid
£850 for their trouble.
A repository was established in Norwich for the sale of
articles of ingenuity, to increase the funds of the society for
relieving the sick poor in Norwich. The first exhibition
took place on Tombland fair day, at Mr. Noverre’s room.
March 11th. This year, the several wards in Norwich
(except the Northern ward) were strongly contested, particularly
the Wymer ward. After a spirited poll for nominees of the
common council, the numbers were for Mr. Foster, 361; Mr. Higgen,
357; Mr. Purland, 355; Mr. Mitchell, 345; Mr. Culley, 340; Mr.
Beckwith, 322. The liberal party at last obtained the
ascendancy, but had to pay for it. The expenditure at this
local contest was estimated at some thousands. From
£15 to £40 were given for votes, and the freemen were
brought in carriages from the country.
May 16th. This being Guild-day, Barnabas Leman, Esq., was
sworn in mayor of Norwich for the second time. The
corporation went in procession to the Cathedral, preceded by the
Blue and White Clubs, the freemen wearing those colours in their
hats, which was considered improper and ill-timed. Mr.
William Smith, before the procession started, after recommending
his friends to abstain from this display of party feeling on such
a day, pulled his colours from his hat and put them in his
pocket. It being quite a matter of taste, his example was
not followed.
1819. This year some important meetings were
held, and a good deal of political excitement prevailed in the
city. Mr. E. Taylor was elected sheriff after a contest
with Mr. T. S. Day. The former was evidently the popular
candidate, the numbers being for Taylor 807, for Day 530.
In acknowledging the honour which had been conferred upon him he
said,—
“There are times, gentlemen, when the post
of honour is the post of duty—times when it is the duty of
every man to stand forward to maintain and uphold the laws of his
country, and prevent them from being outraged. Such,
gentlemen, are the present. Scenes have recently been
exhibited in a distant part of this country which I blush to
mention. The laws have there been outraged and trodden
under foot, not by the people, but by the magistrates, whose duty
it was to protect them. At Manchester we have seen a
merciless soldiery, or rather, I should say, persons wearing red
coats, and pretending to be soldiers, let loose to butcher men,
women, and children in cold blood who were peaceably and legally
met to discharge a duty which they owed to their country. The right of petitioning is a right
which, till lately, we have enjoyed uninterruptedly, none daring
to make us afraid; and where is the man who will tell me that
these people did not legally and constitutionally meet?
But, gentlemen, they have been treated in a manner so brutal and
inhuman, that our history furnishes no parallel.”
He alluded to the “Peterloo Massacre” as it was
then called, and which excited universal indignation throughout
the country.
January 25th. The birthday of Mr. Fox was commemorated,
by nearly 250 gentlemen, at the Assembly rooms. The earl of
Albemarle presided, supported by Mr. Coke and Viscount
Bury. The high sheriff was at the head of the right hand
table, and Mr. Wm. Smith of the left. After dinner,
speeches were delivered, setting forth the views of the Liberal
party.
April 15th. A public meeting was held in St.
Andrew’s Hall, when a petition to the House of Commons
against the duty on coals (6s. 6d. per chaldron) was adopted by
acclamation. R. H. Gurney, Esq., M.P., assured the meeting
that he should support the prayer of the petition, and do
everything in his power towards alleviating the burdens of his
fellow-citizens. The tax was ultimately abolished.
April 22nd. The duke of Sussex arrived in Norwich and
lodged at the house of William Foster, Esq., in Queen Street,
where his royal highness was waited upon by the mayor and
corporation. Mr. Steward Alderson, in an address of
congratulation on his arrival, informed his royal highness that
the whole body corporate had voted to him the freedom of the city, which
the royal duke was pleased to accept, at the same time returning
a dignified answer. On the next day a grand meeting of the
Masonic brethren, 320 in number, was held in Chapel-field
house. The large Assembly room was decorated in the most
splendid style. At 10.30 a.m., the duke of Sussex (as grand
master of England) installed Thomas Wm. Coke, Esq., M.P., as
provincial grand master, with the accustomed Masonic
ceremonies. His royal highness delivered an impressive
charge, on investing Mr. Coke with the jewel, apron, and
gloves. After this ceremony a procession was formed, every
officer and member of the assembled lodges wearing his full
masonic costume and jewels, and the banners were carried in the
procession to the Cathedral. In the evening, there was a
sumptuous banquet in St. Andrew’s Hall, at which the royal
duke presided, supported by Mr. Coke and I. Ives, Esq., the
deputy provincial grand master. About 254 persons dined,
and many ladies were present to witness the festive scene.
Toasts were proposed in right royal style, and duly responded
to. Next day His Royal Highness was admitted to the
honorary freedom of the city at the Guildhall, where he took the
customary oaths. After visiting the exhibition of the
Artists’ Society, the royal duke left Norwich about noon
and proceeded to Holkham, paying a visit to Sir George
Jerningham, at Cossey Hall, on his way thither.
May 28th. The anniversary of the birthday of the Rt.
Hon. Wm. Pitt was commemorated at the Assembly rooms, Norwich, by
a very numerous company of noblemen, gentlemen, and citizens.
June
4th. The anniversary of the birthday of the long afflicted
sovereign, George III., who had entered on the eighty-second year
of his age, was celebrated for the last time in Norwich,
Yarmouth, Lynn, and other towns, with the accustomed
demonstration of loyalty and attachment.
July 15th. Meetings were held in Norwich, and
resolutions were passed, and petitions to parliament adopted,
against the proposed additional duties on malt and on foreign
wool. Petitions were also presented to parliament praying
for an alteration in the corn laws, in consequence of the
depressed state of agriculture.
September 16th. A public meeting was held in St.
Andrew’s Hall, in order to take into consideration the late
disastrous transactions at Manchester, on August 16th. The
mayor, R. Bolingbroke, Esq., presided, when resolutions were
adopted asserting the right of the subject to petition the king,
and the legality of the late meeting at Manchester, censuring the
conduct of the magistrates and yeomanry, and recommending a
subscription for the relief of the sufferers. An address to
the prince regent was agreed to for the removal of ministers from
his presence and councils for ever. The address was
afterwards presented by the city members.
October 18th. A public meeting was held by adjournment
at the Guildhall to take into consideration the propriety of
erecting a bridge over the river, near the Duke’s Palace,
to connect Pitt Street with the Market Place. A proposition
to that effect was negatived, but a bill for erecting the bridge was
introduced into parliament and ultimately passed. Nearly
£9,000 were proposed to be raised, by shares of £25
each, to complete the same. The bridge was built in course
of time, and toll had to be paid for many years. By the
exertions and influence of the late T. O. Springfield, Esq., the
bridge was made a free thoroughfare, greatly to the convenience
of the citizens.
1820. January 5th. At a special meeting of
the Diocesan Committee of the Society for Promoting Christian
Knowledge, held in Norwich, (the Lord Bishop presiding)
resolutions were adopted to counteract the evil effects of
infidel and blasphemous publications, by issuing tracts of the
Parent Society at very reduced prices, and a subscription was
entered into for that purpose.
January 24th. The anniversary of the birthday of the
Right Hon. C. J. Fox was commemorated by a grand public dinner in
St. Andrew’s Hall by 460 noblemen and gentlemen, amongst
whom were the Duke of Sussex, the Duke of Norfolk, the Earl of
Albemarle (who presided), Viscount Bury, Lord Molyneux, and many
other leading gentlemen of the liberal party. The hall was
handsomely decorated, and the names of Fox and Albemarle
appeared in variegated lamps, and in a semi-circular transparency
was that of Sussex, in letters of gold
upon a ground of purple silk.
January 30th. A messenger from London brought to Lord
and Lady Castlereagh (who were at Gunton Hall) the
melancholy tidings of the death of King George III., which became
known in Norwich on the following morning, when nearly all the
shops were closed, and the bells of the churches were tolled for
three hours. The king died on January 29th, in the 82nd
year of his age, and the 60th of his troubled reign, during which
long wars desolated Europe, doubled our national debt, and
impoverished the country. His Royal Highness, the Prince of
Wales, (who was appointed regent on February 6th, 1811,)
immediately ascended the throne. King George IV. was soon
afterwards seriously indisposed with inflammation in the lungs,
but happily recovered from the attack in the course of a
week.
February 1st. King George IV. was proclaimed on the
Castle Hill by the High Sheriff, Sir William Windham Dalling,
Bart., amid the cheers of those assembled. On the same day
His Majesty was proclaimed in the city in full form and with
great rejoicings.
March 6th. A spirited contest took place for the gown,
vacant by the death of Starling Day, Esq., alderman of Wymer
ward. At the close of the poll the numbers were for Henry
Francis, Esq., 413; John Lovick, Esq., 372; majority for Mr.
Francis 41, who was declared duly elected. In this month
Messrs. Mitchell, Beckwith, and Culley were elected nominees for
the long ward without opposition. The other three wards
were contested. After the elections for Wymer and the
Northern wards, processions took place at night to celebrate the
triumph of the two contending parties.
August 2nd. A common hall was held for the
purpose of getting up an address to be presented to Queen
Caroline. Mr. Alderman Leman presided, and Mr. Sheriff
Taylor introduced the subject, declaring that their duty was not
merely to vote an address to Her Majesty on her accession, but to
protest against the proceedings adopted by His Majesty’s
ministers, against her “whom we ought to honour as our
Queen, and esteem as a woman.” He denied the
imputation that this meeting was held for factious and seditious
purposes. He reviewed the various charges which had been
brought against Her Majesty, and mentioned several instances of
noble conduct on her part. He regarded the erasure of her
name from the liturgy as a gross insult, and spoke of the
firmness, and sagacity, and judgment which characterised her
determination to return to England. He reminded his hearers
of the enthusiasm which attended her entry into London. But
no sooner was she arrived than a large green bag was laid on the
table. Now he had an instinctive horror of a green bag, as
he had once the honour of occupying a small corner of one.
He then challenged the ministers, through Mr. Coke, to prove any
one of the charges brought against him in the green bag; and he
received an answer that it was all a mistake, and that Norwich
should not have been inserted. The resolutions were carried
by acclamation, and he afterwards presented an address to the
Queen at Brandenburgh house.
There was but one opinion here as to the character of George
IV., and with respect to the Queen, all the world
agreed that she was much to be pitied. Men’s passions
were so strongly excited, that whichever side they took, whether
for her or against her, her conduct was viewed through a false
medium. Nothing showed this more strongly than the
behaviour of the two parties upon her death. The
blue-and-whites, many of whom had never put on black for a royal
personage before, were to be seen dressed in black and white,
while on the other hand the orange-and-purples, not content with
appearing in their ordinary attire, flaunted about in the gayest
colours.
December 12th. In consequence of the numerous robberies
committed in the city and county, public meetings were held, and
resolutions passed to grant high rewards to watchmen who might
apprehend offenders. More burglaries had been committed in
that year than in the preceding twenty years. Increased
poverty had produced crime, and the “Old Charlies”
were of little use.
1821. March 7th. E. T. Booth, Esq.,
(sheriff) was elected an alderman of Great Wymer ward in the room
of the late William Foster, Esq., who had died on March
3rd. There was an opposition; at the close of the poll the
numbers were, for Mr. Booth 444, Mr. R. Shaw 433.
March 31st. The freedom of the city having been voted at
the quarterly assembly of the corporation on the 24th ult., to be
presented to Captain William Edward Parry of the Royal Navy; that
gallant officer attended in full uniform, and was sworn in at a full
court of mayoralty. The parchment containing the freedom of
the city was presented to him in a box formed of a piece of oak,
part of the ship Hecla, with an appropriate inscription.
April 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th. Cleansing Week ward
elections took place. Conisford ward no opposition, Messrs.
J. Kitton, J. Angel, and J. P. Cocksedge (nominees); Mancroft
ward no opposition, Messrs. P. Chamberlin, J. Bennett, and J.
Goodwin, (nominees); Wymer ward, Mr. A. A. H. Beckwith 432, Mr.
J. Culley, 432, Mr. J. Reynolds 423 (nominees), Mr. J. Parkinson
254, Mr. Newin 249, Mr. R. Purland 236, Mr. S. Mitchell 45;
Northern ward, Mr. T. Barnard 418, Mr. T. O. Springfield 416, Mr.
S. S. Beare 416, (nominees), Mr. G. Morse 231, Mr. Troughton 230,
Mr. T. Grimmer 231.
May 1st. The election for mayor came on. At the
close of the poll the numbers were for Alderman Rackham 986,
Alderman Hawkes 950, Alderman Marsh 630, Alderman Yallop
631. The former two were returned to the court of aldermen,
who elected William Rackham, Esq., to serve the office of chief
magistrate.
June 18th. This being Guild day, William Rackham, Esq.,
was sworn in mayor, on which occasion he gave a sumptuous dinner
to about 650 ladies and gentlemen in St. Andrews Hall, the hall
having previously undergone various alterations and
improvements.
July 27th. The coronation of George IV. was celebrated
here in a very splendid manner, and gave occasion for a display of the
exuberant loyalty of the citizens. This king, called
“the finest gentleman in Europe,” had governed the
realm for nearly ten years, and visited the city in 1812.
His reign was peaceful and prosperous, and he was a great
promoter of the arts and sciences. The most important event
of his reign was the passing of the act for Roman Catholic
emancipation, by which Roman Catholics became entitled to all the
rights and privileges enjoyed by the rest of the community, a
measure strongly supported here by the liberal party.
During this reign the citizens of Norwich took a very active part
in all the great movements of the age—the Roman Catholic
Emancipation movement, the Anti-Slavery movement, and the Reform
agitation. Strong contests at elections took place on all
these questions. Bribery, corruption, treating, cooping,
and intimidation, were resorted to by both parties on every
occasion, as will appear in a subsequent chapter, on our
political history. Party spirit never ran higher in any
town than in Norwich.
1822. January 24th. The anniversary of the
birthday of the Rt. Hon. C. J. Fox was commemorated by a public
dinner of the liberal party at the Assembly Rooms.
February 24th. At a quarterly meeting of the corporation
it was unanimously resolved, that a piece of plate, of the value
of 150 guineas, be presented to Charles Harvey, Esq., the
recorder of Norwich, as a testimony of the high appreciation
entertained by that assembly of his upright and impartial conduct in
the performance of the duties of his office, and of his zeal on
all occasions for the interests of the city.
March. When the elections came on in Cleansing Week,
there was no opposition for the Conisford and Mancroft wards, and
the orange-and-purple party maintained their ascendancy.
Wymer ward, Mr. J. Reynolds 401, Mr. A. A. H. Beckwith 401, Mr.
J. Culley 401, (nominees); P. Greenwood 56, W. Simmons 56, R.
Widdows 54. Northern ward, Mr. A. Shaw 379, Mr. S. S. Beare
368, Mr. E. Taylor 200, (nominees); W. G. Edwards 189, A. Beloe
193, T. Grimmer 190, St. Quintin 190.
May 1st. The election of mayor came on. At the
close of the poll the numbers were for Alderman Hawkes 957,
Alderman J. S. Patteson 908, Alderman Thurtell 364, Alderman
Yallop 318; the former two were returned to the court of
aldermen, who elected Robert Hawkes, Esq., to serve the office of
chief magistrate.
June 18th. This being Guild day, Robert Hawkes, Esq.,
was sworn in as mayor, and he gave a grand dinner to the citizens
in St. Andrew’s Hall.
September 27th. The weavers, 2,361 in number, subscribed
for, and presented a piece of plate to John Harvey, Esq., as a
testimony of the high esteem in which they held him; and he
deserved it, for he was a great promoter of the manufactures of
the city, and a friend of the operatives. They were then in
a prosperous state, and well employed by many large firms who
executed orders for the East India Company to the extent of
20,000 pieces of camlets yearly. This trade continued till
1832.
1823. January 23rd. At a meeting held in
the Old Library Room, St. Andrew’s Hall, a society was
formed for supplying the poor with blankets at a reduced price;
and upwards of 1100 were distributed during the winter.
February 24th. At a quarterly assembly of the
corporation a lease was granted to the magistrates of the city,
for 500 years, of the piece of land outside of St. Giles’
Gates, on which it had been decided to build the new jail, at the
annual rent of £50.
March 4th. At a meeting held at the Guildhall, petitions
to parliament were adopted against the Insolvent Debtors Act.
March. Cleansing Week for the ward elections passed off
without any opposition; the orange-and-purple party kept the
Conisford, Mancroft, and Wymer wards, and the blue-and-white the
Northern ward.
April 14th. At a special assembly of the corporation, a
petition to His Majesty was adopted, praying for two jail
deliveries in the course of the year.
April 25th. At a meeting held at the Guildhall, to take
into consideration the state of the West India Colonies, with a
view to promote the abolition of slavery, resolutions in favour
of the object were carried.
May 1st. The election of mayor took place, and at the
close of the poll the numbers were, Alderman J. S. Patteson 835,
Alderman Francis 774, Alderman Leman 101, Alderman Yallop
94. The two former were returned to the court of
aldermen, who elected J. S. Patteson, Esq., to serve the office
of chief magistrate.
May 3rd. At a quarterly assembly of the corporation, the
freedom of the city was voted to the Hon. John Wodehouse,
lieutenant of the city and county.
June 17th. This being Guild day, J. S. Patteson, Esq.,
was sworn in mayor; and he gave a splendid dinner to a large
party in St. Andrew’s Hall.
1824. In September of this year the first Norfolk
and Norwich Musical Festival was held in St. Andrew’s Hall,
and the concerts given were well attended by the nobility and
gentry of the county. This Festival was very much promoted
by Mr. Edward Taylor, Mr. R. M. Bacon, then editor of the
Mercury, and other amateurs in the city, and proved
eminently successful, the hospital receiving the sum of
£2,399 out of the profits. In 1825, King George IV.
presented the hospital with a copy of Arnold’s edition of
Handel’s Works. It was determined that a triennial
festival should be held in aid of the funds of the institution,
and that the Norwich Choral Society should be maintained in an
efficient state for that purpose.
About this time a very important
movement took place in the city, with the view to make
“Norwich a port,” and many meetings were held to
promote that object. Here, therefore, will be a proper
place to review the proceedings in reference to our navigation to
Yarmouth and Lowestoft. The history will show the grasping
selfishness of the old corporation at Yarmouth, which always
tried to tax the trade of the city, and opposed every
improvement, even when it was for the benefit of both towns.
Norwich, no doubt, derived its mercantile and carrying trade
from its original situation as a sea-port. In ancient times
the Gariensis Ostium, or mouth of the Yare, extended in
breadth from Burgh Castle to Caister, the two Roman camps being
opposite each other. The spot on which Yarmouth now stands
was then covered by water, and a broad arm of the sea extended
all over the present marshes to the city, which was then a
sea-port, before Yarmouth had any existence. This appears
from the legal contests that took place in later times between
the burgesses of Yarmouth and the citizens of Norwich.
Norwich had long been a mercantile and trading town, and one
of the royal cities of England, and ships came up by an arm of
the sea to an open market, which was held every day in the
week. Public marts or fairs were held twice a year, with
all manner of merchandise for sale to citizens, strangers, or
foreigners. The traders for centuries used this right of
buying and selling, loading and unloading all their goods and
merchandise, free of all tolls and dues. Foreign merchants
paid at Norwich 4d. on every ship of bulk, 2d. for every boat,
and all other customs for their merchandise.
At the commencement of the 14th century Yarmouth began to be a
rival port to Norwich, and some legal contests took place between
the two towns respecting their rights and privileges. In
1327, a suit was commenced, and in 1331 it was renewed, between
the citizens of Norwich and the burgesses of Yarmouth, relating
to certain tolls which the latter imposed on goods, claiming the
right to do so under the charter of Edward I., which made
Yarmouth a port. Indeed, they appear to have been so
incensed at the city becoming a staple that they proceeded so far
as to stop all vessels coming through from their port to
Norwich. A very remarkable contest consequently arose, and
terminated in favour of the city. The result of the suit
was, that the bailiffs of Yarmouth were commanded to make
proclamation in their town, “That if any hindered or in any
way molested the merchant vessels of what kind soever from passing and
re-passing through the port of Yarmouth, to and from the city of
Norwich, they should forfeit all their goods and chattels,
forfeitable, for so doing.” Yarmouth was, therefore,
prevented for a time from levying duties, but subsequently
regained the power of doing so to a great extent.
If Norwich in former ages was an important seaport, the
question naturally arises how it ceased to be so. There is
sufficient evidence that after the year 500, the arm of the sea
became narrower, though at that period the water came up close to
the Castle Hill. After 1050, the river was much reduced in
breadth, and a new town arose round the fortress. Centuries
elapsed and the river became still narrower, and streets were
extended on each side. At length the stream became so
shallow that it was no longer navigable for sea-borne vessels,
and the ancient trade of the city began to decline. The
citizens, occupied by political contests, did not keep up the
navigation for sea-borne vessels, as they might easily have
done. Attempts were made in this (19th) century to retrieve
the long neglect of former ages by some schemes of improvement,
but these attempts almost entirely failed. Still the city
owed many trading advantages to its river, which is navigable for
wherries and packets to the sea.
The navigation between Norwich and Yarmouth has not been, for
centuries, suited for sea-borne vessels, owing, chiefly, to the
shallowness of the channel over Breydon. The embouchure of
the river into the sea has been frequently blocked up by
shifting sands, and vessels have been detained fourteen days
before they could get into the river. Indeed, at the
present time there is great danger of the mouth of the harbour
being blocked up at Yarmouth altogether.
Prior to the year 1762, the quantity of coals brought from
Yarmouth to Norwich, annually, was 26,000 chaldrons. Of
these, nearly 5000 chaldrons were carried out of Norwich into the
surrounding district, so that 21,000 chaldrons were consumed in
the city. At that time, the king’s dues and the
Yarmouth dues amounted to 8s. 1d. per chaldron, which was felt by
the consumers to be a grievous tax. A cheap and plentiful
supply of coal has always been of the utmost importance to the
citizens, not only for domestic purposes, but also as fuel for
manufacturers, dyers, hot pressers, lime burners, brewers, and
maltsters. Yet, at the period referred to, this necessary
commodity was heavily taxed, to the extent of £1200 yearly,
more than was paid on an equal consumption in London. This
tax was rendered more grievous by the illegal measurement at
Yarmouth. The legal chaldron consisted of thirty-six
bushels; but, at Yarmouth the chaldron was estimated not by
bushels, but by a measure called a mett, sixteen of which were
computed to contain a chaldron, but did not. As may be
supposed, the injustice naturally caused considerable
dissatisfaction among the Norwich coal merchants and other
citizens, and frequent complaints were made of the grievance
which was ultimately abolished. This was important, for
formerly, from the north of England, immense quantities of coal and
heavy goods were brought by sea, viâ Yarmouth to
Norwich, for distribution over the eastern side of Norfolk and
Suffolk. The importation of coal, by this route, has,
however, been greatly diminished; not only by the opening of
railways in every direction, but also by the working of the
central coal fields of England.
By the act of the 12th George I., c. 15, commonly called the
Tonnage Act, the corporation obtained the power to levy tolls on
all goods brought into the city by any boat, keel wherry,
lighter, buoy, or other vessel as follows:—4d. for every
chaldron of coals, for every last of wheat, rye, barley, malt, or
other grain, for every weight of salt, for every hogshead of
sugar, tobacco, molasses, or hogshead packed with other goods,
for every three puncheons of liquor, for every two pipes of wine,
spirits, &c., for every eight barrels of soap, raisins, oil,
pitch, tar, &c. For five years prior to May, 1836, the
average amount of revenue derived from the tonnage dues was
£970, showing that a very large quantity of goods was
brought by river to the city. After June 24th, 1836, the
tolls were let by auction for £1375; in 1838, for
£1210; in 1840, for £1220; in 1847, for £1000;
in 1850, for £1050 yearly. This shows that after the
opening of railways the dues were reduced, but not so much as
might have been expected; the wherries continued to bring in a
large proportion of the heavy goods.
The project of opening a communication between Norwich and the
sea, for sea-borne vessels, originated with
Alderman Crisp Brown, who in 1814, submitted to the corporation a
plan for making Norwich a port by way of Yarmouth. After
this, surveys were made, and a report was published in 1818, by
Mr. Cubitt, who recommended avoiding Breydon by a new cut on the
south side. In the same year he made another survey, to
ascertain the practicability of opening a communication with the
sea at Lowestoft, and in 1821 this report was laid before the
public. As the Yarmouth corporation had signified their
determination to oppose either of these plans, it was at length
determined to carry out the communication to Lowestoft, although
the expense was double that of the Yarmouth plan. This
turned out to be a very unfortunate undertaking.
Subscriptions were raised and fresh surveys were made; and in
1826, a company having been formed, an application was made to
Parliament for an Act; but being opposed by the Yarmouth
corporation and timid owners of the marsh lands, who were fearful
of an inundation, it was lost by a majority of five. This
act, however, was finally passed in 1827, after £8000 had
been spent by the corporation of Yarmouth in opposing it.
Of course, the object of that body was to retain the monopoly of
the Norwich trade, which was then very great.
On May 23rd, 1827, the bill for making Norwich a port having
been passed through both houses of Parliament, the navigation
committee, with the mayor (their chairman), were met at Hartford
Hill, on their return from London, by thousands of their
fellow-citizens who were assembled to welcome them; and a grand
procession having been formed, they marched through the city,
while guns were fired in all directions. The celebration
concluded with a bonfire at night.
In effecting the great undertaking of a communication with
Lowestoft, the river Yare was deepened near Norwich and the
navigation was continued by that river as far as Reedham, whence
it was carried across the marshes by a new cut, two miles and
a-half long, to the river Waveney, along which it passed to
Oulton Dyke, which was widened and deepened to Oulton Broad,
whence by a short cut the canal entered Lake Lothing, through
which it passed to the shore at Lowestoft, where, by cutting
through the bank, the tides were freely admitted into the
lake. Here a large harbour was formed, covering 160 acres,
nearly three miles in length, and averaging from fifteen to
seventeen feet in depth at high water. In this work the
company spent their whole capital of £150,000.
On September 30th, 1833, the Norwich and Lowestoft navigation
was opened, when two vessels came from the latter place and
arrived at the wharfs without once touching ground. This
caused great rejoicing, and the advantages of the undertaking
were soon apparent. But the company wanted money, and were
obliged to borrow it from the Exchequer Loan Commissioners, into
whose hands the port fell in 1842. Norwich traders might
afterwards have recovered possession of the port for a small sum
by a combined effort, but they lost the opportunity. The
commissioners disposed of the port and navigation to a new
company at Lowestoft, and that company, after expending large sums
in repairs, sold the harbour and navigation to Mr. Peto for
almost a nominal price. He, with other gentlemen, organised
another company, raised a capital of £200,000 (afterwards
doubled), and obtained an act of parliament for the formation of
a new harbour, and a railway to Reedham in connection with the
line to Norwich. The new harbour was made, and the railway
was opened in 1847, from which year the carrying trade of the
port gradually increased. Before 1850 the importation of
coal and the harbour dues increased five-fold, and the
importations of corn increased 10,000 quarters yearly. The
number of vessels was doubled, and of course employment increased
in proportion. The harbour and railway contributed a large
traffic to the Eastern Counties lines. Norwich traders made
great use of the port, and through it brought quantities of coal
and heavy goods to the city. There is every mechanical
facility afforded for the loading and unloading of vessels; and
port dues are lower than at Yarmouth. In 1851, the number
of vessels that entered the harbour was 1,636, or 131,767 tons,
showing an increase of 23,000 tons. In the same year there
was an increase of 6,997 tons in the coal imported. Of
course, as the shipping trade of the port increased, the railway
traffic increased also. One of the chief sources from which
the additional revenue was derived was from the fish traffic; for
in 1851 the packages were 78,000 in number, and produced a
freight of £3,739. The traffic also in coal and goods
has greatly improved.
Between 1840 and 1850 the corporation of Norwich, aided by
the city merchants, made a most determined effort to improve the
navigation to Yarmouth. A large subscription was raised for
this purpose, and Mr. Cockburn Curtiss, the engineer, was engaged
to make a survey of the river Yare, and to prepare plans.
He did so, and his plans were approved by the citizens generally;
but the corporation of Yarmouth gave notice of a strong
opposition. Application was made to parliament for a bill
giving the corporation here jurisdiction over the river down to
the mouth of the Haven. The bill was opposed and lost, and
the Norwich corporation were defeated after an expenditure of
some thousands of pounds.
We resume our chronological list of
the leading events of the century:—
1825. January 5th. At a public meeting held
at the Guildhall, a Mechanics’ Institution was established,
and it was continued for some years in the rooms above the
Bazaar, St. Andrew’s.
March. Cleansing week passed off without opposition for
the second time.
April 7th. The clergy of the archdeaconry of Norwich
agreed to petition in favour of the claims of the Catholics to
have the same political rights and privileges as other
people.
April 18th. At a public meeting, held in St.
Andrew’s Hall, a petition for a revision of the Corn Laws
was adopted unanimously. The petition afterwards received
14,385 signatures, and was forwarded on the 26th to be presented
to parliament. As yet it was not proposed to repeal
the Corn Laws, which were then a monstrous injustice.
May
1st. The election for mayor took place, and the numbers
were for Alderman Day, 679; Alderman Booth, 597; Alderman Leman,
152; Alderman Burt, 150. Thomas Starling Day, Esq., was
elected.
May 3rd. The corporation adopted a petition against the
Catholic claims, the members going quite out of their way to
perpetuate a great wrong.
May 31st. The anniversary of the birthday of the Rt.
Hon. William Pitt was celebrated by the members of the castle
corporation.
June 11th. The first stone of the new theatre was laid,
and it was erected on the present site. The building is
only a piece of patch-work, and has no pretensions to
architectural design. It is no credit to the city in any
respect. It was opened on March 27th, in the following
year.
June 21st. The mayor (T. S. Day, Esq.,) was sworn into
office; he afterwards gave a dinner to upwards of 460 gentlemen
in St. Andrew’s Hall.
August 30th. A contest took place for freemen’s
sheriff; at the close of the poll the numbers were for Mr.
Brookes, 865; Alderman Springfield, 501. The former was
returned.
September 1st. The corporation presented a piece of
plate, of the value of 100 guineas, to William Simpson, Esq.,
chamberlain, in testimony of their high esteem for the ability
and integrity displayed in the discharge of his official duties;
and of their unanimous approbation of his long and faithful
services.
November 2nd. Sir Thomas P. Hankin, Lieut. Colonel of
His Majesty regiment of Royal North British Dragoons, was interred in
the Cathedral with military honours.
November 21st. At a public meeting, held in St. Andrews
Hall, a Society was formed for promoting the Abolition of
Colonial Slavery. The late J. J. Gurney and all his family
were great advocates of negro emancipation, but the diabolical
injustice of slavery continued for many years to be the disgrace
of England. At many meetings held in this city, the late J.
J. Gurney denounced the atrocities of the slave trade, and
advocated its abolition. This object was at last
accomplished after a violent agitation throughout the country, at
a cost of twenty millions sterling!
1826. January. This year, in consequence of
the iniquitous corn laws, bread was dear, work was scarce, and
the poor were destitute. Nearly £5000 was subscribed
for their relief.
March. Cleansing Week ward elections passed off without
opposition, except in the Wymer ward, where it was merely
nominal.
May 1st. The election of mayor took place. Messrs.
Booth and Patteson were returned to the court of aldermen without
opposition, and Mr. E. T. Booth was elected.
May 30th. The anniversary of Mr. William Pitt’s
birthday was again celebrated by the members of the castle
corporation. The dinners of this and other clubs served to
keep alive party spirit.
June 20th. This being Guild day, E. T. Booth, Esq., was
sworn into the office of chief magistrate; after which, the
Rt. Hon. Robert Peel, secretary of state for the Home department,
and Jonathan Peel, Esq., the new member of parliament for the
city, were admitted to the freedom of the city.
August 29th. A contest took place for the office of
freemen’s sheriff. At the close of the poll the
numbers were for Mr. James Bennett, 1164; Mr. Alderman
Springfield, 1079. The former was returned.
November. Parish meetings were held in many parts of the
city, and votes of thanks were passed to Crisp Brown, Esq., for
his strenuous exertions in preventing impositions in paying
public money for the new jail, then considered a job.
November 21st. William Simpson, Esq., was elected town
clerk and clerk of the peace for this city, in the room of the
late Elisha De Hague, Esq., who died on the 11th inst., at the
age of 72.
December 6th. Robert Alderson, Esq., was unanimously
elected recorder of the city, on the resignation of Charles
Savill Onley, Esq., and on the 12th, Isaac Preston, Esq., was
elected steward of the corporation, vacant by the resignation of
Mr. Alderson.
1827. January 7th. On the intelligence
being received here of the death of his late Royal Highness, Duke
of York and Albany, the bells of the different churches were
tolled for some time, and the shops were partially closed on the
following days.
January 20th. This being the day appointed for the
funeral of his late Royal Highness the Duke of York, the
melancholy occasion was observed by a general suspension of business; the
corporation attended divine service at the Cathedral, and the
bells of the parish churches were tolled.
January 26th. At a meeting of the clergy, a petition was
adopted in favour of the Catholic claims.
April. Cleansing Week ward elections came on with
several severe contests. Conisford ward, J. Marshall, 213;
T. Edwards, 212; J. Kitton, 205 (nominees); J. Angell, 204; A. B.
Beevor, 203; J. P. Cocksedge, 202. Mancroft ward, no
opposition, J. Goodwin, T. Eaton, C. Hardy (nominees).
Wymer ward, W. Foster, 435; J. S. Parkinson, 434; G. Kitton, 429
(nominees). Northern ward, S. S. Beare, 424; R. Shaw, 415;
H. Martineau, 420 (nominees); G. Coleby, 237; T. Grimmer,
244.
May 1st. The election of mayor took place; at the close
of the poll the numbers were, Alderman Finch, 918; Alderman
Yallop, 867; Alderman Patteson, 566; Alderman Browne, 565.
Peter Finch, Esq., was elected. He lived for many years in
a large house built of flint in St. Mary’s.
June 19th. This being Guild day, Peter Finch, Esq., was
sworn into the office of chief magistrate.
August 28th. The election for freemen’s sheriff
came on; at the close of the poll the numbers were for Mr.
Alderman Springfield, 1210; Mr. F. White, 474. The former
was returned.
September 12th. There was a severe contest for the
office of alderman of Conisford ward in the room of the late
William Herring, Esq., who died on the 8th, aged 74. At the
close of the poll the numbers were for J. Angell, 218; J.
Marshall, 196; and the former was returned. A scrutiny was
demanded by Mr. Marshall’s friends, but was afterwards
abandoned.
This month Mr. Myher Levi, a Jew, and his wife Hannah Levi, a
Jewess, having been converted, were baptised in the parish church
of St. Stephen’s, and received the name of Herbert.
1828. January 10th. The members of the
castle corporation celebrated their sixty-third anniversary.
March. Cleansing Week elections. Conisford ward,
J. Marshall, 240; T. Edwards, 240; A. B. Beevor, 239, (nominees);
J. Skipper, 225; S. W. Mealing, 226; R. Merry, 225. No
opposition in the other wards, but for Mancroft ward, J. Bennett,
A. Beloe, and C. Hardy (nominees); and for the Northern ward, S.
S. Beare, R. Shaw, and H. Martineau (nominees).
May 1st. A contest for mayor, which lasted two days; at
the close of the poll the numbers were for Alderman Yallop, 1212;
Alderman Thurtell, 1210; Alderman Angell, 1097; Alderman
Patteson, 1020. The two former were returned to the court
of aldermen, who elected T. Thurtell, Esq.
May 5th. At a public meeting held at the Guildhall,
resolutions were passed and a petition to parliament was adopted
for the immediate alleviation and ultimate extinction of slavery
in the West India colonies. The petition afterwards
received the signatures of 10,125 persons, and was 150 feet in
length.
June 12th. The anniversary of the birthday of the late
Rt. Hon. William Pitt was commemorated by a dinner of
the Tories at the Assembly Rooms. About 160 gentlemen were
present.
In August, the new Exchange Street was opened, and on October
11th, a new Corn Hall was opened to the public.
1829. January and February. Petitions were
adopted against the claims of the Roman Catholics by the
Brunswick Constitutional Club, and other inhabitants of this
city; but counter declarations from the clergy of the diocese of
Norwich, and from a “Society of the friends of civil and
religious liberty,” were agreed to. The agitation on
this vexed question had now reached its height in the
country.
February 17th. Even the common council now agreed to
present an address to the king for the removal of Roman Catholic
disabilities.
March. Cleansing Week ward elections came on.
Conisford ward, J. Marshall, 258; T. Edwards, 259; J. Youngs,
253, (nominees); J. Skipper, 83; S. W. Mealing, 84; R. Merry,
82. Mancroft ward, no opposition, J. Bennett, A. Beloe, and
C. Hardy (nominees). Wymer ward, W. Foster, 466; G. Kitton,
464; A. Barnard, 464 (nominees); J. Culley, 397; J. Brookes, 396;
E. Newton, 394. Northern ward, S. S. Beare, 342; R. Shaw,
343; H. Martineau, 341 (nominees); T. Grimmer, 63; E. Hinde, 64;
W. Fromow, 64.
May 1st. T. O. Springfield, Esq., and John Angell, Esq.,
were returned to the court of aldermen for the office of mayor
without opposition, and the former was chosen mayor.
June
16th. This being Guild day, T. O. Springfield, Esq., was
sworn into the office of chief magistrate; after which he gave a
grand dinner to upwards of 800 ladies and gentlemen in St.
Andrew’s Hall.
July 15th. A public dinner was given to Thomas Thurtell,
Esq., at the Norfolk Hotel, attended by 80 gentlemen, in
testimony of their approval of his honourable, impartial, and
upright conduct in the performance of his duties as mayor during
the previous year.
1830. January. Great disturbances took
place in the city in consequence of differences between the
manufacturers and weavers concerning wages. On the 12th,
between 3000 and 4000 weavers collected in the avenues to the
workhouse, where they greatly interrupted the business of the
court of guardians, but they were dispersed by the magistrates
and patroles. Munificent donations of £200 from
Hudson Gurney, Esq., and £400 from London were distributed
amongst the distressed weavers in bread and coal, under the
direction of a committee. A general subscription was
afterwards raised in the city, amounting to £2300, for the
relief of the poor.
March. Cleansing Week ward elections. Conisford
ward, T. Edwards, 251; J. Youngs, 251; W. G. Edwards, 249
(nominees); J. Skipper, 233; S. W. Mealing, 232; R. Merry,
228. Mancroft ward, J. Bennett, 195; H. Newton, 196; B.
Boardman, 196 (nominees); W. Burt, jun., 50; W. J. Robberds, 50;
P. Nicholls, 50. Wymer ward, J. Culley, 521; J. Winter,
520; J. Bexfield, 516 (nominees); W. Foster, 376; G. Kitton, 374;
A. Barnard, 374. Northern ward, T. Grimmer, 292; E. Browne,
290; W. Fromow, 289 (nominees); H. Martineau, 278; R. Shaw, 276;
W. Newson, 276.
March 29th. On the evening of the Conisford ward
election, the gates leading to the workhouse were pulled down and
destroyed, and considerable injury was done to the offices
adjoining, by a great concourse of persons riotously assembled,
and who were returning from a procession formed by the defeated
party.
May 1st. John Angell, Esq., was elected to serve the
office of mayor.
May 3rd. The common council adopted a petition to the
lord chancellor for two general jail deliveries in the
year. This was subsequently granted.
December 23rd. At a special meeting of the council,
Isaac Preston, Esq., (afterwards Jermy) was elected recorder of
the city in place of R. Alderson, Esq., who had resigned.
1831. January 12th. At a meeting held in
the Old Library Room, St. Andrews Hall, a petition to parliament
was adopted, praying for the entire abolition of slavery in the
British colonies.
February 1st. At a special assembly of the corporation,
Fitzroy Kelly, Esq., was unanimously elected steward of that
body, and he held that office till the passing of the Municipal
Reform Act.
March 22nd. A petition was sent from the city against
the disfranchisement of the freemen by the proposed
Reform Bill. The signatures were limited to freemen,
denizens, and apprentices.
March. Cleansing Week ward elections. Conisford
ward, J. Skipper, 270; R. Merry, 265; B. Bunting, 237,
(nominees); T. Edwards, 169; J. Youngs, 167; W. G. Edwards,
167. Mancroft ward, no opposition, J. Bennett, H. Newton,
and B. Boardman (nominees). Wymer ward, no opposition, J.
Culley, J. Winter, W. J. U. Browne (nominees). Northern
ward, S. S. Beare, 344; R. Shaw, 337; W. Enfield, 347 (nominees);
T. Grimmer, 222; E. Browne, 220; W. Fromow, 220.
This year the Lent assizes were held in Norwich by adjournment
from Thetford.
May 1st. J. H. Yallop, Esq., was elected mayor for the
second time, and he gave a grand dinner in St. Andrew’s
Hall.
In this month a census of the population was taken, showing
27,910 males, 33,437 females; total 61,347. Inhabited
houses, 13,283; uninhabited houses, 1,082; total 14,365.
June 20th. Samuel Bignold, Esq., was elected an alderman
without opposition in the room of John Patteson, Esq., who had
resigned.
August 22nd. The new act of the court of guardians
received the royal assent, and came into operation. This
act has since been superseded by another.
September 12th. The election of guardians took place
under the new act.
1832. January 11th. At a court of
mayoralty it was resolved to present a memorial to the Home
Secretary and the Lord Chancellor, praying that Norwich might be
included in the ensuing circuit of the judges. A committee
was appointed to prepare the memorial. A special court was
convened on the 14th to receive the report, and a memorial was
adopted which was presented by the members for the city.
The petition was granted, and the council passed a vote of thanks
to the Lord Chancellor.
April. Cleansing Week for ward elections.
Conisford ward, J. Skipper, 266; R. Merry, 264; B. Bunting, 266
(nominees); T. Edwards, 157; J. Youngs, 159; R. Mills, 157.
Mancroft ward, no opposition, J. Bennett, B. Boardman, and H.
Newton (nominees). Wymer ward, J. Culley, 489; J. Winter,
484; W. J. U. Browne, 485 (nominees); W. Foster, 388; A. Barnard,
383; T. Edwards, 382. Northern ward, S. S. Beare, 380; R.
Shaw, 371; W. Enfield, 381 (nominees); T. Grimmer, 101; E.
Browne, 109; H. Steel, 107.
May 1st. The election of mayor took place without
opposition. Mr. Alderman Stevenson, and Mr. Alderman
Bignold were nominated, and they were duly returned; the aldermen
chose S. W. Stevenson, Esq., then proprietor and editor of the
Norfolk Chronicle. After being sworn in on the Guild
day he gave a grand dinner to about 900 ladies and gentlemen in
St. Andrew’s Hall.
August 28th. The election for freemen’s sheriff
was severely contested. At the close of the poll the numbers
were for William Foster, Esq., 1282; Mr. Alderman Steward, 1275;
and after a scrutiny the former was declared duly elected.
This was a triumph for the blue-and-white party.
September 3rd. An election took place for an alderman of
Mancroft ward in the place of J. S. Patteson, Esq.,
deceased. Charles Turner, Esq., was elected; F. Morse,
Esq., being the other candidate.
November 11th. This day, at all the churches in the
city, thanksgiving services were performed for the cessation of
the cholera, and for the mild manner in which the inhabitants had
been afflicted as compared with other places. The Norwich
Lying-in Charity for delivering poor married women at their own
homes was established, and it has been of great benefit to the
poor.
1833. January. The town clerk of this city
received a circular from the secretary of state, requesting to be
informed of the mode of electing members of the
corporation. The town clerk forwarded his answer on the
21st.
March. Cleansing Week for ward elections.
Conisford ward, no contest, J. Skipper, R. Merry, and B. Bunting
(nominees). Mancroft ward, no opposition, J. Bennett, B.
Boardman, H. Newton (nominees). Wymer ward, J. Culley, 486;
J. Winter, 484; W. J. U. Browne, 486 (nominees); G. Kitton, 122;
R. Miller, 122; C. W. Unthank, 121. Northern ward, S. S.
Beare, 300; R. Shaw, 298; W. Enfield, 300 (nominees); T. Grimmer,
206; H. Steel, 204; J. Sinclair, 203.
May
1st. At the election for mayor, Aldermen Bignold and Turner
were returned to the court without opposition, and S. Bignold,
Esq., was chosen to serve the office. On the Guild day he
was sworn in, and on this occasion he gave a magnificent banquet
to about 1100 ladies and gentlemen in St. Andrew’s
Hall. The same place was the scene of great festivity on
June 20th and 21st, when dinners were given to the electors in
the orange-and-purple interest, those in the Conisford and
Northern wards to the number of 750 on the first day, and those
of the Wymer and Mancroft wards 912 on the following day.
Great was the rejoicing, but it was of short duration. The
days of the old corporation were numbered.
William IV. ascended the throne in
1830, in a period of great political excitement. During his
short reign of seven years, there was the greatest political
agitation ever known in this country about a Reform of
Parliament, a measure which the people had long and earnestly
desired. Many meetings were held in this city, and
petitions were adopted in favour of reform, long called for and
long deferred. In fact, the king, during the early part of
his reign, had other and more pressing causes of anxiety.
His accession to the throne brought him an inheritance of the
jealousy, to which the country had been gradually roused, on the
subject of the extravagance and corruption of the old systems of
government. In the effort to reduce a vast expenditure, the
House of Commons was in no mood to be so liberal to the new
sovereign as he thought he had a right to expect. The
ministry were withheld, by the very forcible opposition of one of
its members, from asking the house to grant the expenses of the
queen’s outfit, and the king himself had to submit to the
mortification of finding the pensions charged on the public by former
monarchs sharply criticised, and even his own household expenses
commented on with severity.
On September 8th, 1831, the grand ceremony of the coronation
of the king took place in Westminster Abbey. The auspicious
event was celebrated in Norwich in a most loyal and joyous
manner. The festivities of the day commenced with the merry
chime of St. Peter’s bells, and the waving of banners from
all the public buildings. The mayor and members of the
corporation went in procession from the Guildhall to the
Cathedral. After their return to the hall, the regiment of
the First Royals marched into the Market Place and fired three
vollies. The electors who had supported Gurney and Grant
received £1 each, and a dinner was given to 600 of the
freemen, who voted for Wetherell and Sadler, at Laccohee’s
gardens. The citizens, in fact, have never lost an
opportunity of displaying their loyalty, but they always expected
something in return. Several petitions were sent from
Norwich in favour of the Reform Bill; and the passing of the bill
was celebrated here with great rejoicings, festivities, and a
public procession on July 5th, 1832. This brief reign was
remarkable, moreover, for the abolition of the slave trade after
a violent agitation which convulsed the whole country, and ended
in the passing of an act of emancipation of the slaves in the
West Indies, at a cost of twenty millions; and it is also noted
for the suppression of the rebellion in Canada, and the
restoration of tranquillity to that colony.
An
Act of Parliament received the royal assent on June 23rd, 1832,
removing the assizes from Thetford to Norwich; and the
corporation passed a vote of thanks to John Stracey, Esq., for
his exertions in obtaining that measure, and also a vote of
thanks to the lord chancellor for having granted two jail
deliveries in the year. Since then the city assizes have
been held at the Guildhall, and the Norfolk assizes at the
Shirehall. The city sessions are held every quarter at the
Guildhall, and the petty sessions daily at the same place.
The reformed House of Commons having presented an address to
His Majesty, praying for the appointment of a commission to
inquire as to the existing state of municipal corporations in
England and Wales; the king, on July 18th, 1833, complied with
the address, by issuing a commission; and notice was subsequently
given to the mayor of this city, S. Bignold, Esq. (now Sir Samuel
Bignold), of the intention of the commissioners appointed to
investigate the affairs of the Norwich corporation, in compliance
with a request from a meeting of 300 citizens, held on the 13th
of May preceding. A special meeting of the corporation was
at once convened to consider the course to be pursued, and the
assembly determined on a reluctant submission to the inquiry, so
far as regarded the production, by the corporate officers, of all
“charters, books, deeds, accounts, papers, and muniments of
title,” but at the same time protested against the
commission as illegal and unconstitutional, and against the right
of the commissioners to make any inquiry whatsoever. As may
be supposed, the dominant party in the city did not like it, and the
sheriffs especially protested against it. They declined to
attend at the proposed enquiry, or to recognize the authority of
the commissioners by any act, and addressed a letter to that
effect to the commissioners, signing their names, W. J. Utten Browne, and Edward
Steward, sheriffs of Norwich. Of course the
commissioners were not very pleased at this ostentatious
opposition to their authority, and in the course of their enquiry
showed an evident hostility to the predominant party.
Witnesses were allowed to make statements reflecting on the
characters of the living and the dead, and every facility was
afforded for the gratification of political, perhaps of
private, revenge. This will appear in the following
summary of the evidence, taken from the Digest, published soon
afterwards.
This inquiry was conducted by George Long and John Buckle,
Esqs., and commenced on November 25th, 1833, at the
Guildhall. Nearly all the officials of the corporation were
examined, and many influential gentlemen. Some strange
statements were made as to the effects of party spirit, and the
enemies of the old corporation alleged, amongst their favourite
charges, that the magistrates were biassed by party spirit, and
that the funds of the corporation had been devoted to
electioneering purposes. Evidence, however, was given to
the contrary.
J. J.
Gurney, Esq., said, “I believe that there are
many most laborious and useful magistrates in the city, and no
persons would be so fit as many of those who have already been
accustomed to the business. I do not find the slightest
fault with the application of the magisterial power. It is
my most decided opinion that the magisterial authority has been
impartially exercised.”
W. Simpson, Esq., said, “Whatever money may have
been spent, it certainly has not been the money of the
corporation.”
Alderman Bolingbroke said, “I
have been an alderman near twenty years; I do not know of any
corrupt application of the corporate funds to elections or any
other purposes. I do not think any misapplication of the
corporate funds could have taken place without my knowing
it.”
As the inquiry proceeded, however, evidence was given of the
influence of party spirit in the distribution of patronage,
appointments, and employments, and also in admissions to
freedom. It was proved that the police were very
inefficient, and often refused to act in cases of riot, and when
the mob were pulling down polling booths. As to the
expenditure of money at local elections,
The Mayor, S. Bignold, Esq., said,
“I am quite sure that if respectable persons were to offer
themselves at local elections, it would repress the excesses
which sometimes take place. The local elections are
attended with considerable expense. I am not aware that the
aldermen interfere in these elections. I am not aware of
anything which would prevent the aldermen interfering in the
promotion of sheriffs. They consider the oath as debarring
in the one case and not in the other. Committees are
formed on the occasion of elections in the different wards.
I cannot say whether the aldermen are frequently members of those
committees. I have not had any opportunity of witnessing
unfair exertions. I cannot say whether any subscriptions
are made on those occasions. I have never subscribed a
shilling. I cannot say whether notes are given by the
aldermen or others. I never saw such a note as the one
produced before. I have heard of notes purporting to get
certain persons into the hospitals, being given by aldermen on
the occasions of municipal elections. I have never seen any
such notes. My knowledge of them has arisen in this
way. I have been asked myself and told that A and B have
given them, but never fulfilled their promise.”
“Question. Do you think that the mode in which the
local elections are carried on tends to keep out respectable and
intelligent persons from filling the various offices?
Answer. I am sorry to say that those respectable and
intelligent persons have contributed to the system.
Q. Has that been the case generally?
A. I should say, generally, with the leading persons in
this city on both sides, connected and unconnected with the
corporation.
Q. Have the members of the court of aldermen contributed
to your knowledge?
A. Not to my knowledge.
Q. Is it your belief that they have or have not?
A. I think they would not in the election of an
alderman, but they might for sheriff or common councilmen.
Q. On what ground is that distinction made?
A. The aldermen consider that they are not to interfere
in the election of their brethren, in consequence of the oath
they have taken.
Q. The oath makes no distinction?
A. There is an impression to the contrary.
Q. If there had been an extraordinary excitement at
elections, can you say that in no case that excitement was
enlarged by the aldermen?
A. I should say in no case.
Q. What do you consider the intention of the aldermen in
subscribing to the funds?
A. I can only answer that question in general terms,
that the excitement has never been increased by any act of the
aldermen.
Q. Are you acquainted with the case of Hornigolds with
reference to the elections?
A. In no other way than by your drawing my attention to
it. I know of no other note to that effect. No
improper persons have been admitted into the hospitals on account
of their votes.
Q. Have they in all cases been fit and proper
persons?
A. Certainly they have.
Q. Do you think the same persons would have been
introduced if they had not been political supporters?
A. Not identically the same persons.
Q. Are there instances where persons have been put in by
the aldermen, who have not been political supporters?
A. Yes. I have put an individual in myself who was
not a political supporter in any way.
Q. Are such instances rare or frequent?
A. I am only able to answer from information I have
derived from my seniors; I should say they are frequent.
Q. Are the great majority of persons admitted
freemen?
A. Yes. I think they are.
Q. Are the exceptions few?
A. I do not know.
Q. You said all the freemen introduced to the
hospitals were fit and proper persons: have they been introduced
as the political friends of the aldermen?
A. Yes. I should certainly introduce my political
friends in preference.
Q. Do you consider the power of the aldermen to have
been exercised bonâ fide, or for influence at the
elections?
A. Certainly, bonâ fide.
Q. Do you think this privilege is frequently exercised
in favor of political opponents?
A. No. There are twenty-four aldermen, and the
patronage is about 15–24ths on the Tory side to
9–24ths on the Whig side.
Q. Is it your opinion that more urgent cases have been
passed by, and others taken on account of political services?
A. I think not; I think very pressing cases have had the
preference over political supporters.
Q. Is it, in your opinion, a justification if a person
is put into the hospital under such a promise, or a more pressing
case; and would the alderman exercising the power, do it under an
impression that he was not guilty of any breach of duty, or of
violating his moral feelings?
A. I think where an alderman had made such a promise, he
would be perfectly justified in performing it, provided the
person was a fit and proper object.
Q. The alderman, so promising, in the event of a more
pressing case, would he change his turn?
A. It is done frequently for the express purpose in
pressing cases; and those changes are made with political
opponents.”
Alderman Newton examined, said,
“I have no doubt there have been large sums of money
expended at local elections. It has been a common thing to
make subscriptions for local elections. Sometimes the subscriptions
have far exceeded the necessary expenses. In some cases,
but not generally, the subscriptions have been under the
management of a committee. An individual mostly takes the
management. He has the whole of the funds under his care,
and is not accountable to anyone. The committee never
interfere. It is left to one individual to manage the
funds. The mode of distributing the money is known to
members of the committees, who are generally members of the
corporation. I do not know of aldermen being members of the
committees. Aldermen have subscribed, but very rarely, at
contested elections. A good deal of money has been expended
on those occasions. The general supporters of the parties
have been subscribers, including the common council, but not the
aldermen. The scenes at elections have been very
disgraceful sometimes. I recollect the election of Alderman
Marshall. I have heard that the scene on that occasion was
very disgraceful. I have heard that much money was spent,
but I think £1000 would be the outside. I recollect
the election of Alderman Steward. Money was spent on that
occasion, but nothing like £1000. I remember the
election of Mr. Steward for sheriff. I have heard that
money was then spent. I heard that the Whig party gave a
large sum for the last six votes that they polled, and I believe
it to a certain extent. No doubt there was money spent by
the Tory party to a large extent. I have heard that from
£10 to £15 were given for a vote. There was a
large subscription by members of the council, but not by the
aldermen. I think Mr. Steward subscribed, but I do not know
to what amount. On other occasions subscriptions have been
made for the same office. Money was given to the freemen,
but the far greater amount was spent in giving them beer and
tobacco on either side. It has been carried to a
greater extent by the Gurneys than by any other persons. I
have no doubt that the money was given for bribery.”
J. J. Gurney, Esq.; stated that the
assertion as to bribery by the Gurneys was utterly false as to
him; that he had never given a farthing for the purpose of
bribery; nor had the firm done so; nor had they any loans; nor
had their clerks been employed for such a purpose; had the
deepest impression of the sin, guilt, and misery, involved in our
local elections; and he would rather have his arm cut off than
promote them directly, or in any way whatsoever. Not only
had there been bribery, but a system of demoralization to a
fearful extent; but treating was the root of the mischief
here. He believed the root of the evil was the election of
the magistrates and corporate officers by popular means.
The commissioners asked, What mode of election do you consider
would be preferable? and Mr. J. J. Gurney replied:—
“I think that the magistrates, being the
representatives of the king, ought to be appointed by the
executive government; I mean those officers connected with the
government of the town. The parties here are evenly
balanced, and it therefore becomes a close contest. Nothing
gives us rest but the predominance of one party. We are at
rest now solely owing to the predominance of the Tory
party.”
A good deal of evidence was given of the great extent to which
the system of cooping was carried on at elections. Voters
had been frequently taken away by force a dozen miles, locked up
in public houses and half-starved in them, and otherwise
ill-treated. This system was carried on by both
parties. The worst proceedings of this sort seem to
have occurred at the elections of Alderman Angell and Alderman
Springfield, when there was a vast amount of bribery, treating,
and cooping.
Mr. William Wilde, afterwards
coroner, gave evidence as to the election of Alderman
Springfield, in November, 1821. He was one of the committee
for conducting that election. Mr. Ives, a retired clergyman
of the Church of England, was the other candidate. The
Northern ward was then two to one in favour of Springfield.
About 440 to 240 would have been a fair poll if no money had been
given. When the vacancy occurred, Mr. Springfield was not
in Norwich. Mr. Wilde continued, “I sent for him
express, and when he returned we heard from good authority that
great sums had been offered by Ives’s party first. We
generally sent out freemen to see how markets were going.
Springfield was returned, though it was generally reported that
Ives’s party meant to buy the ward. But Springfield
said he would not be bought out. We went then into a
regular system of buying, they buying all the men of ours they
could, and we buying all of theirs we could. About
£10 was a regular price. We spent £600 or
£700 in buying votes. On the morning of the election,
Mr. Ives’s party commenced by giving two sovereigns each at
the polling place. Mr. Springfield paid his men the
same. In consequence more than 300 out of 430 who voted for
Springfield took two sovereigns at the booths. Persons draw
a distinction between money paid at the booths, and a bribe at
any other place. Many who take money at the booths will not
accept bribes in any other shape. Springfield’s
election cost £1530. The money at the booths is
openly given, and it is not considered a crime to take it.
I think about 60 or 70 persons sold their votes at
£10 apiece. Small shopkeepers are not a bit better
than freemen. I have stood openly in the market to buy
votes with money in my hand. This system is generally acted
upon at all contested elections where the money can be
found. Nothing but poverty of purse makes purity of
election in Norwich. At Alderman Angell’s election
the same system was followed. It is the same at ward
elections. I have given £30 for a vote at an election
for common council only for a year, but there are few instances
of such a high price. I once gave the father of a nominee
£20 for his vote. That sum is frequently given.
I have known promissory notes given for votes. I do not
recollect an instance of notes given by aldermen, but 1 have no
doubt of the fact. The usual plan is for a person to say
‘My family wall not vote unless you give a turn at the
hospital,’ and application is then made to an
alderman. I think the effects of what I have been stating
are most debasing and demoralising. I have known poor men
who have for years withstood the temptations offered them at
elections; and when once they have fallen into the snare, I have
observed their conduct to alter, and they have been much
changed. I am perfectly satisfied of the evil tendency of
the course pursued hitherto, and in very few instances has the
money given been any benefit to the freemen, but quite the
contrary. The effect has been the same with both the giver
and receiver of bribes. I should be sorry to bring up any
of my children in the course which I have pursued.”
Commissioner Buckle then thanked Mr. Wilde for the very open
and candid manner in which he had given his evidence.
Mr. John Rising Staff said that on
Alderman Angell’s election, for two days and two nights
previous the town was in a state of great disorder, occasioned by
large parties of men employed by each party going about the
streets molesting any persons whom they met of the opposite
party, attacking freemen personally, and by improper intrusions
into their dwelling houses or other places where they were
supposed to be concealed. In some instances where they were
in search for a voter, and could not find him at his own
residence, they went into the residence of other persons, not in
the ward where the election was to take place, to search for
individuals. Witness gave several instances of cooping.
Alderman Bolingbroke also stated
instances of cooping that came under his notice as a
magistrate.
Mr. John Francis said, “I
have been a manufacturer in Norwich many years, and I consider
the acts of the corporation to have engendered every species of
bribery and strife. Its patronage is invariably exercised
in favour of political adherents. During the last ten years
our commercial interests have materially suffered from it.
It creates disunion between those gentlemen where friendship
would otherwise exist. The local elections are pregnant
with evil; they take men from their work, those who are not free
as well as those who are free; and in case of a contest it is
impossible to get any work done for six weeks after; and this in
the spring time of the year when work is brisk and calls for
close attendance. The consequence is that the masters
suffer materially. I never engaged in bribery at elections,
except at the late election for sheriff, when I bought a bunch of
four in the market for £8; I also offered another man
£5, but he wanted £10, which I thought too
much. The numbers, however, were running close, and I went
to buy him at that price, but I found that he had been settled
for and voted. Therefore I saved £10.”
Mr. A. Barnard said, “At the
election of Mr. Foster as sheriff, I bought about forty votes
at from 30s. to £4 apiece. I know personally of no
instances of bribery by an alderman. I have known instances
of an alderman saying, ‘You may make use of my turn in the
hospital to get a vote.’ I have known this five or
six times. These promises were given by three
aldermen. I decline to give their names. I have no
objection to say they were Whigs. I have acted frequently
as paymaster at elections. Aldermen have often subscribed
for ward elections. Both parties are pretty much
alike.”
George Palmer was examined very
closely, and he stated that he had always voted in the Whig
interest, and that he had received a note from Alderman
Springfield for four shillings weekly till his brother’s
child could be got into the hospital. The note was written
and signed by a Mr. Batson in Mr. Springfield’s presence,
and by his order. It was given to witness for his vote in
favour of Mr. Foster at the election of sheriff in 1832.
Witness had never been offered the hospital by any alderman on
the other side.
A great deal more evidence was adduced as to notes of
admission to the hospital given by both parties. The last
part of the inquiry was the most important, relating as it did to
the effect of local elections on the trade of the city.
J. J. Gurney, Esq., said, “I can assure the
commissioners that they have no notion of the sin, guilt,
wickedness, and poverty, which our local elections inflict upon
this city. I wish to add an expression of my conviction,
that if the election of magistrates and other officers was
altered, the whole city would be benefitted, and no persons more
so than the poor freemen. I was lately informed by a
principal manufacturer, who has large dealings with the poor,
that it was his firm conviction that one single ward election
does more harm than all the preaching in all the churches and all
the meeting houses in all the year does good; and I believe it to
be true. I would observe that I make no distinction of
parties; both, to my knowledge, are equally guilty; and whenever
the managers find a purse, they fly to it as an eagle does to a
carcase.”
Mr. H. Willett was of opinion that
the local elections were an injury to the lower orders,
notwithstanding the money they received. There was less
work done on account of these elections. Party had a very
injurious effect on the trade of the city. He thought
Norwich suffered from carrying on trade in a different manner to
that pursued in other towns. The trade had not paid in
previous years, and capital was not employed because it did not
pay. The trade was carried on upon such a system that there
was no inducement to employ capital. An open rate of wages
would cause capital to be more beneficially employed. A
great deal of capital had been lost to the city. At that
time there was less capital employed in this city than in any
manufacturing town of its size in the kingdom. He thought
the city had been brought into this state by a fixed rate of
wages, and the trade had been gradually leaving the city for
years. The fixed rate operated against the workmen, because
it prevented their being employed regularly. In consequence
of this small capitals were employed. The men thought they
would be injured by a fluctuating scale, but he believed the
contrary. While the country generally was never more
flourishing, the city was never in a worse state.
Manufacturers feared so much annoyance, that they would not risk
altering the present system. Many influential men were of
his opinion as to the fixed rate of wages, but dared not avow it,
lest they should lose their political influence. He dared
not adopt the varied rate. He did not choose to subject
himself to the consequences. The weavers were the only
operatives who had a fixed rate. He believed that a fixed
rate was kept up by municipal elections, because the leading men
were afraid of losing their influence. Most of the
influential men were unconnected with manufactures. He
believed politics to be the first consideration with all of
them. He believed that the apprehension of violence
deterred all the manufacturers from attempting to alter the fixed
rate of wages; but wages were reduced, or else the whole trade
would have left the city. This caused such a disturbance
that he dared not go home. The civil power was not
sufficiently strong at the time, and the Dragoons were called out
to enable him to go home. His warehouse was attacked, and
his windows were broken. The magistrates rendered all the
assistance in their power, and measures were adopted to prevent
any further injury. His premises were guarded by special
constables for two or three weeks.
Mr. Wright, one of the largest
manufacturers of the city, said he was attacked in consequence of
his reducing wages. Vitriol was thrown on his face, by
which he lost the sight of one of his eyes. A majority of
the manufacturers considered a reduction of wages to be
necessary, but some of them became alarmed and did not
acknowledge it. The reduction prevented a further decrease
of a declining trade. But for the reduction there would
have been a greater decline of the trade. Formerly the
trade was very flourishing when there was a fixed rate of wages,
but that was when there was a great demand for Norwich crapes,
then very much worn for mourning.
Mr. John Francis, a manufacturer,
said he did not quite agree with Mr. Willett. He did not
think a fixed scale of wages advisable; but they were not in a
condition to alter it. He thought the alteration would
create more strife between masters and men. He considered a
fixed scale to be a disadvantage to the men, but it was not too
high. He believed that the local elections prevented
capital being employed, and disunited the people. But for
these local elections there would have been more trade.
Both parties had united in promoting one establishment, but six
such mills would not supply all the yarns wanted for Norwich
manufactures.
Mr. John Athow regarded the local
elections as the cause of the ruin of the city, as far as such
ruin had taken place; as ruinous both to property and
morals. The mode in which the elections were then conducted
had contributed to the poverty and depravity of the city.
He believed that the streets were in a more disgraceful state
than in any other town, from what he had seen, and from what he
had heard from commercial men visiting Norwich.
Mr. R. M. Bacon, then editor of the
Norwich Mercury, believed that the prosperity of the city
and private intercourse were all poisoned by the party spirit
engendered by frequent municipal elections.
Mr. J. W. Robberds, a manufacturer,
connected with the corporation from 1807 till 1827, said that
during that period he had seen the working of the municipal
system, and witnessed the strife of parties. He believed
that by the contests in the different wards the character of the
whole population of the city had been greatly deteriorated; that
a great depravity among the lower classes had been produced; and
that the character of the whole corporation had been
affected. He knew that individuals had entered the
corporation, not from any consideration of public duty, but to
serve their own private interests.
During the inquiry of the commissioners, evidence was taken as
to the general election of the previous year.
Thomas Rust stated, “Mr.
Grimmer, in order to induce me to vote for Stormont and Scarlett,
offered to pay me £50 down, and to procure me £50 of
the city money after Christmas. He promised distinctly to
procure the city money. I have taken an active part at
general elections. I believe there was great bribery at the
last election for members of parliament. I do not think
there was any bribery previous to the last election. I do
not know any instance of it. I saw some bribery at the last
general election. I was up two nights working for the
party. I never had money offered to me at local elections,
but I was offered £100 at the last general election to go
out and buy votes. The proposition was made by two leading
partizans of Stormont and Scarlett. One of the parties
produced a large quantity of promissory notes. I told him
that he was playing a dangerous game. The partizan said
‘Can’t I lend money to whom I like?’ I
replied, ‘I think not; it depends on the
conditions.’ The gentleman who made the proposition
said, “This is the way we do business.” The
proposers were not members of the corporation. They went
away and called again. One of them pulled out a large bag
of sovereigns, and said he would not only lend me £100, but
give it to me to join the party, and to do what I could in the
Northern ward. They declared more than once that they were
determined to buy it. They were guardians of the
poor. There was no distinction as to the voters to be
bought; freemen as well as others.”
Henry Bush said, “Alderman Turner
authorized me to give £6 to a voter, to vote for Lord
Stormont and Sir James Scarlett, and said that was the most money
they were then giving. I would not take the money as I said
it was not enough.”
Mr. Alderman Turner declared on
oath that the statement was false.
Mr. John Hayes said, “On the
second day of the last general election, Mr. George Liddell gave
me three sovereigns for my vote, but never told me in which
interest I was to vote. Mr. Wortley, one of the common
council, also gave me three sovereigns to vote in the interest of
Stormont and Scarlett. I took the sovereigns but voted in
the Whig interest, and carried the money to the committee and
gave it to Mr. Beare and Mr. Springfield. It was returned
to me in four months afterwards.”
Mr. Wortley denied the statement,
but several persons were named who were present when Mr. Wortley
paid the money.
Mr. Cozens was examined as to the
evidence which had been given before the House of Commons’
committee by Mr. W. J. U. Browne, then sheriff, who when asked
whether there was any committee for conducting the election of
Lord Stormont and Sir James Scarlett, replied, “Certainly
not;” and the manuscript was produced of a letter which
appeared in the Mercury, in answer to one sent out by Mr.
Robberds, in which Mr. Browne spoke of “the committee for
conducting the election,” and signed himself as
chairman.
Mr. J. Francis mentioned
circumstances to prove that there was a committee, and produced a
note.
Mr. William Cooper, deposed,
“There was no formal committee. If anybody had asked
him for a committee man, he could not have stated one. He
should say the whole party formed the committee. He was active
during the election, but he was not aware that he belonged to any
committee.”
Commissioner
Buckle:—“We have a letter in Mr.
Browne’s own handwriting, in which he states that the
committee was not dissolved, and he signs himself
chairman.”
Mr. Cooper observed, “Mr.
Browne has given his own explanation of that. I am not
prepared to give any other interpretation to the
circumstance. I have given my opinion and my belief as to
the existence of the committee.”
Commissioner Long said, “I
have no doubt, Mr. Cooper, you have spoken perfectly
correct. At some elections there are committees, and at
others it is thought better to avoid them.”
After the prolonged inquiry, a special meeting of the
corporate body was held on January 9th, 1834, to determine what
should be done in consequence of the course pursued by the
commissioners. A great deal of virtuous indignation was
expressed, and it was resolved—
“That it is the confirmed opinion of this
assembly, that this corporation would have been perfectly
justified in refusing their sanction to the attendance of their
members and officers, and in declining to allow the production of
their charters and muniments before the commissioners,
considering themselves well advised in regarding the commission
as an assumption of power contrary to law, and as an exercise of
prerogative, totally at variance with those constitutional
principles which, in defining the limits of regal authority,
guarantee alike the public rights and the private of the
subject.”
“That on these grounds, and influenced solely by
a strong sense of duty, the assembly of the 15th November last,
recorded their protest against a commission so dangerous in
precedent, so menacing to the privileges of chartered
institutions, and so hostile to the cause of civil liberty.
Yet, at the same time, animated with reverential attachment to
the king, unwilling to be deficient in proper respect towards
functionaries acting in the sovereign’s name, and above all
being unconscious of having, either in a corporate or magisterial
capacity, done any act calculated to prejudice the interests of
the city, or to bring discredit on themselves as a body, the
assembly of the 15th November last, ordered that the town clerk
and other officers should give the fullest documentary
information for which the commissioners might think fit to
call.”
“That this corporation not only by such order, but also
by subsequently permitting oral evidence to be given by their
members and officers, now feel themselves the more imperatively
called upon to express their mingled sentiments of regret and
disapproval at the course of examination pursued, an examination
governed by no rules of evidence recognised in any English courts
of law, but carried on in a manner irregular, vague, and
arbitrary, precluding the slightest hope of arrival at such a
conclusion as can possibly conduce to the ends of truth and
justice, still less such as can prove congenial to the good
feelings of any well-regulated, candid, and impartial
mind.”
“That this assembly, considering that the great mass of
information received by the commissioners, emanated from the most
decided and unscrupulous partizans; that many of them were
intimately connected with, and implicated in the transactions to
which allusions were made; that those allusions involved charges
against highly respected and honourable individuals, since
deceased, whose representatives had no means of refuting the
aspersions cast upon their memories; that many also of those who
came forward as the most material witnesses to impugn the conduct
and character of the corporate body, stand self-convicted as the
active unblushing agents of gross corruption, and by their own
admissions have proved themselves unworthy of
credit—considering all these things, and looking moreover
to the incontrovertible fact, that not one farthing of the
corporate funds has been either appropriated to electioneering
purposes or diverted from its originally destined and legitimate,
object”—
“Do PROTEST against any
report being made by the municipal commissioners respecting the
corporation of Norwich, based on statements so utterly unfit to
justify parliament in legislating on so important a subject, and
do most respectfully towards the crown, but with firmness and
fidelity to the obligation of their oaths as corporators, deem it
their duty to resist every attempt to exact from them a surrender
of the charters of the city and, therewith, of the rights and
privileges of the freemen of Norwich.”
“That this assembly invite the various corporations
throughout the kingdom to make common cause with them in
endeavouring by every lawful and constitutional means of
resistance to defeat any design that may be in contemplation for
wresting from them their ancient charters, franchises, and
liberties.”
A committee was appointed for this purpose, and to devise
means for protecting the charters, rights, and privileges of the
corporation. But all this opposition proved to be of no
avail, and the Municipal Reform Act came into operation in
1835.
1835. In January, 1835, the number of
registered voters was 4018. At the election in this month,
the bribery oath was administered to every voter. Sir James
Scarlett, who had represented the city in parliament from 1832 to
1834, on being made Chief Baron of the Court of Exchequer, was
raised to the peerage by the title of Baron Abinger of Abinger,
in the county of Surrey, and of the city of Norwich. He
took for his motto, “Stat viribis suis,” and
on application to the corporation, was permitted to use the two
angels, supporters to the city arms, as supporters to his
own.
On January 28th, the first conversazione of the Norfolk
and Norwich Museum was held, and was well attended. On the
27th and 28th, a dinner was given to the electors who voted for
the defeated candidates, Messrs. Harbord and Martin, at the late
election. About 1000 dined on the first day.
March 23rd. A meeting of the hand-loom weavers was held
in the Cellar House, at St. Martin’s at Oak, to petition
the legislature to establish local boards of trade.
In April an alteration was made in the conveyance of letters
to and from London, being transmitted by the Ipswich instead of
the Newmarket Mail, by which means the citizens got their letters
earlier. On the third of this month the mayor and
corporation waited on Lord Abinger, at the lodgings of the
judges, with an address of congratulation on his first visit to
the city in his judicial capacity.
June 16th. William Moore, Esq., was sworn into office as
mayor of the city. This was the last Guild day under
the old corporation. It was celebrated with all the
customary civic splendour. The Latin speech was delivered
at the porch of the Free School by Master Chambers, son of John
Chambers, Esq., of the Close, and he was presented with books to
the value of £5 5s., as was also Master Norgate, the orator
of the preceding year. At the dinner in St. Andrew’s
Hall about 800 ladies and gentlemen sat down to a sumptuous
repast.
July 14th. A meeting of the freemen was held in St.
Andrew’s Hall to petition parliament to preserve to them
and their children the privileges they had so long enjoyed, but
they soon lost their exclusive privilege of voting for members of
the corporation. The Municipal Reform Bill passed on
September 8th, and received the royal assent on the following
day. On Sunday, September 27th, the mayor and corporation
attended divine service in the Cathedral for the last time under
the old charters. The Hon. and Very Rev. the Dean (Dr.
Pellew) preached the funeral sermon of the old corporation.
Michaelmas day this year passed over without the customary
ceremony, owing to the new Municipal Act coming into force.
From 1403 it had been customary to swear the sheriffs into office
on that day, and for many years they had given inauguration
dinners. Mr. Winter, the last speaker of the old
corporation, was presented with a handsome piece of plate by that
body on October 21st; and at a special assembly held on December
17th, a vote of thanks was passed to the mayor, William Moore,
Esq. This was the very last meeting of the old corporation under
the ancient charters of the city.
On December 26th, the day fixed by the Municipal Act, the
first election of councillors took place under the new law.
1836. January 1st. T. O. Springfield, Esq.,
was chosen the first mayor of the new corporation. He had
been a very active partizan in the Liberal interest. He was
a member of the council nearly all his long life; his influence
was very great in promoting the return of candidates of his own
party. On the occasion of his going out of office, a dinner
was given to him in St. Andrew’s Hall. About 600 sat
down to a sumptuous banquet.
March 1st. The new police, eighteen in number, made
their first appearance under Chief Constable Yarington.
On September 20th, 21st, and 22nd, the Norfolk and Norwich
Musical Festival was held in St. Andrew’s Hall, when the
concerts were well attended, and realised a large sum for the
charities.
December 1st. S. Bignold, Esq., was the chief promoter
of the Norwich Yarn Company, which had a large capital, the whole
of which was lost to the shareholders. On the occasion of
laying the first stone of the yarn factory, the pageant in honour
of “Bishop Blaize” was revived, on December 1st,
1836. The whole affair was cleverly got up, and admirably
conducted. The procession having completed a tour of the
city, returned to St. Edmund’s, whence they proceeded to the site of
the new building, where S. Bignold, Esq., laid the first
stone. This being done, the procession set out to St.
Andrew’s Hall, where 900 persons, men, women, and children,
sat down to an excellent dinner.
Queen Victoria was proclaimed here
in the usual manner, on June 23rd, 1837, amid great
rejoicing. On Thursday, August 17th, Dr. Stanley was
enthroned in the Cathedral; he was the sixty-sixth bishop of the
diocese, and the thirty-third since the reformation. After
the installation about a hundred of the gentry, clergy, and laity
dined at the Norfolk Hotel. This bishop was a great
promoter of the education of the poor. An episcopal chapel
was opened in Heigham on August 10th, and afterwards consecrated
by the bishop under the name of “Trinity
Chapel.” His lordship also consecrated the new church
at Catton.
1838. January 3rd. A meeting was held in
St. Andrew’s Hall to petition parliament to abolish the
apprenticeship of negroes in the colonies. On the 5th the
new district schools were opened in St. Augustine’s.
On
July 11th, a very numerous meeting of the camlet weavers was
held, for the purpose of resisting the proposed reduction of
wages. About this time some differences existed between the
men and their employers respecting wages. Col. Harvey was
requested to mediate between them, and he did so, but without any
good result. The city was much disturbed in consequence of
these disagreements.
1839. On May 18th, a meeting was held at the
Norfolk Hotel to consider a bill about to be presented to
parliament for the improvement of the city, and to give the
citizens an opportunity of objecting to any of its clauses.
On June 19th this bill passed, but very little was done under it
in the way of improvement. A great part of the city
remained undrained, and the pavements continued in a bad
state.
On August 16th, the Norfolk and Norwich Art Union opened their
exhibition of pictures at the Bazaar in St. Andrew’s.
About 400 pictures were exhibited, some of them of great
merit.
About this time much excitement prevailed in the city
respecting the designs of the Chartists, who, although they were
not numerous, were considered dangerous, as they were known to
possess arms, many guns and pikes having been taken from them by
the police. On Sunday, August 18th, the Chartists attended
divine service at the Cathedral, when the bishop made a spirited
appeal to them. Many meetings of the Chartists were held,
and exciting harangues were delivered, advocating the five points
of the charter, including universal suffrage, and vote by
ballot, which, some of their opponents said, meant
“Universal suffering, and vote by bullet.”
1840. On February 10th, Queen Victoria’s
wedding day was kept as a holiday, and addresses were adopted, to
be presented to Her Majesty and Prince Albert. The poor of
the various parishes were substantially regaled, and the citizens
were admitted free to the pit and gallery of the theatre.
On many subsequent occasions, on the birth of a prince or
princess, the citizens have shown their loyalty by presenting
addresses of congratulation.
On February 25th, a meeting was held in St. Andrew’s
Hall to consider the necessity of a bill then before parliament,
for “repealing and altering the existing paving
acts,” and to oppose the same, if necessary: when a
petition was adopted to be presented to the House of Commons,
praying that the bill might not pass. The Marquis of Douro
presented the petition.
On June 15th, at a meeting in the Guildhall, addresses of
congratulation were agreed on, to be presented to the Queen and
Prince Albert, on their happy escape from an attempt at
assassination.
The first annual meeting of the Norfolk and Norwich Protestant
Association was held on October 15th in St. Andrew’s Hall,
when 2000 persons were present. Addresses were delivered
advocating the Protestant cause. Subsequently many similar
meetings were held in this city. The speakers always raised
the cry of “no popery,” explaining that they meant,
“No withholding of the bible from the people; no
worshipping of God in a dead language; no bowing down before
images as helps to devotion; no divine homage offered to a human
being, though the mother of our Lord; no prayers to saints; no
priests pretending to offer the sacrifice of Christ continually
in the mass; no polluting confessional; no persecuting
inquisition; no Jesuits with their hidden works of darkness; no
licenses for doing evil that good may come; no absolution for the
worst of crimes; no power of a priesthood over courts of law; no
canon law to overrule the statutes of the realm; no cursing with
bell, book, and candle; no enforced celibacy; no nunneries where
women are buried alive; no convents for lazy, vicious monks; no
masses for the dead; no fictitious purgatory; no power of priests
to forgive sins,” &c., &c
1841. In June this year the census of the united
kingdom was taken, and the result, as regarded this city, showed
but a small increase of the population, the total number being
62,294, while in 1831 the number was 61,304. The number of
hand-loom weavers had been greatly diminished by the competition
of steam power. Many of them left the city, and others went
into the boot and shoe trade, which had now become of some
importance.
This year many political meetings were held in the city, of
Tories, Whigs, Radicals, and Chartists. The prospect of a
general election kept the city in a state of great
excitement. The leaders of the two former parties
tried to prevent a repetition of such scenes as had taken place,
by a compromise, which was a most hateful thing to the freemen,
and working men generally. When the election came on in
June, Mr. Dover, a Chartist, nominated Mr. Eagle, a Chartist, of
Suffolk, and afterwards, it was said, received a bribe of
£50 to withdraw the nomination. In consequence of
this, a riotous mob assembled in the Market Place, and Dover had
to be protected by the police from their violence, for if they
had got hold of him, they seemed as though they would have torn
him in pieces. On the following day the mob having learned
that Dover was at a public house in St. George’s Colegate,
went there and dragged him thence, threatening to throw him into
the river. He was much injured, and would probably have
lost his life but for the timely arrival of the police.
1843. On August 9th, a dreadful storm of hail,
rain, wind, and thunder, passed over the city and county, and did
immense damage to property, especially to the growing
crops. Parochial subscriptions were raised to the amount of
£5,622, and private subscriptions £4,391, towards
compensating the sufferers for their losses. An immense
number of windows were broken by the hail in the city, and many
places were flooded.
1844. This year the railway was opened between
Yarmouth and Norwich, and in the next year the line was opened
from Norwich to Brandon, simultaneously with the
Eastern Counties line from London to Ely. This caused an
entire change in the mode of travelling, and in the carrying
trade of the district. All the old stage coaches were of
course discontinued.
1846. About the year 1846, the high rates in
Norwich became the subject of complaint and discussion. A
good deal of alarm was excited in the city in consequence of a
proposal of Sir Robert Peel, then prime minister, to alter the
law of settlement, so that all persons who had resided five years
in any place should have a permanent settlement there. As
many families belonging to the county parishes were then resident
in Norwich, it was feared that they would become chargeable to
the city and be a permanent burden on the rate-payers. This
apprehension proved to be well founded, for after the passing of
the Poor Removal Act, hundreds of county families did become
chargeable to the city, and have been so ever since.
Mr. G. Gedge, of Catton, instituted inquiries on the subject;
and being a member of the court of guardians, often called
attention to it. He was, in fact, the first in this city to
advocate a general or national rate as the most effectual remedy
for the evils of the then existing system of rating. He
spared neither time, trouble, nor expense in promoting his views,
which were generally approved by the more influential
citizens. He employed Mr. Hutchinson, an eminent statist in
London, on the recommendation of Mr. Wakley, to collect information
respecting the gross inequalities of the system of rating all
over England, and this information was published and circulated
in a valuable work, from which nearly all the statistics on the
subject have been derived and quoted by members of
Parliament.
Mr. Gedge introduced the question of a national rate at many
meetings of the court of guardians in 1846. He showed that
the poor rates then collected annually amounted to about five
millions. Nearly the same sum was raised by the property
and income tax; and it followed that if only those were rated who
paid the latter tax, the charge throughout England and Wales for
the support of the poor would not amount to more than sevenpence
in the pound. But including all the parties not then
chargeable to the property and income tax, and who would be
fairly liable to the poor rates, the annual rate would not amount
to more than half that sum. This would be a most important
difference to the great mass of the rate-payers, whose payments
to the relief of the poor would be greatly diminished, whilst
they would have the pleasure of knowing that the poor would be
better cared for, and that those comforts which they had a right
to expect, as producers of wealth, would be placed more
immediately within their reach.
Mr. Gedge explained that, as all the parishes in the city were
incorporated in regard to the relief of the poor, a general rate
being raised from all those parishes for that purpose, his
proposition was that this general mode of rating should be
extended over the whole country, and that a general rate should be raised
to be applied for the relief of the poor wherever they were
located. He showed that if each parish in this city
supported its own poor, the rating would be very unequal, and
some of the richest parishes would pay least, while the poorest
and more populous would pay most. To prevent this
inequality, all the parishes had been incorporated. This
had been found to be a great improvement, and it should be
further extended. Many persons, fund-holders and others,
living in lodgings, were exempted from poor rates. Many
large establishments in Cheapside and the middle of London paid
no poor rates, because the poor did not live in those
localities. Many persons living in fashionable towns also
escaped poor rates, for the same reason, while the industrious
and the middle classes had to bear the burden. He therefore
maintained that there should be a national rate.
Most of the members of the court of guardians concurred with
these views, and ultimately a petition to Parliament was adopted
in favour of a national rate. The petition was duly
presented in the House of Commons.
On Wednesday, June 10th, 1846, an important meeting of the
rate-payers of the city was held in the sessions court, at the
Guildhall, to petition Parliament against the Poor Law Removal
Act, which had been lately introduced into the House of
Commons. The mayor, J. Betts, Esq., presided and opened the
proceedings. Mr. S. Bignold, Mr. T. Brightwell, Mr. J. G.
Johnson, Mr. E. Willett, Mr. A. A. H. Beckwith, Mr. Banks, Mr.
Newbegin, Mr. Hardy, & Mr. G. Gedge, addressed the meeting in
support of resolutions, and a petition was adopted against the
proposed alteration in the Law of Settlement and the Poor Law
Removal Bill. Mr. G. Gedge moved a resolution,—
“That this meeting is decidedly of opinion
that the only effectual alteration of the law of settlement, by
which free scope would be given to the labour of the people,
would be to abolish the present law of settlement and rating, and
to substitute a general national tax on real and personal
property, and that a petition founded on this resolution be
presented to the House of Commons.”
He showed the very injurious operation of the law then
existing, and expressed his belief that a national rate, if
obtained, would prove a great benefit to the city. Mr.
Sheriff Colman seconded the resolution, which was carried
unanimously.
After this meeting, two petitions were presented to
Parliament, from this city, in favour of a national rate; one
from the court of guardians, and one from the citizens at
large. These petitions, however, had no effect, and the
Poor Law Removal Bill was passed into a law. The
consequence was, that about 1500 families belonging to county
parishes, who had lived five years in the city, obtained a
settlement in it, and most of them soon applied for relief.
This greatly increased the expenditure for the relief of the
poor.
At the monthly meeting of the court of guardians, held on
December 1st, 1846, Mr. G. Gedge moved a resolution
of which he had given notice at the previous court, in respect to
a national rate, and he urged the usual arguments in favour of
that measure. He wished the support of the court to a
petition to be presented to Parliament during the following
session, for the total repeal of the mode of rating to the relief
of the poor, then in operation, and the substitution of a
national rate. He believed that public opinion was now
fixed on this question, and that a national rate must come.
A petition was adopted, nem con.
1847. A meeting of the city operatives was held
on Wednesday, March 23rd, in St. Andrew’s Hall, for the
purpose of petitioning Parliament to abolish the law of
settlement then in operation, and to establish a national poor
rate. The meeting was numerously attended by working men,
who manifested a great interest in the question. Several of
them delivered speeches against the law of settlement and in
favour of a national rate, and a petition to Parliament was
adopted. Mr. Gedge spoke at some length in favour of the
measure, which he believed would be carried.
A public meeting of the citizens was held on December the 2nd,
1847, to consider the evils arising from the alteration of the
law of settlement. The mayor (G. L. Coleman, Esq.)
presided, and many influential gentlemen addressed the meeting in
support of resolutions deprecating the alteration in the law, and
in favour of a more equitable system than that in
operation. Sir S. M. Peto, M.P. for the city expressed his
concurrence, and the resolution was carried unanimously.
Subsequently, several meetings were held in Norwich in favour of
a national rate. During the same year, also, an association
was formed in London, having the same object in view; and,
eventually, the movement resulted in the passing of an Act of
Parliament, by which a union poor rate was established in every
county in England. This has proved to be a vast improvement
of the old system, and a great advance in the direction of a
national rate, but still the poor rate is levied on real property
only. The most equitable system would be for every man to
pay according to his ability, whether he be a landowner, a
shipowner, a houseowner, a fund-holder, or an artisan.
Before the Removal Act passed, the Norwich guardians were
quite aware of the effect it would have on the city. In
order to prove that their apprehensions were well founded, they
caused a census to be taken in the city and county of those
paying a yearly rental of £6 and under, and an inquiry to
be instituted as to the settlement of the tenants of those
houses. They found, after a full investigation, that more
than a third of the houses were occupied by persons not having a
settlement in Norwich, but in other districts. The
operation of the act was to throw the expense of the maintenance
of such persons on the city, at an estimated cost of £5000
yearly. This was represented to the government, who paid no
attention to it, and the Act passed nevertheless.
In the autumn of 1848, the Royal
Agricultural Society of England held a meeting in this
city. The exhibition of stock and implements took place in
a large field near the Newmarket Road, and attracted thousands of
visitors. The trials of implements took place on land near
the city. Lectures were delivered by the Rev. E. Sidney and
others at the Shirehall. The members of the Society and
their friends dined together on two occasions, in St.
Andrew’s Hall. Addresses were delivered by Professor
Sedgwick and other eminent men on various subjects. S.
Bignold, Esq., was mayor during this year.
Late on the night of November 28th, 1848, the city was
startled by the intelligence of the murder of Isaac Jermy, Esq.,
the Recorder of Norwich, and his son. His son’s wife
(Mrs. Jermy Jermy), and her servant, Eliza Chastney, were also
fired at and wounded by the same murderous hand. The first
news of
these murders and attempted murders excited universal
horror. They appeared to be so inhuman and atrocious, that
public feeling was wrought up to the highest pitch; and all the
reports published in the local and metropolitan journals were
read with the greatest avidity. James Blomfield Rush, a
farmer, well known in Norfolk, and a tenant under Mr. Jermy, was
at once suspected and apprehended. He was examined before
the magistrates, committed, tried, found guilty, and
executed. We give a short account of this terrible
tragedy.
Mr. Jermy, with his wife and family, lived at a mansion called
Stanfield Hall, about two miles distant from Wymondham, and Rush
lived at a neighbouring farm house, known as Potash Farm.
The Preston family, of which the recorder was a descendant,
originally came from the village of Preston, in the hundred of
Babergh, Suffolk, and settled at Beeston St. Lawrence, in the
hundred of Tunstead, in Norfolk. In 1837, the Rev. G.
Preston died, leaving his son, the recorder, heir to Stanfield
and his other entailed property. The recorder, previous to
his father’s death, was called Mr. Preston; but soon after
that event, he took the necessary steps for complying with the
stipulation in the will of Mr. Wm. Jermy, from whom the property
had descended, that the possessor of the estate should assume his
name and arms, and accordingly he took the name and arms of Jermy
by license from the crown. He was a county magistrate and
one of the chairmen at quarter sessions, recorder for Norwich,
and a director of the Norwich Union Insurance Office. Indeed, he
had been all his life closely connected with the city.
There had been some disputes relative to the Stanfield
property. It was said that one of the male relatives of
William Jermy had disposed of his reversionary interest in these
estates for the trifling consideration of £20. This
occurred in the year 1754. In June 1838, when the Rev.
George Pearson’s furniture and library at Stanfield Hall
were advertised for sale, a person named Thomas Jermy, a grandson
of John Jermy, with a cousin of his, named John Larner, put in a
claim to the estate, and served notices both upon Mr. Jermy and
the auctioneer to stop the sale. Larner then attempted to
obtain possession of the hall, but was shortly afterwards ejected
by Rush, (who was then acting as bailiff for Mr. Jermy,) with a
party of labourers. Larner then cut down some timber and
carted it away; and he and his party were apprehended for the
offence, but he himself was acquitted, though his accomplices
were convicted in penalties. Shortly afterwards placards
were posted in the neighbourhood, stating their intention to
obtain forcible possession. This they attempted to do, but
they were apprehended and committed to the assizes. They
pleaded guilty, and were sentenced to various periods of
imprisonment.
Rush, being aware of all these circumstances, may have thought
that he could perpetrate the murder in disguise, and that
suspicion would rest on those who claimed the estate. It
was stated and believed that he was a near relation to the
recorder, who, when he came into possession of his estates,
employed Rush as his steward, but rescinded his leases, having
found that they were illegal. This created the first ill
feeling between the parties. The recorder granted new
leases to Rush, but, as the latter alleged, at higher rent.
Rush soon afterwards took the Potash Farm in Hethel, under Mr.
Calver; this farm adjoining the Stanfield estate, and being very
convenient for his occupation. It being for sale, Mr. Jermy
wished to become the purchaser, and he authorised Rush, who fixed
the value at £3,500, to buy it for him. Rush attended
the sale, and having bid £3,500 for Mr. Jermy, bade
£3,750 for himself. The recorder, though much annoyed
by this transaction at first, was induced to lend Rush the money,
on mortgage, to complete the purchase. The equity of
redemption, or the ownership, therefore belonged to him. A
number of mortgage deeds were executed, the last of which was
dated September 28th, 1844, and it recited several prior
mortgages.
The effect of it was, that a sum of £5000 in all was
charged upon the estate, by way of mortgage, in favour of the
recorder, and it contained a provision that the money was to
remain on the security of that estate until the
30th November, 1848. The interest on the
£5000 was 4 per cent. or £200 per annum, and Rush
became tenant so as to enable the recorder to distrain for
rent. Rush now held three farms, and in October, 1847, he
was in arrear of rent for the Stanfield farm, and the recorder
put in some distresses. Rush being ejected went to live at
Potash farm house. Mr. Jermy also brought an action
against Rush for breach of covenants. This action was tried
at the March assizes, 1848, and it, as well as the previous
distresses, seemed to have occasioned rancourous feelings in
Rush’s mind towards Mr. Jermy. He published a
pamphlet which professed to be a report of the trial, calling Mr.
Jermy a villain, and stating that he had no right to Stanfield
Hall. This showed that Rush cherished malignant feelings
towards his victim.
Rush appears to have for some time premeditated the murder of
Mr. Jermy and his whole family; and he ultimately resolved to
carry out a deep-laid scheme, both of murder and robbery.
He got a young woman named Emily Sandford into his service as
governess, and seduced her. He then employed her to draw up
some quasi legal documents, as she could write like a
lawyer’s clerk. According to one of these documents,
signed “Isaac Jermy,” that gentleman gave up all
claim on Rush, if the latter gave up all papers and documents
relating to the Stanfield estate. The signature was of
course forged. After the murder these documents were found
concealed under the floor of a bed-room in Rush’s house,
ready to be produced had he escaped suspicion.
Rush’s conduct before the murders had been
observed. He had taken every precaution to throw off
suspicion. During the latter part of November, he had been
in the habit of going out at night, pretending to be on the
look-out for poachers. He ordered a quantity of straw to be
littered down from his homestead to the fields towards Stanfield
Hall. A portion of the path which had never before been
littered with straw, was then littered by his direction, and the
straw ceased where the green sward began, so that he could walk
from his house towards the recorder’s mansion, without any
danger of his footsteps being traced. Before November 28th,
he had caused everybody to leave his house except Emily Sandford
and a lad named Savory. On that day he returned home about
5 p.m., and asked when the dinner would be ready. Emily
Sandford said it would be ready soon, upon which he remarked,
“There is just time for me to go into the garden and fire
off my gun;” and he went into the garden and discharged his
gun accordingly. This was intended to account for his gun
having been recently used. He had bought a double-barrelled
gun in London the last time he was there. After tea he
appeared to be extremely agitated. He went up-stairs to his
bedroom and put on a disguise; one part of which was for the
whole person, being in fact a widow’s dress, which was
quite new. Another part was a black crape bonnet with a
double frill hanging by it; and the frill rendered it difficult
for any one to discern the wearer’s features. He
enveloped himself with a large cloak, armed himself with his
double-barrelled gun, and went out to do his work of murder
between seven and eight o’clock. Nobody saw him leave
the house. The night was dark and windy and well suited for
the deeds of an assassin.
Soon after eight o’clock, the recorder’s dinner
being over, he was sitting alone in the dining-room, little dreaming of
the doom that awaited him and his son. His son and his
son’s wife, who had retired to the drawing-room, were about
to partake of tea and to amuse themselves with a game of picquet,
the cards being on the table. Mr. Jermy was in the habit of
going outside the hall after dinner, and on this evening he left
the dining-room and walked to a porch in front of the
mansion. Rush, who knew the recorder’s habits and
expected him to come out, was standing near the porch in disguise
holding his loaded gun in his hand. As soon as Mr. Jermy
reached the porch, Rush presented his gun, fired, and shot him
through the heart. He fell backwards, groaned, and
instantly expired. Rush immediately ran to the side door,
entered, and proceeded along the passages leading to the
staircase hall. He passed close to the butler, who,
affrighted at the appearance of an armed man in disguise, retired
to his pantry. Rush passed on to the door opening into the
staircase hall. Mr. Jermy, jun., who had heard the report
of a gun, opened the door at that very moment. They met;
Rush drew back, presented the gun, and fired; and young Mr. Jermy
fell dead in the hall. The assassin then passed on into the
dining-room, no doubt with the intention of exterminating the
whole family. Mrs. Jermy, still in the drawing-room, on
hearing the second report, immediately went into the hall, and
passed over the dead body of her husband. Eliza Chastney,
one of the female servants, on hearing her mistress screaming for
help, ran up to her, and holding her by the waist cried out,
“My dear mistress, what is the matter?” At this
moment, Rush came out of the dining-room, and seeing the two
women opposite to him, levelled his weapon and fired twice,
wounding Mrs. Jermy in the arm and her servant in the leg.
The murderer then made his escape by the side door, leaving
death, misery, and woe behind him. He did not escape,
however, before some of the servants had made their observations
of him. Eliza Chastney had marked the man, and she
afterwards identified him at the trial. Strange to say,
several persons were standing at the gate close to the bridge,
heard the reports of a gun, and heard the alarm bell ringing, but
did not imagine that anything serious had happened. Some
people are so stolid that an earthquake would scarcely arouse
them. A man who had been employed in the stables, hearing
the reports, thought that the hall was attacked by a band of
ruffians, went to the back, swam over the moat which surrounds
the hall, and ran to the house of a neighbouring farmer (Mr.
Colman), and having obtained a horse rode to Wymondham, spreading
the alarm as he went.
In the meantime, the scene at Stanfield Hall was one of utter
dismay. The cook had fled to the coach house with little
Miss Jermy, the daughter of Mr. Jermy, jun. The cowardly
butler, who might have seized the assassin in the passage, rushed
to Mr. Gower’s, another farmer, for assistance. The
maid servants conveyed their wounded mistress upstairs to
bed. Eliza Chastney was lying wounded on the ground; Mr.
Jermy, sen., was lying dead in the porch, everybody being then
uncertain as to his fate; and Mr. Jermy, jun., was lying
dead in the hall. Mr. Colman, Mr. Gower, and Mr.
Gower’s two sons, having received some vague information,
had hurried to the hall, and were the first who discovered what
had happened. The servants were all panic-stricken.
What was the conduct of the assassin after the murders?
Emily Sandford, whom he had seduced, though at first she told a
false story, revealed it all in the course of the inquest and the
examinations before the magistrates. Between nine and ten
o’clock on that same night, Rush’s knock was heard at
his own door. Emily Sandford went to the door to open it,
but without a light, and she did not see him come in. He
went upstairs to his own room, put off his disguise which was
found there by the police, and in a short time came down again
without his boots and coat. He told Emily Sandford to make
haste and put out her fire and go to bed; and before he left her
he said, “If any inquiry is made about me, say I was not
out more than ten minutes.” She followed, after she
had put out the fire, and asked him where she should sleep.
He told her that she was to sleep in her own room; that being the
first night she had done so for a long time. She went to
bed, and between two and three o’clock in the morning Rush,
who had heard voices outside, rapped at the door of her room and
desired her to let him in; and she did so. He came
trembling to her bedside and said, “Now you be firm, and
remember that I was out only ten minutes.” She was
extremely agitated and inquired what was the matter; but he would
only tell her that she might hear of something in the morning.
Taking hold of his hand she observed that he trembled
violently. Next morning the police, who had watched the
house all night, apprehended him, and on the same day he was
examined before the magistrates. Emily Sandford also
underwent a lengthened examination, and persisted in stating that
Rush was out only a quarter of an hour on the previous night; but
at the inquest subsequently held by Mr. Press at Wymondham, she
confessed that her first statement was false, admitting that Rush
did not return home till after nine o’clock, and that he
told her to say he had been out only ten minutes. She also
gave evidence as to all that passed between her and Rush that
night, as already related.
On the morning after the murder the police searched Potash
farm house, and found two double-barrelled guns in the closet in
Rush’s bed-room, but these were not the weapons he
used. The gun he had used was afterwards found under a
manure heap. In the house the police found a black dress, a
grey and black frontlet, female wig, and a long black veil, as
for a female head-dress. These were hidden in a closet in
Rush’s bed-room. Concealed under the floor of a
closet a number of documents were also found, which turned out to
be the forged deeds before alluded to. These formed an
extraordinary link in the case, and after repeated examinations
the prisoner was committed to the assizes for trial. The
bodies of his victims were consigned to their last resting place
at Wymondham on December 5th, in the presence of a vast concourse
of spectators.
The
trial of Rush excited universal interest all over England,
Scotland, and Ireland. It commenced at the Shirehall,
Norwich, on Thursday, March 29th, 1849, before Baron Rolfe.
It continued six days, and each day the court was crowded to
excess. He was not defended by counsel. Mr. Sergeant
Byles stated the case for the prosecution, and then called a
number of witnesses who clearly proved the facts. Having in
the preceding part of this narrative stated all the particulars,
it is unnecessary to give the evidence. The documents which
were found in a secret place under the floor of the bed-room
closet in the prisoner’s house were produced, and several
of them were proved to be forgeries, which, if carried into
effect after the recorder’s death, would have placed the
prisoner in a very good position with respect to the farms which
he occupied, and would have rid him of all his liabilities.
A powerful motive for the commission of the murders was therefore
apparent. The servants at the hall, who had seen the
disguised armed man there, all deposed that they believed the
prisoner to be the man, as they had known him before, and as they
had recognised him by his height, form, walk, and gait.
Eliza Chastney, who had been severely wounded by the assassin,
was brought into court on a couch, attended by medical men.
When asked if she saw the assassin in court, she pointed to Rush
and said, “That is the man.” She had seen him
several times at the hall. When he fired at her, she saw
the whole form of his head and shoulders, and she knew no one
else having a similar appearance. Emily Sandford entered the
box apparently in a weak state. She was examined at great
length, and she stated with much clearness all that had passed
between her and Rush and other parties in reference to the
documents produced. She also gave a full account of the
prisoner’s conduct on the night of the 28th, as already
narrated.
When the prisoner commenced his cross-examination of this
witness there was a profound silence in the court, all present
being anxious to know how he would treat the unfortunate female
whom he had seduced, and who had given evidence against
him. He appeared to be under the influence of strong
emotion, so much so as at times, as to stifle his utterance; and
he was frequently on the verge of bursting into tears, yet he
mastered his feelings, and put his questions mildly in an assumed
endearing manner, trying to rouse any affection that she might
have left for him. She gave her answers in a low tone, and
sometimes weeping, which excited the pity of the
spectators. Nearly all the questions put by the prisoner
were irrelevant to her evidence in chief, but not all the
blandishments and frequent adjurations of the questioner could
elicit answers to suit his purpose. At length he put
questions which roused her indignation, and she reproached him
for his perfidy in not marrying her as he promised. If he
had done so, she could not have given evidence against him.
Four days were occupied with the case for the prosecution.
On the fifth day the prisoner commenced his defence, and he spoke
on that and the following day fourteen hours without making any
impression whatever in his favour. He began by admitting
a guilty knowledge that something was about to take place in the
hall on that night. He said parties had consulted him as to
the expediency of taking forcible possession of the hall, as had
been done some years before. He advised them not to do so,
but still he apprehended that something serious would
happen. He left his house at eight or half-past eight
o’clock on the night of the murders, and he went to the
boundary of his own land. When he got to the fence leading
to the hall, he waited a few minutes and thought he would go back
as he felt ill, but at that moment he heard the report of a gun
or pistol in a direct line from the hall. He then heard two
more, and was struck with amazement, as the parties to whom he
alluded had always said, if they took firearms it would only be
to intimidate, not to use them. He then heard the bell rung
violently, and he hastened back to his house as quickly as he
could, and he went through the garden into the house.
Having given this account of himself on that night, he proceeded
to comment on the evidence with a view to show
contradictions.
Mr. Sergeant Byles replied, showing that the prisoner had only
strengthened the case against him.
The learned judge summed up in a lucid manner, the jury soon
returned a verdict of guilty of wilful murder, the prisoner was
sentenced to be hung, and the dread sentence was executed on the
bridge in front of Norwich Castle on the morning of Saturday,
April 21st, in the presence of many thousands of
spectators. The unhappy man remained impenitent to the
last.
About this time the two parties in
the council became nearly equal in numbers, and the Liberals
found a difficulty in selecting a mayor and sheriff every year
from their own party. They accordingly proposed that each
party should nominate a mayor and sheriff alternately. In
1848 S. Bignold, Esq., was nominated a second time, and elected
unanimously to serve the office of mayor. From that time to
the present the chief magistrate and the sheriff have been
selected from each party alternately. This has also led to
the members of the various committees being selected so as to
represent all parties fairly, and the former exclusive system has
been discontinued.
1850. In 1850, in consequence of a memorial to
the General Board of Health, established under the (1848) Public
Health Act, Mr. Lee, a civil engineer and government inspector,
came to Norwich and commenced an inquiry respecting the sanitary
state of the city. The inquiry lasted a fortnight, and Mr.
Lee heard evidence given by all the officials and other
parties. He afterwards prepared a very elaborate report,
showing that the supply of water was insufficient, that the
drainage was defective, and that many causes of preventible
disease existed. He advised the application of the Public
Health Act, which was ultimately done. A company had been
previously formed with a large capital, and had constructed works
for the supply of water from the river Wensum to all parts of the
city. The abundant supply of pure water proved very
beneficial to the health of the inhabitants, and entirely
relieved the Local Board of Health from all trouble on that
point, and they had only to contract for the supply of water to
water the roads and streets during the summer months.
In January of this year Jenny Lind gave two concerts in St.
Andrew’s Hall, which was quite filled, at high prices, by
fashionable audiences, more than 2000 being present at each
concert. The proceeds, amounting to £1253, were
generously given by the celebrated songstress for the foundation
of the Jenny Lind Infirmary for Children in Pottergate
Street. It was established in 1853, and visited by the
Queen of Song in 1856, when she was so much pleased with the
management that she added £50 to her former gifts.
1851. The Great Exhibition of 1851, which was
opened in May, attracted thousands of the citizens to London,
where many of them spent weeks in viewing the wonders at the
Crystal Palace. Norwich manufacturers sent many specimens
of their shawls and textile fabrics. Amongst the
exhibitors were Messrs C. and F. Bolingbroke and Jones; Messrs.
Middleton and Answorth; Messrs. Towler, Rowling, and Allen;
Messrs. Willett and Nephew; Messrs. Clabburn, Sons, and Crisp;
and Messrs. Grout and Co.; all of whose productions were much
admired and commended. A very large number of our
operatives were conveyed by special train free to London to see
the Exhibition, where they had an opportunity of inspecting the
best productions of art of the whole world. This wonderful
exhibition was supposed to be the harbinger of universal peace,
but it was soon followed by the Russian war, which greatly
depressed the trade of the city and of the whole country.
It cost about a hundred millions of money, destroyed thousands of
brave soldiers, and spread a general gloom over the minds of
men. It ended in the fall of Sebastopol, and the triumph of
the allied armies. Russian aggression was stopped for a
time; but was the rotten Turkish empire worth the waste of men
and money?
The census, which was taken in this year, showed that the
population of Norwich had increased to 68,713 persons who were in
a comparatively prosperous condition, for trade was good and
provisions were cheap.
1853. On November 1st, S. Bignold, Esq., was
elected mayor of Norwich for the third time, and he filled the
office with great approbation throughout the year. He lent
the money required in the first instance for the new building
erected for the Free Library and the School of Art, and which
afforded additional accommodation for the Museum and Literary
Institution.
1854. At a meeting of the corporation held on May
4th, the mayor, S. Bignold, Esq., in the chair, he announced that
Her Majesty had been graciously pleased on the previous day to
confer the honour of knighthood upon him, on the occasion of his
presenting the addresses, voted by the council on the 20th of
April last, pledging their loyalty to the Queen when Her Majesty
declared war against Russia. It was thereupon resolved
unanimously, on the motion of A. A. H. Beckwith, Esq.
“That this council beg to offer their hearty
congratulations to Sir S. Bignold, the mayor of Norwich, on his
accession to the dignity which Her Majesty has graciously
bestowed upon him, and wish him many years to enjoy the honour so
worthily conferred.”
1856. The New Cemetery was opened by the Board of
Health, and the east side of it was consecrated by the
bishop. The other side was assigned to the
Nonconformists. Since then about 20,000 bodies have been
interred in the spacious area of thirty-five acres next the
Earlham Road. The grounds have been well laid out and
planted with trees and shrubs.
1857. The Yare Preservation and Anglers’
Society was founded, for the improvement of the angling in the
rivers Wensum and Yare. This society has done good
service for the lovers of angling on the two rivers, which
formerly abounded with fish near Norwich. But on account of
the pollution of the stream, anglers are obliged to go down as
far as Coldham Hall or Cantley to fish with any prospect of
success.
The Russian war having been brought to a close, peace was
celebrated here with great rejoicings and illuminations.
Major General Windham, “the hero of the Redan,”
visited the city, and a grand banquet was given to him in St.
Andrew’s Hall, where he delivered an eloquent address on
the events of the war and its successful termination.
In August the annual congress of the British
Archæological Association met in Norwich. Meetings
were held in the Guildhall, St. Andrew’s Hall, the Public
Library, and other buildings. Addresses were delivered by
Professor Willis, Mr. Britton, and many other gentlemen.
The members and friends visited the Cathedral, where Professor
Willis gave a description of the edifice. They also made
excursions to Ely, Dereham, Binham, Walsingham, and other places
of interest. On their return to Norwich they dined together
at the Swan Inn.
1858. The Local Government Act came into
operation, and gave the corporation full power to carry out all
necessary improvements.
1859. On November 19th, the Norwich Battalion of
Volunteers was formally enrolled, 300 strong, in three
companies, under the command of Colonel Brett, a highly-esteemed
officer. The other officers were, Capt. Middleton of the
first company, Capt. H. S. Patteson of the second company, and
Captain Hay Gurney of the third company. The force
gradually increased in number till the battalion became 530
strong, in six companies. Colonel Brett resigned on account
of ill health, and Colonel Black was appointed to the chief
command; next to him Major Patteson; Capt. Henry Morgan first
company, Capt. John Steward second, Capt. Peter Hansell third,
Capt. Charles Foster fourth, Capt. J. B. Morgan fifth, Capt. E.
Field sixth; Lieut. H. Pulley, Quarter Master; John Friar Clarke,
Quarter Master Sergeant; T. W. Crosse, Surgeon; Rev. F. Meyrick,
Chaplain. The corporation subsequently granted a piece of
land at the north-west corner of Chapel Field, and a company of
shareholders built the Drill Hall for the use of the members of
the corps, which has the reputation of being very efficient.
1861. A meeting was held on January 10th to
consider the best means of relieving the distress which had for
some time prevailed, owing to the depression of trade; and within
a month, more than £4,000 were raised for the relief of the
poor. Since then the weavers have gradually found
employment in some other branches of industry, especially the
boot and shoe manufacture, which has greatly increased.
Hundreds of operatives are also employed in iron manufactures,
and in making machines for agricultural and horticultural
purposes.
This
year a census of the population was taken, showing a great
increase, the total number being 74,891 persons, viz., males,
33,863; females, 41,028. Inhabited houses, 17,112;
uninhabited houses, 739; building, 103.
The parishes within the city, together with their respective
population in 1861 and their real property in 1860, were as
follows:—
All Saints
|
667
|
£2,280
|
St. Andrew
|
978
|
7,828
|
St. Augustine
|
1,890
|
4,281
|
St. Benedict
|
1,381
|
1,869
|
St. Clement
|
3,961
|
7,554
|
Earlham
|
195
|
1,845
|
Eaton St. Andrew
|
930
|
8,759
|
St. Edmund
|
753
|
1,706
|
St. Etheldred
|
614
|
1,559
|
St. George Colegate
|
1,607
|
4,983
|
St. George Tombland
|
687
|
4,865
|
St. Giles
|
1,586
|
6,391
|
St. Gregory
|
934
|
4,936
|
Heigham
|
13,894
|
36,799
|
St. Helen
|
507
|
901
|
St. James
|
3,408
|
5,384
|
St. John’s Maddermarket
|
537
|
4,959
|
St. John Sepulchre
|
2,219
|
4,452
|
St. John Timberhill
|
1,302
|
2,496
|
St. Julian
|
1,361
|
3,142
|
Lakenham
|
4,866
|
15,745
|
St. Lawrence
|
877
|
2,421
|
St. Margaret
|
664
|
1,608
|
St. Martin at Oak
|
2,546
|
3,789
|
St. Martin at Palace
|
1,085
|
3,267
|
St. Mary Coslany
|
1,498
|
3,081
|
St. Mary in the Marsh
|
451
|
4,289
|
St. Michael Coslany
|
1,365
|
3,052
|
St. Michael at Plea
|
379
|
3,504
|
St. Michael at Thorn
|
2,121
|
4,617
|
St. Paul
|
2,907
|
4,391
|
St. Peter Hungate
|
399
|
1,105
|
St. Peter Mancroft
|
2,575
|
22,615
|
St. Peter Mountergate
|
2,868
|
7,567
|
St. Peter Southgate
|
457
|
3,337
|
St. Saviour
|
1,532
|
3,805
|
St. Simon and St. Jude
|
283
|
1,221
|
St. Stephen
|
4,191
|
15,321
|
St. Swithin
|
699
|
2,174
|
There are also within the city jurisdiction the hamlet of
Hellesdon, population 393, belonging to Hellesdon parish; Thorpe
hamlet, population 2,388, belonging to the parish of Thorpe St.
Andrew; Trowse Millgate, Carrow, and Bracondale, population 687,
belonging to Trowse parish; population 249, extra
parochial. The population in 1861 and the real property in
1860 of all Hellesdon were 496, £3,376; of all Thorpe St.
Andrew 3,841, £9,003; of all Trowse, 1,404,
£3,534.
1862. In 1862 the Great Exhibition in London
afforded some of our city manufacturers another opportunity of
exhibiting their productions, and making known the skill of our
artisans. Messrs. Clabburn, Son, and Crisp won the gold
medal for their superfine fillover shawls, which are made by a
patented process, so as to display a perfect design on each
side. Messrs. C. and F. Bolingbroke and Jones gained a
medal for their poplins and poplinettes. The shawls of
Messrs. Towler, Rowling, and Allen obtained honourable
mention. So much for what are usually regarded as the
staple products of Norwich. But Norwich won for itself the
admiration of the world in some other matters. Messrs.
Barnard and Bishop, for instance, were spoken of far and wide for
their splendid park gates in ornamental wrought iron, which were
subsequently purchased and presented to the Prince of Wales, and
now adorn one of the entrances to His Royal Highness’s park
at Sandringham. Of course also Messrs. Colman took high
prizes for their world-renowned mustard and starch—the
medal given them for mustard being the only medal granted in the
United Kingdom for this article of commerce. As publishers,
Messrs. Jarrold and Sons received honourable mention for their
educational works, and publications of high moral excellence.
1863. H. S. Patteson, Esq., was mayor in 1863,
when on March 10th the citizens again displayed their
enthusiastic loyalty by processions, illuminations, balls,
&c., on the occasion of the marriage of the Prince and
Princess of Wales. Their Royal Highnesses have made
themselves very popular in this county, by living part of the
year at Sandringham, and participating in all the festivities and
amusements of the gentry and inhabitants. On the occasion
of the marriage of their Royal Highnesses, seven of the principal
manufacturing firms presented, through the corporation to the
Princess Alexandra, specimens of the elegant fabrics for which
Norwich has so long been famous.
In this year the Court of Guardians of this city obtained a
new act of parliament for an improved management of the poor, and
repealing all former acts. Under the new act the present
Board of Guardians is constituted with a reduced number of
guardians, and the whole management is more in accordance with
the New Poor Law system. Norwich is now a union of
parishes, divided into districts, each having medical
attendants. By this new act all former acts, including the
Norwich Small Tenements Act of 1847, were repealed, and the city
was brought under the operation of the General Poor Law, and all
other statute and laws from time to time in force with respect to
the poor in England. The union is now divided into sixteen
districts, viz.:—
1. St. Peter Mountergate, St. George of Tombland.
2. St. Mary in the Marsh, St. Martin at Palace, St.
Helen, St. Michael at Plea.
3. St. Peter Hungate, St. Simon and Jude, St.
Andrew.
4. St. John Maddermarket, St. Gregory, St. Lawrence.
5. St. Margaret, St. Swithin, St. Benedict, St.
Giles.
6. South Heigham. 7. North Heigham.
8. St. Peter Mancroft.
9. St. Stephen and the Town Close.
10. Eaton, Earlham, and Hellesdon.
11. St. John Sepulchre, St. Michael at Thorn, St. John
Timberhill, and All Saints.
12. Trowse, Carrow, Bracondale, St. Peter Southgate, St.
Julian, and St. Etheldred.
13. Lakenham.
14. Thorpe, Pockthorpe, St. Paul, and St. James.
15. St. Saviour, St. Clement, St. Edmund, St.
George.
16. St. Michael at Coslany, St. Mary at Coslany, St.
Martin at Oak, St. Augustine.
The board consists of forty-two guardians, elected for the
sixteen districts as follows:—
For each of the first, second, third, fourth, fifth, eleventh,
and twelfth districts, two guardians; for each of the sixth,
seventh, ninth, thirteenth, fourteenth, and sixteenth districts,
three guardians; for the eighth district five guardians.
For the purpose of this act with respect to the limits of the
palace of the bishop of Norwich, the same are deemed to be
locally situated within the parish of St. Mary in the Marsh.
The following are the qualifications for voting in the
election of guardians:—
A. Occupiers of rateable property who respectively are
rated in respect thereof on a gross assessment of ten pounds and
upwards.
B. Owners of rateable property, who respectively are
rated in respect thereof on a net assessment of ten pounds or
upwards. Provided, that where two or more persons are
jointly rated, one only of them shall be entitled to vote, and in every
case the rating shall have been in the last two rates, each made
at least two months before the day of election, and in respect of
property in the district in which the person votes, and the rates
shall have been paid at least fourteen days before the day of
election.
At every election of guardians the rate-payers voting have
votes in accordance with the following scale:—
A. If rated at £10 and under £25, one
vote.
B. If rated at £25 and under £50, two
votes.
C. If rated at £50 and under £75, three
votes.
D. If rated at £75 and under £100, four
votes.
E. If rated at £100 and under £150, five
votes.
F. If rated at £150 or upwards, six votes.
And no rate-payer at any election of guardians for any one and
the same district have more than six votes.
All the compounding provisions of the act were abolished by
the Reform Act of 1867.
The old court of guardians had the management of lunatic
paupers, who were maintained in an asylum in St.
Augustine’s. Great care appears to have been taken of
them, and many of them were cured, more in proportion than in any
other town. Nevertheless, the lunacy commissioners who
visited the asylum reported that the place was unhealthy and
unfit for lunatics, and recommended, or rather demanded that a
new asylum should be built in a more healthy situation.
This the old court of guardians considered to be quite
unnecessary, and the whole matter was transferred to the council
under the Lunatic Asylums Act of 1853, that body having the
option of taking the matter in hand. The council, already
over-loaded with municipal business, Board of Health business,
drainage, paving, lighting, watering the roads, &c., actually
undertook the management of the lunatic paupers, in 1863.
After many discussions a majority of the members decided that a
new asylum was unnecessary, and refused to build one. The
Lunacy Commissioners, however, made a strong report to the
Secretary of State on the subject, who sent down an order to the
council to build an asylum. Since then land has been
purchased for its site, which is likely to cost from
£30,000 to £40,000!
1864. In 1864 the operatives made a very laudable
effort to improve their depressed condition by establishing an
“Industrial Weavers’ Co-operative Society,” and
held many meetings to promote that object. The Rev. C.
Caldwell, and other gentlemen, advocated their cause. The
society was supported by donations, and J. H. Gurney, Esq.,
advanced a sum which had been left by his father for the benefit
of the weavers, the principal with interest amounting to
£1100.
1865. The Norfolk Chamber of Agriculture was
instituted, and frequent meetings of the members have been held
at the Norfolk Hotel, Norwich. The objects of the chamber
are to watch over all measures affecting agriculture both in and
out of parliament, to co-operate with the General Chamber
thereon, and to take such action as may be for the benefit of
agriculturists. At the meetings of the members interesting
questions have been discussed, and C. S. Read, Esq., M.P. for
East Norfolk, has generally presided, and given much valuable
information.
The most important event in this diocese of late years was the
holding of a Church Congress in Norwich. A preliminary
meeting to consider the proposal was held in the Clerical Rooms
on Saturday, December 10th, 1864. When this was announced
there was no little apprehension in Low Church circles, but the
proposal was approved by most of the clergy, and they requested
the Lord Bishop to preside over the Congress, which was held in
October, 1865. After some delay his lordship reluctantly
consented, and never before was there such a gathering of clergy
in the city. St. Andrew’s Hall was filled every day
for a week in October, 1865. High churchmen throughout the
country made it a point of duty to attend the congress; and the
proceedings at the daily meetings were of a very interesting
character to churchmen generally. Addresses were delivered
every day on very important subjects; and the bible history was
ably vindicated against the objections of geologists and
freethinkers. The church as an establishment was well
defended by her champions. Three local newspapers were
published daily, containing full reports of the
proceedings. Dr. Pusey read a discourse of great interest
in defence of the Old Testament narratives.
In November the Prince and Princess of Wales travelled from
their seat at Sandringham to Cossey on a visit to Lord and Lady
Stafford, who entertained their Royal Highnesses in a princely
style. Their Royal Highnesses, during their sojourn at
Cossey, visited this city, entering by way of the Dereham Road
and St. Giles’ Road, and passing under triumphal arches
amid the acclamations of thousands of the citizens, it being a
general holiday. They stopped at the Guildhall and received
an address from the corporation. Then they proceeded to St.
Andrew’s Hall and attended a morning concert of the musical
festival. Their Royal Highnesses, on leaving the hall, rode
along the principal streets, through the Market Place, and up St.
Stephen’s to the Chapel Field, where they were joyously
received by the Manchester Unity of Odd Fellows, and where they
planted two trees in memory of their visit. Their Royal
Highnesses thence proceeded to the new Drill Hall, which the
Prince of Wales formally opened. After this ceremony their
Royal Highnesses returned to Cossey Hall. They were
accompanied by the Queen of Denmark (mother of the Princess of
Wales), and by Prince Alfred (the Duke of Edinburgh). In
the evening the city was brilliantly illuminated.
1867. The Norwich Industrial Exhibition was held
for six weeks, from August 15th till October 20th, 1867, in
St. Andrew’s Hall. About 1000 exhibitors sent
specimens of works of art and useful articles, which quite filled
the hall. Hundreds of splendid paintings were lent for the
occasion, and the show attracted many thousands of
visitors. The industrial part of the exhibition was most
creditable to the working men of Norwich, many of whom gained
medals and money prizes for the best specimens of useful and
ornamental articles. The mayor, F. E. Watson, Esq.,
distributed the prizes on November 5th.
1868. The great event of the year 1868 was the
meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science
in the city. It commenced on August 19th and continued till
the 26th. The old city was filled with distinguished
visitors from all parts of Europe; and the hotels, inns, and
lodging houses were crowded with strangers. Norwich gave a
hospitable welcome to the Society. Dr. Hooker, who by
association and descent is a Norfolk man, delivered the inaugural
address. The various scientific sections held daily
meetings at different public places. The proceedings were
reported in daily issues of the Norfolk News and the
Norfolk Chronicle, and also in the regular issues of the
Norwich Mercury.
On November the 9th, J. J. Colman, Esq., retired from the
office of mayor, and E. K. Harvey, Esq., was elected as his
successor; John Robison, Esq., was at the same time chosen as
sheriff, as successor to Robert Fitch, Esq. As this is the
last act of the council which we shall have to chronicle, we take
the
opportunity of adding a few words on the present state of the
corporation. By the Municipal Reform Act all previous
charters remain in force, except so far as they are rendered
inconsistent with the provisions of that act, and the city is now
divided into eight wards, and incorporated under the style or
title of the “Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses of the city
and borough of Norwich.” The corporate body consists
of sixteen aldermen and forty-eight councillors. The mayor
is chosen annually on the 9th of November from the members of the
council, who also on the same day choose the sheriff from the
same body, or from persons qualified to vote for councillors, and
who are eligible to the office of councillor. The members
of the council are chosen annually on November 1st by the
inhabitant householders of three years’ successive
occupation, the freemen having been disfranchised for municipal
purposes. The aldermen are elected by the council, and go
out of office every three years. Committees of the council
are appointed for conducting the business of the corporate
body. The corporation is possessed of various estates,
tolls, and dues, the profits and proceeds of which are placed to
the Borough Fund, under the act, and are applied towards the
reduction of the rates levied on the citizens. Several
large estates which were in the hands of the corporation for
charitable purposes are now vested in charity trustees. The
corporation still pay fee farm rents to the crown, over
£100 yearly. There is in trust of the corporation an
estate of 112 acres, situated outside of St. Stephen’s Gate, called the “Town
Close,” on which the burgesses had the right of commonage
formerly, but in lieu of which right the freemen receive a few
shillings yearly. The meetings of the corporation are held
in the Council Chamber in the Guildhall almost every fortnight
for the despatch of business, and meetings of the committees are
held almost daily. The body corporate, as a Council and
Board of Health, levies rates as we have already said to the
amount of £45,000 yearly. The Board of Guardians sits
in the same room, and raises by poor rates about £30,000
yearly, making the local taxation amount to £75,000 per
annum. The City Police and Fire Brigade, under direction of
Mr. R. Hitchman, the chief constable, occupy the basement of the
Guildhall. The force, comprising nearly a hundred men, is
considered to be very efficient.
This year an extensive scheme was begun for an effective
drainage of the city. We subjoin a brief history of the
proceedings which led to this movement, and take the opportunity
at the same time of giving some details as to the general
operations of the Local Board of Health.
So long ago as 1862, complaints were made of the impurity of
the river in consequence of all the sewage of the city and of all
the water closets being poured into the stream. In 1863,
many inhabitants of Thorpe became urgent in their demands that
some immediate steps should be taken to divert the sewage from the
river, but this was more easily asked than done. The Board
of Health, however, requested their then surveyor (Mr. Barry) to
report on the subject; and subsequently Mr. Bazalgette visited
Norwich and surveyed the stream.
In the autumn of 1865 Mr. Bazalgette’s report was
received. It recommended a plan of conveying the sewage
through main drains to Crown Point to irrigate the land
there. The board discussed the report and appointed a
sewerage committee, who entered into negotiations with R. J. H.
Harvey, Esq., M.P., for irrigating part of his estate at Crown
Point. Mr. Harvey was to pay the cost of preparing the land
for irrigation, and the annual cost of pumping; but after a
preliminary notice had been given of the intention of the board
to apply for an act of parliament, the board determined not to
proceed at that time with the application for the act.
The board subsequently entered into contract with Mr. Hope, of
London, to sell him the sewage for thirty years; and the
necessary works were ordered to be commenced on March 20th,
1866. The board, however, being pressed by a strong
opposition to the scheme, in a few days afterwards rescinded the
contract. In consequence of this, proceedings in chancery
were commenced, and an injunction was ultimately obtained.
On May 31st, 1866, the board resolved, “That it is
absolutely needful at once to take measures to divert the sewage
from the river.” Negotiations were entered
into for the hire of part of the Crown Point estate, the
agreement for which was confirmed by the board on July 10th,
1866. By this agreement the board took on lease 1290 acres
of land at Crown Point, at £3 5s. per acre, for thirty
years—the whole sewage of the city to be conveyed to Trowse
and pumped over the land. Many objections were made to this
measure, that the rent was too high, and that the experiment
would prove a failure. Pursuant, however, to a resolution
of the board, passed on October 9th, in the same year, the
committee took the necessary steps to obtain an act of
parliament, and did obtain it in June, 1867.
After the act was obtained, Mr. Morant, the city engineer, by
direction of the committee, proceeded with the preparation of the
necessary drawings and specifications for the drainage works, and
by order of the board the following contracts were entered into,
namely:—
|
|
£
|
1.
|
For the steam engines (with Mr. John Clayton of
Preston)
|
6435
|
2.
|
For iron pipes (the Staveley Coal and Iron Company)
|
3500
|
3.
|
For laying such pipes (Mr. John Downing of Norwich)
|
549
|
4.
|
For the erection of engine houses (Mr. Daniel Balls of
Norwich)
|
6988
|
5.
|
For the construction of the main intercepting sewers (Mr.
Thomas Wainwright of London)
|
28,830
|
6.
|
The ground for the pumping works was purchased for
|
2000
|
|
|
£48,302
|
Other
sums are required for constructing drains, sewers, penstock
chamber, and other subsidiary works, and the entire scheme is
proposed to be carried out under the sanction of the act of
Parliament, at the estimated cost of £60,000.
A very powerful opposition was raised against the
scheme. A memorial, very numerously signed, was presented
to the board of health against it. Public meetings were
held at which the whole thing was condemned as unnecessary,
expensive, and likely to be a failure. Eventually, after
much discussion, with a large minority against it, and in
opposition to the opinions of the citizens expressed in common
hall, the board resolved to carry out the scheme, and the works
are now in progress. The general plan is to construct two
main drains, one on each side of the river Wensum, to intercept
the sewage and to carry it to Trowse, where a pumping station has
been erected, and engines will be set to work to pump all the
sewage over the land hired at Crown Point estate.
The drainage expenditure, though so enormous, has been only a
part of the expenditure of the board, upon which the duty falls
of repairing all the streets and roads, lighting, watering,
&c. In the first half year of 1867, the estimated
expenditure was as follows:—
|
£
|
s.
|
d.
|
Repairs to streets and roads
|
2008
|
7
|
0
|
Lighting the same
|
1776
|
11
|
9
|
Salaries
|
442
|
1
|
5
|
Sundries
|
475
|
5
|
6
|
Interest on loans
|
1336
|
16
|
0
|
Interest on bonds
|
372
|
0
|
0
|
|
£6411
|
1
|
8
|
Twice
that sum would be £12,822 3s. 4d. for the year, quite
irrespective of the drainage works.
The annual abstract of the accounts of the board issued in
1867, shows the receipts and payments from September 1st, 1866,
to September 1st, 1867. The receipts amounted to
£15,873 3s. 6d., the payments to £15,323 18s. 2d.,
which sum included £1204 16s. 7d. sewage expenses, (chiefly
law charges). Of course the receipts were derived almost
entirely from the half-yearly rates. The expenditure
included £3314 9s. 8d. for interest, the rest being for
repairs to streets and roads, paving, lighting, sewerage works,
salaries, &c.
Mr. Morant, the present able engineer to the Board of Health,
made his first annual report in May, 1867, and showed the
expenditure in his department for the year preceding April 5th,
1867, to be as follows:—
|
£
|
s.
|
d.
|
Repairs to roads
|
2192
|
4
|
11
|
Paving
|
870
|
0
|
0
|
Sewers
|
576
|
2
|
2
|
Urinals
|
86
|
13
|
0
|
|
£3725
|
0
|
1
|
The engineer’s next report was for the year ending April
5th, 1868, and was divided into three heads. Repairs to
roads; repairs to paving; and repairs to sewers. First with
respect to roads. The cost of the macadamised roads had
been £2329 12s. 7d., being an increase of £137 7s. 8d.
Some new roads had been taken by the board, and were repaired and
cleansed, and all the roads were stated to be in good
order. Second, with respect to paving. The
expenditure had been £1088 8s. 10d., being an increase of
£218 13s., but a part of the Market Place had been newly
paved with granite at a cost of £216. Third, with
respect to the sewers. The cost of repairs, &c., had
been £546 5s. 5d., being a decrease of £29 16s.
9d.
Since 1850 the annals of the city consist chiefly of
proceedings of the corporation as a council or Board of
Health. Meetings have been held almost every fortnight for
the transaction of public business, which has been largely
increased. The proceedings of one single year, even if
summarised, would fill a volume. The corporation has levied
rates to the amount of £45,000 yearly! and the expenditure
has been of equal amount. This has been caused by many
public improvements, by widening old streets and opening new
ones, and by the extension of the area of the Cattle Market.
Mr. Morant gives the following account of the drainage
works:
“The drainage of the city of Norwich flows
into the river at numerous places, as is commonly the case; it is
the object of the new works now in progress to intercept all the
old sewers, to prevent the sewage flowing into the river, and to
convey it to one point. For this purpose several deep
sewers are being constructed, varying in size from 18 inches in
diameter to 6 feet high by 4 feet wide, of oval shape.
“The point selected for the pumping station is between
the
railway at Trowse Station and the river Yare; and a large piece
of garden ground has been purchased, and engine and boilerhouses,
workshops, &c., have been erected. Adjoining the
engine-well are the grating tank and penstock chamber, and with
these the principal main sewer communicates. This sewer,
which is 6 ft by 4 ft., is intended to be carried under the
bottom of Bracondale, Carrow Hill, and along King Street to near
Messrs. Morgan’s brewery, where it will receive the
high-level sewer. This sewer will be from 30 ft. to 80 ft.
below the surface of the ground. From this point it will be
5 ft. 3 in. by 3 ft. 6 in., and will be continued along King
Street to the top of Rose Lane; here one branch will turn off to
the right under Rose Lane, beneath the bottom of the river near
Foundry Bridge, under the towing path, to beyond Bishopgate
Bridge, where it will unite with the present outfall sewer, and
receive the whole of the drainage of the northern portion of the
city. From Rose Lane the main will continue to Tombland,
where a branch will extend to Bishopgate Bridge, with subsidiary
branches to Quay Side, &c.; it will then turn to the left
under Prince’s Street, St. Andrews Broad Street, Charing
Cross, and Lower Westwick Street, and will unite with the present
sewer emptying itself at the New Mills.
“From the end of the principal main near Messrs.
Morgan’s in King Street the high-level sewer will commence
with a flight of granite steps, about 30 feet in height, and
continue 4 ft. 6 in. by 3 ft., gradually reducing, and carried
under King Street to Rose Lane, across the Bull Ring, where it
will be about 44 feet below the surface, under Opie Street,
Bedford Street, Pottergate Street, West Pottergate Street, Mill
Hill, Rose Valley, Mount Pleasant, Town Close Road to Ipswich
Road, and will provide for the sewage of a very large district
hitherto entirely undrained.
“Self-acting Storm Overflows are provided at
several convenient points, and also numerous shafts for access
to, and ventilation of, the sewers. At the pumping station
at Trowse the sewage, after passing through gratings to prevent
sticks and other substances from choking the pump valves, will
pass into the engine-well, from whence it will be pumped through
cast-iron pipes 20 inches in diameter, laid under the Kirby Road
to near the cross road leading to the Bungay Road, and then be
led in a main conduit across the centre of the land hired by the
Board, and by means of small feeders to every part of the
farm.
“The steam engines will be three in number, and of the
kind known as condensing rotative beam engines, with steam
cylinders of 35 in. diameter and 6 ft. stroke. Each engine
will be provided with a high lift pump connected with the pumping
main, and also with a low lift pump; the object of the low lift
pumps is to enable the rain water to be pumped into the overflow
sewer in time of heavy storms, when the sewage is so greatly
diluted as to be little more than soiled water; the first
scouring of the sewers will be pumped by the high lift pumps on
to the land.
“Four boilers, each 27 ft. 6 in. long and 7 ft.
diameter, with two flues, are provided to produce the steam
necessary for working the engines, and the chimney shaft to
remove the smoke is 140 feet in height.
“The foundation of the engine had to be carried down 29
feet below the surface, and much difficulty was found in getting
in the walls on account of the force of the springs, the bottom
being 22 feet below the water level in the adjoining river, and
from the same cause considerable difficulty is met with in
driving the tunnels for the sewers. In Trowse for example,
the soil proved to be running sand and mud, which was very
troublesome to overcome; the same soil exists
under Rose Lane, Foundry Bridge, and Bishopgate Street, but
nearly everywhere else the tunnels will be in the chalk.
“Irrigation by sewage is no doubt quite in its infancy,
but from the very satisfactory results arrived at at Barking,
Croydon, Norwood, Edinburgh, Banbury, Rugby, and other places,
there is good reason to hope that eventually the Board’s
Sewage Farm at Crown Point will prove a success.”
Since the year 1824, musical
festivals have been held in this city triennially, for the
benefit, originally, of the hospitals, and lately of various
other charities also, and for the promotion of musical
science. These celebrations have been so successful on the
whole that the total surplus receipts over the expenditure have
amounted to more than £10,000. Works of the greatest
composers have been well performed by the most eminent
instrumentalists and vocalists of the day, and thereby a taste
for music has been diffused throughout the city and county.
The patrons of the festivals have included the Queen, the late
Prince Consort, the Prince and Princess of Wales, the Duchess of
Kent, the Duchess of Cambridge, the Duke of Cambridge, the
Princess Mary of Cambridge, the Duke of Wellington, the Marquis
of Lothian, the Earl of Roseberry, the Earl of Gosford, the Earl
of Orford, Lord W. Powlett, Lord Stanley, Lord Walsingham, Lord
Wodehouse, and many others of the nobility. The committee
of management have included the Lord Lieutenant of the
county, the Earl of Albemarle, Lord Ranelagh, Lord Sondes, Lord
Hastings, Lord Stafford, Lord Suffield, Lord Bayning, Hon. W. C.
W. Coke, Hon. H. Walpole, Hon. W. Jerningham, Sir J. P. Boileau,
Bart., Sir W. Foster, Bart., Sir S. Bignold, and others.
The first musical performance for charitable purposes is said
to have been on the anniversary of the Sons of the Clergy, in
1709; some fifteen years after which period, the meeting of the
three choirs of Gloucester, Hereford, and Worcester, was
instituted, those cathedral cities sending their choristers to
each place in alternate years. These early music meetings,
however, were held in the evening, and seem to have been limited
to the performance of Anthems and the Te Deum. The first
occasion of an Oratorio having been performed in the morning
appears to have been at Hereford in 1759, when the Messiah was
given.
The Birmingham Triennial Festival was instituted about the
year 1778, and that of Norwich, as now held in St. Andrew’s
Hall, in 1824, previously to which the Norwich festival consisted
of the yearly performance of an Oratorio in the cathedral for the
benefit of the Norfolk and Norwich Hospital. The
performances of later years have been on a much grander
scale. The festivals at Birmingham and Norwich now stand
pre-eminent among provincial musical meetings, both for the
excellence of the performances, and for the special interest
given to the programmes by the first production of new or
little-known works. Among other claims to honourable distinction
in this respect, it is the chief and will be the lasting honour
to Norwich that Dr. Spohr’s sacred Oratorios were first
performed here, his earliest production being conducted by
himself in person before a large audience.
The selection of works and music to be performed has always
occupied a great deal of the time and attention of the
committees, who have made it an object to bring out some new work
at every festival. Most of Handel’s best Oratorios
have also been performed, including, of course, the
“Messiah,” which is never omitted from the
programme. Haydn’s “Creation” and
“Seasons” have also been frequently given, while Dr.
Spohr’s “Calvary,” “Fall of
Babylon,” and “The Last Judgment.” Dr.
Bexfield’s “Israel Restored,” Pierson’s
“Jerusalem,” and Molique’s
“Abraham” were first performed in this city.
The programmes have also included Sterndale Bennett’s
“May Queen,” which won all hearts; Benedict’s
brilliant “Undine,” and many other approved
compositions.
The committees, acting on the principle of securing the
highest talent, have generally engaged the best vocal performers
whose services were available. In proof of this we need
only mention the names of the following female
vocalists:—Madame Viardot Garcia, Madame Caradori Allan,
Madame Clara Novello, Madame Sainton-Dolby, Madame Alboni, Madame
Malibran, Madlle. Tietjens, Madame Patti, Madame
Lemmens-Sherrington, Madame Rudersdorf, Miss Louisa Pyne, Madame
Grisi; and among the male vocal performers may be mentioned
Signor Lablache, Herr Formes, Mr. Weiss, Signor Rubini, Signor
Belletti, Signor Morini, Mr. Santley, Mr. Sims Reeves, Mr.
Cummings, Signor Gassier, Signor Giuglini, Signor Mario, Mr.
Phillips, Mr. Lockey, &c. &c.
The Norwich Choral Society, comprising 300 members having good
voices, altos, tenors, and basses, has contributed greatly to the
success of the festivals by the excellence of the choral
performances, especially in grand Oratorios. The Choral
Society was established in 1824, and had its origin in the
establishment of the musical festivals, Professor Taylor being
its chief promoter. In 1825 the Professor removed to
London, and the direction of the society was confided to the Rev.
R. F. Elwin. The management of affairs was entrusted to a
committee of twelve, who were annually elected by ballot at a
general meeting. The practice was held in the Old Library
Room or in St. Andrew’s Hall. The society has
undergone many changes, but has always maintained its high
reputation for choral performances. A memoir of the late
Professor Taylor, which appeared in the Norfolk News,
contained some information as to the part he took in promoting
the festivals. We give the following extracts:—
“We learn from the Quarterly Musical
Review, which was edited by the late Mr. R. M. Bacon, that at
the Festival of 1824, ‘Mr. Bacon, Mr. Taylor (late
Professor Taylor), and Mr. Athow, were nominated as a committee
for the entire conduct of the musical department.’
Vol. VI. p. 434. The same authority says a little further
on, ‘Mr. Taylor undertook the formation of a Choral Society,
which he accomplished with a degree of knowledge, skill, and
perseverance, that cannot be too highly praised.’
Again ‘The musical committee then decided on the following
vocalists and instrumentalists, &c.’ From all
which it seems that the triumvirate managed the musical
department.
“Mr. Fitch once wrote to Mr. E. Taylor requesting him to
state what share he had in the management of the first
festival. The following was Mr. Taylor’s reply, dated
March 25th, 1847. ‘When the Norwich Festival was
resolved on in 1823, I made the entire selection (morning and
evening). I engaged every performer; I selected the entire
band, and I formed and trained the Choral Society. I have
done the same for every subsequent festival (until the last,
1845,) with the exception of having nothing to do with the Choral
Society, or any of the country performers. Every Oratorio
brought out (and a new one was always brought out) was translated
and prepared for performance by me.’ These were the
following performed for the first time here. ‘The
Last Judgment,’ Spohr; ‘The Crucifixion,’
Spohr; ‘The Fall of Babylon,’ Spohr; ‘The
Deluge,’ Schneider; ‘Redemption,’ Mozart;
‘The Death of Christ,’ Graun; ‘The
Christian’s Prayer,’ Spohr.
“It will be seen by the above how little Mr. E. Taylor
left for anybody else to do. Mr. Taylor’s two
associates, like the wings on a stage sylph, were more for
ornament than use. His statement is confirmed by the
Musical Review, which says, ‘The Hospital Board
presented to Mr. Taylor a piece of plate, of fifty guineas value,
for his services in raising and instructing the Choral Society,
and for his general assistance.’”
The memoir before mentioned further states:—
“At the Norwich Festival of 1830, Mr. Taylor
introduced Spohr’s Oratorio of ‘The Last
Judgment’ for the first time into this country, the words
being translated and adapted to the music by Mr. Taylor
himself. This was followed at subsequent festivals by other
oratorios of the same composer, which for originality, richness,
and beauty, are unrivalled in their way. After the
performance of ‘The Last Judgment,’ Mr. Taylor became
personally acquainted with Spohr, and one day, getting an
invitation from Mendelssohn to visit him and his family at
Dusseldorf on the Rhine, where Spohr then was, the invitation was
accepted, and thus Mr. Taylor first became known to the
illustrious composer, with whom he formed a friendship which
lasted as long as they both lived.
“At the Norwich Festival of 1836, the expenses exceeded
the receipts by £231 5s. 10d. We give an extract from
a letter, written in the following year by Mr. Taylor to Mr.
Henry Browne, which will be read with pain, because it shows that
Mr. Taylor received far other treatment than he deserved at the
hands of the committee of management. Mr. Taylor said,
‘I hear of the discord engendered by the winding up of the
Festival with much concern, and which seems to threaten the
existence of future ones. How it happened that the last
terminated so unprofitably has always been a mystery to me.
I think it ought not.’”
And Mr. Taylor goes on to state the amount of work which he
himself did for nothing.
All the festivals had been hitherto successful. The
first, in 1824, produced a surplus of £2399 to the Norfolk
and Norwich Hospital. The second, in 1827, afforded that
institution £1672; the third, in 1830, yielded £535
to the hospital; the fourth, in 1833, was also
successful; but in 1836 the expenses of the Festival, as has been
shown, exceeded the receipts by £231, and a general board
of the hospital resolved that no part of the funds belonging to
the institution should be used for any purpose connected with the
Festival.
At the Sixth Musical Festival, held on the 17th, 18th, 19th,
and 20th September, 1839, Dr. Spohr conducted his own new
Oratorio of “Calvary,” before a very large audience,
in St. Andrew’s Hall. The performance was very grand,
and produced a thrilling effect on the audience. The
selection of such a subject as the Crucifixion for an Oratorio
drew forth a good deal of criticism, but there could be no doubt
of the musical merits of the composition.
After the performance of “The Crucifixion,” Spohr
and Mr. Taylor were travelling outside the coach to London, when
the former expressed a wish to write another oratorio for
Norwich, but said that he was at a loss for a subject. Mr.
Taylor then suggested The Fall of Babylon. This led to a
chat about the effects which might be introduced in the way of
contrast, &c., and ultimately Spohr promised to write the
oratorio if Taylor on his part would write the words. The
bargain was struck, and the result was a work which will live to
the end of time.
The Festival of 1842 was by far the most brilliant that had
been held. Of course Dr. Spohr’s “Fall of
Babylon” was the chief attraction. It was performed
in the presence of the largest and most fashionable audience ever
seen in St. Andrew’s Hall. Numbers of the
gentry could not obtain admission. People stood under the
long galleries, and along the passages, and in every corner of
the building. The performance was a splendid success, and
greatly added to the fame of the composer. Professor Taylor
translated the Libretto, and was the conductor of the
Oratorio. On the following day he conducted the performance
of Handel’s Oratorio of “Samson,” to which he
added selections from Handel’s works. This caused a
good deal of adverse criticism, but it was not without
precedent. On Friday morning the Professor conducted a
performance of Handel’s “Messiah.”
The Festival of 1845 commenced on Tuesday evening, September
16th, and continued on the 17th, 18th, and 19th. The
programme included miscellaneous concerts on Tuesday, Wednesday,
and Thursday evenings; a selection of sacred music, and
Haydn’s Oratorio “The Seasons,” on Wednesday
morning; another selection of sacred music, and Spohr’s
Oratorio “Calvary,” on Thursday morning; and
Handel’s sacred Oratorio “Messiah,” with
additional accompaniments by Mozart, on Friday morning. All
the concerts were well attended. The principal vocalists
were Madame Grisi, Miss Dolby, Madame Caradori Allan, Miss Poole,
Signor Mario, Signor F. Lablache, Mr. Hobbs, Mr. Machin, Mr.
Hawkins, Mr. Bradbury, and Herr Staudigl. Mr. Benedict was
conductor; Mr. J. Hill, chorus master; Mr. F. Cooke, leader of
the band; Mr. Turle, organist. The chorus comprised the
usual number of voices. The band included the best
instrumentalists in England, and the festival was very
successful.
The
Festival of 1848 commenced on Tuesday, September 12th, with a
miscellaneous concert, followed by similar concerts on Wednesday
and Thursday evenings. On Wednesday morning the programme
comprised a sacred Cantata, by L. Spohr, “The
Christian’s Prayer,” and Haydn’s Oratorio
“Creation.” On Thursday morning
Mendelssohn’s Oratorio of “Elijah” was
performed. On Friday morning “David Penitent,”
a sacred Cantata by Mozart, was given, followed by Handel’s
“Israel in Egypt,” one of the best of his numerous
productions. The principal vocalists were Madame Castellan,
Madame Alboni, Madame Viardot Garcia, Miss A. Williams, Miss M.
Williams; Signor Lablache, basso; Mr. Sims Reeves, tenor; Mr. H.
Phillips, basso; Mr. Whitworth, tenor; Mr. Lockey, tenor.
Mr. Benedict was conductor; Mr. H. Blagrove, leader of the band;
Mr. Harcourt, organist. Professor Taylor translated
“The Christian’s Prayer” for this
occasion. Mr. J. F. Hill was chorus master.
In September, 1852, the Festival again comprised grand
miscellaneous concerts on the Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday
evenings, which concerts were well attended. On the first
evening, Mrs. Fanny Kemble read the “Midsummer’s
Night’s Dream,” but the reading was a failure, as she
could only be heard a short distance from the orchestra. On
the Wednesday morning a new Oratorio, “Israel
Restored,” by Dr. Bexfield, was performed for the first
time at a festival. On Thursday morning Mr. H. H.
Pierson’s Oratorio, “Jerusalem,” was performed
for the first time, and occupied nearly four hours. On
Friday morning the “Messiah” was performed as
usual. The principal vocalists were Miss Louisa Pyne, Miss
Alleyne, Miss Dolby, Madame Viardot Garcia, Madame Fiorentini,
Signor Gardoni, Signor Belletti, Mr. Weiss, Mr. Lockey, Herr
Formes, Mr. Sims Reeves. Mr. Benedict was conductor; Mr. H.
Blagrove, leader of the band in the morning performances, and
Mons. Sainton in the evening performances; Mr. J. F. Hill, chorus
master. At the close of the performance on the Wednesday
morning (September 22nd), a short selection from Handel’s
Oratorio of “Samson” was given as a tribute of
respect to the memory of the late Duke of Wellington.
Madame V. Garcia sung the solo—
“Ye sons of Israel, now lament,
Your spear is broke, your bow unbent,
Your glory’s fled.
Among the dead,
Our hero lies,
For ever closed his eyes.”
The “Dead March” was played and the chorus
sung—
“Glorious hero, may thy grave
Peace and honour ever have;
After all thy pains and woes,
Rest eternal, sweet repose.”
The Festival in September, 1854, again comprised miscellaneous
concerts in the evenings, and Oratorios in the mornings. On
Tuesday morning, September 12th, the programme included
Rossini’s “Stabat Mater,” Meyerbeer’s
“91st Psalm,” and a selection of sacred music.
On Wednesday morning Beethoven’s Service in
C, and Haydn’s “Creation” were brilliantly
performed. On Thursday morning Mendelssohn’s
“Elijah” attracted a very large audience. On
Friday morning the “Messiah” was given, with the
additional accompaniments by Mozart. The principal
vocalists were Madame Clara Novello, Madame Angelina Bosio,
Madame Castellan, Madame Weiss, Miss Dolby, Mr. Sims Reeves,
Signor Gardoni, Herr Reichardt, Signor Lablache, Signor Belletti,
and Mr. Weiss. Mr. Benedict was conductor; Mons. Sainton
and Mr. H. Blagrove, instrumental solo performers; Herr Hausman,
violoncello; Mr. J. F. Hill, chorus master. On Tuesday
evening the concert included a descriptive and characteristic
Cantata, called “Tam o’ Shanter,” the words by
Burns and the music by Macfarren. It consisted of a solo
and chorus, which were sung with great applause. Indeed,
nothing so comic and lively had ever been heard before at any
festival.
Notwithstanding all the attractions of this festival it proved
a failure in a financial point of view, and it was feared that
these triennial musical meetings would no longer answer, but
their promoters determined not to give them up. A committee
was appointed; efforts were made to secure by all proper means
success in future; and several of the county nobility joined as
members of the committee. That this determination was made
on good grounds, was fully proved by the success of the three
subsequent festivals of 1857, 1860, and 1863, the surplus from
which was, in round numbers, severally, £425, £916,
and £1221. From these sums no less than £2000
were distributed amongst the charities.
The
Festival of 1857 commenced on Tuesday evening, September 15th,
with a miscellaneous concert, and similar concerts were given on
Wednesday and Thursday evenings. On Wednesday morning the
programme comprised a sacred Cantata by Louis Spohr, “God
Thou art Great,” a Hymn of Praise (Lobgesang) by
Mendelssohn, and the “Requiem” of Mozart, his latest
work. On Thursday morning Beethoven’s Sacred Cantata,
“The Mount of Olives,” and Haydn’s Oratorio,
“The Seasons” were performed. The
“Messiah” was given on Friday morning, and concluded
the festival. The principal vocalists were Madame Clara
Novello, Madlle. Leonhardi, Madame Weiss, Mrs. Lockey, Madlle.
Piccolomini, Signor Gardoni, Signor Giuglini, Signor Belletti,
Mr. Lockey, Mr. Miranda, and Mr. Weiss. Mr. Benedict was
conductor; Mons. Sainton, H. Blagrove, and Herr Hausman, were
instrumental solo performers; Mr. J. F. Hill was chorus
master.
The Festival of 1860 was under very distinguished patronage
and eminently successful. The programme included
Haydn’s “Creation,” Handel’s
“Messiah,” Dr. Spohr’s “Last
Judgment,” Herr Molique’s “Abraham,” and
Handel’s “Dettingen Te Deum,” all sacred music
of the highest class, assigned to the morning performances.
The evening concerts comprised Glück’s
“Armida,” Professor Sterndale Bennett’s
Pastoral, “The May Queen,” Benedict’s Cantata,
“Undine,” besides selections from the most popular
operas, part songs, madrigals, symphonies, and overtures, all of
which were admirably rendered and highly applauded.
The
choice of so large a work as Hadyn’s
“Creation,” one of the finest of his productions, on
the first evening, was considered desirable, as it gave full
employment at once for the principal vocalists, the chorus, and
the band. As many persons could not attend in the morning,
an oratorio in the evening gave them an opportunity of hearing a
great work well performed, and the lovers of sacred music readily
seized the opportunity presented to them of attending the
performance, which was never more perfect. No band could
have possibly played it more exquisitely, no chorus could have
sung it more honestly or earnestly, and the solos were beyond all
praise.
Wednesday morning was assigned to performances of a sacred and
very solemn character; Handel’s “Dettingen Te
Deum,” and Spohr’s “Last Judgment.”
Handel composed five Te Deums, but the finest is that written in
1743, in celebration of the victory at Dettingen, then thought a
great event. The victory was rather unexpected, and as
George II. commanded in person, the rejoicings in England were
very general. Horace Walpole wrote, “We are all mad;
drums, trumpets, bumpers, bonfires! The mob are wild, and
cry ‘Long live King George and the Duke of
Cumberland!’” After the “Te Deum,”
there was a short interval preceding the performance of Dr.
Spohr’s great work “Die Letzten Dinge” (The
Last Things), the earliest of the composer’s three
oratorios. In 1825 it was brought over from Germany by
Professor Taylor, and it was first performed before an English
audience at the Norwich Festival on September 24th, 1830, under
the title of “The Last Judgment,” which does not
convey a very correct idea of the work. It was received
with the greatest possible favour, like all other works of the
same master, in this city. The grand theme is set forth in
a series of paraphrases of scripture texts referring to the final
consummation of all things.
The novelties at this festival were Professor Sterndale
Bennett’s Pastoral “The May Queen,” and
Benedict’s brilliant Cantata, “Undine,” both of
which were performed with great success. The Pastoral was
produced with complete success at the Leeds Musical Festival, in
September, 1858. Mr. Chorley composed the poem, and he
deserves some credit for the verses, as well as for the dramatic
character of the piece. The overture is a beautiful
composition, and the whole work displays a marvellous combination
of simplicity and ingenuity. Herr Molique’s new
Oratorio, “Abraham,” was performed here for the first
time, and conducted by the composer, who at the close was greatly
applauded. The words are taken from the Old Testament, and
the characters personated are Abraham, Sarah, Hagar, Isaac,
Angel, and Messenger, who in turn depict the different scenes in
the life of the patriarch. He is exhibited as a saint, as a
warrior, and as a great sufferer. Full scope is given for
the display of human passion in almost every phase, from
triumphant joy to a sorrow that borders on despair. The
incidents are picturesque, striking, and varied, calling all the
powers of the orchestra into play. The principal vocalists
were Madame Clara Novello, (her last appearance in Norwich,) Madame
Weiss, Miss Palmer, Madame Borghi Mamo, Madlle. Tietjens, Signor
Giuglini, Signor Belletti, Mr. Sims Reeves, Mr. Wilbye Cooper,
Mr. Santley, Mr. Weiss. Instrumental solo performers, Miss
Arabella Goddard, piano; Mr. Sainton, Mr. H. Blagrove, Signor
Piatti, violoncello; Mr. Benedict, conductor; Mr. J. F. Hill,
chorus master.
The Festival of 1863 commenced on Monday evening, September
14th, with a performance of Handel’s grand Oratorio,
“Judas Maccabæus,” which was eminently
successful. The large audience seemed to be carried away by
the martial music. On the Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday
evenings, miscellaneous concerts were given. On Wednesday
morning Mr. Silas conducted a performance of his own sacred
drama, “Joash,” with success. This was followed
by a “Scene at the Gates of Nain,” from the Oratorio
“Immanuel,” by Henry Leslie; also selections from the
Stabat Maters of Haydn, Pergolesi, and Rossini, and a selection
of sacred music. “Elijah” was performed on
Thursday morning, and the “Messiah” on Friday
morning. Another novelty at this festival was a Cantata,
entitled “Richard Cœur De Leon,” composed
expressly for the occasion, and performed on Thursday evening
with immense applause. This Cantata embodied the romantic
story of the warrior king in captivity, being discovered by the
minstrel Blondel, who at last caused the liberation of the
monarch. The principal vocalists were Madlle. Tietjens,
Madame Lemmens Sherrington, Madame Weiss, Miss Wilkinson,
Miss Palmer, Madlle. Trebelli, (her first appearance in Norwich,)
Mr. Sims Reeves, Mr. Montem Smith, Mr. Santley, Mr. Weiss, Signor
Bettini, (his first appearance here,) Signor Bossi, (his first
appearance here). Mr. Benedict was conductor.
Instrumental soloists, M. Paque, violoncello; Mr. H. Blagrove and
Mr. Sainton, violins. Mr. J. F. Hill, chorus master.
The Festival of 1866 was deferred till November, very
unwisely, in anticipation of a visit of the Prince and Princess
of Wales on the occasion. This caused a larger attendance
on the day their Royal Highnesses were expected, and a smaller on
all the other days. The arrangements for the visit were
also injudicious, to say the least. Their Royal Highnesses
should at once have proceeded to the Wednesday morning’s
performance, but they were detained at the Guildhall to hear an
address from the corporation, and then they were allowed to go to
St. Andrew’s Hall in the middle of a performance, which was
greatly interrupted. Their Royal Highnesses, therefore,
could not possibly have appreciated Costa’s Oratorio from
hearing only half of it. The festivals have been always
patronized by royalty, and by the nobility, gentry, and clergy,
and have never failed to attract the county families; but this
year (1866) was the first in which members of the royal family
were actually present.
The general programme for 1866 when issued, presented some
points of peculiar attraction, including “Israel in
Egypt,” by Handel, on Monday evening; an Anthem by Dr.
Spohr, and the Oratorio of “Naaman,” by Costa, on
Wednesday morning; “St. Cecilia,” a new Cantata by
Benedict, selections from the Passion Music of Handel, and first
and second parts of the “Creation,” by Haydn, on
Thursday morning; and the “Messiah” on Friday
morning. Most lovers of sacred music would have preferred
Haydn’s entire Oratorio to the sombre Passion Music.
The committee, acting on the principle of securing the highest
talent, made engagements with Madlle. Tietjens, Madame
Rudersdorff, Miss Edith Wynne, Madame De Meric Lablache, Madlle.
Anna Drasdil, three of them appearing for the first time in this
city; also with Mr. Sims Reeves, Mr. Cummings, Signor Morini, Mr.
Santley, Mr. Weiss, and Signor Gassier, all well-known
vocalists. The instrumentalists were all first-class
performers. The choral body was much improved and
strengthened, and included 62 of the best trebles ever selected,
24 contraltos, 35 altos, 59 tenors, and 67 basses.
Handel’s Oratorio, “Israel in Egypt,” was
splendidly performed on the Monday evening; the solos were in the
hands of first-class vocalists, but the absence of Mr. Sims
Reeves was a disappointment. Mr. George Macfarren had
improved the instrumentation by the addition of parts to the
original score. He had no occasion to apologize for doing
for “Israel,” what many musicians have done for other
productions. It is not presumptuous to have recourse to the
resources of more modern instrumentation, so long as the
character of the work is not altered.
On Wednesday morning, as we have said, the Prince and
Princess of Wales were present. The performances commenced
with Dr. Spohr’s Anthem “O blessed, for ever blessed,
are they,” the first time of performance, and it was
admirably rendered. Mr. Costa then conducted a splendid
performance of his own Oratorio of “Naaman,” founded
on a part of Old Testament history, relating to the restoration
from death of the son of the Shunamite by the prophet Elisha; a
subject not very well adapted for musical purposes. All
Oratorios are cast more or less in the Handelian mould, but Mr.
Costa has introduced more of the secular clement than usual.
On Thursday morning the hall was well filled by a large
audience desirous of hearing a performance of Handel’s
Passion Music, and Mr. Benedict’s new work, “St.
Cecilia.” As to the former, we may state that there
are two works of Handel entitled “Passion Music,” one
produced, it is believed, in 1704, the other in 1716. Dr.
Chrysander caused the publication of both these works by the
Leipzig Handel Society in 1860 and 1863. It is strange that
these two productions should have slumbered so long unheard and
unknown till the selection was performed in Norwich.
Interesting as the Passion Music might be, the all-important
event of this morning’s concert was, the production of Mr.
Benedict’s new Cantata. “St. Cecilia” has
long been a favourite subject with both poets and
composers. Among the former, Fletcher, Dryden, Pope,
Addison, Congreve, and a host of versifiers, have contributed
Odes in honour of the patroness of music. Many of these
Odes are still in existence, with their accompanying music, of
various degrees of merit; the principal being those by Purcell
and Handel. These are great names, but the construction of
the older works is entirely different from the Cantata now
performed for the first time with great applause. After a
short interval the concert was continued with the
“Creation,” which could not have been better
performed or with a stronger cast.
Friday morning has been always assigned to the performance of
the “Messiah,” and to hear it every seat in the hall
was this time occupied, and numbers could not obtain
admission. We have heard this sublime Oratorio scores of
times, in London and in many large towns, and here at every
festival since 1840, but we never heard it rendered with greater
effect than the last time (in 1866).
Norwich has in many ways obtained credit and advantage from
the Musical Festivals. Their high character has placed the
city in a very eminent position in the musical world, and many of
the citizens cherish a just pride in endeavouring to qualify
themselves for the maintenance of that degree of excellence which
the festivals enable them to exhibit in the choral performances,
which the best judges have pronounced second to none in the
kingdom. On the whole the festivals have contributed
largely to the funds of important charities, and will no doubt
continue to do so if conducted with judgment and economy.
They have always attracted large numbers of visitors to the old
city, for the same facilities which make it easy for us to
go elsewhere to hear good music, enable others to
come hither for the same purpose. Many persons will always
come from distant places to hear a well-trained Norwich
chorus. And besides all this, not the least of the benefits
derived from these triennial meetings, is that they encourage an
interchange of good feeling and hospitality between the city and
county, and afford to those who enjoy music such an amount of
pleasure as must contribute, at least for a time, to cheerfulness
and happiness in their social intercourse with their fellow
creatures.
Professor Taylor claims the first
place in our notices of the eminent citizens of this period, as a
politician, a musician, and a public man. After his death a
memoir of him appeared in the Norfolk News of March 28th,
and April 4th, 1863, and from it we derive the following
details:—
“Mr. Edward Taylor was the great grandson of
the celebrated Dr. John Taylor, a man not less beloved for the
kindliness of his disposition, than he was venerated for his vast
learning. Dr. Taylor was born at Lancaster in the year
1694, and came to Norwich (according to Mr. Edward Taylor’s
account) in 1733. Here he remained till 1757, and here it
was that he produced many of his works, amongst others his famous
Hebrew Concordance, which was published in two large volumes,
folio, and was the labour of fourteen years. Many copies of
the frontispiece (a fine portrait engraved by Houbraken) are
still extant in this city. Dr. Taylor must have been fond
of music, and must also have made it a personal study. This
we infer, less from his having published ‘A Collection
of Tunes in Various Airs’ for the use of his Norwich
congregation, than from his having been able to Prefix thereto
‘Instructions in the Art of Psalmody.’ The airs
themselves have no other accompaniment added than an unfigured
bass, but the collection contains many of the finest melodies
which are now in use. The instructions were intended to
enable a student to sing at sight.
“When Dr. Taylor quitted Norwich, his only surviving
son, Richard, remained, and carried on the business of a
manufacturer in St. George Colegate. Mr. John Taylor,
father of the subject of this memoir, was born the 30th July,
1750. In 1773, he entered into the business of a yarn
maker, in partnership with his brother, in the parish where their
father had lived. If not a musical composer, John had the
reputation of being at least a tolerable poet, and he was
peculiarly happy in writing words for music.
“In April, 1777, Mr. John Taylor married Susannah, the
youngest daughter of Mr. John Cook of Norwich. Mr. Edward
Taylor was born on the 22nd of January, 1784, in the parish of
St. George Colegate.
“In his boyish days, Edward Taylor was made to imbibe
the usual quantity of Greek and Latin, and the cask ever after
retained the flavour of the wine. But music even then was
his chief delight. When arrived at manhood he was tall and
well formed; he had a fair, though by no means a pallid
complexion, a penetrating eye, and a majestic voice, which
sounded in conversation like the roll of a bass drum. In
whatever part of the world he had been met, it would have been
said at a glance, ‘That’s an Englishman.’
He had that unmistakeable stamp of bluntness and sturdy
independence which seems to be an Englishman’s
birthright. He was proud, not altogether without reason, of
his ancestors, whose religious and political opinions he
inherited. Hence, he was a Dissenter of the Unitarian
School, and what was then called a Radical Reformer.
Deeming himself to be in the right, he of course considered all
those who differed from him to be in the wrong. But being
himself consistent, he knew how to respect consistency in
others. His hostility was confined to men’s doctrines
and measures; it was never extended to their persons. In a
word, he was generous, manly, and sincere, and he therefore
enjoyed the friendship of good and true men, whatever might be
their party or creed. Mr. Taylor married, in 1808, Deborah,
daughter of Mr. William Newson, of Stump Cross, in this city, a
man of upright and honourable character, and a successful
tradesman.”
The memoir contains a sketch of Mr. Taylor’s political
doings, which we shall give in another part of this work, and it
then proceeds:—
“On the 19th January, 1824, he had the
honour of dining with the Duke of Sussex, at Kensington
Palace. The next year, 1825, terminated Mr. Taylor’s
residence in his native city, though to the end of his life he
continued to take a warm interest in whatever concerned its
welfare. On the 21st of May, having already made
arrangements for giving up his business in Norwich, he went up to
London to prepare for making it his future abode. On the
5th of August, he served on the Norwich grand jury for the last
time, and the next day took his final departure. On the
15th, he joined his brother Philip and his cousin John Martineau
in their business, as civil engineers, having hired a house for
that purpose in York Place, City Road.
“On the 3rd of January, 1826, the year after Mr. Taylor
finally left the city for London, he came down to a dinner which was
given at the Rampant Horse Hotel in his honour. The
original intention had been to place his portrait in St.
Andrew’s Hall, and Sir James Smith had actually written
some lines to be placed under it, beginning—
‘Avaunt, ye base, approach ye wise and good,
Thus in this hall once Edward Taylor stood.’
But that idea was abandoned, and a presentation of a service
of plate was determined upon by his fellow-citizens. The
proposition originated with the strongest of his political
antagonists in the Corporation. The plate was given at this
dinner at the Rampant Horse, the chairman being Henry Francis,
Esq., against whom Mr. Taylor had entered the lists in the
severest contest ever known in the Mancroft Ward. This
rendered the compliment greater.
“Mr. Edward Taylor’s first music master was the
Rev. Charles Smyth, a man who was equally remarkable for his
eccentricity and musical learning. Mr. Taylor always spoke
with great respect of Mr. Smyth’s musical knowledge.
How long the lessons continued we have no means of ascertaining,
but we afterwards find Taylor gaining instruction with the
Cathedral boys under Dr. Beckwith at the music room in the
Cathedral. He also had lessons in the vestry room of the
Octagon Chapel; and he acquired some skill upon the flute and
oboe from Mr. Fish. But we believe that his musical
education was throughout gratuitously bestowed, out of respect to
himself and his family. Doubtless he was greatly indebted
for his extensive knowledge of the art, as well as of the German
and Italian languages, to his own perseverance in solitary
study.”
The author of the memoir, after giving a sketch of the
“Hall Concert”, notices Mr. Taylor’s labours on
behalf of the Musical Festivals in this city, as already
related in our brief account of those celebrations. Mr.
Taylor was one of their chief promoters, and he worked hard to
make them successful. In reference to Mr. Taylor’s
career in London, the author of the memoir says,—
“It has been before stated that on the 15th
August, 1825, Mr. Taylor entered upon a new course of life, in
London, in connection with his brother Philip and Mr. John
Martineau, who were civil engineers. Had the business
proved lucrative, there is no reason to suppose that Mr. Taylor
would have left it. It is certain that when he went to live
in London, nothing was further from his thoughts than that he
would ever embrace music as a profession.
“Mr. Taylor began anew the battle of life by taking
private pupils. From the first moment of his entering the
musical profession, his classical attainments, his skill as a
translator, his superior mental powers, and his extensive musical
research, were honestly and fully recognized. On the 29th
March, 1827, Mr. Taylor made his first appearance before a London
audience as a public singer. His debût was at Covent
Garden, at the Oratorios under the management of Sir H. R.
Bishop. The song he chose was ‘The Battle of
Hohenlinden,’ composed by C. Smith, and the reception he
received from a very crowded audience was exceedingly
favourable.”
After quoting some very eulogistic notices of Mr.
Taylor’s subsequent performances, the writer of the memoir
continues:—
“In this year (1828) was published
‘Airs of the Rhine,’ accompaniments by William
Horsley, Mus. Bac., Oxon, the poetry translated by Edward
Taylor. Of Mr. Taylor’s brief sketch of
German music prefixed to this collection, the Quarterly
Musical Review (conducted by Mr. R. M. Bacon) says, ‘It
is so agreeably written, and contains so many authentic and
interesting particulars, that we must do him the justice to give
it a place at length. It will speak more for the
publication than anything we can say to interest the
reader.’
“In 1837, Mr. Taylor was elected Gresham Professor of
Music. The place had been for 200 years a mere sinecure,
generally held by persons totally ignorant of music, but he did
much to render it useful to the art. In 1838 he published
his ‘Three Inaugural Lectures,’ which he dedicated to
the Trustees of Gresham College. He was not content with
reading his lectures, however good. He illustrated them by
having some compositions of the master who might be under
discussion, well sung in parts by a competent choir.
Amateurs of distinction and professional men lent their aid, and
this attracted large audiences to the theatre.
“In 1843, Professor Taylor, who had been musical critic
for the Spectator for fourteen years, retired from that
department, and he received a very complimentary letter from Mr.
Rintoul the editor, who said, ‘I can bear my willing
testimony to the high aims, the great ability, the persevering
zeal, and undeviating punctuality with which you have upheld the
cause of good music in my journal for the long period of fourteen
years. I believe that a selection from your writings in the
Spectator would comprise a body of the soundest and best
musical criticism in the language; and when you retire, I know
not that any second man in England is qualified to sustain the
elevated standard that you have raised, &c.’ High
praise indeed, but well deserved.
“In the year 1845, Professor Taylor published, in the
British and Foreign Review, an article headed ‘The
English Cathedral Service; its Glory, its Decline, and its
Designed Extinction.’ This was subsequently published
by permission of the proprietor in the form of a thin octavo
volume. It was a masterly defence of the musical services
of our Cathedrals, and of the choirs, against the spoliation of
the deans and chapters, which had been silently and surely going
on ever since the time of Queen Elizabeth. It made a strong
sensation at the time, and even now, whoever would strike a blow
for the cause of Cathedral music, (which in Professor
Taylor’s opinion is the salt which can alone save the
musical taste of the people from corruption) will find the best
weapons ready to his hand contained in this little volume.
“Professor Taylor, who had been long a widower, died
(March 12th, 1863,) with the utmost tranquillity, at his house at
Brentwood. He had three children, all of whom survive him;
a son, Mr. John Edward Taylor, who was with him in his last
moments, and two daughters, one of whom is married and lives in
Germany, her sister living with her.
“We believe that Mr. Taylor left injunctions that his
manuscripts should not be published, which is surely to be
regretted. If his rare and valuable musical library, the
acquisition of which was the labour of a life, should be sold, we
trust that it will not go piecemeal to the hoards of individual
collectors, but be bought for the use of Gresham College and its
future musical professors.”
The compiler of this history had some long interviews with
Professor Taylor when he last visited Norwich in 1857, and he
then stated that he had large collections of music, and a large
number of lectures on the music of every period. He
delivered a very splendid lecture on the music of the Elizabethan
age, in
aid of the funds of the Free Library, before a large audience, in
the Lecture Hall, St. Andrew’s.
The Rev. Mark Wilks, who lived in the last, and in the early
part of the present century, was a very remarkable character as a
politician and a preacher. From his biography, written by
his daughter and published in 1821, we derive the following
particulars. He was the son of a subordinate officer in the
army, and was born at Gibraltar on February 5th, 1748. When
his father and family returned to England they lived at
Birmingham, where young Mark was brought up to a trade, and where
he became an itinerant Baptist preacher, without any
chapel. The Countess of Huntingdon heard of his exertions,
and invited him to her college at Trevecca, to which he removed
in 1775, and studied there for a year. In 1776 the Countess
appointed him to be minister of the Tabernacle in Norwich, which
became the scene of his most continued and concentrated
exertions. The first sermon he preached here was on a
Sunday evening to a crowded congregation, and he made a great
impression. He preached in the same pulpit that Whitfield
once occupied, and the simplicity of the new minister’s
appearance, and the negligence of his exterior, surpassed that of
the apostle of Calvinism. His long hair fell carelessly
over his shoulders; his meagre person and ruddy countenance gave
him at mature age the aspect of youth. The whole of his demeanour
was illuminated by the fire of affectionate zeal, and by an
earnestness of manner, evincing that he was honest in the sacred
cause of truth. From this time he continued his ministry
till 1778, when in the spring of that year he married Susannah
Jackson of Norwich. This was an event which he ever justly
estimated as the happiest of his life, but it severed his
connexion with the patroness of the Tabernacle. Her rule
was to dismiss the students of her college on their
marriage. The Countess of Huntingdon regretted the
separation and recommended him to several destitute
congregations, none of which, however, were then suited to his
views.
After travelling about for some time in Wiltshire, where he
preached in several chapels, he returned to Norwich, and on
January 1st, 1780, his new meeting place was opened, and he
became a pastor under the denomination of Calvinistic Methodist,
without the customary form of ordination. During the
interval which elapsed between his return to Norwich and his
establishment as a Baptist minister, his congregation rapidly
increased, and continued to increase from 1780 till 1788.
He lived in retirement, and performed with satisfaction and
marked punctuality the duties of his ministry. His
congregation was formed into a regular Baptist church in May,
1788, and it remained so all his life. On this change many
of his former supporters left him, so that his income was
reduced. He therefore took a farm in the neighbourhood of
Norwich, and commenced farming on an extensive scale.
Employment or poverty was his only alternative, and he
followed the example of the apostle Paul by supporting
himself.
We now approach a period in his life in which he distinguished
himself not only as a pastor, but also as a citizen and patriot;
for in the year 1790 commenced those great events in France which
laid the foundation of the long war between this country and that
unfortunate empire, a war disastrous to both. On July 14th,
1791, Mr. Wilks preached two eloquent discourses to commemorate
the leading features of the first French Revolution, before
crowded congregations, composed of the most influential persons
in the city and its neighbourhood. The propriety of such
discourses from the pulpit may be doubted, but they caused great
excitement, as the preacher defended the revolution, which was
then viewed with terror by many people. We shall notice
this, however, more at length in the political part of our
narrative, in which we shall have to speak of the very active
part which Mr. Wilks took in political affairs both in the city
and county. That Mr. Wilks was a rather violent partisan,
and more of a Radical than a Whig, will appear by an extract from
his biography, respecting a county election.
“When the Honourable William Wyndham first
offered himself as a candidate for the county of Norfolk, he came
in the character of a Whig, and a professed friend of civil and
religious liberty. Mr. Wilks then warmly supported him, and
to his exertions Mr. Wyndham attributed his success. But
the revolution in France effected a strange change in the
principles of Mr. Wyndham; and on his second appearance as
candidate for Norfolk, he presented himself in the character of a
‘war minister,’ and the enthusiastic abettor of the
most disgraceful and perilous measures ever pursued by weak and
wicked men. Instead, therefore, of receiving support, he
met with the most determined opposition from those who had been
before his active friends. As Mr. Wilks on his former
election had supported him by the most vigorous exertions, he now
appeared foremost in the ranks of his opponents; and Mr. Wyndham
regarded him with fear and jealousy. The following anecdote
will show with what gratitude he returned the former services of
him whom he had called his friend. One morning, as a very
intimate friend of Mr. Wilks was passing by the house of a poor
man, he was unexpectedly invited in, and was informed by the man
that his wife had just found an open letter, the contents of
which were of the greatest importance to Mr. Wilks. It
indeed proved so. It was a letter from Mr. Wyndham to one
of his friends at Norwich, desiring him to be most vigilant in
watching the movements and expressions of Mr. Wilks; and if at
any time he uttered anything which might be made to appear
treasonable, to make him acquainted with it, assuring him that he
would take the most prompt and severe means for his
conviction. No sooner had Mr. Wilks read this letter than
he hastened with it to the printer’s, and in a few hours
the perfidy of Mr. Wyndham was publicly known in every part of
the city, and the original letter returned to its proprietor, to
his inexpressible dismay and confusion. The family and
friends of Mr. Wilks regarded this circumstance as an
interposition of a watchful Providence. But for this
circumstance a few days might have seen him the inmate of a
dungeon, and his life devoted, through the incautiousness of a
sentence, to the treachery of an enemy. This supposition
may appear less improbable when it is known, that at that time
some who had been less active and less violent than himself, had
been snatched from their families during the stillness of the
midnight hour, and had been conveyed to prison without any form
or reason assigned to them. This attempt upon the liberty,
and perhaps the life, of Mr. Wilks had the beneficial effect of
making him more vigilant over his words, and more cautious,
although not less bold and decisive in all his proceedings.
Yet his wife and friends entertained so great an anxiety for his
safety, that they strongly importuned him to seek an asylum under
the calmer skies of America, but he resisted their
importunities.
“It must be mentioned, as an instance of the generosity
of Mr. Wilks’ disposition, as well as a proof that his
political conduct originated in genuine principles of patriotism,
that when Mr. Wyndham again returned as a candidate for Norfolk
as conjoint supporter of the Whig interest in union with Mr.
Coke, Mr. Wilks never suffered the recollection of his private
wrongs to interfere with the principles that Mr. Wyndham had come
forward to maintain, but supported him with the same firmness and
ardour as he had ever done.
“But it is necessary to return to those incidents of his
life, the order of which has been neglected in pursuing the chain
of his political character, and which he considered of far
greater importance than any other. In the year 1792, the
Baptist Missionary Society was established by Carey, Fuller,
Pearce, and Ryland. Those incomparable men, in a small room
at Kettering, planted the germ of that tree which has since
spread its branches into the remotest corners of the earth.
The Indian Banyan is famed for its fertility; it is planted, it
grows, and its branches descending, strike root, and reproduce
another tree; its branches again descend, and produce another
tree; trees succeed in endless multiplication, till a far and
wide-spreading beauteous forest is formed from the vast trunk of
what was once a single plant. In India flourishes a moral
Banyan; it has been planted by the hand of a Carey, a Fuller, a
Pearce, a Ryland, and a Wilks; watered and cultivated by their
labours and their prayers, its roots have taken a deeper and
deeper root, and the day is approaching when the sultry clime of
India shall be covered by its shadows, cheered by its verdant
foliage, and refreshed by its heavenly fruits.
“It is well known that Mr. Wilks’ devotion to the
missionary cause was early and invincible. Whether he was
present at its establishment is rather doubtful; but from its
commencement he regarded it as the dawn of happiness to the
world, and put into action all his powers and his influence in
promoting so benevolent an end. But it was not in the
mission alone that he evinced his benevolence and his
disinterestedness. Nine years had elapsed since he first
commenced farming, and during that time and the succeeding year
he preached regularly, and fulfilled all the duties incumbent on
his station, without receiving for his services the smallest
remuneration. Whether in this instance he acted in all
respects with prudence has frequently been doubted by himself as
well as his friends. His conduct originated in feelings of
the purest benevolence, although perhaps it lost its excellence
in losing its justice.”
In the year 1797 Mr. Wilks was obliged to quit his farm, the
lease of which had expired. He immediately engaged another
at Aldborough, a village near Harleston in Suffolk, and went
there to reside with his family in March, 1797. The
distance of that place was seventeen miles from Norwich; yet
although he was necessarily obliged to omit the week-day preaching,
he never once neglected the regular performance of his pastoral
duties on Sunday. In every kind of weather he constantly
travelled thirty-four miles every Sunday to preach to a
congregation from whom he received no remuneration. This
course of exertion, however, could not be long continued.
With the engagements of his farm, which were at this time very
considerable, and the care attendant on a large family of twelve
children, he found it was necessary either to give up his church
or to leave his farm. Though his farm was a very profitable
one, he did not hesitate which course to pursue; and he took
another farm at Cossey, near Norwich, where he continued for some
time, and where he often preached to the people in the
village.
In March, 1802, he purchased a farm at the village of
Sprowston, only two miles from Norwich. Here he enjoyed the
society of his friends in the city, and in every respect his own
comfort and that of his family were improved by this
removal. His congregation increased, and the chapel in
which he preached became too small for all who wished to attend
his ministry. His friends were therefore desirous of
erecting a more commodious one, and purchased a piece of ground
for its erection. In September, 1812, he laid the first
stone, and Mr. Andrew Fuller preached on the occasion.
In 1814, he went on a begging tour for his meeting house, and
travelled through the counties of Norfolk, Suffolk, Essex, and
Cambridgeshire, and thence to London. In six weeks he
collected about £400, but his exertions brought on a
serious illness. After his return his family scarcely hoped for
his recovery. On May 4th, 1814, the new meeting house, in
St. Clement’s, Norwich, was opened by Mr. M. Wilks of
London, and Mr. A. Fuller. The pastor was present, but in a
very feeble state of health. He recovered slowly in a few
weeks, and when his health was sufficiently restored, he made
another effort to diminish the debt on the new chapel.
Though he frequently considered himself to be in a dying state,
yet at every interval of ease he pursued his work with
unremitting ardour. It is unnecessary to relate all the
details of the few latter years of his life; the long journeys he
took in the years 1815 and 1816, were a proof of the generosity
of his heart. His last two years he spent in retirement,
yet in the performance of his ministerial duties; and ever ready
to advance the interests of his church, of his family, and of
mankind.
He was ill only four days previous to his death, which took
place on February 5th, 1819. When it was publicly known in
the city that he was no more, hundreds of people went to his
house to take a last look of him whom living they had so much
loved and respected. And the bitter tears of his surviving
relatives, the deep affliction of his friends, and the sorrow of
mourning multitudes, bore a sad testimony to his worth as a
husband, a father, a friend, a minister, a neighbour, and a
christian.
He died on his birthday, when he had attained the age of
seventy-one. His much valued friend, the Rev. W. Hull of
Norwich, spoke at his interment to a large assembly of sincere
mourners, and to a great concourse of spectators. The
Rev. Mark Wilks of London, his nephew, preached a funeral sermon
on Sunday, February 14th, before a large congregation. The
deceased was buried under the pulpit where he had preached the
gospel for forty years. Of his family of twelve children,
including his four sons, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, none of
them and none of their descendants now live in Norwich.
The Rev. John Alexander was the pastor of the Independent
Congregation in Prince’s Street for a period of fifty
years. He was much beloved by all who knew him for his
kindly disposition and genuine piety. Bishop Stanley often
spoke of him in terms of the highest commendation as a christian
minister. He took an active interest in all the
philanthropic and educational movements of the district, and was
for some time the Chairman of the Board of Management of the
Norfolk and Norwich Hospital. After his death, on July
31st, 1868, a short memoir of him appeared in the Norfolk
News; and this memoir contained nearly the whole history of
Prince’s Street Chapel in this city. We give the
following extracts:—
“Mr. Alexander was born at Lancaster in
1792. Of his father, the Rev. William Alexander, our
deceased friend published an interesting Memoir; and, as
showing his own appreciation of the excellencies of his parents,
he placed on the title page these lines of
Cowper’s:—
‘My boast is, not that I deduce my birth
From loins enthroned, and rulers of the earth;
But higher far my proud pretensions rise,
The son of parents passed into the skies.’
In the same volume we find him thus writing in reference to
his early days:—‘The reader will, I trust, perceive
that our domestic discipline, union, and affection, together with
the sweet influences of religion, rendered us a happy
family. The recollections and the love of home, too, and
our reverence for holy parents, became a shield of protection to
us, and “a way of escape” in the day of
evil.’ With an atmosphere like this surrounding his
childhood, we wonder not that he became in early life the subject
of deep religious convictions. In 1807 he entered a large
commercial establishment connected with a household in which
‘the most beautiful domestic order was combined with
everything that was pure and lovely in religion.’
This privilege was greatly prized by him, and he ever cherished a
grateful sense of the goodness of God in placing him there.
During this period he attended the ministry of the Rev. P. S.
Charrier of Liverpool, and joined the church under his
care. For some time he had cherished a desire, and
entertained a hope, in reference to the christian ministry, which
was now soon to be realised.
“The celebrated Dr. Edward Williams, one of the tutors
at Rotherham College, happened just then to visit Liverpool, and
unexpectedly spoke to him on the subject, offering him the
advantages of the institution over which he presided. This
incident naturally made a deep impression on his mind, and led
him very seriously and prayerfully to consider the matter.
Of course, he lost no time in communicating his thoughts to his
father, who urged on him the greatest caution, saying, ‘God
forbid you should take it up, except in compliance with the
will of God.’ Nothing daunted, however, by the
somewhat discouraging aspect of the ministry set before him in
his father’s letters, he intimated to him, in reply to his
inquiries, that he retained an unalterable ‘determination
to give himself to the work, believing he had been called of God
to it;’ and in 1814 he was admitted as a student into
Hoxton College. Here the amiable qualities which
distinguished him all through life soon endeared him to every
fellow-student, and one still surviving speaks of hours spent
with him as ‘the happiest, holiest, and most profitable
spent under the college roof.’
“In his Thirty Years’ History of the Church and
Congregation in Prince’s Street Chapel, he gives us an
account of his first visit to and subsequent residence in this
city. From that source we learn that early in the year 1817
he received an invitation to preach for a few Sabbaths in the
Tabernacle, and that on Friday, April 4th, 1817, (the day on
which a fatal steam-packet catastrophe occurred by which many
lives were lost), he entered Norwich. On the following
Sunday evening he preached from the text, ‘Therefore be ye
also ready; for in such an hour as ye think not, the Son of Man
cometh.’ The place was crowded; and, says he,
‘The Lord stood by me and strengthened me.’ At
the expiration of three Sabbaths he returned to London, promising
to visit Norwich again and preach during the whole of the
Midsummer vacation. He resumed his labours with very great
encouragement at the Tabernacle on July 6th; and some legal
difficulty occurring as to the power of appointing the minister,
he consented, with the approbation of his tutors, to continue
them till the disputed point was settled, which was not till the
following December. The legal decision was such as
necessitated him to give notice the very day it arrived, that in
the evening he should preach his last sermon in the Tabernacle. On
that occasion he chose as his text, words which the people
believed to have been divinely suggested to his mind,
‘Weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the
morning.’ That text, it was often afterwards
remarked, built the new chapel. The prospect, however, of
the toil connected with the establishment of a new church and
congregation, and the building of a chapel, was such that he
shrank from it, and took his place in the coach to return to
London on his way to Kidderminster, where he had been requested
to supply, with a view to settlement.
“But so deep was the impression his services had
produced, and so warm the interest and affection created, that
the people would not part from him. On the day of his
departure, a deputation waited on him and pressed on him an
invitation to become their minister with such affectionate
earnestness, that, says he ‘I felt the appeal to be
irresistible, and I promised to lay the whole matter before my
tutor and friends, and to make it the subject of serious and
prayerful re-consideration.’ The result was that he
returned, and for some time preached in the Lancasterian
School-room. At length the site on which Prince’s
Street Chapel now stands was purchased, and the foundation stone
laid on the 16th of March, 1819. It was opened on December
1st in the same year, and thenceforward, for the space of about
five and forty years, it continued to be the scene of the living
and life-quickening ministry of one whose ‘praise is in all
the churches.’ Of the characteristics of Mr.
Alexander’s preaching this is not the place to speak beyond
saying it was truly evangelical and eminently successful.
But he was not the preacher only. He was the faithful
pastor, the unswerving friend, and the cheerful companion as
well. Hence in times of sorrow or of joy he was a welcome
guest, either in the family meeting or at more social
gatherings. He carried summer and sunshine with him into
every circle, and never left any without leaving a longing in
every heart, young and old, for the next visit. When he
crossed the threshold, the young loved to caress and to be
caressed by him, whilst to the others the cares of life seemed
lessened, and the burden lightened, as he spoke to them a few
words of loving sympathy or wise counsel, and left them with his
soft tones of benediction treasured in their hearts and vibrating
on their ears.
“Time rolled on, ever finding him at his work, till
thirty years had gone, when his friends gathered round him in St.
Andrew’s Hall to testify their high appreciation of his
excellencies, and their deep and strong affection for him as
their pastor and their friend. On that occasion it was the
desire of the people to present a purse to him as a substantial
token of their esteem, but there being at that time a debt of
£400 remaining on the chapel, he, with that characteristic
unselfishness which ever marked him, urgently requested that they
would abandon the purse, but remove the debt. But it must
not be supposed that Mr. Alexander’s energies were confined
to the cause of Christ at Prince’s Street Chapel, or that
the members of his church and congregation were allowed to claim
him as exclusively belonging to them. This was seen when
ten years more of active service had passed, and troops of
admirers, from far and near, flocked again to St. Andrew’s
Hall to do him honour. On that occasion the Mayor (J. G.
Johnson, Esq.,) represented the city, and the Rev. S. Titlow the
Church of England, in most eulogistic speeches. The Baptist
Churches of the county presented him with an address, whilst
brethren of his own denomination, and others, lay and
ministerial, seemed to vie with one another in magnifying
‘the grace of God’ in him. The desire
entertained ten years before was now carried into effect, and a
purse, with an elegant skeleton timepiece, and a memorial
engrossed on vellum and framed, were presented to him, and a gold
watch and chain to Mrs. Alexander. The timepiece bore the
following inscription:—
Presented to the Rev. John Alexander, together with a purse of
500 sovereigns, on his commencing the fortieth year of his
ministry in Norwich, by the members of his congregation and
numerous other friends, as a memorial of Christian esteem and
love.—Norwich, June 3rd, 1856.
From that time the infirmities of age, and the claims of a
large congregation, led him to desire help, which was secured for
him in the person of an assistant minister. With that help
he happily and zealously worked on in his Master’s service
through another decade of years, when once more the old Gothic
hall resounded with his praises and witnessed another outburst of
affectionate congratulation. Having lived to see the
jubilee of his ministry, he now resigned the pastoral office, and
was presented with an annuity of £200 and a magnificent
epergne, on which a suitable inscription was engraved. With
trembling emotion the venerable man read his reply and
acknowledgment, in which, after recording the goodness of God and
the kindness of his friends through the long period of fifty
years, he stated that during his pastorate more than a thousand
members had been added to the church, two chapels had been added
to the one in Prince’s Street, four Sunday Schools had been
raised and supplied with a hundred teachers and with nearly a
thousand children, and eight members of the church had become
ministers of the Gospel.
“Seldom is it the lot of the most favoured ministers
thus to be blessed and made a blessing. We shall not
attempt to describe what Mr. Alexander was in the pulpit, on
the platform, in the committee room, or from the press, nor how
he discharged his duties as chairman of ‘The Congregational
Union of England and Wales,’ and secretary of ‘The
Association for the Spread of the Gospel in the
County.’ Much less shall we venture a word on his
private or domestic life. We hope another and abler pen
will pourtray his character more fully, and hence we content
ourselves by adding words written by a friend, ‘His life is
his eulogy.’ It was a holy life, a useful life, an
honourable life, a happy life.
“The last sermon Mr. Alexander preached was delivered in
Prince’s Street Chapel on April 22nd, 1866, from 2
Cor. ii. 14–17. The last time that he spoke in
St. Andrew’s Hall was a few months before his death, on the
occasion of the mayor’s invitation to the Sunday school
teachers, and the last public religious service he attended was
in the Old Meeting House on Sunday evening, July 19th, 1868,
where his presence was ever as welcome as in his own chapel.
“Of his history since his retirement into private life,
little only can be said. At first the ease and seeming
uselessness imposed on him by the infirmities of age had a
depressing influence on his mind, but latterly this gave place to
his wonted calm confidence in God, and his usual joyousness of
heart. Occasionally, to the grief of his friends, the
decline of his mental powers was painfully visible, but this was
often relieved by his still sparkling and felicitous utterances,
and his fervent devotional exercises.
“Some lines written in our album so recently as last
November will, perhaps, best indicate the state of his mind, and
the theme on which it delighted to dwell:—
Amidst the fragrance richly shed,
And beauty blooming in the bowers,
The willow bends its mournful head,
And seems to weep among the flowers.
And so in human life we find,
How bright soever it appears,
That grief is rooted in the mind,
And smiles are mingled with its tears.
But there’s a garden in the sky
Where mourning willows cannot grow,
Where tears are wiped from every eye,
And streams of joy unmingled flow.
“And now the time drew nigh that he must die. For
only a few days he was withdrawn from the outer world.
During that time it was very evident that constant intercourse
was being carried on with heaven. On asking him, two days
prior to his death, if the Saviour he had so long and faithfully
preached to others was now near and precious to himself, he
replied, ‘Oh, what should I do without Him!’
The day before his departure he was much in prayer. His
family were all remembered before God, as were also the servants
of the household. And very touching were the words in which
he sought a blessing on the ministers of the city, and on their
work, with whom he had lived in closest and loving
fellowship. And so he passed away, spending his last hours,
as he had spent his life, in blessing others.
“On Tuesday, the 4th of August, he was carried to his
grave amid the lamentations of a vast concourse of his
fellow-citizens, and friends from the country, who had known him
and esteemed him very highly in love for his works’
sake. The funeral service at the grave was conducted by the
Revs. G. Gould, J. Hallett, P. Colborne, and G. S. Barrett, B.A.;
but gathered there were clergymen and ministers of every denomination, as
well as laymen of all classes, from the mayor to the humblest
artisan.
“And so has passed away from our midst, full of days and
honours, one, whom it was a privilege to have known, and an
impossibility not to have loved. His Christian catholicity,
his large-hearted charity, his generous liberality, his
untarnished reputation, and his fidelity to Christian truth,
together with other virtues that adorned his long life, constrain
us to thank God for having given him to Norwich, and, now that He
has taken him to Himself, constrain us to say ‘Let me die
the death of the righteous, and let my last end be like
his!’”
The funeral sermon was preached by the Rev. John Stoughton, of
London, before a large congregation in St. Andrew’s
Hall.
The members of the Gurney family, from an early period, have
been distinguished by their station, wealth, and intelligence,
both in Norfolk and Norwich. Memoirs of Joseph John Gurney,
with selections from his journal and correspondence, were edited
by Joseph Bevan Braithwaite, and published by Mr. Fletcher of
this city. From these memoirs we derive the following
interesting details respecting the family, and the Society of
Friends in Norwich.
“The family of Gurney or Gournay is said to
have sprung from a house of Norman barons, who followed William
the Conqueror into England and obtained a large estate in this
country, chiefly in the county of Norfolk. From them descended a
long line of country gentlemen, who maintained themselves at
Harpley, and West Barsham, in this county, for many generations,
and from a very early period had one of their residences in this
city. The last of these dying without male issue, about the
commencement of the reign of Charles II., the old family estates
at that period became dispersed amongst females. The name
of Gurney was, however, honourably continued through a descendant
of one of the younger sons of an earlier generation, John Gurney,
the ancestor of the present family. He was born in the year
1655, and notwithstanding his family connections, commenced life
in Norwich in somewhat straitened circumstances. Devoting
himself in his youth to the cause of religion, we find him in the
year 1678, at the age of twenty-three, already connected with the
oppressed, persecuted Quakers.
“The family of John Gurney appear previously to have had
some connexion with the Puritans. Henry Gurney, indeed, of
West Barsham, the representative of the family in the early part
of the 17th century, had a distaste for Puritanism, if, at least,
we are to judge from the insertion in his will (proved in 1623)
of a special charge to his younger son, ‘That none hould
any fantisticall or erroneous opinions, so adjudged by our bishop
or civill lawes.’ But Edmund Gurney, rector of
Harpley, one of these younger sons, who was a person of
influence, became known as a zealous Puritan; he declined wearing
the surplice, and was probably among those who took the covenant
in 1643. After him John Gurney successively named two of
his children. Others of his connexions were also inclined
to Puritanism, and some of them, like himself, joined the Society
of Friends. In the case of the early Friends generally,
their ultimate settlement in those gospel principles by which
they became distinguished from others, was preceded by a state of
much religious awakening and earnest seeking after God, in which they
‘searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were
so.’
“Through what course of experience John Gurney arrived
at his conviction, the scanty materials of his history do not
inform us. Let it suffice us to know that what he became
convinced of, was precious to him as the truth, and that for it
he was prepared to suffer. On the 29th of the ninth month
(O. S.), 1682, (so the records of the Friends in Norwich inform
us,) ‘Friends being kept out of their meeting house, met
together in the street to wait upon the Lord,’ and, being
there, John Gurney and another Friend, were violently pulled out
from among the rest, as if they had been malefactors, and carried
before a justice of the peace, by whom, as they declined giving,
on such an account, the required bail, they were committed until
the next quarter sessions. In the following year, 1683, he
was again imprisoned, for refusing to take an oath, and continued
in prison, under successive recommitments, nearly three
years. He died in the year 1721, having greatly prospered
in his temporal concerns; and, what is far more important,
having, according to the testimony of those who knew him, taken
particular care in the religious education of all his children,
and continued faithful to the end.
“His two elder sons, John and Joseph, were both men of
marked character. John was gifted with much natural
eloquence, and obtained considerable reputation by the spirit and
ability with which he successfully defended the Norwich trade,
before a committee of the House of Lords, against some
apprehended encroachments. He subsequently received from
Sir Robert Walpole the offer of a seat in parliament, which,
however, he declined as inconsistent with his religious
principles in the then state of the law. Religion had early
taken possession of his heart, and about the 22nd year of his
age, in obedience to the call of apprehended duty, he had yielded
himself to the work of the public ministry of the gospel, in
which service he laboured diligently for many years; neither the
temptation of prosperity nor the kindness and esteem of great men
of this world, being, in the simple and forcible language of the
memorial respecting him, ‘permitted to separate him from
that truth which the Lord had eminently convinced him
of.’
“Besides numerous other descendants, he was the
grandfather of Martha Birkbeck, whose daughter Jane became the
first wife of Joseph John Gurney. Joseph Gurney, his
younger brother, who, towards the close of his life, fixed his
residence at Keswick, near Norwich, also became a valued minister
of the gospel among Friends. His christian profession was
eminently adorned by a life of humility, benevolence, and
moderation. He died in the year 1750, after a suffering
illness which he bore with exemplary resignation, giving a final
evidence of the truth of what he then expressed that it had been
‘the business of his whole life to be prepared for such a
time!’
“His eldest son, John Gurney, was a man of great
activity and energy, and notwithstanding his extensive
engagements in business, devoted much of his time to the
interests of his own religious society, to the principles of
which he was warmly attached. In the midst of a course of
remarkable temporal prosperity, it is instructive to observe the
fears which he expresses in one of his private memoranda, lest
his increasing opulence should lead away his children from those
religious habits and associations in which they had been
educated. He left three sons, all of whom married and
settled near Norwich. Richard Gurney the eldest, on his
father’s decease, in 1770, became the occupant of the
family residence at Keswick. John Gurney, the father of J. J.
Gurney, had previously to the birth of the latter settled at
Earlham. Joseph Gurney, the youngest, resided at Lakenham
Grove. The three families were naturally much associated,
and exercised an important influence upon each other. At a
later period especially, the consistency with which Joseph
Gurney, of The Grove, was enabled to maintain his position as a
Friend, and as a christian minister, rendered his influence
peculiarly valuable.”
John Gurney, of Earlham, is eulogised highly by the editor of
these memoirs as generous, ardent, and warm-hearted, abounding in
kindness to all, uniting very remarkable activity, both in public
and private business, with an acute intellect and extensive
information. His wife was Catherine Bell, a daughter of
Daniel Bell of Stamford Hill, near London, her mother being a
granddaughter of Robert Barclay, the well-known author of the
“Apology.” She is described as a woman of very
superior mind as well as personal charms, and as a serious
christian and decided Friend. She died in the autumn of
1792, leaving her sorrowing husband the widowed parent of eleven
children. The following list of the names may be found
useful:—
Catherine died unmarried, 1850.
Rachel died unmarried, 1827.
Elizabeth, married in 1800 to Joseph Fry, of London, became
the celebrated Mrs. Fry, who died in 1845.
John died in 1814.
Richenda married in 1816 to Francis Cunningham, who died in
1855.
Hannah married in 1807 to Thomas Fowell Buxton.
Louisa, married in 1806 to Samuel Hoare, died in 1836.
Priscilla died unmarried, 1821.
Samuel, who died in 1856.
Joseph John, who died in 1847.
Daniel, still living.
Joseph John Gurney, Esq.
Among the eminent citizens of this century, none will take a
higher place than the late J. J. Gurney, Esq., the well-known
philanthropist. He was born at Earlham Hall on August 8th,
1788. That hall was one of the happiest homes in
England. It was also the birth-place of Mrs. Elizabeth Fry,
sister of J. J. Gurney, and almost as celebrated as her
brother. Here they were both trained with religious care,
and passed their days of childhood and youth in happiness and
peace. In after life they were associated together in works
of benevolence, and the brother often aided his sister in many of
her schemes for improving prison discipline.
In 1803, soon after he had completed his 15th year, Joseph
John was sent to Oxford with his cousin Gurney Barclay to pursue
his studies under the care of John Rogers, a private tutor.
Young J. J. Gurney continued at Oxford two years, with the
exception of the vacations, which he spent mostly at home.
His tutor, though resident at Oxford, was not in that character
connected with the university or with any of the colleges.
The student became an excellent classical and oriental scholar,
and ultimately the author of several valuable religious works,
such as “Essays on Christianity,” “Thoughts on
Habit and Discipline.” He was scarcely seventeen when, in
August, 1805, he was removed from the care of John Rogers.
He had become attached to his tutor and to his studies, and he
quitted the place with regret, but there was brightness in the
thought of settling at home. The bank in which his father
was a partner had been established in Norwich in the year
1770. After that time the concern was considerably extended
with branch banks at Lynn, Fakenham, Yarmouth, and other
places. His elder brother, John, had been placed in the
establishment at Lynn, and his brother Samuel had been sent up to
London, where he had become the head of a district concern; so
that circumstances had prepared the way for that which J. J.
Gurney himself had desired—a place in the bank at
Norwich. Here in the enjoyment of daily communication with
his father, and a home at Earlham with his sisters, the ensuing
three years of his life passed in peace and joy. In the
year 1806, he accompanied his father and a large family party in
a tour to the English lakes and through Scotland. On their
return, J. J. Gurney was regular in his attendance at the bank,
but he found time for study at home, and he carefully read
ancient historians in the original languages. Gradually,
however, his attention became unceasingly directed to biblical
literature, which continued for some years to absorb much of his
leisure. His habits of study were eminently methodical,
exemplifying his favourite maxim, which he was afterwards
accustomed strongly to inculcate upon his young friends,
“Be a whole man to one thing at a time.” His position and tastes introduced
him to the highly-cultivated society, for which Norwich was at
the time remarkable, at the house of his cousin Hudson Gurney,
where he was accustomed to meet many persons who were eminent for
their parts and learning. He had early become a favourite
with Dr. Bathurst, then Bishop of Norwich, and their intercourse
gradually ripened into a warm friendship, which was maintained
unbroken till that prelate’s decease, in 1837, at the very
advanced age of ninety-three. Young J. J. Gurney was but
just twenty-one when, as one of his father’s executors and
representative at Earlham, and as a partner in the bank, very
grave responsibilities devolved upon him. However, he
continued to pursue his studies with ardour, and he made his
first essay as an author in an article published in the
Classical Journal on September 9th, 1810, under the title
of “A Critical Notice of Sir William Drummond’s
Dissertations on the Herculanesia.” After this effort
his mind became increasingly drawn towards the principles of the
Society of Friends, and many of his allusions to his feelings, in
his autobiography, are peculiarly interesting and instructive,
indicating the spiritual phase of his mind. The example of
his sister, Elizabeth Fry, as well as of his sister Priscilla,
who like her, had become a decided Friend and a preacher of the
gospel, strengthened his convictions; but the influence of other
members of the family who resided at Earlham, as well as of many
other estimable persons, tended in an opposite direction.
The editor of the Memoirs, already referred to, says:—
“Whilst Joseph John Gurney’s religious
convictions were thus gradually drawing him into a narrower path
in connection with the Society of Friends, his heart was becoming
increasingly enlarged in Christian concern for the welfare of
others. He had already warmly interested himself in the
formation of a Lancasterian School in Norwich, an institution
which long continued to have his effective support. The
establishment of an auxiliary Bible Society in this city, was an
object into which he now entered with youthful ardour. The
general meeting for its formation was held on the 11th of the 9th
month, 1811.”
The philanthropist was married to Jane Birkbeck on October
10th, 1817, in his 29th year, and it appears to have been a very
happy marriage. The event took place at Wells Meeting, and,
after a short sojourn at Hunstanton, the newly-married couple
travelled to their home at Earlham, where they received the
visits of many friends, who were most hospitably
entertained. After his marriage, J. J. Gurney continued at
Earlham; and the hall, where his father had resided, and in which
he himself lived from his birth, was his settled residence.
“To this place (with its lovely lawn nested
among large trees) he was strongly attached all his life.
And they who knew him there can still picture him in his study
among his books, or in his drawing-room among his friends, his
countenance beaming with love and intelligence, the life of the
whole circle; or in his garden amongst his flowers, with his
Greek Testament in his hand, still drawing from the books
‘of nature and of grace’ that lay open before him,
new motives to raise the heart to the Author of all his
blessings.
“Placed by circumstances, though not the elder
brother, in the position which his father had occupied in Norfolk
as Master of Earlham, and a partner in the bank, it was his
delight, as far as possible, to continue Earlham as the family
house. Even after his marriage, his sisters, Catherine,
Rachel, and Priscilla, continued to live with him, occupying
their own apartments, and it was the custom of the other members
of the family frequently to meet there as under a common roof. *
* * Up to the period of his brother John’s decease, and for
some time afterwards, it was the habit of his brothers and
himself, with their brothers-in-law, Thomas Fowell Buxton and
Samuel Hoare, to improve these occasions by a mutual impartial
examination of their conduct, in which each with brotherly
openness stated what he conceived to be the brother’s
faults. Happy indeed was such an intercourse between such
minds. * * * Besides this, to him, delightful band of brothers
and sisters, his house was, as must have been already apparent to
the reader, freely opened to a large circle.
“Whilst every year strengthened his conviction of the
soundness and importance of the christian principles which he
professed, he rejoiced in that liberty wherewith Christ had made
him free to embrace as brethren all those in whom he thought he
could discern traces of his heavenly image.
“Towards the close of the year (1817) in company with
his wife, his brother Samuel Gurney, his brother and sister
Buxton, and Francis and Richenda Cunningham, he took a short tour
upon the continent of Europe, their principal objects being to
establish a branch Bible Society in Paris, and to procure
information as to the systems of prison discipline adopted in the
jails of Antwerp and Ghent. Having accomplished their
objects, they returned home after an absence of about a
month.”
Soon
afterwards J. J. Gurney began to preach at meetings of the
Friends in Norwich and elsewhere.
“Early in the year 1818, private business
called him to London. His sister, Elizabeth Fry, had
previously entered upon her important labours for the benefit of
the prisoners in Newgate, and for the improvement of prison
discipline generally. Joseph John Gurney warmly entered
into his sister’s views, and accompanied her to the
committee of the House of Commons on the occasion of giving her
evidence, and afterwards to Lord Sidmouth, then Secretary of
State for the Home Department.
“His visit to London and the pamphlet on Prison
Discipline, soon afterward published by his brother-in-law,
Thomas Fowell Buxton, tended to deepen in his own mind a sense of
the importance of that subject, and an opportunity soon occurred
for endeavouring to influence the authorities at Norwich to some
exertion respecting it. The mayor and corporation, attended
by the sheriffs and other citizens, whilst perambulating the
boundaries of the county of the city, were by his desire invited
to partake of refreshment in passing by the hall at
Earlham. Besides those immediately connected with the
magistracy many others assembled, the whole company consisting of
about 800 persons. On this occasion, Joseph John Gurney, in
an address to the mayor and corporation, urged the erection of a
new jail, and its establishment on better principles, with a view
to the employment of the prisoners, and the improvement of their
morals; enforcing his appeal by a reference to the extraordinary
change that had then recently taken place in Newgate, through the
exertions of a committee of ladies, and concluding by offering a
donation of £100 towards the object. The effort was
not without fruit, though the result was not immediately
apparent.”
The
editor of his Memoirs proceeds:—
“In the 8th and 9th month of this year
(1818), in company with his wife, his sister Elizabeth Fry, and
one of her daughters, he took a journey into Scotland, visiting
many of the prisons both there and in the north of England,
besides attending many of the meetings of Friends. On this
occasion, in conformity with the christian order established in
the Society of Friends, he was furnished with a minute or
testimonial expressing the concurrence of his Friends of his own
‘Monthly Meeting’ in his prospects of religious
service.”
We have now to view the philanthropist not only in the varied
relations of private life, but also in the very important
character of a christian minister. He gradually became the
most distinguished member of the Society of Friends in all
England, and he often delivered exceedingly impressive discourses
in Norwich and other large towns, preaching the gospel with a
peculiar grace of manner which fascinated every audience.
We have often heard him preach before large congregations of
educated people in the Meeting House at Liverpool, and always
with great effect. His journal is full of details of his
labours in all parts of England, Scotland, and Ireland. He
became a Home Missionary, working hard at his own expense; but we
must confine this brief sketch to his doings here in
Norwich. The death of his beloved wife at Earlham on
October 6th, 1822, put his religious principle to the severest
test, and in his letters he expresses deep sorrow, but he was of
too active a disposition to be long subdued by grief.
During the few months succeeding his loss, he continued mostly at home in
the enjoyment of the society of his sisters, Catherine and
Rachel; his children becoming increasingly the objects of his
tender solicitude. In the mean time, besides attending to
the necessary claims of business, and to the various public
objects that had long shared his interest, he devoted his leisure
to study, finding relief, as he intimates, “Not in the
indulgence of sorrow, but in a diligent attention to the calls of
duty.”
After giving many extracts from his journal, Mr. Braithwaite
continues in reference to the anti-slavery agitation:—
“Retiring for a few days to Cromer Hall, he
found a large and interesting circle. Amongst others, the
late William Wilberforce and Zachary Macaulay were there,
deliberating with his brother-in-law Thomas Fowell Buxton on the
position and prospects of the Anti-Slavery question. It was
the occasion on which the latter appears to have arrived at his
final decision, to accept the responsible post of advocate of the
cause as successor to Wilberforce. In this important
undertaking, and throughout the succeeding struggle, Joseph John
Gurney gave him his warm and efficient encouragement and
support.”
Mr. J. J. Gurney, Mr. Clarkson, Mr. T. F. Buxton, Mr.
Wilberforce, and others, were earnest advocates for the total
abolition of the slave trade and of slavery; and they attended
many public meetings at which they denounced and exposed the
horrid traffic. Ultimately, as we all know, their efforts
were rewarded, by rousing public indignation to such a pitch as
to result in the passing of an act of parliament
emancipating the slaves in the West Indies, at a cost of twenty
millions.
The panic in the monetary and commercial world, and the sudden
run upon the banks in London and the country, have rendered the
winter of 1825–1826 memorable. As a banker, J. J.
Gurney did not escape his share of anxiety, as appears from his
journal, but his firm weathered the storm. Another
circumstance was at this time deeply interesting to his feelings,
namely, his attachment to Mary Fowler, daughter of Rachel Fowler,
a cousin of his late wife. After some correspondence he
made Mary Fowler an offer of marriage, which she accepted.
On July 18th, 1827, they were married at Elm Grove. On this
interesting occasion, he remarks in his journal,—
“Bright, hopeful, and happy was our wedding
day. We dined on the lawn, a large united company, and
rejoiced together, I trust in the Lord. Mary and I left the
party at Elm Grove, in the afternoon, for North Devon.”
They arrived at Linton, and thence proceeded to
Ilfracombe. There they spent the honeymoon, and then the
happy husband brought his second wife home to Earlham, where they
were received with joy. After this he was visited by many
eminent characters at Earlham, including Dr. Chalmers, who stayed
with him several days.
“None can have attentively perused the
foregoing pages” (says the editor of the memoirs)
“without perceiving that one leading feature of Joseph John
Gurneys character was an unweared active
benevolence. Like his sister, Elizabeth Fry, he seemed
continually to live under a deep sense of his responsibility
towards others. A cheerful and bountiful giver, it was not
merely by large pecuniary assistance that he proved his interest
in objects connected with the welfare of his fellow-men: to these
objects he was exemplary in devoting no common share of his time
and personal attention. The steady devotion to the
Anti-slavery and Bible Societies is already before the
reader. In addition to these great and often absorbing
interests, his exertions for the distressed labouring population
of Norwich were unremitting. Year after year, during the
winter, or on any occasion when their distress was aggravated by
want of employment, he was at his post, stirring up his
fellow-citizens to the necessary measures for the alleviation of
their wants. The District Visiting Society, which was
mainly instrumental in originating the Soup Society and the Coal
Society, found in him a steady and effective supporter.
Often would he say that the painful consciousness of the poverty
and suffering of many thousands around him, almost prevented his
enjoyment of the abundant blessings with which he was himself so
richly favoured. On one occasion he expended a considerable
sum in providing the capital for an attempt to supply the poor
weavers and mechanics with employment during a scarcity of
work. But, though like many similar attempts, it failed to
answer the expectation of the promoter, and was abandoned, it
served at least to furnish another proof of the sincerity and
earnestness with which he laboured for their welfare.
“The depressions in trade occasioned by the panic of
1825 will be long remembered. Norwich did not escape its
influence. As a banker, Joseph John Gurney was more than
usually absorbed in his own immediate cares, but his heart at
once turned towards his suffering fellow-citizens.
‘The dreadful distress,’ he writes to a friend,
‘which prevails in the great mass of our once labouring,
now, alas! idle population, has been such as to call forth my
strenuous efforts on their behalf. In this, success has
been mercifully vouchsafed. We have raised £3300 in
five days.’
“One more illustration deserves notice. In the
winter of 1829–30, the manufactures of Norwich were again
greatly depressed. The weavers became unsettled, holding
riotous meetings, and using threatening language against their
employers. The state of things was alarming. J. J.
Gurney felt it to be his duty to use his influence in checking
the spirit of discontent that was rapidly spreading. He
attended one of the very large and tumultuous meetings of the
operatives, and endeavoured to persuade them to desist from their
disorderly proceedings, and quietly to resume their work.
With a view of still further winning them by kindness, he invited
a deputation from those assembled to breakfast at Earlham on the
following morning. Between forty and fifty of them came,
with Dover, a notorious Chartist leader, at their head.
After the usual family reading of the Scriptures, they sat down
to a plentiful repast which had been provided for them in the
large dining room, of which they partook heartily; and their host
afterwards addressed them in a kind, conciliatory manner upon the
subject of wages, and their duty to their employers. The
men conducted themselves in an orderly manner and appeared
grateful for the attention shown them. The scene was not
soon to be forgotten.”
The editor gives some illustrations of the
philanthropist’s benevolent character, by narrating
instances of his visits to prisoners in the Jail, and to
afflicted inmates of the Bethel and the Norfolk and Norwich Hospital. A volume might be filled by an account
of his acts of private benevolence, but we must pass on to more
public matters. He seldom took an active part in contested
elections, but at the election in 1833, after the passing of the
Reform Act, the Whig candidates, one of whom was his near
relative, were defeated, chiefly, as was generally believed,
through the influence of bribery. On this subject J. J.
Gurney wrote,—
“As usual, I took little or no interest in
the election, but when a petition was presented to Parliament
against the returned members on the score of bribery, I imagined
it to be my place to subscribe to the object, and wrote a letter
in the Norwich newspapers stating the grounds of my so
doing. Those grounds were in no degree personal, but simply
moral and Christian. But the appearance of evil was not
avoided. The measure was construed into an act of political
partizanship; and I entirely lost ground by it in my own true
calling, that of promoting simple Christianity among all
classes.”
He had thought of becoming a candidate for the representation
of this city, or some other place, in Parliament. After
some long conferences with his friends he abandoned the idea and
devoted himself to his higher calling. Mr. J. J. Gurney was
a well-known Liberal in politics, but he did not often speak at
political meetings in this city. His speeches were always
short and generally pertinent; and showed good sense accompanied
with the seriousness of conviction. On whatever side of any
question he spoke he was listened to very attentively, and all
parties believed that he delivered the unbiassed opinion of an
honest man. His conduct on every occasion gained him the esteem of
all friends of civil and religious liberty.
In 1835, he was once more plunged into deep affliction by the
long illness and death of his wife. Her health had of late
years been much improved, and she had been unremitting in her
attentions to his daughter during her illness from typhus fever,
without apparently suffering in consequence. The disease
was, however, lurking in her constitution, and after some time
made its appearance. The fever gradually gained ground, and
she sank under it on Nov. 9th of that year. She died
happily, amid her mourning friends; and her husband knelt down at
her bedside and returned thanks for her deliverance from every
trouble!
His journal contains many details of his visits to Manchester
and Liverpool, of his journeys in Derbyshire and North Wales, of
his journeys in Scotland and the north of England, of his voyage
to America, of his journey to Ohio, Indiana, and North Carolina,
of his journey from Richmond to Washington, of interviews with
eminent statesmen, of labours at New York, of a voyage to the
West Indies and proceedings there, of a tour on the continent,
and of his return home. But we cannot follow him in all his
wanderings in many lands, where he went about doing good,
promoting benevolent objects and preaching the gospel, his heart
being too large to be confined to his native country, much less
to his native city. On his return from the continent in
1841, he attended a meeting of the Bible Society, and delivered
his last great speech, which occupied two hours, on the state of
religion in Europe. A shorthand writer took notes of that
address, which was so full of information that it was afterwards
published in the Journal of the Bible Society.
Soon after his return home he married Eliza P.
Kirkbridge. The event took place at Darlington, on October
10th, 1841, as noted in his journal. After the marriage he
delivered an address on the “Victory which is of
faith.” The dinner party was cheerful, and concluded
with a short religious service. He and his bride parted
from their friends, made a short tour, and returned to Earlham,
which they “reached in health and great peace, the place
comfortable and homeish, and the reception from his dearest
children glowing.”
J. J. Gurney signed the total-abstinence pledge at the house
of his friend, Richard Dykes Alexander, at Ipswich, on April 8th,
1843. He and his wife attended a great “Teetotal
Meeting” held at Norwich, on the arrival of Father Mathew,
on September 9th, that year. The lord bishop, Dr. Stanley,
was present and requested J. J. Gurney to preside. He did
so, and declared himself to be a pledged teetotaller. He
spoke fully and carefully on the subject, and the lord bishop
afterwards expressed his admiration of the apostle of temperance
as the instrument of effecting so much moral good.
As a man of business, Mr. J. J. Gurney was ready, punctual,
and attentive. He was very modest, but of a candid and
social disposition. Though in large or mixed
companies he seldom appeared forward, yet in the society of his
friends he was exceedingly agreeable. In private life no
man was more estimable as a husband, a father, a neighbour, and a
friend. In Norwich and in the surrounding district he was
universally honoured and beloved. He was a great reader of
the bible, and he was regular and exact in family worship, but he
was a stranger to bigotry, no stickler for forms, and no friend
to mysticism in matters of religion.
The autumn of 1846 was spent by the philanthropist quietly at
home, with the exception of engagements connected with the
attendance of meetings of Friends, and with what proved to be a
farewell visit to his beloved daughter at Darlington, and to his
friends in several places on his way home. He attended a
committee of the Norwich District Visiting Society on December
28th in that year, and on his return to Earlham he complained of
great exhaustion, feverishness, &c. A few simple
remedies were administered, but the uncomfortable symptoms
remaining his medical man was summoned on the following
morning. He pronounced it a slight bilious attack, and
seemed to have no anxiety about the recovery. The
philanthropist, however, gradually sank, apparently from
exhaustion, and he died on January 4th, 1847, in the 59th year of
his age. The news of his death spread a gloom over the
city, and the universal lamentations of the citizens proved that
they regarded him as a father and a friend, as indeed he had been
to thousands of them. The sensation in Norwich and its
neighbourhood cannot easily be described, and is probably without
precedent in the case of a mere private individual. During
the entire interval of seven days between his decease and the
funeral, the half-closed shops and the darkened windows of the
houses gave ample proof of the feelings of the inhabitants.
It furnished the principal topic of conversation in every family,
in every private circle, in every group by the wayside.
People of all ranks vied with each other in their eulogies of
their departed friend. Everyone had his own story to tell
of some public benefit, or of some private kindness which had
been shown to others or to himself.
The funeral, as might have been expected from this unusual
public emotion, was an extraordinary scene. All the shops
were closed and all business was suspended in the city. A
number of gentlemen, including the mayor, the ex-mayor, and the
sheriff, went out in carriages as far as Earlham Hall. The
citizens generally formed the funeral procession, and followed
the hearse and plain carriages from the hall to the burial place
at the Gildencroft. There was no pomp or parade, no mockery
of woe. A simplicity in harmony with the character of the
departed marked all the arrangements. As the procession
moved on towards the city it was joined by an increasing number
of the inhabitants, who issued forth in a continuous stream to
pay their last tribute to the memory of departed worth.
Silently and sadly many stood while the hearse passed slowly by,
and many a tearful countenance among the crowd bore testimony to
their love for the dead. The procession gradually
increased in numbers all the way to the Gildencroft, and after
the thousands of people had gathered round the grave a profound
silence ensued, which was at length broken by a Friend repeating
the verses, “O death, where is thy sting? O grave,
where is thy victory?” &c. Another pause then
took place, followed by another address, and then the body was
lowered into its last resting place. The circle of mourning
relatives, including J. H. Gurney and his wife, the surrounding
crowd of spectators—persons of all ranks, of all ages, of
all communions—magistrates and artizans, clergymen and
Nonconformists—representatives, in short, of the whole
people of Norwich, now took their last farewell of Joseph John
Gurney, and slowly turned towards the meeting house, where a
meeting for worship was to be held. The service was deeply
impressive, and formed an appropriate conclusion to the solemn
occasion. At the Cathedral, on the following Sunday, the
good Bishop Stanley preached a funeral sermon before a large
congregation. His text was “Watchman, what of the
night?” and after enlarging on it, he alluded in a most
pathetic and impressive manner to the virtues of the deceased,
and we never before saw so many people so deeply moved. The
death of the beloved citizen was also publicly adverted to in
most of the places of worship in Norwich.
Mr. J. J. Gurney was the author of various works, the most
popular being one on the Evidences of Christianity.
It is a production more calculated to confirm the faith of a believer than
to convert a free thinker who may not admit the possibility of
anything supernatural. He also published a work on
“The Vows and Practices of Friends;” “Essays on
Christianity;” “Essays on the Moral Character of
Christ,” and “Love to God;” “The Papal
and Hierarchical System compared with the Religion of the New
Testament, &c.” His last and best work is
entitled, “Thoughts on Habit and Discipline,” an
excellent moral treatise.
Henry Bathurst, LL.D., canon of Christchurch, rector of
Cirencester, and prebend of Durham, was installed bishop of
Norwich in 1805. He was a prelate much esteemed and
respected. His christian deportment, conciliatory manners,
and general benevolence, endeared him to this city and
diocese. He was eminently distinguished for his liberal
sentiments, and for his attachment to the great principles of
civil and religious liberty. He was often seen walking arm
in arm with Dissenters in our streets. He voted in the
House of Peers for the Repeal of the Catholic Disabilities Bill,
and also in favour of the Reform Bill. This disinterested
and noble advocacy of liberal principles is thought to have stood
in the way of his promotion to an archbishopric. He died
April 7th, 1837, in the 93rd year of his age, and much
lamented. A statue to his memory was placed in the choir of
the Cathedral. This beautiful work of art was the
last work of Sir Francis Chantrey, and is executed in his
masterly style from a block of the purest Carrara marble.
It is placed on a plain pedestal of white marble, and fixed in
the recess at the foot of the altar steps, on the north side of
the choir, commonly called Queen Elizabeth’s seat, because
she sat there when she visited Norwich. The bishop is
represented in a sitting posture, clothed in full ecclesiastical
costume, and the artist has admirably succeeded in giving to his
face that expression of benevolence for which he was so well
known.
The following is a translation of the Latin inscription on the
pedestal:—
To the Memory of
The Right Reverend Father in Christ,
HENRY BATHURST, Doctor in Civil Law,
Who,
While for more than 30 years he presided over
This Diocese,
By his frankness and purity of heart,
Gentleness of manners, and pleasantness of conversation, attached
to himself the good will of all:
His friends,
In testimony of their regret for one so much beloved,
Have caused this effigy to be erected.
He died 5 Ap. A.D. 1837, in the
93rd year
Of his age.
Dr. Stanley was born January 1st, 1779, and became rector of
Alderley, in Cheshire. After twice declining the office, he
was installed bishop of Norwich, August 17th, 1837. He
ruled the diocese for twelve years, and was highly esteemed by
all sects for his unceasing efforts to promote the spiritual
interests of every class of society, and his readiness on every
occasion to co-operate with Dissenters in every good work.
He often attended their meetings to promote religious and
benevolent objects. In one of his sermons he quoted the
injunction “The servant of the Lord must not strive, but be
gentle unto all men; in meekness instructing those that oppose
themselves;” &c. His subsequent conduct furnished
ample evidence of the sincerity with which he obeyed this
injunction; and although some of his clergy were somewhat
estranged from him by his frequent expressions of unbounded
charity, yet all were obliged to esteem him for his noble zeal
and consistency of character. He was distinguished for his
extensive liberality to the poor and his interest in their
education. He was often seen going about from school to
school, and the kindliness of his heart was so well known to the
children that they sometimes pulled his coat behind to obtain his
benignant smile, which to them was like sunshine after
rain. On all occasions he was earnest in his advocacy of
civil and religious liberty, and active in his exertions on
behalf of all benevolent associations, both of the Church and of
Dissenters. He was also a promoter of all
literary institutions in the city and elsewhere, and often
attended their anniversaries at which he delivered animated
addresses. He did not lay claim to the character of a man
of science; but astronomy, geology, botany, and natural history
were his favourite studies. He was the author of two
interesting volumes on “The History of Birds,” which
were published by the Society for the Promotion of Christian
Knowledge. He was elected president of the Linnæan
Society, and he accepted an appointment as one of the
commissioners chosen to inquire into the state of the British
Museum.
Bishop Stanley was so little of a bigot that he appeared once
on the same platform with Father Mathew, a Roman Catholic, at a
temperance meeting in St. Andrew’s Hall. He then and
there eulogised the apostle of temperance, and advocated the
cause with great eloquence. On another occasion he invited
Jenny Lind, now Madame Goldscmidt, to the palace, when she
visited this city. At the palace one evening, she sang
before a large company. When it became known that the lord
bishop of the diocese had actually entertained an operatic
singer, great was the indignation of some of the clergy.
This however did not at all distress the good bishop, who held on
the even tenor of his way, doing good whenever he had an
opportunity. By his frequent earnest discourses in many
churches in this diocese, he caused quite a revival of religion
among the clergy and church-going people. He died, much
lamented, on September 6th, 1849, in the 70th year of his age,
and he was buried in the middle of the nave of the Cathedral, in the
presence of thousands who had known and loved him. A short
time after his decease, a slab to his memory was laid over his
grave, bearing the following inscription:—
In the love of Christ
Here rests from his labours
EDWARD STANLEY,
Thirty-two years Rector of Alderley,
Twelve years Bishop of Norwich,
Buried amidst the mourning
Of the Diocese which he had animated,
The City which he had served,
The Poor whom he had visited,
The Schools which he had fostered,
The Family which he had loved,
Of all Christian people
With whom, howsoever divided, he had joined
In whatsoever things were true and honest,
And just, and pure, and lovely,
And of good report.
Born January 1st, 1779.
Installed August 17th, 1837.
Died September 6th, 1849, Aged 70.
Buried September 21st, 1849.
Samuel Hinds, D.D., succeeded Bishop Stanley. He was the
sixty-seventh bishop of the diocese, and was installed on January
24th, 1850. He was the son of Abel and Elizabeth Thornhill
Hinds, born Dec. 23rd, 1793, in Barbadoes; and at the age of twelve he
was sent to England, to the school of Mr. Phillips, at Frenchay,
near Bristol. He entered at Baliol College, Oxford, but for
want of rooms removed to Queen’s, graduated in honours 1815
(second in classics), and in the year following he obtained the
Latin essay. He returned to Barbadoes as a missionary and
remained there five years, the three latter as vice-principal of
Codrington College. After he returned to England he became
vice-principal of Alban Hall, Oxford; and he accompanied
Archbishop Whately to Ireland, as his private chaplain. He
was subsequently presented with the living of Yardley, in Herts.,
by Dr. Coplestone, bishop of Llandaff. Dr. Hinds again
returned to Ireland, having been preferred to the living of
Castlenock by Archbishop Whateley, and was chosen private
chaplain to Lord Clarendon, lord lieutenant of Ireland.
Hence he removed to the deanery of Carlisle, but was scarcely
settled there when he was appointed to the bishopric of
Norwich. He had previously refused the bishoprics of New
Zealand and Cork. He laboured in this diocese for seven
years, often preaching in the churches, attending religious
meetings, and delivering addresses of a high character. He
generally preached at the anniversaries of the Church
Associations in this city. He resigned the see of Norwich
in April, 1857, and retired into private life. His health
is said to have been impaired by his arduous labours in
conducting the Oxford commissions which the government had
entrusted to him, and which, added to his duties in
the diocese and the office of chaplain to the house of lords,
proved too much for his constitution. Dr. Hinds is perhaps
the most learned of modern bishops. His literary talents
are considerable. He is the author of the “Rise and
Progress of Christianity,” first published in the
“Enclyclopædia Metropolitana,” and considered a
standard work, highly esteemed for its comprehensive views of
religious truth. The “Three Temples of the One
God;” “Catechists’ Manual;” and
“Inspirations of the Scriptures,” are works from his
pen, which testify to his deep learning and great research.
He is the author of many beautiful poems and hymns, some of which
are familiar to the congregation at Norwich Cathedral, from being
repeated in the service as arranged to music. The
confirmation hymn is simple and appropriate.
In a brief history of the Norfolk and Norwich Hospital,
published by Dr. Copeman, we find the following memoir of the
subject of this notice:—
“Mr. Dalrymple was a native of Norwich, his
father having removed thither from Scotland. He was born in
1772, and at an early age was sent to the Grammar School at
Aylsham, in Norfolk, from whence he was removed to the Free
School at Norwich, where he became a favourite pupil of its then
head master, the celebrated Dr. Parr. Here he had for a
schoolfellow Dr. Maltby, and with both, Dr. Parr kept up a
friendly intercourse of visits to the latest period of his
life. It affords a strong proof of Mr. Dalrymple’s
early talents and his industry in cultivating them, that,
although in accordance with the then custom of requiring medical
apprenticeship to extend to seven years, he was obliged to leave
school at the age of fourteen, he had yet attained such a
proficiency in classical reading, and so correct an appreciation
of its beauties, that, amidst all the urgent and various
occupations and anxieties of his succeeding life, he found the
greatest relief to his toils in a recurrence to his favourite
authors. His taste was scholarlike as well as scientific;
his conversation embued with classical allusion, and his felicity
in quotation remarkable. [527]
“Mr. Dalrymple was apprenticed in London, and studied at
Guy’s and St. Thomas’ Hospitals under Cline and Sir
Astley Cooper. He returned to Norwich in 1793, and opened a
surgery in his father’s house; and although for several
years his progress in establishing a practice was slow, he at
last attained the highest reputation as a surgeon in his native
city, and for many years enjoyed the confidence, friendship, and
patronage of a very large number of patients of every grade of
society and in every district of the county.
“In 1812 Mr. Dalrymple was elected assistant surgeon to
the Norfolk and Norwich Hospital, and two years afterwards
succeeded to the full surgeoncy, a post which he occupied with
great credit to himself and benefit to his profession until 1839,
a period of twenty-five years. He was then in the 67th year
of his age, his powers were less vigorous, and finding himself no
longer equal to his hospital practice, he resigned his position
there, receiving a cordial acknowledgment from the governors, of
‘the able, humane, and successful exercise of his official
duties,’ and being honoured by a request to accept the
appointment of honorary consulting surgeon. In 1844 Mr. Dalrymple
finally retired from professional life, and died in London on the
5th of December, 1848, aged 75 years.
“From the year 1831 to 1835, I had ample opportunities,
as house surgeon of the hospital, of observing, and profiting by,
the mode in which the late Mr. Dalrymple performed his public
professional duties in that institution; and remember with
pleasure and satisfaction, that I was sometimes able to render
assistance, and save trouble, to one so deserving of the
gratitude and goodwill of those with whom he had to do. At
the period referred to, Mr. Dalrymple was beginning to feel the
burden of heavy surgical responsibilities more weighty than his
somewhat feeble frame would bear; his naturally acute sensibility
was increased by a measure of debility resulting from overmuch
professional occupation. The sudden call to perform a
serious and difficult operation was accompanied sometimes with a
degree of shock to his nerves, which told upon him injuriously;
and the desire he had to save the life of the sufferer submitted
to his charge (always a predominant feeling in his mind,) would
well-nigh overpower him with emotion. I have often heard
him say that he was not able to sleep the night before he had to
perform the operation of lithotomy, although in such cases his
success was great; but he possessed so much sympathy for his
patient, and felt his own responsibility so strongly, that he
failed to secure to his mind that rest which alone could have
enabled him to meet the contingencies of his profession with
composure. This nervous sensibility was due in part to
original constitution, and increased by professional toil.
Sometimes it arises from defective knowledge, or from want of
success; but so far from either being the case with Mr.
Dalrymple, his knowledge was ample, the result of many
years’ industrious application of a mind capable of vast acquirements—sufficient to have given him
confidence in the treatment of any case submitted to his care;
his success was beyond that of many placed in similar
circumstances; such, indeed, as might fairly have been expected
from one who had so much sympathy for suffering humanity, and who
devoted the whole energy of his mind to devise means to relieve
it. For a long period no one but himself, perhaps, was
aware of the stress upon his feelings which his professional
duties, so well performed, were wont to occasion; and when it did
become apparent to others, it was delightful to witness how
pleased, how grateful, how kind in expression he was for any
attention, encouragement, or assistance offered him; and how
highly he estimated the friendship of those who watched an
opportunity to perform those little offices of kindness and
consideration, which, although difficult to be defined, can
always be appreciated by a sensitive mind and a feeling
heart.
“The experience of a long and active professional life
endued Mr. Dalrymple with the valuable qualification of forming a
right judgment in cases of a complex and difficult nature, which
was fully appreciated and acknowledged. The firmness and
decision of his opinion upon a difficult case, when once formed,
could not fail to impress the practitioner by whom he was
consulted with confidence, and his patient with the assurance
that dependence might be placed upon the result of his
deliberations.
“No one who had the privilege of Mr. Dalrymple’s
acquaintance can think of him otherwise than as a kind friend, a
highly intelligent and well-informed man, an amusing and
instructive companion, and a profoundly gifted practitioner of
the art and science it was the business and happiness of his life
to pursue.”
We make the following extracts from a memoir of Mr. Crosse
published in Dr. Copeman’s History of the Norfolk and
Norwich Hospital.
“John Greene Crosse was the second son of
Mr. William Crosse, of Finborough, in Suffolk, and was born on
the 6th of September, 1790. In order to make known some
particulars of his early life and education, I cannot do better
than quote his own journal, which contains many remarks upon the
subject evidently intended to have formed part of a history of
his life. In April, 1819, he penned the following
observations.
“‘I never went to boarding school, which
contributed, with many other occurrences of my subsequent life,
to fix me in the unsocial habits that hitherto never did and
never will forsake me. In my early years, no classical
learning, not a line of Latin, was taught at the proximate market
town to which I resorted as a daily pupil; and my first lessons
of reading, arithmetic, and writing were received from a master
of whom I entertained the greatest horror, for the ferocity of
his conduct, the severe discipline by which he drove into us the
simplest rudimental knowledge. His stern brow, raucous
voice, and long cane, are now livelily depicted to my mind: how
much I owe to him, I am even now, with a long life in retrospect,
unable to tell; but I was glad when circumstances arose that
released me from his tutorage.’
“‘Very small matters, and such as we have no
control over, and call accidental because unable to trace the
chain of causes giving rise to them, influence our mortal
destinies. I had attained my 12th (?) year, under such
tremendous instruction as is related, when a Welsh gentleman
making some mistake at college (not implicating his good
character, an informality I should call it) found it well
to rusticate; and taking with him his premature wife, sought a
living by opening a classical school in Stowmarket. I
became one of his early pupils; and but for this good, easy
man’s settling in the town, should never have launched into
such studies as Latin and Greek; of which, it is true, I did not
learn much, nor very accurately. But he was, nevertheless,
a plodding, working man; an increasing family made him exert his
abilities to the utmost; and I got out of him all the instruction
I ever received as a school-boy in the learned languages.
When about fifteen years of age, returning from my daily school,
in a feat in jumping, I had the accident, I ought not perhaps to
say the misfortune, to break my leg. The respectable
village surgeon attended me: he was one of the old school; of
fine, soft, soothing manners, clean dressed, with powdered head;
rode slowly a very well-looking horse; in short, he was a
gentleman, and commanded the respect of every one when he entered
the house; he was also a skilful and kind surgeon. What
wonder that the idea should be awakened in my mind to be of the
medical profession! to be as great a man as he—the Village
Doctor! to whom every one bowed, and who could relieve pain and
cure injuries so quickly and skilfully. I had conceived an
object of ambition, and the idea never deserted me. I was
in a month upon my crutches, and soon recovered; a surgical case
fixed my future destinies.’
“‘I persevered a few years longer at Latin, Greek,
French, and Euclid. My father was successful and able now
to place me out well; wished me to be a lawyer, and I was for a
time under the instruction of a gentleman of that
profession—attending bankruptcy meetings, and feasting at
midnight
at the expense of the already distracted creditors. Those
were good times for lawyers. A learned chancellor, whom I
met on one such occasion, I well remember complimenting me on my
quickness in counting money; but all would not do, my mind was
prepossessed—I quitted the law to follow my inclination; I
made my own choice; it was a pledge to success. The surgeon
who cured my leg agreed to take me as his first and only pupil,
and I was accordingly articled in due form for five
years.’
“On the 27th of September, 1811, Mr. Crosse went to
London for the purpose of studying his profession in that
Metropolis, and was the following day introduced to Mr.,
afterwards Sir Charles Bell, whose pupil he became, with whom he
contracted a close intimacy, and of whose merits as a teacher and
man of science he always spoke in the highest terms of respect
and gratitude. In the following January, he entered to
Abernethy’s Lectures; and in April, 1812, became a student
at St. George’s Hospital, where his industrious habits and
intelligence attracted the particular attention and marked notice
of the medical officers of that noble institution. In the
following month, he entered as a pupil at the Lock Hospital; and
in the course of the year, officiated as House Surgeon during the
temporary absence of the gentleman who occupied that
situation. In the following winter session, commencing
October, 1812, he studied under Brodie, Bell, Brande, Clarke,
Home, and others; and remarks in his journal, ‘very
industrious all this winter, sitting up constantly till past two
a.m.’ In March, 1813, he became a dresser to Sir
Everard Home at St. George’s Hospital; attended Midwifery
under Dr. Clarke; and on the 16th of April, passed the College of
Surgeons in London. After a short holiday, he returned to
London on the 13th of May, and attended the Eye Infirmary at
Charter-house Square. In June, he resigned his dressership
under Sir E. Home; became acquainted with the late Mr. Travers,
Abernethy, Sir W. Blizard, and Dr. Macartney, whom he agreed to
accompany to Dublin; and much of his spare time during this
summer was devoted to the study of German, a language he ever
after cultivated that he might enjoy the profundity and research
of the professional literature of that country.
“Mr. Crosse left England for Dublin on the 2nd of
October, 1813, arriving there the following day. In
December he became Demonstrator of Anatomy under Dr. Macartney,
and remained there until October, 1814, when he returned to
London, having received a very handsome testimonial from the
numerous students of the school in which he taught, as to his
ability and energy in the capacity of their instructor in
anatomy.
“On quitting Dublin, Mr. Crosse returned to Suffolk, and
was afterwards introduced to the late Dr. Rigby of Norwich.
In December he went to Paris, where he remained until the end of
February, 1815, during which period he took French Lessons, wrote
his Diary in the French language, and availed himself of every
possible opportunity of increasing his professional
knowledge.
“On the 29th of March, 1815, Mr. Crosse came to Norwich;
and after remaining one year in lodgings, took a house in St.
Giles’, in which he resided for many years. He soon
after published his “Sketches of the Medical Schools of
Paris,” and showed, both by his writings and the
industrious pursuit of his professional avocation, that he was
destined to arrive at considerable eminence in the locality he
had chosen for the arena of his future life. On the 19th of
July, 1823, he was the successful candidate for the appointment
of
Assistant Surgeon to the Norfolk and Norwich Hospital. So
great was his desire to become connected with the Hospital, and
so strong the competition in which he was engaged to obtain this
object, that his health gave way under the exertions he made to
succeed; and he was obliged to absent himself for a time, on
which occasion he took a trip to Holland, visiting Brighton on
his return. The result was favourable, and he returned to
Norwich in good health. On the death of Mr. Bond, in 1826,
he was elected full Surgeon to the Hospital, and thus attained
one of the greatest objects of his ambition.
“The rapid rise and progress of Mr. Crosse’s
reputation as a professional man, and the large extent of his
private practice, are too well known to require further notice;
but notwithstanding the unremitting exertions required to fulfil
his private engagements, he never allowed them to interfere with
his public duties; and the devotedness of his service to the
Norfolk and Norwich Hospital was remarkable. It may be
truly said that no private patient received more kindness, skill,
and attention at his hands, than did those who were placed under
his care in the wards of the Hospital.
“As an operating surgeon, Mr. Crosse had but few
superiors, and not many equals. He was possessed of
considerable manual tact and dexterity, which, coupled with a
sound judgment as to the necessity for the performance of an
operation, stamped him as a surgeon of first-rate
attainments. In his early professional life he studied
anatomy with great assiduity, and his subsequent occupation as
Demonstrator of Anatomy at Dublin so impressed the subject upon
his memory, that the constitution and form of the human body were
always in his mind’s eye; and thus he was rendered equal,
at all times and upon all occasions, to the serious emergencies
of surgery. In short, he obtained and held
for a long period the foremost rank in his profession in this
district; and such was the quality of his mind, that he would
probably have been pre-eminent in whatever locality it might have
fallen to his lot to be placed.
“In 1819, Mr. Crosse published A History of the
Variolous Epidemic of Norwich, which has been, and is even
now, quoted as an excellent standard work. In 1822 he
published Memoirs of the Life of the late Dr. Rigby,
prefixed to the valuable Essay which the Doctor had published
some years before On Uterine Hæmorrhage.
“In 1835, the Jacksonian Prize was awarded him for his
Essay on the Formation, Constituents, and
Extraction of the Urinary Calculus; and in the same year he
received, in consequence of this Essay, the Diploma of M.D. from
the University of Heidelberg.
“From 1822 to the close of his life, Mr. Crosse
contributed many valuable Papers to different medical
periodicals, which are of deep interest to professional men.
“In 1836, Mr. Crosse was elected a Fellow of the Royal
Society—a distinction which marked him for eminence
throughout the whole civilized world. In 1845, the College
of St. Andrew conferred the Degree of M.D. upon him, and there is
scarcely a medical or surgical society in Europe of which he was
not a member, as well as being an honorary member of the most
eminent societies in Asia and America.
“During the last year of Mr. Crosse’s life (1850),
it became painfully evident to his friends that he was gradually
losing that vigour of mind and body which had so long
characterized him; and at the urgent solicitation of his medical
advisers, he was induced to leave home for a few weeks, when he
took the opportunity of consulting Sir B. Brodie and Dr. Watson
in London, and spent a short time with the late Dr. Mackness at
Hastings, of whose kindness he afterwards spoke in the highest terms of
gratitude. On his return home, he endeavoured to resume his
professional and even his literary avocations; but although in a
degree benefited by his holiday, he gradually lost power, and it
was clear that his race was almost run.”
He died in his 60th year, having been a resident in Norwich 35
years.
Norwich and Norfolk have produced an array of distinguished
botanists, such as Smith, Turner, Lindley, and the elder
Hooker. The president of the British Association for the
Advancement of Science, Dr. Joseph D. Hooker, F.R.S., is the son
of Sir William J. Hooker, formerly Director of the Royal Gardens
at Kew, and he succeeded his father in that very important post
on November 12th, 1865. The present director of Kew sprung
from a race of botanists. His paternal grandfather, a
citizen of Norwich, devoted his leisure to the cultivation of
curious plants. This circumstance, doubtless, helped to
create that taste for botany which, in the career of his
illustrious father, has borne such ripe fruits. On the
maternal side, the grandfather of Dr. Hooker was Mr. Dawson
Turner, of Yarmouth. The eldest daughter of this gentleman
became the wife of Sir William J. Hooker in 1814. Mr.
Turner’s is a well-known name in the annals of British
botany; he is the author of various botanical publications, and
it was at his suggestion that a narrative of a visit made to
Iceland in 1809 by his future son-in-law was given to the
world, a work which brought the name of Sir William J. Hooker
prominently before the scientific world. So descended Dr.
Joseph D. Hooker was born at Halesworth, in Suffolk, on June
30th, 1817. Although thus by birth a native of Suffolk, he
is by descent a Norwich man. He has been a great botanical
traveller in many parts of the world, and he has added greatly to
our knowledge of the plants of Asia and India. On August
19th, 1868, as President of the British Association, when the
meeting took place in Norwich, he delivered the Inaugural Address
in the Drill Hall before a large audience.
Amelia Opie was the daughter of Dr. Alderson, a physician in
Norwich, and was born here in 1769. The varied
circumstances of her early life gave the bent to her after
career. In her girlhood she beguiled the solitude of her
father’s summer house by composing songs and tragedies; on
her visits to London, the superior society into which the graces
of her person and the accomplishments of her mind introduced her,
served to stimulate her aspirations; and after her marriage, in
1798, to the painter, Mr. John Opie, she was encouraged by her
husband to become a candidate for literary fame.
Accordingly, in 1801, she published a novel, entitled Father
and Daughter. Although this tale showed no artistic
ability in dealing either with incidents or with characters, yet
it was the production of a lively fancy and a feeling heart, and
speedily brought its author into notice. She was encouraged
to publish a volume of sweet and graceful poems in 1802, and to
persist in the kind of novel writing which she had commenced so
successfully. Adelaide Mowbray followed in 1804, and
Simple Tales in 1806. The death of her husband in
1807, and her return to Norwich, did not slacken her
industry. She published Temper in 1812, Tales of
Real Life in 1813, Valentine’s Eve in 1816,
Tales of the Heart in 1818, and Madeline in
1822. At length, in 1825, her assumption of the tenets and
garb of the Society of Friends checked her literary ardour, and
changed her mode of life. Nothing afterwards proceeded from
her pen except a volume entitled Detraction Displayed, and
some contributions in prose and verse to various
periodicals. A good deal of her life was spent in
travelling and in the exercise of Christian benevolence.
When in this city she was often seen in the assize court, sitting
near the judge. She seemed to take a great deal of interest
in criminal cases. She died here in 1853. A life of
Mrs. Opie, by Miss C. L. Brightwell, was published in 1854.
The celebrated musician, William Crotch, was born in the
parish of St. George at Colegate in this city, July 5th,
1775. His genius for music may be supposed to have
commenced with his existence, as his parents did not remember any
period in which he did not shew a great predilection for an
organ, to which instrument he seemed to have a special
attachment. Indeed he had a penchant for every
musical instrument at an early age. As soon as he could
walk alone, which was at the beginning of his second year, he
would frequently quit his mother’s breast to hear a tune on
the organ, and when he wanted any particular tune, he would put
his finger upon that key on which the tune began; and as it
sometimes happened that more than one tune began on the same key,
he would strike two or three of the first or leading notes of the
tune he chose to have played. Before he was two years and a
quarter old, he played “God save the King” with both
hands. At two years and a half he had played to several
ladies and gentlemen, and was soon afterwards noticed in the
public journals. At two and three quarters he could
distinguish any note, and call it by its proper name, though he
did not see it struck. His memory was so retentive, that a
gentleman only playing to him the Minuet in Rodelinda two
or three times in the evening, was astonished to hear him perform
it next morning, as soon as he went to the organ. Before he
was three years old, he played at Beccles, Ipswich, and other
places. Afterwards he was taken to Lynn, Bury, &c., and
in October, 1778, to Cambridge. In November, he was
nominated to a degree of Bachelor of Arts, with a small annuity
annexed to it. In December he went to London, and after
performing before the foreign ambassadors, maids of honour,
&c., in 1779, he was introduced to the sovereign, to whom he
gave the greatest satisfaction, as he had done to the nobility and
gentry in general, but more particularly to the greatest
musicians. At the early age of 22 he was appointed
professor of music in the University of Oxford, and there, in
1799, took his degree of doctor in that art. In 1800 and
the four following years, he read lectures on music at
Oxford. Next he was appointed lecturer on music at the
Royal Institution; and subsequently, in 1823, principal of the
Royal Academy of Music. He published a number of vocal and
instrumental compositions, of which the best is his oratorio of
“Palestine.” In 1831 appeared an octavo volume,
containing the substance of his lectures on music, delivered at
Oxford and in London. He also published “Elements of
Musical Composition and Thorough Bass.” He arranged
for the piano-forte a number of Handel’s oratorios and
operas, besides symphonies and quartetts of Haydn, Mozart, and
Beethoven. He performed all his public duties laboriously,
zealously, and honourably, and in private life he was much
beloved. He died on December 29th, 1847, in the house of
his son, at Taunton.
Norwich artists must have
flourished in the 17th and 18th centuries, as proved by their
portraits of city worthies in the Guildhall and St.
Andrew’s Hall, but we have few notices of early painters or
engravers. About the commencement of the present century, a
gentleman named Thomas Harvey lived at Catton, and was recognised
as a very clever amateur artist. He painted in oil,
admirably, and he induced several of the leading artists of the
day to visit Norfolk, such as Opie, Gainsborough, Sir William
Beechey, Collins, and many others, who produced beautiful works
of art.
About the year 1802, a few professional and amateur artists,
drawn together by a similarity of taste and inclination, for the
advancement of the arts of painting and design in their native
city, began to associate to form a regular academy. Each
member in his turn furnished matter of discussion according with
his particular view; and by eliciting the opinions of his brother
artists, mutually communicated and received information. The first exhibition of this society
was in 1805, in Wrench’s Court, and contained 223
pictures. The following is a list of the members and
exhibitors of the Norwich Society of Artists from the first
catalogue of 1805:—Arthur Browne, J. Blake, E. Bell,
(engraver) Mrs. Coppin, H. M. M. Crotch, M. B. Crotch, J. Crome,
R. Dixon, J. Freeman, W. Freeman, Rev. Wm. Gordon of Saxlingham,
C. Hodgson, W. Harwin, R. Ladbrooke, W. C Leeds, J. Percy, J.
Thirtle, F. Stone, architect. This Society of Artists,
after their establishment, within twenty years exhibited about
4000 pictures, the productions of 323 painters, very few of which
were sold here, but which were readily purchased in London and
other places. In fact, the local artists were very little
patronized in the city; and old Crome, one of the very best
landscape painters in England, was a very poor man all his life,
though, since his death, his pictures have been sold for
thousands of pounds in London.
John Crome, sen., was born December
21st, 1769, in the parish of St. Peter per Mountergate. He
was apprenticed to Mr. Francis Whisler, coach, house, and sign
painter, who, in 1783, lived in Bethel Street; but he felt the
true impulse of genius, and his industry surmounted all
obstacles. By almost unaided exertions he cultivated
drawing and painting in oil with such ardour and success, that
during the latter years of his life he had attained an eminence
highly creditable, and was incessantly employed as a master in
the one branch by families of distinction, and by the
principal schools of Norfolk and Norwich. He possessed the
rare faculty of communicating the ardour he himself felt to his
pupils, both professional and amateur. His mind was too
acute to exact from them a servile imitation of his own style; on
the contrary he contented himself with instilling the more useful
principles of art, and with giving freedom and spirit to their
pencils. He then invited them to let loose the reins of
fancy and taste, and to follow unfettered the promptings of
imagination. The fruits of this wise discrimination were
seen in the reputation of his son, and his companions in
excellence, whose works for some time attracted much attention in
the metropolis to the growing talents and promise of the Norwich
school of artists. In the other department he was seldom
without commissions. He principally cultivated landscape
painting, and he was exceedingly happy in seizing small
picturesque local scenes, which he elevated to a degree of
interest which they could hardly bear in their natural
state. He was in painting the counterpart of Burns in
poetry, both delighting in homely scenes. His pictures were
beginning to be known and appreciated in London, the great mart
of talent, and those he last exhibited in the British Gallery
gained him a lasting fame. He was a man of heart, of
impulse and feeling, quick, lively, and enthusiastic, and in his
conversation animated to a high degree, especially when speaking
on subjects connected with his art, the fond, the incessant, the
earliest and latest object of his thoughts. A wide field of
enterprise and exertion had just opened upon his view,
the last stage of his ardent ambition had unfolded itself, when
he was suddenly seized with an acute disease, which terminated
his life in the short space of seven days, on April 22nd, 1821,
aged fifty years. He was buried in a vault in St.
George’s Colegate Church, where the last sad offices of
respect were paid to his memory by a numerous attendance of
artists and other friends. Of late years a subscription was
raised here for a monument to his memory, and after some delay a
suitable memorial was placed in the church. (See
page 89.)
The following list of Mr. Crome’s principal pictures,
with their former possessors, was extracted from the published
catalogue of his works:—
“Lane Scene near Hingham,” 1812; “Lane Scene
at Blofield,” 1813; and “Grove Scene near
Marlingford,” 1815—Samuel Paget, Esq., of
Yarmouth.
“View at the back of the New Mills,”
1817—William Hawkes, Esq., Norwich.
“Wood and Water Scene near Bawburgh,”
1821—Miss Burrows, Burfield Hall.
“View in Postwick Grove,” 1816—Lord
Stafford.
“Hautbois Common, Norfolk,” 1810—Mr. F.
Stone, Norwich.
“Lane Scene near Whitlingham,” 1820—Mr.
Charles Turner.
“Scene near Hardingham, Norfolk,” 1816—Mr.
J. B. Crome.
“Lane Scene,” 1817—John Bracy, Esq.
“Carrow Abbey,” 1805—P. M. Martineau,
Esq.
“Cottage and Wood Scene,” 1820—Michael
Bland, Esq., London.
“Landscape—Evening”—Mr.
Crome.
“Grove Scene,” 1820—Mr. F. Geldart, jun.
“View of the Italian Boulevards at Paris,” 1815;
and “Fish Market at Boulogne,” 1820—R. H.
Gurney, Esq.
A “Wood Scene” was the last picture painted by Old
Crome, in April, 1821. He painted many others, and etched a
number of plates of Norfolk scenery, some of which have been
printed. His pictures have been lent for various
exhibitions and always much admired.
J. B. Crome, son of the father of
the Norwich School of Landscape Painting, was a landscape painter
of moonlights, &c. The editor of the Examiner
for March, 1828, speaking of this artist’s pictures,
says:—
“Mr. Crome’s moonlight is good, and
has the grey and brown hues of Vanderneer, whose moonlight scenes
have been considered the best as to natural effects; but except
the parts under the immediate light of the moon, no specific
colour should be seen. The browns and yellows here mingle
well into the black shades of night, and have nothing of that
flat grey blue which justly made coloured moonlights to be
compared to a shilling on a slate.”
Mr. J. B. Crome’s pictures were “Rouen,” in
the possession of Mrs. Southwell, Wroxham; “Yarmouth
Quay”—T. Cobbold, Esq., Catton; “Yarmouth
Beach, Moonlight”—R. J. Turner, Esq., Catton;
“View near Amsterdam, Moonlight”—J. Geldart,
Esq., Norwich; “Norwich by Moonlight”—Hon.
General Walpole; “Moonlight”—C. Turner, Esq.,
Norwich. Several others of this artist’s
pictures were exhibited at the Norwich Industrial Exhibition in
1867, and were much admired.
Miss Crome, daughter of Old Crome,
was a painter of fruit and flowers from nature, and painted
successfully.
Joseph Clover was a native of this
city, but he resided some time in London. His first efforts
in art were directed to engraving, and by the advice of a
gentleman named Stocks, he took an impression of one of his
plates to the late Alderman Boydell, in Cheapside, whose remarks
on this performance discouraged him from following the profession
of an engraver, and he remained for some time undetermined as to
his further pursuit in art, until the following autumn, when
being introduced by his uncle to the late Mr. Opie, whilst
painting a portrait of that relation, he was so astonished at the
facility with which the artist painted, and so delighted with his
conversation, that he resolved from that moment to be a
painter. He took Mr. Opie’s advice and followed him
to town, from which period, namely, April, 1807, being nearly
four years, he enjoyed that artist’s friendship. In
the year 1806, Mr. Clover was accidentally introduced to the late
Richard Cumberland, the dramatic poet, who perceiving that the
artist’s health was much impaired by a too close
application to study, invited him to his house at Ramsgate, and
by his introduction he painted several portraits, and to the
hospitable residence of this gentleman he repeated his visits
during the summer months for fourteen years. In Norwich, he
painted three full-length portraits for St. Andrew’s Hall,
besides a number of others, and a picture called “Divided
Attention,” for his friend Mr. Turner, of Norwich.
This first-rate picture excited much interest in London.
Some of the early pictures of this artist were at Beau Port, the
house of the late Sir James Bland Burgess, and at Battle Abbey in
Sussex. Subsequently Mr. Clover had the honour of being
patronised by the Marquis of Stafford and other noblemen.
William Robert Dixon was a native
of this city. His etchings of views in Norfolk were in the
possession of many persons in Norwich. Mr. Charles Turner
had an interesting collection of his drawings. As a scene
painter he was much admired. He had many tempting offers
from the London and other managers of theatres; but being fondly
and firmly attached to his native city and a choice circle of
friends, no allurements could induce him to leave them. He
was very popular as a teacher of drawing. He died October
1st, 1815.
Charles Hodgson, a native of this
city, was a painter of interior architecture, particularly of the
early English style, and of considerable reputation for his
excellent drawing and correct perspective in water colours, which
subjects he was afterwards induced to paint in oil, in which he
excelled. He was a constant exhibitor in the London
exhibitions. His pictures were in the possession of several
gentlemen in the city and county.
David Hodgson, son of the above, a
native also of this city, was a painter of exterior architecture,
landscape, &c. Some of his pictures of interiors of
churches were in the possession of William Herring, Esq.,
Norwich; Pair of Landscapes, W. Roberts, Esq., of Birmingham;
Large Landscape, Rev. J. Hollingworth, Newcastle; Small
Landscape, Wm. Gate, Esq., Carlisle; Market Scenes, T. Bignold,
Esq., Norwich; Landscape, Mr. S. Coleman; Pair of Small
Landscapes, Mr. Stone, Norwich; Tombland, Mr. Stone; Landscape,
Mr. G. Cooke, engraver; Pair of Street Scenes, Mr. Yarington,
Norwich; Market Scenes, sold at the Liverpool exhibition.
Robert Ladbrooke, landscape
painter, for many years enjoyed considerable celebrity as a
drawing master, and in 1821 commenced the publication of “A
Series of Views of the Churches in Norfolk,” printed in
lithography, of which ninety numbers were completed.
Joseph Stannard was a marine
painter, in which walk of art he established a high
reputation. His subjects were generally finely chosen, and
painted with all the truth and transparency of nature. The
grouping of his vessels displayed an admirable taste, and they
were embellished with the most correctly-drawn figures,
highly characteristic of the stations they occupied.
Mrs. Stannard, wife of the above,
was a painter of fruit, flowers, fish, still life, &c.
Her maiden name was Coppin, and her mother was rewarded by the
Society for the Encouragement of Arts, for several copies of
painting. The daughter’s productions were highly
esteemed by the lovers of art.
Alfred Stannard. The talents
of this artist, at an early period of his life, gained him the
approbation of the critics of the London Journals—which
noticed works of fine arts as exhibited in the National
Gallery. The Literary Gazette of March, 1828,
contained this notice,—
“No. 152, Trowse Hall, Norwich, painted on
the spot by A. Stannard. We think that this work partakes
more of the Flemish style of art than legitimately belongs to a
picture painted on the spot; its elaborate finish must
necessarily have required considerable time in the execution; and
the character of our climate is much too variable, day after day,
to paint from the same hue of atmosphere, and the same effect of
Chiaroscuro. Be that as it may, the excellence of the
performance, however it may have been achieved, is an abundantly
sufficient passport to regard of this artist’s
picture. No. 431, Sluice Gate, on the river Wensum, shews
the close resemblance of character and execution between the
works of some of our artists and the best pictures of the Flemish
school.”
The critic might have added that most of the people of Norwich
are of Flemish or Danish extraction, and that the
Norwich school of painting seems to have been derived from the
Flemish school. The subjects painted, and the style of
treatment are very similar.
James Stark was articled to the
senior Crome for three years, from 1810 or 1811, at the
expiration of which time he went to London and drew at the Royal
Academy, which place he was obliged to leave from ill
health. The first picture which he exhibited at the British
Gallery, represented “Boys Bathing,” purchased by the
Bishop of Oxford. His other pictures were “Flounder
Fishing,” in the possession of Sir J. Grey Egleton, Bart.;
“Penning the Flock,” the Marquis of Stafford;
“Lambeth,” the Countess de Grey; “Grove
Scene,” Thomas Phillips, Esq.; “Grove Scene,”
Francis Chantrey, Sculptor; besides many others in the possession
of George Watson Taylor, Esq., M.P.; Mr. Davenport, M.P.; Charles
Savill Onley, Esq., M.P.; Onley Savill Onley, Esq.; &c.,
&c. In 1827, this artist circulated proposals for
printing “Scenery of the Rivers Yare and Waveney,”
with engravings from his own paintings, and the work was
beautifully carried out.
J. S. Cotman became one of the most
celebrated artists in the Water Colour Society, and attained a
very high position in London, where he was appointed Drawing
Master at King’s College; he published Views in Normandy,
and also a work on the Sepulchral Brasses of this locality.
His pictures have always commanded high prices. His two
sons also became eminent artists.
About
the year 1830, there was something like a School of Art commenced
in Norwich, where artists and amateurs could study art in a
proper manner, from the best casts of the finest statues.
Before then, artists had to study as they best could, and their
education was very imperfect. They are much indebted to
John Barwell, Esq., for promoting their interests in this
respect, and rendering them great assistance by his knowledge of
art. Amongst the members of the new society were the
Barwells, father and son, the Cotmans, the Freemans, T. Geldart,
A. Sandys, S. Miers, and many others who studied art either from
the cast or the life.
The Norfolk and Norwich Art Union opened their exhibition of
pictures on August 16th, 1839, at the Bazaar, in St.
Andrew’s Broad Street. About 400 pictures were
exhibited, many of them being of a high order of merit. At
subsequent exhibitions, many pictures of local artists were
exhibited, including some of the Cromes, the Ladbrookes, the
Stannards, the Cotmans, Hodgson, Stark, Vincent, Downes, Sandys,
Capt. Roberts, and others much admired. A Fine Art
Association has also been recently established. It held its
first exhibition in August, 1868. A large number of the
pictures were disposed of on the principle of an Art Union.
