| By Author | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Title | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Language |
|
Download this book: [ ASCII | HTML | PDF ] Look for this book on Amazon Tweet |
Title: Gillingwater's History of Lowestoft - a reprint: with a chapter of more recent events
Author: Gillingwater, Edmund
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Gillingwater's History of Lowestoft - a reprint: with a chapter of more recent events" ***
This book is indexed by ISYS Web Indexing system to allow the reader find any word or number within the document.
LOWESTOFT***
Transcribed from the 1897 (Lowestoft) edition by David Price, email
ccx074@pglaf.org. Many thanks to Ivan Bunn for helping me with the
transcription.
[Picture: Decorative graphic]
GILLINGWATER’S
HISTORY OF LOWESTOFT.
A reprint: with a chapter
of more recent events by
A. E. MURTON.
* * * * *
LOWESTOFT.
* * * * *
mdcccxcvii.
SECTION I.
OF THE ISLAND OF LOTHINGLAND.
THIS island (lately become a peninsula) is situated in the most eastern
part of Great Britain and in the northern corner of the County of
Suffolk. It is bounded by the German Ocean on the east, by the river
Yare on the north, by the Waveney on the west, and by the beautiful and
spacious water, the lake Lothing on the south; thus encircled by water on
every side it is generally called the Island of Lothingland, and would
strictly be so, did not a very narrow neck of land (near Lowestoft)
intervene, and make it a peninsula. Its length, from north to south, is
about ten miles; its breadth from east to west, about six miles; and
contains sixteen parishes, viz.: Lowestoft, Corton, Gunton, Olton, Ashby,
Lound, Fritton, Flixton, Hopton, Somerley, Blundeston, Gorleston, Belton,
Burgh, Bradwell, and Herringfleet, of which Lowestoft is the principal,
and is the only market town in the island. During the Saxon Heptarchy,
this island was part of the kingdom of the East Angles. In respect to
the civil government of the county, it is reckoned but a half hundred,
the other half being the district of Mutford. They are generally called
the half-hundreds of Mutford and Lothingland, but were incorporated as
one hundred by an Act of Parliament in 1764, for the better relief of the
poor, and for building an house of industry for their use.
In the ecclesiastical division of the county, this hundred was one of the
rural deaneries under the archdeacon of Suffolk. Bishop Kennet, in his
parochial antiquities, informs us that this office in the church was very
ancient, for in one of the laws ascribed to Edward the Confessor, it is
provided, that of eight pounds penalty for breach of the king’s peace,
the king shall have an hundred shillings, the earl of the county fifty,
and the dean of the bishop in whose deanery the peace was broken, the
other ten; which words can be applied only to the office of rural deans,
according to the respective districts which they had in parts of every
diocese. At first their office was merely to inspect the manners and
behaviour of the inferior clergy and people, but by degrees they became
possessed of a power to judge and determine in smaller matters, and the
rest they were to report to their ecclesiastical superiors. Some time
before the Reformation, by the great power of the archdeacons and their
officials, the jurisdiction of rural deans declined almost to nothing;
and at that period no steps being taken for the restoration of this part
of the government of the Church, their name and office unhappily ceased
together, notwithstanding attempts have since been made to revive this
ancient and useful institution, which in some places have been
successful.
Rural Deans of the deanery of Lothingland, Anno 1325, Jeffrey de Boudon,
priest, upon the resignation of William de Weston: 1326, John de
Wynneferthyng; 1328, John de Thrillo; 1339, Edmund de Bokenham; 1376,
Roger de Belton. {1}
It has been conjectured by some, that the island took its name from the
lake Lothing, but, I apprehend, without any foundation; it seeming more
probable that both the island and lake derived their names from
Lothbrock, a noble Dane, whose descendants, in order to perpetuate his
memory, gave to this part of the kingdom of the East Angles—frequently
the seat of war in their descents on the British coast—the name of
Luddingland, Lovingland, Luthingland, or as it is now called Lothingland.
This Lothbroth was of royal race, and had two sons, named Ingwar and
Hubba. It happened once, as he was alone in a boat hawking for birds
near the island on the coast of Denmark, that he was driven by a sudden
tempest across the German Ocean and was carried into the mouth of the
Yare up as far as Reedham. The inhabitants of the country having
discovered the stranger they brought him to Edmund, king of the East
Angles, whose palace was at Caister, about ten miles from thence. The
king was astonished at the man’s figure and fortune, and received him
with a countenance and behaviour so engaging that Lothbroch relinquished
every desire of returning to his own country again, and was so delighted
also with the diversions of the courtiers, particularly that of hunting
that he oftentimes accompanied Berno the king’s huntsman, in that
amusement, in order to become more expert in it; and in a short time made
such great proficiency therein, and so far excited the envy of his master
that having seduced him into a wood under the pretence of hunting, he
privately murdered him. While Lothbroch was missing, a vigilant
greyhound which he had kept, guarded his body; but being at last
stimulated with hunger he sometimes visited the royal palace, which being
observed by the servants, it excited their curiosity to follow him on his
return, and they presently discovered the murdered body of Lothbroch.
Berno being suspected, was apprehended and found guilty of the crime, and
was sentenced, by the order of the king’s court, to be put alone into
Lothbroch’s boat, and without a compass or any other instrument was
committed to the mercy of the wind and waves which fortunately carried
him to Denmark. The boat being there known he was suspected of having
been accessary to the death of Lothbroch; and being examined upon the
rack concerning it, he affirmed that the murder was committed by Edmund,
king of the East Angles.
The Danes having resolved to revenge the death of Lothbroch upon King
Edmund and his subjects, levied an army of 20,000 men, made Ingwar and
Hubba (the sons of Lothbroch) commanders in chief of the expedition; and
having made every necessary preparation for the voyage, and taken Berno
with them as a leader, who knew the country, they immediately embarked
and set sail for East England in the year 865, in the tenth year of King
Edmund’s reign; but meeting with contrary winds they were driven ashore
at Berwick upon Tweed, in Scotland, where having committed the most
violent outrages, and in some measure gratified their revenge for the
murder of Lothbroch, they soon after returned home. But in the following
year the relentless Danes re-visited our coasts, when after burning and
destroying all they could meet with, and also having greatly harassed and
had frequent skirmishes with King Edmund’s army, they returned to their
own country. The year after, the Danes again renewed their descents on
the British coast, and so far succeeded in their enterprises against King
Edmund, that they reduced him to the utmost distress; for surrounding him
in a certain place in the Island, where he was so inclosed with marshes
and rivers, that it was almost impossible for him to escape, he was left
to this dreadful alternative, either to surrender to his enemies or fight
his way through them. Having resolved upon the latter, he sought out a
place most convenient for his design, and having at last discovered a
ford (which was called Berneford, from Berno,) and now called Barnby, he
passed it, and falling furiously upon his enemies, he routed them with a
great slaughter, and compelled them to return immediately to Denmark. {3}
In the succeeding year, the Danes returned again to England, and having
committed the most horrid ravages in divers part of it, they came to Ely,
where Hubba being left to guard their spoil, Ingwar, with his army
entered East England, when, after committing many barbarous cruelties at
Thetford, he sent a message to King Edmund, who was then at Eglesdune
(now Hoxne, in Suffolk), proposing to him that if he would renounce
christianity, pay adoration to his idols, and become his vassal and
servant, he would then divide not only his treasure but also his kingdom
with him. No sooner did the king receive this message than he marched
with his whole army against the Danes and engaging them at a place not
far from Thetford, the contending armies fought with great obstinacy from
morning till evening, and great numbers were slain on both sides, when
the Danes retreated from the field of battle. But the pious king was so
exceedingly affected at the fate of so many martyrs who had shed their
blood in this battle in defence of the christian faith as well as for the
unhappy end for such a numerous body of Pagans that he returned with the
shattered remains of his army to Eglesdune with a resolution excited by
religious considerations never to engage any more in battle with the
Pagans, but if it was necessary to appease their rancour by yielding
himself up as a sacrifice for his people and for his christian faith.
The army belonging to Ingwar was much diminished from the loss he
sustained in this battle; but receiving information of Edmund’s retreat
he instantly proceeded to Thetford, where, being joined by Hubba with
10,000 men, the brothers united their forces and pursued the unhappy king
to Eglesdune, where, taking him prisoner he was martyred in the year 871,
in the 29th year of his reign; and with him expired the kingdom of the
East Angles.
After the death of Edmund, the Danes settled themselves in Lothingland,
to which tract of land they are supposed to have given that name, in
remembrance of their ancestor Lothbroch.
The following tradition respecting the death of King Edmund, is current
in the parish of Hoxne to this day; namely, that the King, after he had
relinquished every intention of opposing the Danes any farther, in
consequence of the horrid carnage which the numerous contests between
them had occasioned, fled to this village for safety, but finding himself
closely pursued by his enemies, was obliged for security, to conceal
himself under a bridge in that parish, now called Gold Bridge, so named
from the gilt spurs which the king happened to have on whilst there
concealed. A newly-married couple that were returning home in the
evening, saw, by moonlight, the king’s spurs glitter in the water, and
immediately discovered him to the Danes, who instantly put him to death.
The king, in the warmth of resentment, pronounced a curse upon every
couple that should afterwards pass over this bridge to be married. A
superstitious regard is paid to this sentence even to this day; as not
one will pass over the bridge in their way to the parish church on that
occasion. It is now about a thousand years since the event happened, and
is a remarkable instance of the length of time which traditions in
parishes are sometimes continued.
The Danes, when they got the king into their possession, endeavoured to
prevail with him to renounce the christian faith; which he refusing to
do, they first scourged him with whips, and afterwards bound him to a
stake and shot him to death with arrows. He was first buried in an
obscure wooden chapel at Eglesdune (now Hoxne), but being afterwards
esteemed a martyr, and canonized by the Church, his bones were removed to
Bury St. Edmund’s, where a magnificent abbey was erected to his memory.
It appears from that ancient survey of the landed property of this
kingdom, the Book of Domesday, that the fee of this hundred was
originally in the crown, for that record informs us that Earl Guert {4a}
held Gorleston, (and probably the whole island), in the reign of Edward
the Confessor; and describing the extent and property of this manor in
the time of Edward, and comparing them with the survey made in the reign
of William the Conqueror, it says it contained five carucates of land;
that there were then twenty villains, now only twelve; five bornars, then
five servants, now only four; then two carucates in demesne, now but one;
then cattle for five carucates of land, now only three; then two
workhouses, now none; ten acres of meadow land, three salt pans, wood for
five hogs, always three hundred sheep, and twenty-four fishermen at
Yarmouth.
Both history and tradition informs us that some centuries since, there
were numerous and violent disputes between the lords of this island and
the men of Great Yarmouth, respecting the privileges of that burgh; and
whereas it was alleged that those privileges had been greatly infringed
by the said lords of the island.
King John in the ninth year of his reign, granted the burgesses of
Yarmouth a charter, whereby it was created a free burgh, the burgesses
were thereby invested with many valuable commercial privileges, and
empowered to hold it in fee farm {4b} paying to the king and fisheries an
annual rent of £55 for ever; for payment whereof they had nothing but the
customs arising out of the port, not being allowed to receive any custom
of goods bought or sold in the market in Lothingland at any time of the
year.
Soon after the granting of this charter, the burgh of Great Yarmouth
became most flourishing, and made a more respectable figure in trade and
commerce than before; and whilst Yarmouth and Lothingland were both
holden in the king’s hands, no disputes about customs arose betwixt them,
nor do any records now extant mention any suits about them, payable at
this or that place, but as the charter had invested the men of Yarmouth
with the sole property of their land, as well as their merchandise, they
sought to monopolize the trade to themselves, and to hinder the king’s
tenants of Lothingland from enjoying any part with them. {4c}
The granting these privileges to the burgh of Yarmouth, was effectually
emancipating the inhabitants; no sooner, therefore, had this charter
passed, than the men of Lothingland, and particularly the inhabitants of
Little Yarmouth and Gorleston (much more considerable places than now)
began to be alarmed at the acquisitions of their neighbours, and dreaded
their future power. In consequence of this grant several infringements
were made, and many disputes arose; however, they did not arise to any
considerable degree, till about the twelfth year of Henry III., when
Roger Fitz-Osbert {4d} who was then the king’s bailiff or warden of
Lothingland, endeavoured to draw the trade of herrings and other goods to
his own side of the river Yare, and took certain customs in the port of
Yarmouth, contrary to the liberties which the burgesses claimed by their
charter.
Complaints against these proceedings of the bailiff of Lothingland were
exhibited by the burgesses of Yarmouth, and king Henry, willing to
terminate the dispute, as being a party concerned, and being also
desirous of being informed what customs really belonged to Yarmouth, and
what to his manor of Lothingland, sent Martin de Patteshall, an itinerant
justice, to determine it, who took an inquisition at Yarmouth upon the
oaths of forty-eight persons belonging to the counties of Norfolk and
Suffolk, upon which a verdict was found, that all wares ought to be
unladen and sold at Great Yarmouth, and that all the haven belonged to
the burgesses of Yarmouth; but that small merchandise and provisions of
all kinds might be unladen on the Yarmouth or Lothingland side of the
river, at the option of the owners or importers thereof. This affair
being thus decided, the respective parties continued for some time on
more amicable terms, but it was of short duration, for upon king Henry’s
exchanging the manor of Lothingland, and the rent of the fee-farm of
Yarmouth, in 1228, with John de Baliol, for certain lands in Cheshire, it
opened a new source of contention; for although the men of Yarmouth had
seemingly the advantage in the late decision yet, as a license was given
to unlade ships with provisions on either side, and as fish—which was the
chief merchandise then carried on—was evidently included in that
permission, they soon found, that in reality, they had gained no other
advantage than an expensive suit and an ambiguous decree. John de Baliol
seems to have been as well apprized of this as of their inability to
dispute it with him, for in 1244 he brought a writ against the burgesses
for depriving him of his customary tolls in Little Yarmouth, which
alarmed them so much, that, two years after, we find them soliciting the
king for a new exclusive charter, that all merchandises and wares, as
well fish as other commodities, should be sold at Yarmouth only by the
hands of the importers thereof.
Whatever were King Henry’s motives for thus confining the trade, and
injuring the property which John de Baliol undoubtedly had in it, I know
not, but he granted the burgesses their request, and gave them a new
charter agreeable to their desires; notwithstanding which, I find the
bailiff of Lothingland took the usual customs the very next year, and
also continued to do so whilst the manor remained in the hands of the
Baliols, and consequently fresh disputes about the customs were
continually arising.
In 1259 John de Baliol died, and was succeeded by his son, John de
Baliol, afterwards king of Scotland, and it appears that the usual
disputes were in agitation during the time he held this manor; but upon
his acquiring the kingdom of Scotland, the burgesses of Yarmouth were
obliged to submit to so powerful an opponent, for we find, he levied the
following customs; for every foreign ship, eighteen pence; and of every
English ship trading to or from the port of Yarmouth, fourpence; of every
cart or horse-load of merchandize passing through his manor a half-penny;
and for every last of herrings imported for a foreign merchant,
fourpence; of every stall, fourpence; and of every window where bread was
placed to sell, fourpence. The last is a remarkable article for a tax;
and I can account for it no other way than by supposing the men of
Yarmouth used to make bread and send it to be sold at Little Yarmouth and
Gorleston for the supply of their herring fleet, in case of necessity.
The manor of Lothingland and fee-farm of Yarmouth being in the hands of
the Baliols, by virtue of the above-mentioned exchange, were now in the
actual possession of John de Baliol, king of Scots; but upon this king’s
renouncing his homage to King Edward 1st, all his English estates became
forfeited, and by his resignation afterwards of his person, his dignity,
his kingdom, and all his private states, the said manor of Lothingland,
and the fee-farm of Yarmouth, once more reverted to the crown. This was
accounted by the burgesses of Yarmouth as a most happy deliverance, they
thereby getting rid of a troublesome and powerful neighbour, who not only
vigorously supported the rights of his manor, but interfered also with
their trade, and was willing to become a partner in their gains; for the
Baliols, both father and son, had for many years, by their bailiffs,
greatly infringed on the liberties of Yarmouth, by taking customs in that
port, contrary to its charters, to the great injury of the burgesses
which they were under the necessity of submitting to as being unable to
contend with such powerful adversaries. But after the above forfeiture
the burgesses of Yarmouth adjudging it to be a seasonable opportunity for
having their grievances redressed, made application to King Edward 1st in
the 34th year of his reign, to have the charter granted by his
predecessor Henry 3rd more clearly explained, and to be expressed in such
manner as should leave no room for farther disputes.
The king in order to compromise the difference between the respective
parties, requested the assistance of his council; and notwithstanding the
opposition from Little Yarmouth and Gorleston, yet it appearing upon
enquiry that as the manor of Lothingland and fee-farm of Yarmouth were
now in the hands of the said King Edward, and that certain privileges had
been granted to the burgesses of Great Yarmouth by the charter of Henry
3rd, therefore his said Majesty, in the year above-mentioned, complied
with the request of the burgesses, and both explained and ratified the
said charter of King Henry. {6}
The manor of Lothingland continued in the crown but a short time; for
king Edward 1st in his 34th year, anno 1306, gave it, with all Baliol’s
English estates, to John de Britainy, Earl of Richmond, his sister’s son.
{7a}
The burgesses of Yarmouth, however well pleased they might at first
appear with the loss of their old neighbours, quickly found that they had
acquired nothing by the exchange, for John de Britainy was no less
determined upon a vigorous defence of the rights of his manor than his
predecessors; and as he was a much more powerful opponent, so, in the
end, he was a much more troublesome one. Previous, however, to the
settlement of the manor of Lothingland upon this nobleman, the burgesses
of Yarmouth had obtained from king Edward a charter confirming that of
his father, and commanding that all fish and other merchandize brought up
the river should be sold at Yarmouth only, and that no person whatever
should purchase any goods as they were carrying up the stream. Thus, in
spite of the absurdity and injustice of making all commercial
transactions centre in themselves, under the pretence of their being a
free burgh by charter, the men of Yarmouth effectually hindered those of
Little Yarmouth and Gorleston from sharing in the trade, which their
situation rendered them as equally capable of carrying on to advantage as
their neighbours. Such was the state of affairs between the contending
parties, when the grant of the manor of Lothingland was given to the Earl
of Richmond. Though it appears he took no cognizance of their disputes
till the 2nd of Henry 3rd, anno 1328, yet he could not remain so long
ignorant of them; though it is probable the distance of his residence
(Richmond Castle, in Yorkshire) from this place and the small account a
nobleman of his large possessions must naturally make, of so trifling an
addition to them, might render him unwilling to engage in an expensive
suit, which at best, could procure him very insignificant advantages.
However, after repeated application from the inhabitants of Gorleston and
Little Yarmouth, and the rest of the tenants of Lothingland, {7b} about
the 8th and 19th of Edward 2nd, the Earl, about the year above mentioned,
exhibited a petition to king Edward 3rd.; in which he alleged, that half
the haven of Yarmouth belonged to him in right of his manor; and that he
ought to have as his ancestors, who held this manor before him,
undoubtedly had, the arriving, discharging, and laden of ships, goods and
merchandizes, and a free buying and selling for his tenants of Little
Yarmouth and Gorleston, as had been the case till king Henry 3rd by his
charter to the burgesses, granted that these things should belong solely
to Great Yarmouth, and the aforesaid free buying and selling should be
done there only; and as the burgesses of Yarmouth claimed all their
restrictive power from this charter, the earl wisely considered, that
without removing the cause, the effect must still subsist; therefore, in
the same petition he attacked the charter itself, and represented to the
king, that it had not been rightly granted king Henry not being timely
apprized of the destructive tendency such a grant must necessarily have
upon the fishing trade, how contrary its dictates were to the common
rights of mankind, and, particularly, how injurious to the crown itself,
as the original proprietor of the manor of Lothingland. So severe an
attack upon the Yarmouth palladium, roused the burgesses from their
wonted security, and they were summoned to appear personally before the
king and his Council, to make their defence against the Earl and to
produce their charters, records, and reasons to the contrary. The
burgesses accordingly appeared, and urged in their behalf, that the
claims demanded by the Earl were erroneous and ill-grounded: and
exhibited several grants given them by preceding kings, as the charter of
king John, that of Henry 3rd, the confirmation of the same by Edward 1st,
and the decisions in favour of the burgh, in the 8th and 19th of Edward
2nd, in the Exchequer and other courts, all tending to confirm the rights
they claimed, and to invalidate the earl’s assertions; in which they had
ever been victorious.
The burgesses of Yarmouth founded the merits of their cause on the
charter which had incorporated them. The men of Lothingland, on ancient
customs before those charters existed; alledging that the Manor was part
of the ancient demesne of the crown, and that the customs and privileges
claimed by the Earl of Richmond and his tenants, are the same as were
demanded in the times of Canute and Harold, and the succeeding kings of
England, being owners of the said Manor, and by many other pleadings,
they asserted their lawful right to those privileges, both by
prescription and long-continued possession; but, after hearing the
controversy, the cause was determined in favour of Yarmouth, and the
burgesses triumphed once more over their rival neighbours.
The ill success of this application did not deter the Earl from making
another, which had the same great end in view, the wresting from the
burgesses their great Charter of Incorporation; but, after many pleadings
and decisions, before the king and council, the parliament and the
judges, the Earl had no better success than before; for in the end it
only served to strengthen the designs of the men of Yarmouth, by the
entire overthrow of the adverse party; the affair being at length finally
determined in favour of the burgesses, 5th Edward 3rd, anno 1332.
The men of Lothingland, who had, probably, formed the highest
expectations of success, from the great power and credit of their patron,
the Earl of Richmond now saw themselves left entirely to the mercy of the
elated burgesses, who, on all occasions, exerted their power over them
with a malevolence considerably inflamed by the late dissensions; they
had also the mortification to see that power fixed upon the strongest and
most unalterable basis, by an extensive charter, confirming all their
former rights, and adding many valuable liberties to those they already
enjoyed.
Thus ended this litigious and destructive controversy, in which the
inhabitants of Lothingland had been engaged for more than one hundred
years. The motives which actuated each party were strictly the same; the
one strove for the continuance of those liberties which Henry’s charter
had deprived them of; the other, to retain the rights they had acquired,
so beneficial to themselves, at the expense of their neighbours. It is
not to be doubted, that this was considered by the men of Yarmouth as an
object of the highest importance. A grant which gave a restrictive
trading power to one place, in prejudice to another, must, of course,
draw within its gates all those who wished to advance their interest, or
enlarge their property.
The well-being of any commercial town must depend upon the conveniency of
its situation for traffic, but, in this case, their opponents were
equally fortunate as themselves; the same stream flowing equally between
them, and the same conveyance which brought emolument to the one, would
have carried opulence to the other. To the final determination of this
controversy in their favour, the town of Yarmouth is chiefly indebted for
the prosperity it now enjoys; whilst its rivals, Gorleston and Little
Yarmouth, are sunk into obscure villages, and particularly the latter, of
which hardly anything more than the name remains. In the following year,
the earl of Richmond, who had gone over into France, to settle some
matters relative to the estate which he there held as earl of Britainy,
died in that kingdom, without issue, and was succeeded to his manors and
estates by John de Dreux, son of Arthur, earl of Britainy; and he dying
in 1342, they were granted by Edward III. to John, duke of Britainy, and
earl of Montford in France; who was advanced to this dignity on account
of his adherence to the interest of king Edward in that kingdom, for
which cause the king of France had seized upon his possessions. {8}
After the above decision, which established the burgesses of Great
Yarmouth, in the peaceable possession of all their ancient privileges,
the animosities and disturbances, which had agitated the contending
parties for a century past, appear to have subsided; and they maintained
a more friendly intercourse with each other, without any material
interruption, until the reign of Queen Elizabeth; but, in the 12th year
of the reign of that princess, new dissensions arose, which were combated
with a considerable degree of violence and animosity, between the
burgesses of Great Yarmouth, and Sir Henry Jerningham and his tenants,
the men of Little Yarmouth and Gorleston, concerning divers liberties
claimed by Great Yarmouth, respecting the free fair holden at the said
town; and also concerning a parcel of waste ground, lying on the south
side of the haven’s mouth, near the town of Gorleston; which, some time
ago, when the course of the haven extended to the south of Corton, was
situate between the neck of the haven and the main sea; and because the
said haven had at this time a shorter neck or passage to the sea,
obtained by the town of Great Yarmouth, at an immense expense, and was
brought further to the north, consequently the above-mentioned waste
ground must lie to the south of the haven’s mouth, as then situated; and
as Sir Henry Jerningham was owner, not only of the town of Gorleston, but
also of the greater part of Lothingland in which Gorleston is situated,
the claim of the burgesses of Yarmouth must materially affect the
property of Sir Henry. In order therefore, to restore peace and
tranquility to the several parties, the matter in dispute was referred to
the arbitration of Sir Christopher Heydon, and Sir William Butts,
knights, by virtue of a commission from the Star-Chamber, who finally
determined the difference in such a fair and equitable manner, as met
with the approbation of both parties.
But, notwithstanding this affair was so amicably adjusted, fresh disputes
arose, shortly after, between the town of Great Yarmouth and some
neighbouring towns, respecting a fair that was held at Gorleston; and as
Queen Elizabeth, at that time, happened to be at Norwich, her majesty
deputed several lords of her retinue to proceed to Yarmouth, and survey
the premises; which orders being accordingly executed, they made a report
thereof to the Queen; and the following letter from the Privy Council,
was sent to the Sheriff and Justices of the county of Suffolk, respecting
the same.
A copy of the letter sent from the Lords of the Queen’s Majesty’s Privy
Council, to the Sheriff, and also the Justices of Suffolk, in August,
1578, after that the Lord Treasurer, the Lord of Leicester, and others of
the Council, had viewed and seen the town; (all these noblemen were
elegantly entertained at the priory, at the town’s expense) the Queen
being at Norwich, on her tour at the time. {9a}
After our hearty commendations—Whereas the town of Great Yarmouth is
situated upon the frontiers of the sea, in the county of Norfolk,
near the county of Suffolk; and great care has been taken by the
ancestors of our Sovereign Lady, the Queen’s Majesty, for the
maintenance and preservation of the said town, and divers liberties
and privileges have been granted, by the progenitors of her majesty,
to that intent and purpose; amongst which there is one privilege,
granted unto the burgesses of the town of Great Yarmouth, that no
fair or market should be kept or holden at any place or places within
seven leuks {9b} of the said town, either of fish in general, or
herrings in particular, or any other kind of merchandizes, but only
at the town of Great Yarmouth: which said grants and liberties are
thought very necessary to be continued and protected, for that the
Yarmouth men do expend great costs and charges upon the haven
belonging to the said town. We understanding, nevertheless, that
divers and sundry persons heretofore have sought, and do daily seek,
to keep and hold a fair, for buying, selling, and delivering
herrings, and other fish, and divers other merchandizes, at the town
of Gorleston, in the county of Suffolk, which is within the mouth of
the said haven of Yarmouth. We have therefore, thought good to
charge and require, you that you give due information unto the
inhabitants of the said town of Gorleston, and to all other persons
repairing thither, that they suffer no such fair or market, or any
buying, selling or delivering of herrings, or any other fish or
merchandise, at the said town, or at any other place within the said
haven of Great Yarmouth, but only at the said town, or in the road of
the said town, at any time or times, from the beginning of the
herring fair or fishing, now, next ensuing, until the end of the said
herring fair or fishing, as they tender Her Majesty’s pleasure, and
will answer the contrary at their perils. And if you shall receive
information of any person or persons, either seller or buyer, that
shall be obstinate, or act contrary to this Her Majesty’s command,
you shall bind the said persons to appear before us, to answer their
contempt in that behalf. And, finally, we desire you to use all the
good means you can, to see the design of this our letter put in due
execution. And so we bid you heartily farewell.
Your loving friends, &c.
From Thetford, the 27th August, 1578.
In consequence of this letter the men of Gorleston, Lowestoft, and other
towns upon the coast, in the county of Suffolk, presented a petition to
Her Majesty’s Privy Council, praying to have this letter recalled.
Whereupon the burgesses of Yarmouth sent up immediately to the Privy
Council, William Harebrowne and Thomas Damett, with their charters and
decrees, to answer the complaints presented by the above-mentioned towns;
and succeeded so far in their application as to obtain the following
decree, which was issued forth by the Lords of the Privy Council, and
which finally determined the dispute. {10}
A Decree, made by the Lords and others of the Queen’s Majesty’s Privy
Council, upon a matter in controversy between the town of Great
Yarmouth, in the county of Norfolk, and the towns of Little Yarmouth
and Gorleston, and other towns, in Suffolk, after divers hearings of
both parties; and put in writing and subscribed the four and
twentieth day of February, in the one and twentieth year of the reign
of our Sovereign Lady, the Queen’s Majesty, Elizabeth, and in the
year of our Lord one thousand, five hundred and eighty.
Whereas, upon complaint exhibited before us by Henry Gunvyle, of
Gorleston, and John Hoo, of Gunton, gent.; William Frenche, of
Lowestoft, and John Fox, of Aldborough, merchants; as well in their
own names, as also in the names of the inhabitants of the said towns,
and of other coast towns of Suffolk, against the bailiffs, burgesses,
and commonalty of the town of Great Yarmouth, in the county of
Norfolk; the substance of which complaint and controversy consisteth
in this: Whether, by the liberties belonging to the said town of
Great Yarmouth, all kinds of merchandize, and also herrings and all
other fish, being brought into the haven of Great Yarmouth, should,
be unladen and discharged at the said town of Great Yarmouth, or
elsewhere (saving only to Gorleston and Little Yarmouth, their own
proper merchandize, and fish, brought in their own bottoms, and none
other; but excepting such ships belonging to these towns as are laden
with wool, leather, wool-skins, and other merchandize, whereof great
custom ought to be paid, and to be discharged in the port where the
Queen’s Majesty’s trone {11} and seal called the Coquet do remain).
Which liberty is challenged by the said town of Great Yarmouth: and,
for support thereof, there have been shewed forth sundry charters,
judgments, and decrees, all affirming the said liberties to belong to
Great Yarmouth; and not by any allegations for the other parties,
justly disproved.
And, forasmuch, as upon the deliberate hearing of the allegations of
both parties, concerning the said controversy, there hath not been
shewn before us any sufficient matter to make void the said
liberties, challenged by the said town of Great Yarmouth, by virtue
of their charters: We do therefore order and decree that the said
town of Great Yarmouth, and the bailiffs, burgesses, and commonalty
thereof, shall stand possessed of, and quietly hold and enjoy, the
said liberties, by them claimed according to their said charters; and
that no delivering, buying, or selling of herrings, or any other
fish, or any merchandizes, coming into the said haven be made, kept,
or holden, but only at the said town of Great Yarmouth, or where the
bailiffs, burgesses, and commonalty of the said town will appoint the
same to be done, and not elsewhere: excepting only to the said towns
of Little Yarmouth and Gorleston, and the inhabitants thereof,
liberty to land and receive, at the said towns, all such herrings,
and other fish, and merchandizes, as shall be their own, and taken
and brought into that haven in their own boats and vessels, without
any colouring, fraud, or covyn (saving those ships belonging to the
said towns of Little Yarmouth and Gorleston, as are laden with wool,
leather, wool-skins, and other things, whereof great customs ought to
be paid, which shall be discharged in the port of Great Yarmouth, and
at the same place where the Queen’s Majesty’s trone and seal, called
the Coquet) do remain, and not elsewhere.
And, for the better publication and observation of this our order and
decree, we do not only will and require the said complainants to
publish the tenor thereof, in the said coast towns, but, also, have
ordered, that the justices of assizes of the said county, shall be by
us required to give in charge to the Justices of the Peace there, to
have good regard, that the same may be performed, and put in the
execution, without any manner of disturbance; and, that if any person
or persons shall wilfully disobey this order, that then the next
justice of the peace of the said county, shall take sufficient bond
of the said party to appear before us, and to answer his contempt in
that behalf. And this our order and decree shall stand and remain in
full force, until such time as the said complainants, or any other
persons, in behalf of the said towns, shall justly shew, and prove
before us, such good matter as may move us to revoke this our present
or derand decree.
Given at Westminster, the day and year above written,
(Signed,)
LORD BURLEIGH, LORD LINCOLN, LORD SUSSEX, LORD WARWICK,
LORD LEICESTER, LORD HUNSDON, SIR FRANCIS KNOLLY’S,
SIR JAMES CROFTE, SIR CHRISTOPHER HATTON, SIR FRANCIS
WALSINGHAM, SIR WALTER MILDMAY; T. WILSON, Secretary.
Afterwards in the year 1616 we find the bailiffs of Great Yarmouth
petitioning for leave to extend their jurisdiction, or power, on the west
side of the haven; but it does not appear, that they ever acquired any
authority there till the 20th of Charles II., when Southtown was
incorporated with Great Yarmouth; for about that time Sir Robert Paston,
being desirous of adjusting the differences which had for so many years
subsisted between the town of Great Yarmouth and Little Yarmouth (or
Southtown) and Gorleston, brought a bill into the House of Commons in the
year 1664, for incorporating the former with Southtown, which was
accordingly effected.
And, again, in the 36th of Charles II. a new charter was granted to Great
Yarmouth, wherein the said incorporation was confirmed, and other grants
and privileges subjoined; and was afterwards confirmed again by another
charter, granted in the reign of Queen Anne, and remains incorporated to
this day.
It appears from what has been premised, that this island, as part of the
ancient demesne of the crown, was held in the time of Edward the
Confessor, by Earl Guert; in the time of William the Conqueror, by Earl
Warren; {12a} and in the time of Henry III., by Roger Fitz-Osbert {12b}
afterwards it descended to the Baliols; but, upon John de Baliol’s
renouncing his homage to Edward I. and thereby forfeiting all his English
estates, it again reverted to the crown, and king Edward I. in the 34th
year of his reign gave the island to his nephew John de Britainy, earl of
Richmond, in the reign of Queen Elizabeth the greatest part of the island
belonged to Sir Henry Jerningham {12c} In the reign of Charles II. the
part contiguous to Gorleston was in the hands of Sir Robert Paston,
knight.
History informs us, that the island of Lothingland has experienced a
variety of vicissitudes from the irruptions of the sea; and that the
coast which is washed by the German Ocean, was, in former ages, very
different in its appearance from which it is at present. A large arm of
the sea, at the time when the Romans were in Britain, extended itself, on
the north side of the island, several miles westward of the ground
whereon Yarmouth is now situated; and the mouth of the Yare, or, rather,
arm of the sea, at that time, was very large, and discharged itself into
the ocean by two channels, (being separated by the sand-bank on which
Yarmouth was afterwards built) the one near Caister, and the other near
Gorleston. It is highly probable that before the Christian era, this
extraordinary effect of the secret operations of the ocean, had not
commenced; and that previous to that period, the Yare discharged itself
into the sea by one channel only.
The reason why this sand-bank was not formed before that time, is one of
those secrets of Providence which, to us, continues unexplored.
The north-east winds appear to have been the apparent cause of forming
the sand-bank at the mouth of that river; and is an inconvenience to
which it is subject, even at this present time.
The original name of the bank was, the Cerdick Sand; from Cerdick, a
warlike Saxon, who, about the year 495, landed here; and who, after
having routed the opposing Britons, and greatly harassed the Iceni with a
very grievous war, sailed to the western parts of Britain, where he
founded the kingdom of the West Saxons.
The mouth of the former of these channels being entirely choaked up by
the north-east winds, the whole stream fell, afterwards, into the latter;
and this last-mentioned channel having its entrance so frequently blocked
up by the sand-banks formed by these winds, that its course was greatly
altered, and extended a considerable distance to the south of Gorleston,
before it was able to discharge itself into the sea. These obstructions
still continuing, the mouth of the haven kept proceeding still further to
the south, till, at last, it reached even to the south of Corton, before
it was able to force its passage into the ocean.
The mouth of the haven, from these obstructions, being carried thus far
to the south, and having such numerous sands and shallows formed therein,
especially between the 10th and 20th of Edward III, that its navigation
became extremely dangerous, and but few ships of burthen could enter
there with safety; and, consequently, was so detrimental to Yarmouth,
that it greatly affected the trade, which for many years had subsisted
there, as well as the commerce of the adjacent country.
Whereupon, the bailiffs, burgesses, and commonalty of Great Yarmouth,
presented a petition to king Edward III, in the 20th year of his reign,
for liberty to cut a new mouth to the haven, nearer to Yarmouth than it
was at that time; which petition being granted, a new communication with
the ocean was accordingly opened, and confined with piers, opposite to
the parish of Corton. This great undertaking was accomplished at an
immense expense, and was confined to this place for the space of
twenty-six years; (46th of Edward III), when it began again to be so much
choked up with sand, that no vessels of any considerable burden could
enter, but were obliged to unload their cargoes in an adjoining place,
called Kirkley Road, which was near the mouth of the said haven. The
king, being informed of the great difficulties which the town of Great
Yarmouth laboured under, from the dangerous state of its haven, and how
utterly unable they were thereby rendered of paying the fee-farm rent due
to his majesty, from the great quantity of merchandise that was obliged
to be unladen in the adjoining place called Kirkley Road, and which, by
that means, escaped paying the usual customs to Yarmouth, his majesty, in
consideration of these misfortunes, was pleased to grant a charter for
uniting the said Road of Kirkley unto the port and haven of Yarmouth;
{13a} upon condition, that the said burgesses of Great Yarmouth would pay
to the king and his successors, an additional rent of 100s. yearly: and
also granted unto the said burgesses full power to demand and receive the
same duties in the said Kirkley road, as in the port and haven of
Yarmouth, for ever. {13b}
It is very evident, to an attentive observer, that the whole of the flat
country, which lies between Caister and Burgh, extending about four
miles, and forms a considerable part of the water called Braydon, was
once covered by the German Ocean; and that the mouth of the Yare, at that
time, was an estuary, or arm of the sea, and extended, with considerable
magnitude, for many miles up the country. Tradition, the faithful
preserver of many a fact which history has overlooked or forgotten,
confidently and invariably asserts it; and the present appearance of the
ancient bed of the river, from Yarmouth to Harleston, in Norfolk, tends
to confirm it. Probably the points of land whereon Beccles, Bungay, and
Homersfield are situated, and which protruded themselves into the ancient
river, might serve as convenient situations for placing beacons and other
signals, announcing the approach of an enemy, at the time when the
Romans, Saxons, and Danes invaded and gained possession of the island;
and might, from thence give birth to the origin of those towns. The case
may be the same in respect to other places situated on points of land on
the borders both of the Yare and the Waveney. What is here suggested may
receive farther confirmation from an inspection of the above ancient map
of Garienis Oestium, or mouth of the Yare, as given in the Ives’s
Garianonum, {14a} which represents this part of the country as it
appeared in the year one thousand; and which, also, affords considerable
assistance in forming a just conception of the ancient boundaries of
these rivers, at the time when the Romans and other foreign invaders were
in possession of this island.
The mouth of the Waveney on the south of the island, was also at this
time very large, and discharged itself into the ocean between Lowestoft
and Kirkley. {14b} The conflux of waters arising from the communication
which these two rivers had with the sea, the one at Yarmouth and the
other at Lowestoft, was so great, when they formed a junction as to
render the Waveney navigable some miles beyond Harleston in Norfolk.
{14c}
After that the sea had considerably receded from the river between
Lowestoft and Kirkley, yet it still preserved a small communication with
it; and therefore, whenever a violent storm arose from the north-west, at
the time when the waters were increased by the spring tides, it would
flow into the river with great violence, and threaten the adjacent
country with an inundation. To guard against these irruptions of the
ocean, and prevent the damages that would otherwise ensue, a break-water
was erected between Lowestoft and Kirkley, as a security for the low
grounds and marshes which laid contiguous to the river.
For it appears, that on the 6th February, 1652, a verdict was given by
the jury, on a commission of sewers, of the number of acres of low
grounds in the several towns in Norfolk and Suffolk, which were subject
to inundations from the sea-breach between Lowestoft and Kirkley; wherein
it was found that in the parishes of Ellingham and Kirby only, there were
482 acres, and one rood of low ground subject to those inundations, the
annual value whereof was £87 18s. 10d., and which paid to the charge of
the said breach £7 4s. 9d.; and it was also found, by the said commission
of sewers, that, in the manor of Earsham there were 418 acres of low
grounds liable to inundation from the said sea-breach, valued at £330 and
paid £13 10s. 6d. towards repairing the same. {14d}
And at a commission of sewers, held at the Swan Tavern, at Lowestoft, the
21st February, 1660, before Sir Thomas Meadows, Knight; Henry Bacon, John
Duke, John Garnies, William Cooke, William Cooke, the younger; John
Playters, Francis Brewster, William Gooch, John Baispoole, Esquires;
Robert London, Thomas London, Philip Hayward, Christopher Reeve, Glover
Denny, Gisleham Wollhouse, Henry Jenkenson and Anthony Jenkenson,
gentlemen, commissioners; the two following questions were proposed,
viz.:
1st. Whether the work at the sea-breach between Lowestoft and
Kirkley should stand in its present state until an engineer shall
come or not?
2nd. Whether the fortifications (or fence of the sea-breach) shall
be made at Mutford Bridge, or at the sea?
When it was resolved by the Court and ordered, “That the work and
fortifications shall be proceeded upon forthwith without delay; and that
the said work and fortification shall be made and done at the sea-shore,
where the bank or wall formerly was made, or thereabouts.”
It was further ordered by the Court, “That the sum of six hundred pounds
should forthwith be raised, for a defence and fortification to be made
against the sea-breach at Lowestoft.”
And whereas it appeared to the Court, “That the causeway at Mutford
Bridge was decayed and broken down, in consequence of the sea-breach at
Lowestoft, and made unpassable for foot-passengers, and very dangerous to
others; it was therefore ordered, That the same should be repaired
immediately out of the first money to be raised, but not to exceed the
sum of ten pounds.” It was also ordered, “That Henry Bacon, Esquire,
should treat with Sir Cornelius Vermewden, or any other engineer at
London, to come down to Lowestoft, and view the work and fortification to
be made there against the sea-breach, and to take his opinion concerning
the same. That Gisleham Wollhouse, of Olton, gent., be treasurer, and
Thomas Verdon, of the same place, gent., be surveyor.”
Warrants were also issued to the sheriffs of both counties, to warn a
jury, to take a view of all such breaches and other decays, within the
limits of the said commission, and to make presentiments of the same;
and, accordingly, amongst many other matters, they presented the
sea-breach near Lowestoft, and that it was necessary that a defence
against the sea should be made there, otherwise it would be injurious to
the owners of the lands betwixt the said sea-breach and Ditchingham Dam.
Also, they found the grounds liable to be taxed to the sea-breach, as far
as the former jurors found them, viz.: to Yarmouth on the Suffolk side,
and to Braydon on the Norfolk side. They also found the grounds
hereinafter mentioned, as liable to be taxed to the said sea-breach,
although omitted in the former levy, viz.:
Acres.
Lands within the Town of Lowestoft 60
Low grounds in Carlton Colville, lying between East Heath 20
and the common drain leading from Kirkley Bridge and
against Lowestoft
Several doles in Kirkley, and other low grounds lying 30
against the common, betwixt Lowestoft bounds and inclosed
meadows towards Kirkley Bridge
Several inclosed pieces, betwixt divers common doles and 2
Kirkley Bridge, whereof one piece is glebe, belonging
unto William Bacon, clerk
Two other pieces, in the tenure of Henry Church 2
One other piece of glebe, lying next Kirkley Bridge, 1
belonging to the said William Bacon, clerk
It was further ordered by the Court,
That against the next sessions of sewers, to be holden at the Swan
Tavern, Lowestoft, the 21st June next, a levy be prepared, to be sent
to the several towns chargeable to the sea-breach at Lowestoft, at
double the proportion which was formerly charged, viz. from the said
sea-breach to Beccles Bridge and Gillingham Dam, in the whole level,
chargeable at two shillings in the pound; and from the said Bridge
and Dam to Ditchingham Dam, sixteen pence in the pound; and those
towns which were not charged upon the former levy, to be added to
this.
Also, that the clerk of this commission do issue out warrants to the
several petty constables within the towns charged towards the
sea-breach at Lowestoft, to collect and pay their several sums to Mr.
Gisleham Wollhouse, treasurer, at the White Lion, at Beccles, the 4th
day of July next.
The proportion of the several towns charged to the sea-breach at
Lowestoft, being the second levy at two shillings in the pound to Beccles
Bridge, and sixteen pence in the pound from thence to Bungay Bridge and
Ditchingham Dam. {16}
£ s. d.
Gorleston 26 17 0
South Town 16 4 10
Bradwell 17 11 8
Burgh Castle 16 10 8
Belton 16 8 0
Fritton 16 19 9
Herringfleet 9 6 10
Somerley Town 8 18 10
Blundeston 2 1 4
Flixton 7 19 6
Oulton 16 8 9
Carlton Colville 6 15 9
Lowestoft 2 0 0
Barnaby 10 18 2
North Cove 12 17 0
Worlingham 6 19 4
Beccles 46 8 4
Barsham 6 13 9
Shipmeadow 3 6 8
Mettingham 14 10 9
Kirkley 0 9 9
Broom 5 18 2
Ellingham 8 15 11
Gelston 5 17 8
Aldeby 39 15 2
Burgh 58 18 2
Whitacre All Saints 17 19 10
Haddiscoe 52 19 10
Thorp next Haddiscoe 28 0 8
Ranningham 7 9 4
Thurlton 14 14 7
Loddon 10 11 6
Toft Monks 21 8 9
Langlie 13 1 0
Total £551 17 3
Still to charge—
Ditchingham 4 6 6
Gillingham 15 19 11
Bungay 0 18 0
£573 1 8
There were several other sessions of sewers held under this commission at
Lowestoft, Beccles and Loddon, before the business was finally settled.
(After the isthmus was formed, the breakwater became useless.)
But as all communications between the sea and the river has ceased for
upwards of sixty years, consequently, the apprehensions which the
adjoining country were exposed to, have long subsided. The last
irruption of the sea which happened at this place was on the 14th
December, 1717, occasioned by a violent storm of wind and high tide, when
the sea forced its way over the beach, which separated it from the river,
with such irresistible violence as to carry away Mutford Bridge, at a
mile-and-a-half distance from the sea-shore; and all the fish which were
in the eastern part of the river were destroyed by the salt water. {17a}
Lothingland, most probably, ceased to be an island and became a peninsula
about the year 1712; for at that time there was only a small
communication with the sea at the part between Lowestoft and Kirkley,
which now forms the isthmus. {17b} Soon after that period the sea
entirely withdrew itself, and the eastern point of the river, through a
deficiency of water, gradually receded to the west. The tract of land
between the ocean and the river, which forms this isthmus, is about a
quarter of a mile in breadth, and is able to resist the most sudden and
violent attacks of the boisterous ocean.
I shall conclude these remarks on the island of Lothingland, with
subjoining a few observations on the place of the greatest antiquity
therein, viz. the ancient Garianonum of the Romans, now called Burgh
Castle.
In the celebrated Notitia Imperii, {17c} or Survey of the Roman Empire,
it appears that the troops who garrisoned this station, were a body of
cavalry, called the Stablesian Horse. {17d} They were stationed at this
place under the command of a prœpositus, who was particularly styled
Gariennonensis, signifying the commander at the mouth of Garienis, or
river now called the Yare. In ascertaining the number of troops which
formed this garrison, we must have recourse to conjecture. A camp so
considerable, Garianonum so strongly fortified, and of such great
importance must necessarily require a large body of men to defend it.
The Roman troops in Britain amounted to about fourteen thousand horse;
and seventy-two thousand foot; and these being distributed into near one
hundred and forty fortresses, the mean proportion of men to each, is
about one hundred horse and four hundred and eighty or five hundred foot:
but some stations could not accommodate so many, and others required
more, and, also some consisted of horse only, and some wholly of
infantry; consequently it is impossible to assert—positively the exact
number of troops which composed this garrison.
Sir Henry Spelman, in his Iceni, and also Bishop Gibson, in his Camden,
and from them, some writers of inferior note, have placed the Garianonum
at Caistor; but Camden himself has fixed its situation at Burgh Castle;
and Ives, in his account of this station, has confirmed the opinion of
the latter with the greatest appearance of truth.
Upon a stream, whose largeness and rapidity must have rendered it
formidable to passing armies; upon a shore, peculiarly exposed to the
depredations of lawless pirates; and upon the boundary of a country
possessed by a brave and hardy people, Garianonum must have been a
station of the utmost importance to the Romans; it gave them weight and
consequence in the eyes of the Britons, who were destitute of every idea
respecting mural fortifications; it established their influence, extended
their territories, and afforded them a secure retreat, and an impregnable
defence against the warlike Iceni, who, animated with the spirit of our
immortal Boadicea, frequently rose in arms against the invaders of their
native soil. In each of these views did the politic Romans consider
their new-erected camp; in every respect it answered their designs, and
in every particular corresponded with their wishes. From hence they
commanded the estuary of the Yare, the German Ocean, and the interior
country; and from hence they derived a power and consequence sufficient
to awe and intimidate the Britons, and to prevent their making any
military attempt against them.
Being destitute of express records, and unable to penetrate the clouds
which ignorance and inattention have fabled over our Anglo-Roman
antiquities, it is from the tenor of general history alone that we are
enabled to fix a time for the building of this fortress: without such a
consultation our utmost researches would fail us, and we should have only
the miserable alternative of either guessing at the period or passing it
by unnoticed.
That portion of Anglo-Roman history which more immediately respects
Garianonum is short and limited; it commences with the reign of Claudius,
and it extends no further.
This emperor, who assumed the purple at fifty years old, had neither the
spirit, courage, nor perseverance of his great predecessor; yet,
ambitious of following the steps of Julius, he formed the design of
completing what Cæsar had begun, and of reducing Britain to a Roman
province. In pursuance of this plan, he arrived here about the year of
Christ, 45, having previously sent Aulus Plautius with troops sufficient
to effect his intention. After the emperor had continued here six months
he returned to Rome, and triumphed for conquests never obtained and for
victories never won. {18}
After the emperor’s departure, Plautius remained here near four years,
and carried on the Britannic war with spirit and success.
Next in command was the proprætor, Publius Ostorius Scapula, an
experienced officer, in whom conduct and courage were equally united. To
him the Romans were indebted for the subjection of the Iceni, to him they
were obliged for the retention of their conquests, and to him we owe the
foundation of Garianonum.
No part of the policy of this General claims our attention so much as the
erecting this fortress: it was the most effectual method of curbing the
high spirit of liberty inherent in the native Britons, of dissolving
their alliances, breaking their power, and dividing their resources; and
without these mural encampments, neither conquest nor security could have
attended the Roman banner in Britain. From this period, therefore, we
date the rise of Garianonum, built by the command and by the soldiers of
Ostorius, and garrisoned by a cohort of veteran troops lately returned
victorious from a battle with the Iceni.
Round our now well-cultivated fields, then cold, bleak, and woody, the
Romans diverted themselves with the pleasures of the chase; and cross our
now green and fertile meadows, they navigated their vessels and caught
their fish.
Upon a rising hill, near the confluence of the rivers Yare and Waveney,
and overlooking a large extent of Marshes which once formed the estuary
it commanded, stands Burgh Castle, the ancient Garianonum of the Romans.
In the construction of this camp the Romans pursued their usual method of
security in building, and practised their favourite military
architecture. It formed an irregular parallelogram, the parallel sides
of which were equally right lines, and equally long, but the corners were
rounded. Those camps, which were one-third longer than they were broad,
were esteemed the most beautiful, but here the proportion is as two to
one.
The principal wall of this station, in which is placed the Porta
Prætoria, is that to the east, 14 feet high, 214 yards long, and 9 feet
broad; the north and southern walls are just the same height and breadth,
and just half the length; the western side has no remains of any wall,
nor can we determine, with certainty, whether it ever had any; the sea
might possibly be considered as a sufficient barrier on that side, and
the steepness of the hill, as a collateral security.
Four massive round towers defend the eastern wall; the northern has one;
and another, now thrown down, stood opposite on the southern. These
towers were added after building the walls, and served not only to
ornament and strengthen them, but as _turres exploratorii_, each having
on the top a round hole two feet deep, and as many in diameter, evidently
designed both for the erection of standards and signals, and for the
admission of light temporary watch-towers, under the care and for the use
of the spectators. The south-west corner of the station forms the
pretorium, raised by the earth taken out of a vallum which surrounds and
secures it, and which is sunk eight feet lower than the common surface of
the area.
Near this was placed the south tower, which, being undermined a few years
since by the force of the water running down the vallum after some very
heavy rains, is fallen on one side near its former situation, but remains
perfectly entire. The north tower having met with a similar accident is
reclined from the wall at the top about six feet, has drawn a part of it,
and caused a breach near it. The whole area of the station contains four
acres and two roods, and, including the walls, five acres, two roods and
twenty perches.
The mortar made use of by the Romans in this work was composed of lime
and sand, unrefined by the sieve, and incorporated with common gravel and
small pebbles. It was used two different ways; one cold, in the common
manner now in use; the other, rendered fluid by fire and applied boiling
hot. From the artful mixture of both in the same building, and from the
coarse materials of the composition, this cement is extremely hard and
durable, very difficult to break, and for several days indissoluble in
water. The Romans, raising the wall to a convenient height with the
former sort, at the end of every day’s work poured the latter upon it,
which immediately filled up the interstices, and when cold, proved a most
powerful adhesive. The Roman bricks made use of at Burgh are of a fine
red colour and very close texture; they are about one foot and a half
long, one foot broad, and an inch and a half thick. It does not,
however, appear that the Romans had any exact standard for the size of
their bricks: in different stations their dimensions are considerably
varied. We ought, however, to observe that either in the choice of their
materials, or in their method of preparing them, they far excel those of
later days, being much harder and less porous than ours, and for
durableness more resembling stone, for which they were undoubtedly
substituted.
In the area of this camp, and in many of the fields around it, vast
numbers of Roman coins have been, and are still, found; but none of them
rise higher than the reign of Domitian, {19} and the generality of them
are much later. Few are found of any other metal than copper, and they
are seldom curious, either for design or execution.
The fields adjoining to the eastern wall of Garianonum was the place
allotted for depositing the ashes of the dead, and for the performance of
the funeral rites. Here great numbers of Roman urns have been found, and
innumerable pieces of them are everywhere spread over it: but neither the
workmanship nor the materials of these urns have anything to recommend
them: they are made of a coarse blue clay, brought from the neighbouring
village of Bradwell, ill-formed, brittle, and porous. One of these urns,
when the pieces were united, contained more than a peck and a half of
corn, and had a large thick stone operculum on the top of it; within was
a considerable number of bones and ashes, several fair pieces of
Constantine and the head of a Roman spear. Here also was found a
cockleare, or Roman spoon: it was of silver, and had a long handle very
sharp at the point, that being used to pick fish out of the shell, as the
bowl, or other end, served to take up liquids and small meat. Rings,
keys, buckles, sibulæ, and various other reliquiæ of the Romans, are
continually ploughed up in the fields adjoining to the station.
The intestine feuds of Italy called the Romans from their Britannic
conquests between the years 418 and 427. They gathered all the treasures
which could be found in Britain, some part of which they hid, perhaps in
hopes of returning again in better days, and of recovering their effects
from whence they had deposited them; or it might proceed from an
ambitious design of informing posterity, that the Romans were once
masters of this place. {20a} The Britons, forsaken by their Roman
guards, and exposed to the ravages of their merciless northern
neighbours, frequently hid their money when threatened with fresh
invasions; and if death or exile was the fate of the owners the secret
was lost, and the treasure remained till an accidental plough or pick-axe
once more brought it to light. Thus both Romans and Britons may have
contributed to the great number of ancient coins discovered in the
eastern parts of this county.
A Roman spur, which belonged to the Stablesain Horse, was found some
years ago, in the area of this station; and is now in the possession of
Mr. John Jex, Lowestoft. {20b} Sigebert, one of the heptarchial kings,
and fifth monarch of the East Angles, ascended the East Anglian throne in
the year 636. The Christian faith had made some faint progress in his
dominions during the reign of his father, Redwald. To reinstate some of
his subjects in their belief, and to convert others, was the great object
of Sigebert’s ambition: and to assist him in this design, he brought over
from France a priest of Burgundy, named Felix, whom he procured to be
consecrated bishop of the East Angles, and fixed the episcopal see at
Dunwich. {20c}
Whilst Felix, under the patronage of the king, was spreading the gospel
among the East Angles, Furseus, an Irish Monk, came over to his
assistance; and collecting a company of religious persons, under the
monastic rule, placed them at Burgh Castle, then called Cnobersburgh.
{21a}
Sigebert may be considered as the founder of this early monastery; but
being afterwards slain in a battle with Penda, king of Mercia, the walls
of the Roman camp afforded to Furseus and his monks a comfortable asylum;
and like the Roman soldiers, they lived in tents or huts within the area.
At this early period, regular edifices for the service of religion were
unknown: churches were erected with hurdles, and covered with straw; and
such buildings were fully sufficient for the devotion of a people, who in
compliment to their next prince, might return to Paganism. The death of
Sigebert deprived Furseus of a great and zealous patron; and to avoid the
troubles which succeeded it, he left his monastery at Burgh, and retired
into France.
The monks, however, appeared to have been endued with more constancy and
resolution; for by the favours granted to this religious society, by some
of the latter kings of the East Angles, we find they remained there for
several years: but how long they continued at Burgh, or when they left
it, is uncertain.
It appears that in the reign of Edward I. the prior of Bromeholme held
the manor of Burgh, of our lord the king, in capite; and the prior and
monks of Bromeholme continued lords of this manor till the dissolution of
their house, 26 Henry VIII.; when, with their revenues, it again reverted
to the crown, who possessed it till Queen Mary sold it to William
Roberts, town-clerk of Yarmouth.
Roger de Burgh gave the advowason of this church to the priory of St.
Olave, at Herringfleet for perpetual alms; and King Henry III, confirmed
the donation to them. The prior presented to the rectory, and had a
reserved pension of four marks out of it, which is still paid to the
owner of St. Olave’s. After the dissolution of the priory the patronage
of the church came to the crown. {21b}
The church is a small building, consisting of a nave, chancel, and round
tower, and is dedicated to St. Peter. It is a rectory, anciently valued
at ten marks; in the king’s books at £6 13s. 4d.; and being of the sworn
value of £44 6s. 1d., is discharged of first-fruits and tenths. The
parsonage house adjoins to the north-west corner of the churchyard, and
has thirty-nine acres of glebe belonging to it.
The present rector is the Rev. John Bellward, to whom the author here
acknowledges himself much indebted for his kindness to him many years
since.
SECTION II.
OF THE ORIGIN OF LOWESTOFT.
LESTOFFE, Laystoft, Laistoe, or, as it was more anciently called
Lothnwistoft, is supposed by some to have derived its name from
Lothbroch, the noble Dane, on his arriving in this island about the year
864, and from wista, {23} a half-hide of land; but I apprehend,
erroneously, as it is doubtful whether these several appellations be of
any earlier date than the reign of Queen Elizabeth. In the charter
granted by Edward III. for uniting Kirkley road to the haven of Yarmouth,
we find it expressed Loystoft and Lowystofte; probably, therefore, the
present mode of expression, Lowestoft, may be only the former ones
modernized by subsequent writers. Perhaps, at this distant period, it
may be difficult to ascertain with certainty, the true etymology of its
name, though possibly it may be no improbable conjecture to suppose its
being derived, in some measure, from the fairs and market being held
formerly below the cliff, and from the town being situated upon the most
eastern point of land in England.
In the preceding section an ample description is given of the numerous
revolutions which the northern part of the island of Lothingland
experienced from the various incursions of the sea, from the earliest
period which history can furnish us with, down to the present time; and
it is equally evident that the more southern part of it, particularly
that whereon Lowestoft is situated, has been subject to as large a share
of the same vicissitudes.
In those early ages, when the Romans were in possession of Britain, it is
highly probable that the sea, by its frequent irruptions had not only
approached, but actually formed those cliffs, upon whose summits the town
of Lowestoft is situated.
During those early periods, when the rivers which form the northern and
southern boundaries of the island discharged themselves into the ocean
with an extensive and rapid current, it appears that the incursions of
that boisterous element upon the extremities of the island had made its
utmost progress; but with respect to the intermediate parts of it, the
case was somewhat different; for it is evident from the ancient maps of
the coast and from authentic records which we find interspersed in
topographical history, that those intermediate parts of the island
protruded themselves much farther towards the east than either the
northern or southern boundaries of it did, or either as they do at this
present time.
As a corroborating circumstance of what is here asserted, we shall
observe that some centuries since there was situated on that part of the
coast which lies between Yarmouth and Lowestoft, a village called Newton,
which has long since been entirely swallowed up by the ocean without
leaving any other vestiges of it remaining than a small piece of land
called Newton Green. Since that period the sea on that part of the
island appears to have receded again; as formerly we find there was
sufficient space between the bottom of the cliffs and the sea for the
neck of the Yare to extend itself south as far as Corton before it
discharged itself into the sea; although at this present time the ocean
on the same part of the island approaches very near the cliffs.
That the basis of the cliff on whose summit the town of Lowestoft is
situated was washed by the German Ocean during that era when the Romans
resided in Britain, will evidently appear from an attentive investigation
of the coast contiguous to the town, where it is very conspicuous how the
cliff inclines to the west as it advances towards the river which lies to
the south of Lowestoft, occasioned, probably, by the violence of the
current, which in those early ages united that river with the ocean; and
also the gradual descent of the cliff from the northern part of Lowestoft
to the river on the south part of it, where it becomes a perfect level
with the adjacent country is still evident, and points out the ancient
state of the river and the parts adjoining to the same. These
circumstances, undoubtedly rendered this spot extremely convenient for
fishermen resorting to the coast, and probably were those which gave
birth to the origin of Lowestoft, as similar circumstances did afterwards
to the origin of Yarmouth.
In succeeding ages, when the mouth of the Yare, from being obstructed by
sand-banks, was reduced to the more contracted limits of a narrow
channel; and when every communication between the ocean and the Waveney,
had either totally ceased, or become an insignificant stream, it is
evident, that the sea at that time receded from the extremities of the
island, and made considerable encroachments on the intermediate parts of
it. This is evident, not only from the above-mentioned circumstance
respecting the village of Newton, but also from those which follow: for
we find (Lowestoft town-book) that in the beginning of the reign of Henry
VIII a block-house, which had been erected for the defence of the town,
was then standing to the east of Lowestoft, about four furlongs distant
from the present boundaries of the sea; so that the place where Lowestoft
roads are now situated, was at that time firm land, interspersed with
houses, and defended by a fortress; which continued until the 25th of
Henry VIII when they were either taken down or destroyed by the
encroachments of the sea. And it also appears, about the 30th of Queen
Elizabeth, that the sea had made such great alterations in the roads, and
in the sands and shores bordering upon Lowestoft, that the roads before
the town, which, in the reign of Henry VIII were dry land, had not then
less than three fathoms water at the lowest ebb. This was the state of
the coast near Lowestoft in the reigns of Henry VIII and Queen Elizabeth,
and since that time the sea has kept encroaching near the town; for about
sixty or seventy years ago, upon every gale of wind at north-west,
especially if it happened at a spring tide, the sea will oftentimes force
its way over the beach with great violence, and with so large a body of
water, as not only to overflow the Denes, the yards of the fish-houses,
and approach even to the bottom of the gardens formed upon the declivity
of the cliff, but would also endanger the foundations of the fish-houses
themselves. We had a remarkable instance of these formidable irruptions
of the sea, in the year 1712; when a fish-house, in the southern part of
the town, was entirely washed away, and another fish-house and barn were
so exceedingly damaged, as to make it necessary to have them taken down.
And, again, in the year 1717, the sea, in one of those raging tides,
forced its way over the isthmus which separates the peninsula from the
adjacent country, with such irresistible fury, as to carry away Mutford
Bridge, which cost the county £200 to repair the damages. But these
irruptions have for some time ceased, and the apprehensions which they
excited have, consequently, long since subsided: but so fluctuating in
her operations is this inconstant element, that upon that part of the
coast which lies opposite to Lowestoft, the sea has lately much receded,
and is making proportionable encroachments on the parts which lie to the
north of it. From all these circumstances we may form this general
observation, that whenever the sea obtrudes upon the coast near
Lowestoft, it retires from the intermediate parts or coast to the north
of it; and when it recedes at Lowestoft, it gains upon the more northern
part.
Being almost destitute of express records (the greater part of them being
destroyed by fire in the year 1606) relative to the town of Lowestoft, it
is chiefly from selecting circumstances which we find interspersed in
history, that we are able to form any conjectures respecting its origin.
The principal evidence which now remains respecting the antiquity of
Lowestoft, is that of “The Narrative of the Proceedings between Yarmouth
and Lowestoft during the contest respecting the Herring Fishery”, {24}
wherein it appears that Lowestoft is a more ancient town than Yarmouth.
But notwithstanding the proof which arises from this evidence, it may be
necessary for us to guard ourselves against an error which otherwise
might mislead us, concerning the origin of Yarmouth; and, therefore, it
may be proper to extend our enquiries to this circumstance, and to
endeavour to place it in a true point of light. What endangers our
mistake respecting Yarmouth, is as follows:—In the tables of records,
hanging in the common hall of Yarmouth, it is expressed that in the days
of Canutus there was a sand in the sea, which began to be dry land from
Anno 1040 to 1090. And in a manuscript book, containing the originality
or antiquity of Yarmouth, it is asserted, that in Edward the Confessor’s
time, the same sand began to appear at low water; and that in the days of
King Harold and William the Conqueror the same grew so dry, and not
overflown, that they then began to build tents, and fishermen did then
begin to repair thither, about killing of herrings. These records—for
want of better, which have since been published—have embarrassed the
world with difficulties, and involved them in error; and the more so, as
these records have been regarded as authentic: but if we compare them
with those which are known to be genuine, we may easily detect the
imposition, and prove them to be erroneous. It plainly appears, from
what has been already observed, that the sand on which Yarmouth was
founded was dry in the year 495, when Cerdick the Saxon first landed
there; and that shortly after, Yarmouth began to be erected by the
Saxons, first on a sand a little to the west of that whereon it now
stands, and then shortly after, the inhabitants removed to this latter or
Cerdick Sand, upon account of the unhealthy situation of the former. And
it is also further recorded that in the time of Edward the Confessor,
Yarmouth was become so opulent, that there flourished in it seventy
burgesses. From hence it is evident that the former account above
mentioned, concerning Yarmouth being founded about the year 1040, is
evidently an error; and, consequently, to date the origin of Lowestoft
only prior to that year, would be making it, in fact, of less antiquity
than Yarmouth.
About the year 420, when the Romans had left Britain, the river Yare, at
that time very capacious, was found so extremely commodious for the
reception of a fleet of armed vessels meditating a descent on this coast,
that the Saxons made choice of this place for that purpose, and soon
after landed here; and about the beginning of the sixth century began to
lay the foundation of Yarmouth, which proved afterwards the most
formidable fortress on this part of the coast; and became a place of such
perfect security for the foreign invaders, as to resemble, in some
measure, the famous Gariononum of the ancient Romans. Prior to this time
the ground whereon Yarmouth was afterwards built was only a barren sand,
just emerging from its watery element; and if we extend our investigation
but a little farther back we shall be unable to distinguish it above the
surface of the pathless ocean; and, when it did appear, and also for some
time after—previous to the building of Yarmouth—the principal use that
was made of it was to serve the temporary conveniences of fishermen
resorting to the coast, and the other purposes of a maritime life.
But with respect to Lowestoft the case is quite otherwise. The cliffs,
indeed, whereon it is situated, might be formed during that period when
the Romans resided in Britain; but the ground itself is of the same
origin with the other parts of the island. How long the town had begun
to be erected before the sea approached so far as to form these cliffs is
now uncertain; we, therefore, can only say that as its situation was
found to be extremely convenient for every purpose respecting the
herring-fishery, that probably it was the general rendezvous of the
fishermen resorting to this coast; and, consequently, not only gave birth
to the town, but also to the establishing of a fishery, which has been
its chief support from time immemorial, and has continued to be so till
this present time. From hence we may conclude that prior to the founding
of Yarmouth, Lowestoft was the principal place of resort for all the
fishermen employed in the herring fishery on this coast; and furnished
with provisions and other necessaries, not only such vessels as were
fitted out from our own part of the coast, but, those also which resorted
hither from the northern and western parts of England; and, therefore, we
may reasonably conclude that Lowestoft is a more ancient town than
Yarmouth, as we are able to trace its origin previous to the fourth
century, and, consequently, before the ground was formed whereon Yarmouth
was afterwards erected.
Lowestoft, as we observed before, is situated upon the most eastern point
of land in England; it stands upon a lofty eminence, and commands an
extensive prospect of the German Ocean, and when beheld from the sea has
the noblest and most beautiful appearance of any town upon the coast
between Newcastle and London; it chiefly consists of an extensive
arrangement of houses, whose line of direction is nearly north and south,
and, consequently, faces the sea; it stands upon a dry soil, upon the
summit of a cliff, and enjoys a most salubrious air, keen but bracing;
and not being exposed to any of those unwholesome damps and vapours which
generally arise from low grounds and marshes, it is rendered not only a
very pleasant, but a very healthy situation.
The declivity of this cliff, which formerly was one continued slope of
barren sand, is now converted by modern improvements into very beautiful
hanging gardens, descending from the dwelling-houses above, to the fish
houses at the bottom of the hill; and being interspersed with alcoves and
summer houses, are not only extremely pleasant and convenient to the
inhabitants, but exhibit a very pleasing appearance when beheld from the
sea.
At the bottom of these gardens is a long arrangement of fish houses which
extend the whole length of the town, and are so numerous, that had they
been placed in a more compact form, would have been sufficient of
themselves to have formed a considerable town.
Lowestoft derives many conveniences from the fish houses being detached
from the other buildings of the town, and placed at the bottom of the
hill; such as the easy conveyance of herrings from the boats; also the
avoiding those very offensive smells arising from the smoke and drainage
of the fish, which otherwise it would be subject to, if the houses
wherein the herring are cured had been intermixed with the
dwelling-houses; and, consequently, the town is thereby exempted from
those disagreeable nuisances, so much and so justly complained of in
other places. Between the fish houses and the top of the beach stand the
boats employed in the herring fishery, which are arranged before the town
to a considerable length; also the lower light-house, conveniences for
boat building and the bathing machines. {26}
The shore opposite Lowestoft is bold and steep consisting of a hard sand
intermixed with shingle and perfectly free from ouze and those beds of
mud too frequently met with on other shores.
Lowestoft is about a mile in length; and consists chiefly of one
principal street, running in a gradual descent from north to south, which
is intersected by several smaller streets or lanes from the west; it is
well paved, particularly High Street, and consists of about 445
houses—exclusive of the fish houses—which are chiefly built with brick;
several of the houses have been lately re-built in the modern style, and
make a handsome appearance. {27a} Lowestoft contains about 2231
inhabitants. An extract from the parish register of Lowestoft shews the
number of marriages, christenings, and burials from the year 1561 to
1713, marriages 2539, christenings 10,548, burials 10,056.
During the civil war and to the restoration of Charles II., no entries
were made in the parish register. The Rev. Jacob Rous, then vicar, says,
that on the 14th March, 1643, himself with many others were carried away
prisoners, by Colonel Cromwell, to Cambridge; so that for some time
following there was neither minister or clerk in this town; but the
inhabitants were obliged to procure one another to baptize their
children, by which means there was no register kept; only a few were by
myself baptised in those intervals when I enjoyed my freedom. Parish
register, 7th June 1646, Jacob Rous. There are many entries in this
register of people being married by a justice of the peace, as was usual
at this time. Thomas Pacy, widower, and Mary Arnold, widow were married
first by a justice and then by a minister, 20th August, 1655. By an Act
passed in 1653, those who were in the commission of the peace were
empowered to perform the office of matrimony; previous to the marriage of
the parties, the bands were to be published three times, either in the
church or chapel, on Sundays after morning exercise, or on the market
days in some neighbouring town.
Lowestoft is bounded on the north by Gunton, on the east, by the German
Ocean, on the south by Kirkley, and on the west by Oulton. The soil next
the east is light and sandy, but in the adjacent fields it is
considerably heavier, being in many places intermixed with clay. There
is a market here on Wednesdays, and also two fairs are held in this town,
one on the twelfth of May, the other on the tenth of October. {27b}
In 1735 the number of inhabitants in this town were computed to be 2,200:
but by an acutal survey, taken by the minister and churchwardens on the
7th and 8th of August, 1775, the number of inhabitants in Lowestoft was
found to be 2231, including lodgers; the number of dwelling-houses 445,
of which 438 were occupied; and the number of public-houses, 24; the
principal of which is the Crown, kept by Mr. Capon, and is a very good
inn. It appears from an actual survey of the houses and lands in this
parish, as taken in 1642, that the yearly value of the former was £412
6s. 8d.; and of the latter, £447 11s. 8d.: total value, £859 18s. 4d.
But in the year 1649 they appear to have decreased in value considerably,
as is evident from the following return of their value, taken that year,
in consequence of an order of Parliament.
Lowestoft, in Suffolk, within the half hundred of Lothingland, the
16th of June, 1649.
We whose names are hereunto subscribed, inhabitants there, being
appointed Surveyors by virtue of a warrant from the commissioners,
authorised by an Act of the present Parliament, to return the true
value of all the lands and tenements within the said town; have, in
obedience thereunto, considered thereof; and in our judgment we do
return the yearly value to be about £655 per annum.
(Signed),
ROBERT ALLIN, HENRY WARD, FRANCIS KINGSLEY,
JAMES WILDE, EDWARD BROWNE.
(The decrease was occasioned, probably, by the civil war).
After you have ascended Rant’s score, and crossed High street, the first
turn out of the Blue Anchor Lane to the left will bring you into a large
area, where was formerly kept the market, and is now called the Old
Market.
In the year 1698, the Corn Cross, the Town chamber that is over it, and
the adjoining chapel were built by subscription. They are situated about
the middle of the town, on the west side of the High street, and formed
originally a handsome building. This structure is entered by three large
folding palisade doors or gates. In the upper part of it is a clock, and
on the top of it a cupola, in which is a bell to summon the inhabitants
to attend divine service at the chapel, and for other necessary purposes
of the parish. {28} The chamber over the Cross is the place where the
parish usually assemble to consult about town business; it is also fitted
up as a schoolroom, and has been used for that purpose ever since the
building was first erected, till within a few years past. In the year
1768 the north door of the Cross was closed up, and that part of the
Cross was converted into a vestry for the chapel. In the year 1698, when
this building was first erected, and the front part of it reserved for
the purposes of a Market Cross, the market was removed from the place now
called the Old Market, to that part of the High street contiguous to the
building; but the spot being afterwards found an inconvenient situation
for the market to be held in, it was resolved by the parish, in 1703, to
take down an inn—called the White Horse—which stood on the ground where
the market is now kept—the whole front was parallel with that of the
adjoining houses—and re-build it, further backwards; which resolution
being carried into execution, the market was removed from the Cross to
the spot of ground where that inn formerly stood, and has continued there
ever since. It is now the sign of the Queen’s Head, from Queen Anne, in
whose reign it was re-built.
How long the market and fairs have been held at Lowestoft will appear
from the following account of the grant, taken from Bishop Tanner’s
Collections, in the registry at Norwich, wherein it is said, that in the
reign of King Henry IV. the king granted to William de la Pole, marquis
and earl of Suffolk, one market and two fairs, below the village of
Lowestoft—in the reign of Henry IV. the fairs and markets were held below
the cliff—which is in the ancient demesne of the Crown of England; and
also appoints him his steward, to hold his courts of market and fair; and
ordains that no justice, viscount, escheator, inquisitor, bailiff,
steward of hospital, or clerk of market, tax the said village in any
manner. And that all people holding of, and residing in the said
village, be free from all custom and toll of their goods and vendable
wares throughout the whole kingdom. This last-mentioned privilege, how
trifling soever it may appear now was deemed an important one at the time
it was granted; and was so far accounted valuable in the reign of Queen
Elizabeth, as to be renewed in the writ of exemption granted to the town
by that princess.
The original design of the Cross of Lowestoft was the providing a
convenient shelter for the farmers to stand in when they brought their
corn to market; and was always used for that purpose till the year 1768,
when part of it was inclosed for a vestry to the chapel, and the
remaining part is now made use of merely as a passage to that place of
worship.
I should now proceed to give an account of the several benefactions which
have been given to this parish by charitable and well-disposed persons,
such as a large donation in land, for repairing and ornamenting the
church and assisting the poor; an alms house for the residence of four
poor people; and also the very liberal donations for instituting two
grammar schools in this town, exclusive of several other benefactions of
lesser importance, which I shall pass over in this place, referring the
reader to Section V., where they are more particularly enumerated and
described.
Lowestoft being part of the ancient demesne of the Crown, has, in
consequence thereof, been entitled to many privileges; though many of
them, through the various vicissitudes which all human affairs are
subject to, are now become useless, and almost forgotten; such as paying
toll, stallage, frontage, etc., and an exemption from contributing to the
charges of the knights of the shire during their attendance in
Parliament; which privileges, with several others which are particularly
mentioned in the following writ of exemption, were, some centuries since,
esteemed as valuable ones, however they may be regarded now. But there
is one privilege which the town is entitled to by virtue of this writ,
which is of too advantageous a nature to be passed over unnoticed,
namely, that of being exempted from serving on juries, either at the
assizes or quarter sessions, being subject to those juries only as are
empanelled by the lord of the manor, coroner, etc. This privilege the
town enjoys to this day, and is the only one out of the many specified in
the writ, from which the town at this present time receives any real
benefit; though, possibly, were they duly attended to, they might not at
this distant period be found altogether unprofitable.
The above-mentioned privileges, which were granted to the town of
Lowestoft, as part of the Crown, appear, by the said writ, to have been
confirmed in the fifteenth year of the reign of Queen Elizabeth; and were
again renewed in the fourth year of Charles I.—and is now allowed by the
sheriff of this county—as is evident from the writ itself.
A writ of exemption granted to the town of Lowestoft, the 15th of Queen
Elizabeth, 1573, and renewed the 4th Charles I., 1604:
CHARLES, by the grace of God, of England Scotland, France, and
Ireland, King, Defender of the Faith, to all to whom these presents
shall come, greeting.—We have seen the enrollments of certain letters
executory, bearing date the twenty-seventh day of May, in the
fifteenth year of the reign of our dearly beloved sister, the lady
Elizabeth, late Queen of England, made and granted to the men and
tenants of the town of Lothnwistoft, in the half-hundred of
Ludingland, in the county of Suffolk, enrolled in the rolls of
chancery, and remaining there on record, in these words: ‘The Queen,
to all sheriffs, mayors, bailiffs, constables, officers, and others,
her liege people, as well within liberties as without, to whom these
presents shall come, greeting.—Whereas, according to the custom in
our kingdom of England, hitherto obtained and approved, the men and
tenants in ancient demesne of the crown of England, should and ought
to be free from toll, stollage, chiminage, pontage, pannage piccage,
murrage, lastage, and passage, throughout the whole kingdom
aforesaid, according to the custom aforesaid, concerning men and
tenants in ancient demense of the crown of England, who always
hitherto, time out of mind, have been wont to be free from
contributing towards the expenses of the knights coming to the
Parliament of our ancestors, formerly kings of England, for the
community of the county; also, according to the same custom, the men
and tenants of the manors which are in ancient demesne of the Crown
aforesaid, upon account of the lands and tenements which they hold in
the same demesne, ought not to be returned to the assizes upon juries
or any recognizances, except only in such cases as are to be
transacted in the courts of such manors: {29} and forasmuch as the
town of Lothnwistoft, in the half-hundred of Ludingland, is in
ancient demesne of the Crown, as it appears by a certificate sent to
us by the treasurer, chancellor of our exchequer, from thence into
our court of chancery aforesaid. We enjoin and command you, and
everyone of you, to permit all the men and tenants in the town
aforesaid, to be free from toll, and the rest of the premises, and
every one of them, throughout our whole kingdom aforesaid, from the
expense of the knights of the shire aforesaid; and, also, not to
return the men and tenants of the said town to the assizes, upon
juries or any recognizances, except only in such cases as are to be
transacted in the courts of such towns. In testimony whereof, etc.,
witness the Queen, at Westminster, the twenty-seventh day of May, in
the fifteenth year of her reign.’ And we thought fit, by these
presents, to exemplify the tenor of the enrollments of the premises
aforesaid, at the request of Robert Mellinge, Esq., in witness
whereof we have caused these our letters to be made patent. Witness
Ourself, at Westminster, the twenty-sixth day of February, in the
fourth year of our reign.
The town of Lowestoft appears to have experienced, at different times, a
large proportion of the many miseries and distresses arising from those
dreadful calamities, pestilence, fire, war, storms, and tempests, which
mankind are frequently exposed to.
The great plague which made such dreadful ravages in Europe in 1346, was
brought into England in 1348. In the following year it raged with great
fury at Yarmouth, where there died in one year 7000 persons; and, most
probably, Lowestoft had its share of the calamity, as it was so general,
that not above the tenth part of the inhabitants escaped.
In 1547 the plague raged with such violence in this town, that it cost in
some weeks, for distressed people, three pounds per week, exclusive of
the weekly collections, amounting in the whole to fifty pounds at the
least. This weekly collection was a voluntary contribution of the humane
and charitable; for the poor were not provided for by Act of Parliament
till the reign of Queen Elizabeth. The town did not receive, on this
occasion, any assistance of consequence, either from the country, or from
the town lands. It was customary in these times, when there was no
poors’ rates, and a town was distressed with any grievous calamity, for
the neighbouring towns to give their assistance.
In 1579, the plague raged so violently in this part of England, that at
Yarmouth there died, between the month of May and the Michaelmas
following, above 2,000 persons. In consequence whereof, the Mayor of
Newcastle, on the 22nd September, in that year, sent a letter to the
bailiffs of Yarmouth, forbidding their going to that place for coals;
and, probably, the plague at this time was at Lowestoft. In 1579 twice
the number of people died in Lowestoft, than in 1578. In 1585 there was
a great sickness in this town; for it appears by the register, that in
the month of August only, in that year, there were buried 36 persons; and
in the whole year, the number amounted to 134. The burials, on an
average, for the preceding seven years, were annually about 44.
But the greatest sickness which the town ever experienced, was that in
the year 1603; in which year 280 persons were buried in this parish
during only the space of five months; and in the whole year, 316.
There died in May, 21; in June, 79; in July, 100; in August, 55; in
September 25; Total 280.
In the year 1635 there was another great sickness in this town; in which
year, 46 persons were buried in August only; and the number of burials in
the whole year, amounted to 170. Probably it was the plague.
Another calamity, by which this town has greatly suffered, is war. If we
recollect the many injuries it sustained in Kett’s rebellion; the money
it was obliged to raise, when threatened with an invasion from the
Spanish Armada; the frequent plunderings and other depredations it was
exposed to, from its attachment to the cause, during the usurpation of
Oliver Cromwell; the distress which it laboured under, when deprived of
its principal inhabitants and the greater part of its most useful
sailors, to serve in the navy, during our wars with the Dutch; and the
heavy expenses it has been subjected to in succeeding wars with the
French, in erecting fortresses for the defence of the town. During our
wars with the Dutch, the British navy was furnished by the town of
Lowestoft with three admirals, viz., Sir John Ashby, Sir Thomas Allen,
and Richard Utber, Esq.; also with four captains, viz., Robert and John
Utber, sons of the admiral; Captain Canham, and Captain Whiting;
exclusive of a great, number of excellent seamen. All these
circumstances being duly attended to, we shall find too much reason for
including this calamity, not only among the many, but even among the
greatest misfortunes which the town ever laboured under.
To the above calamities of pestilence and war, many be added that of
fire. In the year 1606 the Vicarage-house belonging to this town was
burnt down, and never re-built; so that there has not been any
Vicarage-house belonging to the parish ever since. This house was
situated upon a small piece of glebe land near the Church, which, a few
years ago, was taken into the church-yard, and lies at the north-west
corner. The Vicarage, when burnt, was occupied by John Glesson, vicar;
at which time the old parish register and many of the ancient records
belonging to the town, in his possession, were destroyed.
On the 10th March, 1644–5, there happened in this town a great and
terrible fire, which consumed dwelling-houses, fish-houses, and goods, as
much property as was estimated at £10,297 2s. 4d.
The General Account of each man’s particular loss, in dwelling-houses,
fish-houses, goods, wares, etc., which happened the 10th day of March,
1644–5, by a lamentable fire at Lowestoft, in the county of Suffolk, as
it was surveyed, and viewed, and given into the committee appointed for
the same, at Lowestoft, the 25th day of April, 1645; namely:—
John Arnold, dwelling house £143, goods £40—total £183. Thomas Smiter
dwelling-houses, £43 10s.; goods £15 8s. 4d.—total £58 18s. 4d. William
Greenwood, dwelling-house £590. Thomas Webb, dwelling-house £544;
fish-houses £450; goods £77 3s.—£1071 3s. Thomas Arnold, dwelling-house
£167 10s.; fish-house, £81; goods £127 3s.—total £375 13s. Thomas
Mighells, dwelling-house £353; fish-office £21—total £374. Mr. Rivit,
dwelling-house, £269; fish-houses £195; goods £240—total £704. Robert
Ashby, dwelling house £303 10s.; goods £250—total £558 10s. James
Smiter, dwelling house £102. Nicholas Pattin, dwelling-house £34 10s.;
goods £23—total £57 10s. Mr. Simonds, dwelling-house £435. Thomas
Barrett, dwelling-house £5. Oliver Ashby, dwelling-house £27 10s.; goods
£6—total £33 10s. Samuel Fisher, dwelling-house £71 10s.; goods
£30—total £101 10s. John Fisher, dwelling-house £215. Robert Ferney,
dwelling-house £91 10s.; goods £14—£150 10. Richard Rooke, goods £6.
Robert Bits, dwelling-house £162; goods £370—total £532. Mr. Abertson,
dwelling-house £200; fish-house £163—total £363. Thomas Harvey,
dwelling-house £383; fish-house £108; goods £40—total £531. Mr. Smith,
fish-house £230; goods £100—total £330. James Munds, fish-house £145;
goods £113 10s.—total £258 10s. Josiah Wilde, fish-house £400; goods
£280—total £680. John Barker, fish-house £25; goods £85—total £110.
James Wilde, fish-house, £120; goods, £40—total £160. Robert
Brissingham, fish-house £94. John Brissingham, fish-house £10. Mr.
Allen, fish-house £140; goods £40—total £180. Thomas Guler, fish-house
£5. Robert Tooley, fish-house £146; goods £8 8s.—total £154 8s. Mr.
Reeve, fish house £102. Thomas Fulwood, fish house £240; goods £32—total
£272. Robert Coe, fish-house £156; goods £49—total £205. John Page,
fish-house £54; goods £12—total £66. William Cauliam, fish-house £210;
goods £15—total £225. John Muese, sen., goods £100. John Meuse, jun.,
goods £50. William Muese, goods £150. Thomas Muese, goods £20. Henry
Geury, goods £35. Henry Ward, jun., goods £97. William Underwood, goods
£80. John Dennis, goods £55. James Mendham, goods £2. Richard
Mighells, goods, £190. Michael Bently, goods £112. George Woodgate,
goods £200. Daniel Sterry, goods £2. Stephen Trip, goods £5. John
Jerhenson, goods £7.—The totals are—dwelling-houses, £4145 10s.;
fish-houses, £3085; goods £3066 12s. 4d.—grand total, £10,297 2s. 4d.
On Sunday the 14th August, 1670, there happened another terrible fire in
this town, which consumed six dwelling-houses and two barns filled with
corn; which loss amounted to three hundred and fifty pounds. {31}
LOWESTOFT IN SUFFOLK.
Whereas, upon the 14th of August, 1670, being the Lord’s day, about
twelve o’clock at night, the wind being very high, there happened a
sudden, dreadful and lamentable fire in this town, which consumed six
dwelling houses with their goods, and two barns with corn, which
loss, upon examination, and in the judgment of workmen, amounted at
least, to three hundred and fifty pounds; to the utter ruin of six
poor families, whose wives and children are left in great distress:
in testimony of the truth thereof, we, the ministers, his Majesty’s
justices of peace, and principal parishioners of Lowestoft, have
hereunto subscribed our names; and do humbly recommend their
condition to the christian charity of your town, and beg the favour
that you would promote it by such way and means as in your wisdom
shall be thought well, either by recommending it to your minister or
otherways; so that a speedy collection may be made answerable to
their present distress. That they beholding God’s goodness handed to
them by you, may bless and praise his holy name for the same. And
what monies shall be collected and conveyed to our hands, we shall
distribute it to those who are truly the objects of charity; and
thankfully remain, etc.,
SIR JOHN ROUS, JOHN YOUELL, vicar; SIR JOHN PETTUS,
SIR ROBERT KEMPE, JOHN BEDDINGFIELD, ESQ., EDWARD
NORTH, ESQ., and several inhabitants.
There was collected on this occasion, in Lowestoft, £18 11s. 3d.; at
Beccles, £6 1s. 6d.; at Pakefield and Kirkley, £4 1s. 7d.; by Sir John
Pettust at different towns, £7 16s. 3d.—total £36 10s. 7d.
And on the 12th of November, 1717, about four in the morning, another
sudden and terrible fire broke out in this town, in the fish houses
belonging to the co-heirs of Captain Josiah Mighels, then in the
occupation of Joseph Smithson, which in a short space of time, entirely
consumed the said houses; together with part of those houses belonging to
William Mewse, which laid to the south, and part of those belonging to
Mr. John Barker and Mr. Thomas Mighels, on the north. The wind blew
pretty fresh at south east, so that the sparks flew over the town, and
once actually fired the thatch of a house in the Swan Lane: but men and
water being ready for that purpose, it was immediately stopped; and it
pleasing God of his mercy both to damp the wind and to bring it more to
the southward, the town escaped as a brand plucked out of the fire. The
damage sustained by the fish houses was estimated at £1000.
And also on Sunday, July 30th, 1780, at one o’clock in the morning, the
east Mill, at the north end of the town, by some cause unknown, took
fire; which fire being communicated by a strong wind to another wind
mill, situate about forty roods distance to the westward, they were both
totally consumed.
The other misfortune to which the town of Lowestoft is peculiarly liable,
and from which it has greatly suffered, is that of a dangerous coast,
when exposed to violent storms. This is, in a great measure, owing to
the singular nature of this coast, arising from its numerous sands and
shoals, and not having any harbour, or other place of security, to
protect the shipping from the violence of a storm; consequently they have
been too often sacrificed to the fury of the relentless ocean.
It is impossible to describe every dreadful shipwreck and melancholy
scene of distress which have happened on this dangerous coast, they being
too numerous to be recounted, as well as painful to be related; it shall
suffice, therefore, only to mention a few of the most remarkable ones,
such as were attended with the most distressing circumstances, and
exposed the unhappy seamen to the most alarming situations.
At the end of the annals of Norwich, a manuscript in the chapter
archives, an account is given, that in the year of Christ 1530, in the
night immediately following the 4th of November, a violent storm, as it
were, all over England, happened; and the next day following, namely, the
5th day of the said month, about one in the afternoon, the lord cardinal
Thomas Wolsey was seized in his own house, at Cahowe, within his diocese
of York; and afterwards, in his journey towards London, in the vigil St.
Andrew next following he died at Leicester, upon which day a storm, _as
if from Hell_—(a remarkable instance of the prejudice of the times; and
shews how much better Christianity is understood in this more liberal and
enlightened age)—again happened almost all over England, by the fury of
which at Lowestoft, within the diocese of Norwich, and elsewhere in
divers places within the realm of England, many ships were lost.
On the 30th July, 1730, happened in this town and neighbourhood, a most
remarkable storm, accompanied with a dreadful tempest of thunder,
lightning, and hail; the hailstones were of such prodigious magnitude as
to measure from six to nine inches in circumference, and descended with
such violence, as to break all the glass windows on the west side of the
town, which cost the inhabitants £300 to repair the damage. All the corn
was beat down and spoiled, for about a mile in breadth and three in
length.
On December 24th, 1739, that severe frost called the hard winter,
commenced with a violent gale of wind; when sixteen sail of ships were
driven ashore on the coast between Yarmouth and Lowestoft, and were all
totally lost, after their respective crews had undergone the severest
hardships from the inclemency of the weather.
And in another storm, which happened on the 15th of December, 1757,
twenty two sail of ships were driven ashore on the coast between Yarmouth
and Kessingland, the greater part of which were lost. A particular
account of the damage each ship sustained was soon after published in the
_London Gazette_.
But the most dreadful storm that ever happened on this coast in the
memory of man, was that of the 18th of December, 1770. The following
account of which was written by Mr. Robert Reeve, attorney-at-law, and
merchant at Lowestoft, who was a spectator of this dreadful scene, and
was published in the _Ipswich Journal_ of the 29th December, as follows:
The dreadful storm on Wednesday the 19th instant, began about one
o’clock in the morning, and continued with increasing violence till
five; when the wind suddenly changed from south-west to the
north-west, and for two hours raged with fury that was hardly ever
equalled. Anchors and cables proved too feeble a security for the
ships, which instantly parting from them, and running on board each
other, produced a confusion neither to be described nor conceived;
not a few immediately founded, others were dismasted, and none
escaped unhurt. At day-light a scene of the most tragic distress wag
exhibited; those who first beheld it assert, no less than eighteen
ships were upon the sand before this place at one and the same time,
and many others were seen to sink; of those upon the sand, one half
were entirely demolished, with their crews, before nine o’clock; the
rest were preserved a few hours longer: but this dreadful pause
served only to aggravate the destruction of the unhappy men who
belonged to them, who betook themselves to the masts and rigging;
these continually breaking, eight or ten were not unfrequently seen
to perish at a time, without the possibility of being assisted.
Fifteen only, about two in the afternoon, were taken off one of the
wrecks, and about as many more were saved by taking to their boats,
or getting on board other ships when they boarded each other. It is
impossible to collect with certainty how many lives, or how many
ships were lost in this terrible hurricane. Twenty-five at least,
perhaps thirty ships, and two hundred men, do not seem to be an
exaggerated account. This, indeed, is too small a calculation, if
credit is to be given to one of the seamen, who declares he saw six
vessels sink not far without the Stanford, among which was a large
ship bound for Lisbon, with sixty or seventy passengers on board.
One or two of the ships which were lost belong to Yarmouth, and one
to Plymouth, but the generality are colliers and belong to
Sunderland, Shields and other places in the north. The concern this
destructive scene occasioned to the spectators of it was increased by
the following circumstance: when the masts of one of the ships, on
which were eight or nine men, fell, two of them were some time
afterwards seen struggling among the wreck, and at length, after
unremmitted efforts, got upon the hull. In the afternoon, the pilot
boat ventured from the shore, but it was found impracticable to
administer any relief to the unfortunate sufferers, whom they were
compelled to leave in their forlorn state; an approaching dark, cold,
stormy night, heightening the horrors of their situation. The next
day to the astonishment of everybody, one of the men was observed to
be alive, and about noon the boat again attempted to save him, and
approached so near as to ask the poor fellow several questions; but
the hull, on which he was, being surrounded with wreck, and the sea
running high, it was impossible to rescue from the impending danger.
He was at the stern of the ship; towards her head the sailors
conceived it barely possible to board her with safety: this they told
the unhappy man and bid him walk to the place, but replying he was
too weak to change his situation, they were again obliged to leave
him, making signs of his inconceivable distress. The ensuing night
put an end to his misfortunes and life. {34} If such calamities as
these, which are the dispensations of Providence, occasion any
painful reflections, how great must our emotions be to consider the
thousands of lives wantonly butchered in wars, killed merely to
gratify the whim of princes, to feed the ambition of aspiring men, or
to furnish men of dissipation with the means of indulging their
excesses? To a dispassionate mind it seems equally wicked and
absurd, that great civilized nations should sacrifice the property,
the repose and the lives of their subjects to determine which of them
has the best right to a desert, as truly worthless to them as if it
was placed in the satellites of Jupiter.
I cannot conclude this section without recommending to the consideration
of the inhabitants of Lowestoft, and all other sea-port towns, the
possibility of constructing a vessel, or some other machine, on such
principles as should not be liable to overset, but should be capable of
approaching any vessel in distress, during the most violent storms, and
when surrounded with the most tumultuous waves. The wretched situation
of so many distressed mariners as are wrecked on this coast, must be a
sufficient excitement to the undertaking; and the pleasure of saving so
many valuable lives, will be an ample recompense for any expense or
trouble that may attend its execution.
That a scheme of this nature is not totally impracticable will be evident
from the following description of a new-invented vessel in France,
something similar to that recommended above; and of an experiment that
was lately made at Paris to discover its utility:
Monsieur Bernieres, director of the bridges and causeways in France, has
contrived and constructed a boat, or sloop, fit for inland navigation,
coasting voyages, and short passages by sea, which is not like ordinary
vessels, liable to be overset or sunk by winds, waves, waterspouts, or
too heavy a load.
Some trials were made on one of these vessels on the first of August,
1776, at the gate of the invalids, in Paris, in the presence of a
numerous concourse of spectators of all conditions.
A boat of the same sort had been tried, October 11th, 1771, at Choisy,
before Louis XV., and his present majesty, then dauphin. During the
experiments it was shewn, though eight men were in one of these boats,
and the boat filled brim full with water, yet, instead of sinking, it
bore being rowed about the river without any danger to the people in it.
M. Bernieres carried his trial still farther. He ordered a mast to be
erected in the same boat, when filled with water, and to the top of the
mast had a rope fastened, and drawn till the end of the mast touched the
surface of the water; yet, as soon as the men who had hauled her into
this situation let go the rope, the boat and mast recovered themselves
perfectly, in less than a quarter of a second; a convincing proof that
the boat could neither be sunk nor overset, and that it afforded the
greatest possible security in every way.
In consequence of the above trials, the provost of the merchants and the
corporation of Paris gave the sieur Bernieres permission to establish his
boats on the river Seine, at the port near Pont Royal; and, moreover,
promised him all the protection and encouragement in their power: and the
sieur Bernieres, on his side proposed to supply the public with a certain
number of these boats before the end of the next year; but whether he
fulfilled his engagement, or whether he has been as successful in the
subsequent trials of this useful invention as he was in the former, I
have not been able to learn.
It is much to be lamented that the general principles on which this
ingenious mechanic constructed his vessel, were not communicated to the
public. However, it is some satisfaction to know that such an invention
has been discovered, and where the author of it resides. And it is hoped
that the known humanity which the sieur Bernieres possesses will surmount
every illiberal restriction, and that he will generously impart to the
public the principles of an invention that may be of such universal
utility, and the means of rescuing many valuable members of society from
those distressful situations which they are so very often exposed to
whenever they frequent this very difficult and dangerous coast. {35a}
Thus, it too plainly appears, that from the many grievous calamities
abovementioned, such as the plague and other sicknesses; the civil war in
the reign of Charles I.; the great fire in 1644; the Dutch war in the
reign of Charles II.; the many losses from storms and tempests; to which
may be added the great law-suit with Yarmouth, which continued from 1659
to 1664; the town of Lowestoft must have been reduced many times to the
greatest distress; and it evidently appears that it really was so from
the many petitions presented to Government during the above suit with
Yarmouth, wherein these misfortunes are frequently alluded to.
On an elevated point of land near the edge of the cliff on which
Lowestoft is situated, and a little to the north of the town, stands the
upper light-house. {35b}
When the high light-house is in the same direction with the light-house
which stands below the cliff, it directs the vessels which are either
coming in or going out of Lowestoft roads, to the Stanford channel, which
lies between the Holme and Barnard sands. This channel is about a
quarter of a mile broad, and three quarters of a mile distant from that
part of the shore that is opposite to it; and though it has existed from
time immemorial to parts contiguous to its present situation, yet, from
the effects of storms and currents, and other causes, beyond perhaps, the
reach of human investigation, it is of such a fluctuating nature, that it
never continues long in the same situation. Of late years its motion has
been northerly, as is evident from the several changes which have been
made in the situation of the lower lighthouse—which is a movable one—to
bring it in a line with the upper light-house and the channel; which
removals have always been towards the north. About a century ago this
channel was situated more distant to the south-west from where it is at
present: for on the spot of ground whereon the upper light-house stands,
there stood, about a hundred years ago, a beacon; and there was also at
the same time, another beacon standing on the north side of the passage
going down the Swan score, as guides to the Stanford; and therefore to
bring these two beacons on a line with the Stanford channel, that channel
must necessarily, at that time, lie more to the south-west than where it
does now.
In the year 1676 the beacon at the north end of the town was taken down,
and on the place where it stood was erected, the upper light-house. This
building is a round-built tower, consisting of brick and stone materials,
is about 40 feet in height, and twenty in diameter. About two-thirds of
the upper part of it next the sea—and about thirty feet from the
ground—was originally sashed, that the fire might be visible to the
spectators on the sea. In this part was placed a hearth, whereon a coal
fire was continually kept burning every night; and was always conducted
in this manner until the alteration in this light-house, in the year
1778, was made.
In the year 1735, when the Stanford channel had proceeded so far to the
north that the beacon near the Swan score became useless, from its being
brought on a line with the upper light-house, {36a}—a moveable
light-house, framed of timber, was erected on the beach below the cliff,
whose construction was such as to admit of its being removed according as
the channel should happen to change its situation. {36b}
On the western side of the upper lighthouse, underneath the arms of
Trinity House are the arms of Samuel Pepys, Esq., beneath which is this
inscription.—
Erected by the Brotherhood of the
Trinity House of Deptford Strond, in
The Mastership of Samuel Pepys, Esq.,
Secretary to the Admiralty of England,
Anno Dom. 1676.
In the year 1777, when the upper part of this lighthouse became so much
decayed that it was necessary to have it repaired in a short time, it was
resolved by the brethren of the Trinity House, to take the top wholly
off, and to erect in its place one of the new-invented reflecting
cylinders. Accordingly in the month of June, 1778, the Trinity yacht,
with several of the elder brethren, arrived at Lowestoft, and brought one
of these curious inventions with them, in order to observe what effect it
would produce. In consequence of this design, a temporary scaffold was
erected on an eminence a little to the north of the lighthouse, and the
cylinder was hoisted upon it; and in the evening the Trinity yacht sailed
off to sea, to a considerable distance, in order to discover what
appearance it would have: when it was found to answer beyond expectation.
When the yacht returned, the cylinder was ordered to be immediately taken
down, and to be shipped on board the yacht, with a view of sending it to
the Isle of Scilly, which was then in immediate want of it, and a new one
was ordered to be sent to Lowestoft presently after, which was
accordingly sent, and erected upon the remaining part of the old
lighthouse. The following account of this reflecting cylinder, with an
engraving of the same, was published by the author of this work, in the
_Town and Country Magazine_, for April, 1788:
This curious machine consists of a glass lanthorn about seven feet
high, and six in diameter, glazed with the best plate glass; the
frame of which is copper, and covered with a roof of the same metal.
In the centre of the lanthorn is set upon a frame a large hexagonal
reflecting cylinder, four feet in height, and three feet in diameter.
This cylinder is made of copper, the outside of which is covered with
cement, upon which are placed nearly 4,000 small mirrors, each mirror
about an inch square. In the centre of this cylinder is fixed a
reservoir of oil, which, by fixed pipes passing through hexagonal
divisions of the cylinder, support and convey the oil to a large
circular tube, which is placed about eighteen inches from the surface
of the cylinder, and upon this tube are fixed 126 lamps. One of
these lighthouses was made by an order of the elder brethren of the
Trinity House, sent on board their yacht, with several of the
brethren, and sailed for Lowestoft, in Suffolk, to make a trial of
its utility. Accordingly in the night of the 23rd of June, a
temporary scaffold being erected for that purpose, the machine was
hoisted and the lamps lighted; when it was found to answer beyond
conception, exhibiting a globe of fire of a steady and most vivid
brightness. This experiment was made at a small distance from the
lighthouse commonly made use of, the light of which is supported by a
coal fire, and was exerted to the utmost on this occasion, to
maintain, its superiority; and was appointed to be the criterion by
which the difference was to be determined. The yacht accompanied by
some boats, sailed off to sea the preceding day, so as to be out of
sight of land before sunset—the time appointed for lighting it. They
sailed in for the land, and discovered the new light-house as soon as
the convexity of the sea would permit, it being at least twenty miles
from the shore, and sailed five or six miles nearer before they could
perceive the fire of the old light-house.
The brethren of the Trinity House being thus convinced of the great
utility of this invention, gave orders the next day to have it taken
down and sent to the Island of Scilly.
SECTION III.
OF THE FISHERIES AND MANUFACTORY AT LOWESTOFT.
THE principal commerce subsisting at Lowestoft is derived from its
herring-fishery. The town most probably, received its very existence
from the convenient situation of its coast for fishermen to exercise the
several occupations of a life dependent on those employments; which in
the more early ages, extended, very likely, to every kind of fish that
the coast afforded; though now, in these more recent times, it is chiefly
confined to the herring fishery. The herrings appear on the coast of
Shetland in the month of June, and from thence they proceed to the coast
of Scotland; but being interrupted in their passage by the Island of
Great Britain, they separate into two divisions, one of which divisions,
after steering west, or south west, and leaving the Isles of Orkney and
Shetland on the north, pass by the western isles, and proceed to Ireland;
and there receiving a second retardation, they subdivide, and one part
keeps the coast and shore of Britain and passing down St. George’s
Channel as far as the mouth of the Severn, where they unite again with
their former friends, and the second part of the same division, who had
edged off to the west and south-west, and sheering along the western
shore of the coast of Ireland, and then proceeding south and south-east,
were also entered into St. George’s Channel. The second part of the
first division, which was separated off the north part of Scotland having
directed their course to the south and south-east, entered the German
ocean; and continuing their progress along the coast of Scotland, they
proceed to the south, and rounding the high shore of Berwick and St.
Abb’s, are not seen any more till they arrive upon the Yorkshire coast,
and not in any great quantities till they appear off Yarmouth and
Lowestoft; where, after continuing a few weeks, and leaving an immense
quantity of spawn, they pass through the German ocean, and entering the
straights of Dover continue to proceed along the coasts of Sussex,
Hampshire, etc., to the Land’s End, where the two divisions forming a
junction, they enter the vast Atlantic ocean.
Herrings have been seen on the shores of North America, though not in
such large quantities as have appeared on the coasts of Britain; neither
are they seen in America any farther south than South Carolina. But
whether these herrings be part of that enormous shoal which first
approach the north of Scotland, and instead of confining their progress
to the British Isles, extend it to the coast of America; or whether they
be part of that vast collection, who, after forming a junction on the
coast of Cornwall, launch into the Atlantic ocean, is difficult to
determine with certainty. It may, perhaps, be no improbable conjecture
to suppose, that the herrings which appear on the American coast are only
such as have deserted from the main body of the fish during their
continuance in the western ocean. And as it is evident that these fish
are never seen in any considerable quantity upon the coast of the more
southern parts of Europe, such as Spain, or Portugal, or the southern
parts of France, neither in the Mediterranean, or coast of Africa; but,
after they have entered the Atlantic ocean, are seen no more till the
succeeding summer, on the coast of Shetland. We may conclude, that after
the herrings have appeared early in the summer on the northern coasts,
and proceeded on the eastern and western sides of the British Isles,
discharging their roes, and having formed a conjunction at their general
rendezvous near the Land’s End, and launched into the Atlantic ocean, and
continued there the remainder of the winter, that they afterwards proceed
to the north; and assembling together near the coasts of Greenland, in
the Spring they continued their progress from those parts to the south,
and in the summer appear again on the north of Shetland and Scotland,
thereby performing, in the course of a year, one entire revolution round
the islands of Great Britain and Ireland; so that the herring may,
without impropriety, be termed a fish of passage.
The convenient situation of the eastern parts of this kingdom for the
advantageous prosecution of the herring fishery, and the great benefit
which the nation derives in consequence thereof, have much excited the
envy of our maritime neighbours, the Dutch; and have frequently induced
them to infringe on the liberties which this kingdom is indisputably
entitled to, by approaching too near the British coasts, in view either
to usurp the whole of this fishery to themselves, or to monopolise a
considerable share of it: but the policy of these rivals has hitherto
been such, that whenever they perceived that their illegal proceedings
were complained of, and threatened to be opposed, they always endeavoured
to pacify our resentment, either by compounding for the trespass, or by
relinquishing their pretensions, and afterwards having recourse to a more
legal mode of conducting their fishery. {39}
It is highly probable, that the herring fishery on this part of the coast
originated at Lowestoft, and, in some measure, afterwards transferred
itself to Yarmouth: for in the early ages, before Yarmouth was founded,
Lowestoft appears to have been the general rendezvous of the northern and
western fishers employed in the herring fishery: but when the sand upon
which Yarmouth was afterwards built, appeared above the surface of the
water, and became dry land, it was then that the fishermen from different
parts of England, especially the cinque ports—who were antiently the
principal fishermen of England—resorted thither annually to catch
herrings; where, finding this sand to be unoccupied, and its situation
extremely convenient both for drying their nets, manufacturing their
fish, and exhibiting it to sale, they began to erect temporary booths or
tents, as their several circumstances required, either to secure
themselves from the irruptions of an enemy, or as a shelter from the
inclemency of the weather. And for the better keeping the peace and
securing to every owner his respective property, the barons of the cinque
ports deputed several officers, called bailiffs, to attend this fishery
the space of forty days, viz., from Michaelmas to Martinmas, the
principal time of the herring season; as it would have been dangerous
both to private interest, as well as public tranquility, to have
permitted such a mixed multitude of natives and foreigners to have
assembled in one place without having a person with proper authority to
preside over them, in order to preserve subordination and regularity; and
in this manner the herring fishery continued for some time after its
commencement at this place, which, probably, happened soon after the
landing of Cerdick, the Saxon, in the year 495, as above related; and
from which circumstance it was called the Cerdick sand. {40a}
Some years after, as soon as it appeared that the herring fishery was
established upon a permanent foundation, and the sand became safe and
commodious to reside upon, some of the inhabitants on the western shore,
and others from different parts of the kingdom, began to build houses
thereon, and for their mutual support and defence founded a town there,
from whence arose the origin of Yarmouth; whereby it appears that the
founders of Great Yarmouth were chiefly portsmen, or natives of the
cinque ports. These portsmen continued to frequent the place for several
centuries afterwards, and many of them chose to reside here, and became
seized of lands and tenements, some portion whereof, at their deaths they
would bequeath to their countrymen of the cinque ports, in order to
signify to posterity from whence they came. But as soon as the burgesses
of Yarmouth had a charter of liberties granted them by King John, and the
barons of the cinque ports having also certain liberties granted them at
Yarmouth by the same king, or rather confirmed what they held before by
prescriptive {40b} right,—the liberties which were granted to the cinque
ports, by interfering with those newly granted to the burgesses of
Yarmouth gave rise to the most violent disputes and animosities, such as
are not to be paralleled, perhaps, between any other two places in the
British dominions; for the riots and depredations which arose from these
disputes became at last so very outrageous as to be not only extremely
injurious to the contending parties, but even to alarm the whole kingdom.
These violent quarrels and commotions continued to agitate the respective
parties, with little permission, until the reign of Queen Elizabeth, when
a proposal was made for compromising their differences and establishing a
durable reconciliation, by making Yarmouth a member of the cinque ports;
but this attempt, however laudable in its intention, proved wholly
ineffectual in its execution: nevertheless, we find, that in the year
1576, every circumstance which had afforded matter of dispute was
amicably adjusted, and finally settled to the mutual satisfaction of the
respective parties: and accordingly an award was published, which
contained the following article, namely, “That whereas for every fishing
vessel coming to the said free fair, in ancient times, fourpence for toll
or custom was paid to the bailiffs of the cinque ports, which afterwards,
by composition was reduced to a certain sum of six pounds yearly: but for
the sake of restoring peace and quiet it was hereby agreed that the
bailiffs of Yarmouth should pay to the bailiffs of the barons of the
cinque ports, at their departure from Yarmouth, three pounds and ten
shillings only, in recompense and full satisfaction for the said toll.”
After the conclusion of this agreement, the several parties maintained a
more peaceable and friendly correspondence with each other than had
subsisted for many years before; and persevered in this amicable
intercourse until the year 1662, when the annual composition of three
pounds and ten shilling being either refused or neglected to be paid by
the burgesses of Yarmouth to the bailiffs of the ports, the said bailiffs
never repaired to Yarmouth any more in a public capacity. {41a}
The town of Yarmouth having thus driven away the bailiffs of the cinque
ports, that place became the general rendezvous of all such vessels as
were employed in the herring fishery; and thereby monopolised, in a great
measure, the whole fishery to themselves, by confining to the narrow
limits of their own haven, the purchasing of all such herrings as were
not caught by the boats belonging to the neighbouring towns, and where
they were compelled to pay the custom demanded by the town of Yarmouth:
for the town of Lowestoft, and all other towns on the coast, an
indisputable right to fit out what number of vessels they pleased from
their own towns, for the purpose of catching herrings, without being
subject to any customs payable to Yarmouth, and also to purchase herrings
at sea from certain vessels called ketchmen; but if they could not be
sufficiently supplied with herrings by these means, they were then under
the necessity of repairing to Kirkley road or Yarmouth haven, where they
became subject to the customs due to the town of Yarmouth; for the right
of the burgesses of Yarmouth to levy these customs was confined solely to
the haven and Kirkley road; and therefore the ketchmen, who sold herrings
at sea, thereby evaded the customs and injured the town of Yarmouth;
which formerly had occasioned many disputes, particularly in the reign of
queen Elizabeth, and probably was the principal motive which induced the
burgesses of Yarmouth to force away the portsmen.
The town of Yarmouth, not being satisfied with their late acquisitions,
began to extend their views much farther, even so far as to endeavour to
exclude the town of Lowestoft from having any share in the herring
fishery; and in order to give their designs the greater appearance of
justice, they pleaded the Charter, 46 Edward III., for uniting Kirkley
road to Yarmouth haven; and pretended that the seven leuks, inserted in
that charter as the boundary of their liberties, were not miles, but
leagues; and also, that the said leuks were not to be measured from the
key of Yarmouth, but from the mouth of the haven which at this time had
extended far to the south, and formerly as far as Corton; thereby
expecting to extend their liberties beyond the roads of Lowestoft, and
consequently wholly to exclude the merchants of that place from a
privilege which they had enjoyed from time immemorial, viz., that of
purchasing herrings near their own town.
Corton is situated about a mile to the north of Lowestoft, and
comprehends upwards of a thousand acres, chiefly cultivated, and prettily
diversified with rising grounds and some woods; and contains about
thirty-eight dwelling houses, mostly situated in a street, tolerably
compact, on a high cliff that commands an extensive prospect of the sea.
This parish is a vicarage, and the impropriation, before the dissolution
of the monasteries, belonged to the abbey of Leystone, in Suffolk. {41b}
It was granted by Henry VIII. to Charles Brandon, duke of Suffolk, and
has passed through various hands since to the present owner, John Ives,
of Yarmouth, Esq. The advowson of the vicarage formerly belonged to the
proprietors of the impropriation; but, by some neglect or other, has been
suffered to lapse to the Crown.
The body of the Church is now dilapidated, and the chancel is the only
part of it appropriated to divine service. The ruins which are now
remaining give evident proof that the building was of considerable
dimensions; and the handsome tower, which is still perfect, strongly
denotes its original elegance.
Tradition informs us that when the church became ruinous, the
parishioners, finding themselves unequal to the task of repairing it, and
at the same time thinking it unnecessary, petitioned the bishop of the
diocese for his license to suffer it to remain as it was, on condition
that, at their own charge, they would fit up and maintain the chancel as
a place of public worship, which was granted them, and the chancel was
made very adequate to the purpose. But in a long series of years, either
by means of the inability, or through the inattention of the people, this
too was suffered to fall into decay, insomuch, that in the year 1776, the
lead admitted the rain in various places, and pulpit, the desk, gallery,
etc., were rotten, and ready to fall down. Under these circumstances,
the Rev. Francis Bowness, then vicar, thought it expedient to coincide
with the wishes of the generality of the parishioners, to apply to the
diocesan for a faculty to dispose of the lead, and lay out the money
arising from the sale of it, in the reparation of the building; and
notwithstanding much opposition, the perseverance of the vicar prevailed,
and he obtained, from the candour of Bishop Younge, a full power to sell
not only the lead, but also, if it should be necessary, a large bell,
which hung in the porch of the old church. He availed himself of no more
than the former part of the license; and with a very small rate added to
the produce of the lead, the chancel was again put into complete good
order, and divine service is now regularly performed there, and decently
attended.
In justice to the merits of the worthy vicar, I hope it will not be
thought impertinent to add, that he has been an equal benefactor to the
church and the living; that he lives in great harmony with his
parishioners, and receives from them that respect, which a constant
endeavour to be useful seldom fails to inspire. He was instituted in
1758. The church is dedicated to St. Bartholomew. The vicarage, though
of late years much improved by the increased cultivation of the parish,
is yet inconsiderable.
The same difficulty which we have to encounter with respecting the origin
of Lowestoft Church, presents itself in our enquiry concerning this at
Corton, viz.: How so small and inconvenient a village as this seems
always to have been, should ever have been able, from any resources of
its own, to erect so stately a structure; and if unable of itself, from
what other sources did it derive its assistances? In solving this
difficulty we must have recourse to the same mode of reasoning as we
shall urge hereafter respecting Lowestoft Church, which is, that as the
church at Corton was part of the endowment of Leystone Abbey, it is
highly probable that this church was first erected and afterwards kept in
repair through the assistance of the Abbey, as Lowestoft Church was by
the priory of St. Bartholomew, in London.
After the dissolution of the monasteries, when no further assistance
could be received from those institutions, and the parish being unable of
itself to keep such structure in repair, the building fell to ruin. And
the case would have been the same with respect to Lowestoft Church,
notwithstanding it was a much larger parish, had not a benefaction of
lands, expressly given for repairing and ornamenting the same, been
happily recovered at the dissolution of the priory, and prevented the
like misfortune.
It is supposed that the village of Corton, in former times, was much
larger than it is at present. It is certain there were two churches in
the parish, or, at least, a chapel of ease to the mother church; the
small remains, still visible at a place called the Gate, tend to confirm
the latter opinion, as the old foundations of houses discovered in
different parts of the parish, lead to evince the former. Probably the
parish had arrived at its most opulent state about the 13th century, when
the mouth of Yarmouth haven had extended almost to this place; which
added to the adjoining situation of Kirkley road, must occasion a great
resort of fishermen, from different parts of the kingdom, to this
village.
Some centuries ago there was, contiguous to Corton, another parish called
Newton, of which scarce any other vestiges are now remaining, than a
stone which supported a cross, called Newton cross, and a small piece of
ground, called Newton green; almost every other part of this parish being
swallowed up by the sea.
It appears, that in the year 1408, 10th of Henry IV., Yarmouth haven made
near Newton Cross; and Swinden informs us, “that the charges and monies
bestowed and spente in and aboute repairenge of the haven of the towne of
Yarmouthe, and of the fortfienge the same with two greate mayne peeres,
which at the firste was cutte a-newe and digged out, into the sea right
over agenst the parsonage of Gorleston, and the same haven then runninge
alongeste the cliffe as farr as Newton Crosse, was agenst the parsonage
stopped up, and there forced to runne into the sea; which was done in the
yere of our Saviour 1559. After which tyme, in few yeres, the said
haven, for want of two peeres, did eate, and seeke towardes the south,
for preventenge of whose olde evell and accustomed course, the towne did
begenne this charge, by the advice of a verrye conninge workman, sent for
from beyond the sea.”
In 1306 John de Herling, a family of great antiquity in the parish of
East Herling, in Norfolk, had free warren allowed him in the manors of
Newton and Corton, and died seized of these manors and many others; and
left them to his eldest son and heir, Sir John de Herling, Knight, whose
brother Robert—a great warrior who followed Henry V. into France, and was
killed in 1436—had an estate in Newton and Newton and Corton, as had also
Thomas, another brother, at Lounde. The manors of Corton, Newton,
Lounde, and Blundeston, together with Lounde advowson, and some others,
were in the Herling family, and possessed by lady Anne, daughter and sole
heiress of the above Sir Robert, 1408. Soon after she married her third
husband, lord Scroop, of Bolton, and was afterwards a great benefactress
to Gonvile (afterwards Caius) college, Cambridge; her mother being the
heiress of the Gonvile family.
The Yarmouth men attempted also further to prove that that part of the
sea called Kirkley Road was opposite to the parish of Kirkley, which is
situated about a mile to the south of Lowestoft, notwithstanding the real
name of the sea at that place is Pakefield bay.
Kirkley parish lies so contiguous to Pakefield (being separated from it
only by the common highway) that it forms a considerable part of what is
generally understood by that town. It is situated to the west of
Pakefield and on the north side of it lies the lake of Lothing, from
whence runs a small inlet, called Kirkley Ham; which, probably, was made
use of formerly as a haven for the fishing craft employed by this parish,
at the time when the communication between this lake and the sea retained
such a sufficient depth of water as to admit vessels of small draught.
The chief support of this village, as well as that of Pakefield, arises
principally from their fisheries, which formerly were considerable, but
are now much declined. It appeared, from an account of the inhabitants
of this parish, taken in the year 1676, in pursuance of the penal laws
then in force against religious dissenters, that the number amounted to
103, from sixteen years of age and upwards; of which number, 18 were
dissenters. Since that time the number of inhabitants has rather
increased, whilst that of dissenters has decreased; the former may be
owing to the herring fishery being a little revived there; the latter to
the toleration which they have since enjoyed; it being evident that the
exercise of rigorous measures against religious sects, instead of
exterminating them, tends to increase them; probably therefore the
relaxing those severities may be the cause of the number decreasing. The
church is dedicated to St. Peter, and valued in the King’s books £15
10s.; and till the year 1749 was dilapidated: but this misfortune was in
some measure compensated by the minister of Kirkley having permission to
make use of the church at Pakefield one part of the Sunday, and the
minister of Pakefield to use it on the other part. In this manner both
these parishes were supplied for many years, but at length they were
parted again. After this separation the incumbent of Kirkley not only
declined performing divine service in Pakefield church any longer, but
also refused to allow anything to the incumbent of Pakefield for
officiating on both parts of the Lord’s day; alledging that he could not
legally be compelled to it. The Rev. Mr. Tanner, vicar of Lowestoft, was
at that time commissary and official in the archdeaconry of Suffolk; and
he failed not to use all the mild persuasive arguments in his power, to
prevail on the incumbent of Kirkley to make an allowance, but to no
purpose; so that finding him inflexible in his resolution he left him
with this threat:—“Sir, if you will not officiate in Pakefield Church I
will build you a church at Kirkley, and in that you _shall_ officiate.”
Mr. Tanner was as good as his word; for partly at his own expense, and
partly with the assistance of his friends and acquaintance, he shortly
erected the present church at Kirkley; and divine service has accordingly
been performed there ever since. Mr. Tanner collected money from house
to house at Lowestoft, and contributed himself twenty guineas. He also
preached the first sermon there in the summer, 1750. The old church
consisted of two aisles; the north aisle still continues in ruins, and it
is only the aisle which constitutes the new church. The steeple is about
72 feet in height, is a good tower, and an excellent sea-mark; but is now
somewhat in decay. It contains only one bell. December 5th, 1749, when
they began to clear away the rubbish from the ruins of the old church,
they discovered (eighteen feet from the east wall, and six from the
north) a stone with a brass label containing the following
inscription:—“Orate, Pana Thome Melle Clarisi, nup. Rectore, deKerkley,
q’ obijit XVIº die augustij Aº do mº VcXXVI cui (ane ppinet des) ame.”
That is, “Pray for the soul of Thomas Melle, clerk, late rector of
Kirkley, who died 16th day of August, anno. dom. 1526. For whose soul
may God provide. Amen.”
And on another label, found in the north isle, a like inscription for
one, John Boodherd, who died in August, 1486.
There were several other brass-plated stones taken out of the body of the
church and north isle; but were all disrobed, and laid promiscuously
under the pews, etc., of the new building.
The old font was broken to pieces, probably by accident, and was left
amongst the ruins of the north isle. The font now used in the new
church, was brought from the church of Saint —, lately taken down at
Gillingham.
Kirkele, Suff, Edmundus de Wymundhale Clamat habere liberam Warennam
in Dominicis terris Suis in Kirkele, etc. Et profert Curtam Dri
Henrici Regis, patris Dri Regis Nunc, que hoc testatur, etc. Plita
Corone, A°. 14° E. I E 4t°. Vide Wymundhale.
Kirkele 33 E I Inter Robertum Rist de North Jernemuth Quer. et Godefr
le Ludham de Mag. Jernemuth, et Constantiam Ux: ejus Imped, de I
Mess. 45 acr. terr et v acr turbar in Kirkele. Pagefelde south
Carlton, Mutford Jus Roberti. Fin: Suff: A°. 33. E. I. Lig 3. No.
151.
Kirkele 1560. Henricus Hobart de Loddon in Com Norf: Arm: Cond:
Testam 17 Oct: 1560 etc. Habuit inter Alia Maneriu de Kirkly, voc:
K. Hall. Terras & Tenemta in K. et alibi in Hundredo de Mutford
perquisit de Antonio Rouse Armigo cum Advoc: Ecclie de Kirkley pred:
etc, probat, 3 May 1561. Ex libro Bircham Regr: Norwic. (Le Neve,
from T. Martin’s Suffolk papers.)
The ascertaining the true situation of Kirkley road, and determining
whether the seven miles which terminated the liberties of Yarmouth, were
to be measured from the key or the haven’s mouth, occasioned the great
law suit between that burgh and Lowestoft.
Pakefield is a considerable large parish about a mile to the south of
Lowestoft. Under the general name Pakefield is commonly comprehended not
only what is properly called by that name, but also the adjoining parish
of Kirkley; and though to a common observer they appear as only one town,
yet, in reality, they are distinct parishes, and under different
regulations respecting all the branches of parochial government. The
town is situated to the east of Kirkley, and extends to the very summit
of the cliffs which form its eastern boundary. The German ocean by
frequently dashing against the bases of these cliffs, has often received
large portions of those ponderous masses, together with the buildings
they supported into its voracious bosom. When a raging tide has
occasioned an extraordinary fall of the cliffs either here, or at Corton,
or Kessingland, the curiosity of the antiquarian is frequently gratified
by the discovery of many ancient coins, etc.
There is scarce any trade carried on in this town; what little there is
is chiefly in piloting ships to London, catching cods, sprats, etc., and
a small part of the herring fishery.
According to Ecton, the church is dedicated to All Saints; but it seems,
by the inscription on the communion-cup, to be dedicated to St. Margaret.
It is valued in the king’s books at £29 1s. 1d. {45}
It consists of two isles, built nearly uniform; the steeple stands at the
west end of the south isle, and contains five bells.
At the east end of the south isle stands the altar; it is elevated on
three steps of considerable height, and underneath is a charnel house.
A new pulpit was erected a few years since by the late rector, the Rev.
Dr. Leman: the old one was a very ancient piece of architecture; on
several parts of it was the figure of a man in a devout posture, with a
label issuing from his mouth, containing this inscription:—
Misericordia diu in eternu Cantabo.
That is
I will celebrate the divine mercy for ever.
At the upper end of the south isle, on a fair brass-plated stone, is the
following inscription, in Anglo-Saxon characters:—
Here lies master Richard Folcard, formerly rector of a mediety of
this church to the south, who died on St. Martin’s day, in the year
of our Lord, one thousand four hundred.
To whose soul be merciful O God. Amen.
On a brass plate of a man and his wife, with eleven children, in the
north isle, is another inscription, in old Anglo-Saxon characters, to the
memory of one John Bowf or Bowfe, who died anno millo 6666, XVII.
On a flat marble in the north isle is an inscription to the memory of
Philip Richardson, who was rector of Pakefield fifty-one years, and died
October 8th 1748, aged 82.
On the north side of the church is a very ancient parsonage-house, built
with stone.
On a small silver communion cup is the following inscription:—
X PAKEFELDE-SANTE-MARGARET, 1367.
On a silver paten,
PACKEFELDE.
And on a fine Holland communion cloth,
III III . 1640.
This church was lately much repaired and beautified at the expense of its
late rector, the Rev. Dr. Leman; who not only new laid the floor, erected
a new pulpit and desk, and placed over a curious old font, a handsome
model of the tower and spire of Norwich Cathedral, but also embellished
it with many other useful ornaments. He was endued with many excellent
qualities particularly charity and beneficense, which he constantly
exercised with the greatest liberality, both with respect to his
parishioners and to mankind in general; and, consequently, was justly
entitled to the following character, which was given of him at his
decease:—“He was an admired preacher, a strenuous assertor of the rites
and ceremonies of the church of which he was so bright an ornament, and
indefatigable in every other part of the pastoral office.”
There is also a meeting house in this parish for the people called
Quakers, who have held meetings here for 130 years past, though their
number is but small.
Int Rogeru Townesend & Henricum Spilman Quer et Tho: Aslack et Eliz
ux ejus Deforc, Manerij de Elgh als dict Willingham All Saint set
Advoc: Ecclie ejusd: Et Ecclie de Pakefield: Jus Rogeri. Fines Suff.
A.° 10 E. 4 Lig. 1, No. 24.
Edmund Jenney Miles, Cond: Test die Veneris ante fm Nat B. Marr:
Virg. 1522. Habuit int al: Advoc: Ecclie de Pakefield. P.bat 21°
Dec. 1522 ’E libro. (Briggs Regr. Norw. 35 vid. plus in Knodeshall.)
These injuries, and, in a great measure, illegal attempts to exclude the
town of Lowestoft from having any share in the herring fishery occasioned
a most violent rupture between the towns, and who carried their
resentment so far as to fit out armed vessels, to commence hostilities on
each others property, and even to commit bloodshed; the one party
insisting upon the privileges they pretended to be entitled to by their
charter, and the other party as strenuously defending those rights which
for many centuries they had enjoyed, without any other interruption than
paying the custom due to Yarmouth for the purchase of herrings in Kirkley
road. But now it evidently appeared, that an utter exclusion of the
Lowestoft men from the benefit of the herring fishery, was the determined
resolution of the town of Yarmouth; and, therefore it occasioned the most
violent struggles between liberty and oppression that can be well
imagined; which continued so long as to make both the parties, most
probably, weary of the contention, and agreed at last (in order for
settling the dispute) to lay this long-contested affair before the Privy
Council; from thence it was referred to the judges, and at last to a
hearing before the house of Lords, where the case was finally determined
in favour of the town of Lowestoft, as will be more fully shewn in the
following section.
Upon an inquiry into the state of the herring fishery, after this contest
was decided, it was found that the fishery at Lowestoft, and also at the
adjoining towns, was greatly on the decline, occasioned partly by the
disputes with Yarmouth, by the civil war in the reign of Charles I, the
great fire at Lowestoft in 1644, and the war the nation was then engaged
with the Dutch.
In consequence of these distresses, the town of Lowestoft and the
neighbouring towns of Pakefield and Kirkley, presented a petition to both
Houses of Parliament, requesting their lordships to take the unfortunate
state of these towns into consideration, and to grant them relief; and
particularly with respect to enforcing the old statutes relative to the
consumption of fish in this Kingdom, and also by adding such new ones for
that purpose as their lordships might think necessary.
To the right honourable the lords and commons in the high courts of
Parliament now assembled,
The humble petition of the fishing adventurers and fishermen of the
townes of Lowestoft, Pakefield, and Kirtlye, in the countye of
Suffolk,
Humbly sheweth,
That your petitioners have ever chieflye subsisted by the fishing
trade, in catching lingg, codds, and herrings, the staple fish of
this Kingdom; and have, before the unhappye difference fell in this
Kingdom, (the civil wars of Charles I) uttered and soulde greate
quantitye of the said fish, which tendered to the welfare and
mainteyneing of these townes, in regard of the sale they found for
the same, (but nowe so it is.) May in please your honours that our
townes are become very poore, and these adventurers in fishing
affaires so undone, that one half of them are taken off, our
fishermen lamentablye impoverished, and if better encouragement be
not given they will fall to nothing; and these fishermen, the
nurserye of seamen, will be enforced to undertake other employments,
which will prove a greate prejudice to the nation; and for want of
expense of the fish, through our adventures therein are soe much
declined, yet that fish which we have cannot be soulde for twoe
thirde of the price it have formerlye yielded, when twice as much
fish have been taken, whereby manye poore faimilyes are utterly
decayed, and these poore townes will be undone; they wholye depending
upon the fishing trade.
Your petitioners therefore, humblye pray your honours will be pleased
to take the premises into consideration, and in your greate wisdomes
make provision for the reveiveing of the ould good lawes, and making
such additional lawes, that from henceforth fish may be more expended
in this Kingdome. That soe your petitioners may be inabled to
adventure in the fisherye as formerlye, and thereby support
themselves, the fishermen, and theire faimilyes.
And your petitioners, as in dutye bound, shall ever pray.
John Youell, vicar, Thomas Tye, John Landifield,
Samuel Pacy, James Reeve, James Sprat,
Peter Durrant, Robert Bell, Simond Spicer,
John Durrant, Thomas Harvey, Richard Drake,
John Wilde, Ar. Jermey, John Drake,
Tho. Uttinge, Thomas Ashby, Robert Bray,
John Gardinar, William Pearson, William Fowler, sen.,
Richard Spendlove, Thomas Felton, John Colby,
Robert Daines, Edward Long, Thomas Fowler,
Robert Ashby, John Longe, William Thurrkettle,
John Gardinar, Robert Botson, William Wood,
Robert Hawes, Francis Botson, William Church,
Thomas Bolton, Cornelles Landifield, Obed Haulsworth,
Francis Mewse, Henry Ward, George Wooden,
Thomas Newton, John Fowler, William Browne,
William Shorting, Thomas Batchelor, John Barber,
Stephen Corfin, James Spicer, John Munds,
John Uttinge, Simon Mewse, William Seagoe,
Thomas Harrould, William Harrould, William Richman,
Matthew Reeve, John Postle, Thomas Church.
John Soane, John Kittrige,
Thomas Mighells, John Bootey,
To this petition were annexed several proposals tending to the
improvement of the herring fishery; and both together were transmitted to
Sir John Pettus, to be by him presented to the committee appointed by
Parliament for drawing up an Act for the further support and advancement
of the herring fisheries, these complaints were so far attended to by
Parliament that the petitioners obtained for the further increase of
their fisheries; and also seamen and shipping; together with other
privileges of considerable importance.
A trewe copy of the severall proposalls sent to London this 24th of
February, to Sir John Pettus, to be offered to the courtte of
Parliament, 1670.
IMPROVEMENTS FOR ADVANCING THE FISHING TRADE.
1st. That the fishers be free from payeing costome or excyse for any
materralls to build, finish, victuall, repayre, and fitt to sea,
their vessells, on their respective voyadges for herring, codd, ling,
or any other fish.
2nd. That the fishers be free to dispose of their fish at all tymes,
in all places for their most advantage, within his majesty’s
dominions and countries, without restraint of corporation, or any
othor place or places whatever. And that noe person or persons be
excluded that trade.
3rd. That one year’s assessment for the pore may be advansed in the
respective parishes in England, to be employed in building convenient
houses in the chefist of their townes; and for stocke for hempe, to
sett the pore and idle persons oute of imployment to work to spinn
twine and make netts.
4th. That when one yeare after such housis be built, stocke of hemp
provided and the pore sett on work to make netts; that all forryne
nets be exhebated, upon payne of forfeiture of the same.
AND FOR THE EXPENCE OF FISH, TO SUPPORT THE FISHERS.
1st. That all persons of abilitie may have a small quantitie of fish
and herrings imposed on them, at the common rate, according to their
qualitie.
2nd. That tooe fish days in the weke be duly observed, and no flesh
spent unless for good reason they be lysensed by the mynister of the
parish.
A BILL FOR CARRYING ON THE FISHING TRADE, AND FOR INCREASE OF SEAMEN
AND SHIPPING.
Whereas the sovereignty of the British seas hath been ever (tyme out
of mind) a flower inherent in the crown of England; and whereas the
principall supporte thereof, as alsoe of the safetye and welfare of
the English nations depend upon multidudes of shipping and seamen.
And whereas the fishing trade doth above all others breede and
increase seamen and shipping; and alsoe employes greate nombers of
all sortes of impotent and aged people, as well women as children,
above any other trade, in spinning, making and tanning netts, and in
making roapes and sailes; and alsoe in curing, dressing and drying
herrings, pilchards, ling, cod, salmon, and other sortes of fish, and
otherwise. And whereas this soe advantagious and beneficiable trade,
wherein the crowne, strength, and safetye of England is soe much
concerned, and whereby innumerable people of all sorts might be
maintained, is of late years become neglected, and in hazard to be
wholly lost, to the indangering not onlye the soveraignty of the
British seas, but also of the safetye of these three nations, if not
timelye prevented. And whereas it is impossible for the people of
England to attaine unto a share in the taking of herrings, ling, cod,
or other fish, to be pickled or otherwise cured and vented in
forreigne countryes, unless they be in all respects enabled to
builde, furnish and victuall busses and other fishing vessels, to
catch them as cheape as other nations; and that the returnes of the
said fish, more than shall be found usefull for England, may be
brought into England and shipped out againe into any forreigne parts
with as little charge and trouble as merchants, fishermen and others,
in like cases, are put unto other countryes. Be it therefore enacted
by the King’s most excellent maiestie, and by and with the advice and
concern of the lords spirrittuall and temporall and commons in
Parliament assembled, that all materialls and provisions for
building, furnishing, victualling, or repayring of busses or other
fishing vessels, or otherwise, to be imployed or spent in and about
the fishing trade upon certificate of the trueth thereof, shall be
freed from paying the duty of costomes and excise. And be it further
enacted, by the authority aforesaid, that all victuallers, inns,
alehowses, ordinaries, chaundlers, vintners, and coffeehowses,
according as they are better accustomed one then another, be and are
hereby obliged to take of such merchaunt or other person as shall
first tender the same in such porte or other convenient towne or
cittye, upon a river neare unto theire respective habitations (as his
maiestie, by advice of his right honourable privye council shall
appoint) and cause notice thereof, by letters or otherwise in writing
to be left here, and a copy thereof to be left with the cheife
magistrate or chiefe officer, of such cittye, porte, or towne, or
with theire respective officers or servants in that behalfe, one,
two, three, four, or more good and merchantable barrells of herrings
of herrings yearly, at such tymes and prise as his maiestie, by
advice of his right honourable privye councill shall appoint dureing
the term of seven years, to commence immediately after the end of
this present sessions of Parliament, upon penalty of double the said
prise unto the owners of the said herrings soe tendered by due course
of lawe in any of his maiestie’s courts of justice, etc.
The town of Lowestoft soon after presented another petition to the lords
spiritual and temporal, praying to be relieved from paying a duty of two
shillings and sixpence per barrel upon all such beer as should be used in
the herring fishery; which petition was also accordingly granted.
To the right honourable the lords and Commons now assembled in the
high Court of Parliament,
The humble petition of the inhabitants of the towne of Lowestoft, in
the countye of Suffolke,
Sheweth
That your petitioners have ever cheifliest subsisted by the fishing
trade, which for many yeares have much decayed, and your petitioners
greatly impoverished by reason of the late wars and dearness of
tacklin. {48}
That notwithstanding the officers for the excise have required the
duty of twoe shillings and sixpence per barrell upon all fishing
beer, which in noe tyme past have ever bene demanded; and for
non-payment thereoff, have taken some of your petitioners goods,
which doth much add to the decaye of youre poore petitioners trade,
and discurridgement in the pursuite of theire calling; good bread and
beer being theire cheifest comfort.
Wherefore they most humbly pray that your honours would be graciously
pleased to take into your considerations, that the excise uppon
fishing beere, may wholly be taken off, as in your grave wisdomes
shall be thought fitt; that youre poore petitioners may be
incorridged comfortably to followe theire calling.
And your petitioners, as in duty bound, shall ever pray, etc.
It is evident, from the above petitions, that Pakefield and Kirkley,
etc., were involved in a considerable share of the misfortunes which
distressed Lowestoft; and that in petitioning for relief under the
hardship respecting the fishing beer, the towns mutually concurred, as
appears by the following letter:
TO MR. JAMES WILDE, AT LOWESTOFT.
Sir,—By order of Henry Trott, from yourself, these are to certifye
you, that here is belonging unto these townes of Pakefield and
Kirkley, 14 fisher boats; which in their several voyages of one year,
by estimation of us whose names are under-written, may expend nine
tunns of beer each boate, which in the whole, is 126 tunnes, which is
all at present from them that are
Yours at command,
JO. FOWLER and others.
Pakefield, this 9th of January, 1670.
The state of the herring fishery at Lowestoft and the adjoining towns, in
the year 1670, will appear from the following account; together with what
beer they respectively expended that year:—
LOWESTOFT.
Thomas Mighells 3 boats
Thomas Wilde 1 ,,
Robert Barber 1 ,,
John Wilde 2 ,,
Margaret Munds 1 ,,
Richard Church 1 ,,
Richard Jex 1 ,,
Thomas Ashby 2 ,,
William Rising 1 ,,
Joe Wilde 2 ,,
Nicholas Utting 1 ,,
Samuel Pacy 2 ,,
John Landifield 3 ,,
John Utting 1 ,,
Thomas Hayles 1 ,,
Henry Ward 1 ,,
Joe Pacy 1 ,,
Total 25 boats
Twenty-five at nine tuns each, is two hundred and twenty-five tuns.
Pakefield and Kirkley 14 boats.
Southwold, 8 herring boats and 3 Iceland boats 11 ,,
Alborough, 2 herring boats and 3 Iceland boats 5 ,,
Corton 2 ,,
Dunwich 1 ,,
Total 33 boats
These 33 boats from Pakefield and Kirkley, etc., together with 25 boats
from Lowestoft (the towns which joined in the petition), expending nine
tuns each boat, make the consumption of beer, in the whole, to be 522
tuns.
A few years after, the merchants of Lowestoft presented a petition to the
lord-treasurer, praying that they might have the further privilege of
importing coals, and exporting corn and other goods, for the benefit of
the said town; which petition his lordship reported to the lords of the
privy council, who granted the request.
THE ORDER FOR IMPORTING COALS, AND EXPORTING
CORN, ETC., AT LOWESTOFT.
After our hearty commendations—Wee have received your report of the
12th instant upon the petition of the inhabitants of Lowestoft;
praying that corne and coles may be exported and emported there as
well as other goods mentioned in a report by you to the late
lord-treasurer of the 15th of October last. In which report of the
12th instant you gave us your opinion that the petitioners may have
liberty to export corn from Lowestoft, due entryes being first made
at Yarmouth. But not to emport it thither from beyond the seas.
Also that they may emport sea coles thither due entreyes being first
made at Yarmouth; but not to export them from thence to parts beyond
the seas. And that, when the officers at Yarmouth shall see it
necessary, an officer be sent over to Lowestoffe, the petitioners
paying the officer such allowance per diem for his paines as shall be
reasonable. These are therefore to pray and require you to give the
necessary orders and directions for permitting and suffering corne to
be exported, and sea coales to be imported at Lowestoft aforesaid,
provided that due entreyes be made at Yarmouth; and that when the
officer at Yarmouth see it necessary, an officer be sent over to
Lowestoft, and gain for his pains according to the said Regulation by
you proposed. And for soe doing this shall be your warrant.
Whitehall Treasury Chamber, the 24th May, 1679.
To our very loving friends the Commissioners of his majesties
customs.
ESSEX. J. ERULE
ED. DERING
S. GODOLPHIN.
Their lordships also at the same time issued another order to the
commissioners of the customs informing them, that the merchants at
Lowestoft should have liberty to import salt for curing fish, and also to
import all such materials as are generally used for fishing vessels, as
tackling, etc.
After our hearty commendations—Whereas upon a petition presented to
the late lord treasurer, by the inhabitants of Lowestoft, praying
that an officer might be settled in the saide towne for receiving
their entreys with his maiesties customes, and for granting coequetts
for exportation of goods, or that the chiefe officer of his maiesties
customes in Yarmouth, upon the petitioners making honest and just
entreys, may permit the landing theire goods at Lowestoffe. And upon
reference made of the said petition unto you, you did in a report
made to the said late lord-treasurer of the 15th October last, set
forth,—That the petitioners alledge theire having beene of late
denyed to land theire goods at Lowestoft, notwithstanding they have
entered them, and paid his maiesties dutyes at Yarmouth, and profered
to be at the charge of an officer to see the delivery of them, but
are forced to deliver them at Yarmouth, where the towne dutyes are
great, and the charges (in regard of theire distance from the port of
Yarmouth), also greate, especially upon salt for the fishery, which
they cannot carry without greate and apparent loss; for which cause
they were compelled to send their ships last yeare beyond the seas
with theire goods, whereof his maiestie lost his customes, and the
petitioners were much damnified. They likewise alledge that to land
the grosser sort of goods at Yarmouth, it would consume almost a
quarter part of their profitt to get them home. That the said towne
of Lowestoffe is increased in shipping to the number of sixty
vessells which is more considerable than both the townes of Southwold
and Aldeborough, at each of which townes is an officer to receive
entreyes and to grant coequetts. On the other side you set forth,
that Southwold and Aldeborough are members of the port of Yarmouth,
where antiently there hath been established a collector, and the
patent officers of that port are required by law to keep theire
deputyes in the said members; but that Lowestoffe is but a creeke in
the said porte, where the patent officers are not required by law to
have theire deputyes to attend, although it be much increased in
shipping. And that it would be a great charge to his maiestie, and
the patent officers, to make it a port of receipt, and a member
annexed to the said port. That you have also received the report of
Mr. Dumsteir, one of the general surveyors, and the patent officers
and surveyors of the port of Yarmouth upon the said petitions. Wee
are of opinion that it would be to the prejudice of his maiesties
customes, besides a charge to his maiestie, to settle a collector
there. That great frauds have been formerly practised in the Port of
Yarmouth, where with much difficulty things are brought in some good
order. That you are of opinion, that by giving the general liberty
desired by the petitioners, the same frauds would be practised at
Lowestoffe. But as to the importing gross goods, viz., salt, timber,
deale boards, pitch, tarr, rozine, iron, hemp, ropes, cordage, and
pantiles; and as to the exporting butter, cheese, and fish, you think
they may be laden and unladen at Lowestoffe, entreyes being first
duly made at Yarmouth, and an officer being sent over to Lowestoffe,
when the officer at Yarmouth shall see it necessary, they at
Lowestoffe payeing the officer such allowance per diem for his paines
as shall be reasonable. Wee have considered what you have set forth
and proposed as aforesaid in your said report and do accordingly
order and direct that you permitt and suffer the gross goods before
enumerated to be respectively imported and exported at Lowestoffe in
such manner and under such regulations, as you advise in your report
above received, and that you give such directions to the officers
whom it concerns as may be necessary in this behalf; and for soe
doing this shall be your warrant.
Whitehall Treasury Chamber, June 6th, 1679.
To our very loving friends the commissioners of His Maisties
customes.
L. HYDE,
E. D. DERING,
S. GODOLPHIN,
J. ERULE.
The herring season begins on the eastern coast of England about a
fortnight before Michaelmas, and continues till Martinmas. The number of
boats annually employed at Lowestoft in this fishery, upon an average
from the year 1772 to 1781, was about 33; and the quantity of herrings
caught in each of those years, was about 714 lasts, or 21 lasts to a
boat, which makes the quantity of herrings caught by the Lowestoft boats
during that period to be 7140 lasts. These herrings were sold, upon an
average, at about £12 10s. per last, which makes the whole produce
arising from the sale of the said fish to be £89,250. After the year
1781, the number of boats employed in this fishery were rather less,
occasioned by the war with the Dutch and other powers. {51}
At the beginning of the season, the boats sail off to sea about thirteen
leagues north-east from Lowestoft, in order to meet the shoals, or second
part of the first division of the herrings (mentioned in the beginning of
this section), which separated off the north part of Scotland. Being
arrived on the fishing ground, in the evening (the proper time for
fishing) they shoot their nets, extending about 2,200 yards in length,
and eight in depth, which, by the help of small casks, called bowls,
fastened on one side, at the distance of 44 yards, from each other, cause
the nets to swim in a position perpendicular to the surface of the water.
If the quantity of fish caught in one night amounts only to a few
thousands, they are salted, and the vessels, if they have no better
success, continue on the fishing ground two or three nights longer,
salting the fish as they are caught, till they have obtained a
considerable quantity, when they bring them into the roads, where they
are landed, and lodged in the fish houses. Sometimes when the quantity
of fish is very small, they will continue on the fishing ground a week or
ten days; but in general they bring in the fish every two or three days,
and sometimes oftener, especially when the quantity amounts to six or
seven lasts, which frequently happens, and instances have been known,
when a single boat has brought into the roads, at one time, twelve or
fourteen lasts.
As soon as the herrings are brought on shore, they are carried to the
fish houses, where they are salted, and laid on the floors in heaps,
about two feet deep; after they have continued in this situation about
fifty hours, the salt is washed from them by putting them into baskets
and plunging them into water; from thence they are carried into an
adjoining fish house, where, after being pierced through the gills by
small wooden spits about four feet long, they are handed to the men in
the upper part of the house, who place them at proper distances as high
as the top of the roof, where they are cured and made red.
The upper part of the house being thus filled with herrings, many small
wood fires are kindled underneath, upon the floor, whose number is in
proportion to the size of the room, and the smoke which ascends from
these fires is what dries or cures the herrings. After the fish have
hung in this manner about seven days, the fires are extinguished, that
the oil and fat may drip from them and in about two days after the fires
are re-kindled and after two more such drippings, the fires are kept
continually burning until the herrings are perfectly cured, which
requires a longer or shorter time, according as they are designed either
for a foreign or home consumption. After the herrings have hung a proper
time, they are taken down (which is called “striking”), and are packed in
barrels containing 800 or 1000 herrings each.
From the many frauds which have been formerly practised in this part of
the fishing branch the packing of herrings, a complaint was made to the
government, in the reign of Charles II. praying that this grievance might
be redressed, and accordingly an Act of Parliament was obtained, 15
Charles II, to the following purpose:—
That from and after the first day of August, 1664, no white or red
herrings of English catching shall be put up to sale in England,
Wales, or towne of Berwick upon Tweed, but what shall be packed in
lawful barrels or vessels, and what shall be well, truly, and justly
laid and packed; and shall be of one time of taking, salting,
saveing, or drying, and equally well packed in the midst, and every
part of the barrel or vessel: and by a sworn packer, with a mark or
brand denoting the gage of the barrel or vessel, and quantity,
quality and condition of the herrings packed therein, and the towne
or place where they are packed. And the bayliffs of Great Yarmouth
for the time being, and the mayor, bayliffs, or other head officer
for the time being, of every port, haven, or creek, out of which any
vessell or ships do proceed to fish for herrings are hereby
authorised and required before the first day of July in the year
1664. And before the first day of July every year after, to appoint
for their respective haven, port, or creek, a competent number of
able and experienced packers to view and pack all white and red
herrings of English catching as shall be brought into their port,
haven, or creek; and well and truly to mark and brand the barrels or
vessels into which such herrings are put, with such mark or brand as
is above directed. And to administer to them yearly an oath, (which
oath they are hereby authorised and appointed to give them) for the
well and true doing thereof according to this Act. And in case the
said bayliffs of Great Yarmouth, or the mayor, bayliffs, or other
head officer for the time being of any such port, haven, or creek,
shall not appoint and swear such packers before him in every year, as
is by this Act required they shall for every default, forfeit the sum
of one hundred pounds of lawful money of England. One moiety to his
maiestie, his hiers and succesors and the other moiety to him or them
that shall informe or sue for the same in any court of record, by
bill, plaint, or other action, wherein no essoyn, protection, or
wager in law shall be allowed.
THE OATH.
You shall well and truly doe, execute, and perform, the office and
duty of packer of herrings; according to the tenour of an Act of
Parliament in that case made and provided. So help you God.
The herrings are shipped off for market, which formerly was chiefly
confined to foreign ports especially those belonging to Roman Catholic
countries, and only a small quantity reserved for home consumption; but
of late years the home consumption has greatly increased, and the
commissions from foreign parts have neither been so numerous nor so large
as in former years. The great increase of inhabitants in London appears
to be the cause of the former, as the less rigorous observance of Lent,
and other fish days, in Popish countries, is the reason assigned for the
latter.
These reasons will receive farther confirmation from the following
account of the demand for herrings for foreign consumption, in 1755. In
that year there were cured in Lowestoft and Yarmouth 70,000 barrels,
which were consigned to the following ports:—
To Leghorn 13,000 barrels
Naples 7,500 ,,
Venice 5,700 ,,
Genoa 5,500 ,,
Ancona 4,500 ,,
Cadiz 900 ,,
Trieste 700 ,,
Civita Vecchia 700 ,,
Bordeaux 500 ,,
39,000 ,,
To Holland 13,000 ,,
Home Consumption, chiefly in London 18,000 ,,
Total 70,000 barrels
From hence it appears, that out of 70,000 barrels of herrings cured that
year, only 18,000 were consumed in England. Since that time the demand
for herrings for foreign markets has further declined, and that for home
consumption has increased in the same proportion.
The quantity of herrings properly termed a barrel is 1000, though
oftentimes 800, as when the fish are picked; the antient method of
packing red herrings was in cades, containing 600; but that is a method
observed now only in the packing of sprats.
In the year 1776 the herring merchants of Lowestoft were much alarmed
with apprehensions of the utter extinction of their fishery, and,
consequently, with the total ruin of the town. Some merchants belonging
to Liverpool, the Isle of Man, and Dunbar and Caithness, in Scotland,
having introduced the method of curing herrings into these parts, and set
up a red herring fishery in opposition to Yarmouth and Lowestoft,
endeavoured to become their rivals both at the London as well as the
foreign markets. But, after repeated attempts, their schemes proved
totally abortive, through the superior quality of the Lowestoft herrings;
and, consequently, the fishery at Lowestoft was thereby re-established
upon a more permanent foundation than before.
The superior quality of the Lowestoft herrings, both in respect of colour
and flavour, is evident from this circumstance—their bearing a better
price at market than those from any other place.
It has been a long-established rule with the fish-mongers in London, to
give ten shillings per last for the Lowestoft herrings more than those of
Yarmouth, let the Yarmouth price be what it will. Two reasons may be
assigned for the cause of this difference.
In Yarmouth, the merchants entrust the curing of the fish to the care of
a head man, called a towher, more than the merchants at Lowestoft do; for
at Lowestoft the merchants inspect the curing of the fish chiefly
themselves. The other, and more probable cause may be, that in Yarmouth
the fish houses are intermixed with the dwelling-houses, and being
situated in these narrow passages called rows, are too closely confined,
and, consequently, deprived of that free circulation of air so necessary
in the proper curing of herrings. At Lowestoft these houses are detached
from the other buildings of the town and are arranged at the bottom of
the cliff by themselves, where from the benefit of a free and
uninterrupted currency of the air, they acquire those excellent qualities
which are not to be attained in any other place which has not the same
advantages.
Nevertheless, it afterwards appeared, that these new adventurers had a
design of this nature in contemplation some time before they attempted to
carry it into execution; and in order to the rendering it successful, had
sent several persons to Lowestoft, for the purpose of taking dimensions
of the fish houses, their manner of construction, etc., and to make every
other inquiry respecting the method of curing herrings.
Having by these means obtained every information necessary for their
purpose, they began soon after to erect houses, and made every other
preparation proper for the curing of herrings, and were able in a short
time to furnish the markets with immense quantities of fish; and had not
their herrings been so extremely large and fat as to prevent their being
properly cured, the undertaking, most probably, would have been
successful. The last circumstance which I shall mention concerning the
herring fishery at Lowestoft, is the proposal made in 1779, by the French
King to the English Court, for a reciprocal neutrality respecting their
fisheries, during the war, which met with the approbation of both courts,
as appears from the letters below:
COPY OF THE LETTER FROM M. DE SARTINE TO M. D’ANGLEMONT.
Versailles, the 31st May, 1779.
The benefit, sir, that must result from the reciprocal liberty of
fishing between France and England, and above all the desire to
preserve the means of subsistence during the war, to the subjects of
the two nations, to whom this employment is essential, have
determined the King in no respect to interrupt the fishery of the
English; his MAJESTY, persuaded that this example of humanity will be
followed by the court of London charges me to order you to make it
known to all the officers commanding his ships, and to all private
commanders, that it is most expressly forbid them to molest in any
manner till after new orders, the fishing boats of the English which
shall have no offensive arms; and also such as shall be laden with
fresh fish, though such fish should not have been taken by those
vessels, unless they should be found making signals to give
intelligence to the cruizers of the ships of the enemy.
I have no doubt that you will carefully observe that the King’s
commands will be executed.—I am, very truly sir, your very humble and
very obedient servant,
(_Signed_) DE SARTINE.
A Copy of this letter was sent by M. D’Anglemont to the officers of the
chamber of commerce at Dunkirk, who had it printed, that they may the
better conform to the views of the minister of the marine.
THE FOLLOWING LETTER WAS ALSO SENT FROM THE FRENCH KING TO HIS SERENE
HIGHNESS THE ADMIRAL OF FRANCE:—
Cousin,
The desire I have always had of softening, as much as in my power
lies, the calamities of war, has induced me to direct my attention to
that part of my subjects, who employ themselves in the fisheries, and
who derive their sole subsistence from those resources. I suppose
that the example which I shall now give to my enemies, and which can
have no other views than what arise from sentiments of humanity, will
induce them to grant the same liberty to our fisheries, which I
readily grant them. In consequence whereof, I send you this letter
to acquaint you, that I have given orders to all the commanders of my
vessels, armed ships, and captains of privateers, not to molest
(until further orders) the English fishery, nor to stop their
vessels, whether they be laden with fresh fish, or not having taken
in their freight; provided, however, that they do not carry offensive
arms, and that they are not found to have given signals, which might
indicate their holding an intelligence with the enemy’s ships of war.
You will make known these my intentions to the officers of the
admiralty, and to all who are under your orders. Such being the
purposes of these presents, I pray God, my cousin, that he will grant
you His Holy protection,
Given at Versailles, the 5th day of June, in the year, 1779.
(_Signed_) LOUIS.
(_Countersigned_) DE SARTINE.
Two gentlemen were sent from France to the English Court, to solicit our
concurrence in this proposal; they came first to Lowestoft and the other
towns on the coast, to request these places to join with them in the
solicitation. It appeared that the English Court refused to accede
formally to the overture, though they tacitly complied with it, and gave
such orders to their commanders that no act of hostility was committed on
the fisheries by either side during the war.
Another fishery subsisting at Lowestoft, is that called the mackarel
fair. The principal advantages which the merchants receive from this
fishery, is that of employing the fishermen, and keeping them at home for
the herring season, more than any emolument to themselves; as the
benefits which they receive are very inadequate to the expense of fitting
out the vessels, the dangers they are liable to from the sea, and in time
of war from the enemy.
The mackarel season begins about the middle of May, and continues to the
end of June. The number of boats annually employed at Lowestoft in this
fishery are about 23; and the money arising from the sale of the fish
caught by these boats, amount upon an average to about £2,309. At the
beginning of this season (as in the herring season) the boats sail into
the north-east, in order to meet the fish at the beginning of their
annual revolution around the British Isles. The mackarel being naturally
a slothful fish, never rises to the surface of the water in any large
quantities in calm weather, so that the success of the voyage almost
entirely depends upon a blustering, stormy season, which rouses the fish
from the lower parts of the ocean, and brings them within reach of the
fishing nets. The quantity caught at the beginning of the season is
generally small; afterwards it so far increases, that 500 or 1,800 fish
will be caught by one boat in a night, if the weather be turbulent;
otherwise, if it be calm and serene, the quantity is inconsiderable. As
the mackarel is never salted, but requires an immediate consumption, the
boats employed in catching them are under the necessity of returning
every day to their respective towns, to deliver the fish which they
caught in the preceding night; but when the quantity of fish is small,
the weather calm, or the wind contrary, they will sometimes continue upon
the fishing ground a second night.
AN ACCOUNT OF THE MACKAREL FISHERY AT LOWESTOFT, FROM 1770 TO 1785
INCLUSIVE; CONTAINING THE NUMBER OF BOATS EMPLOYED EACH YEAR, AND THE
ANNUAL AMOUNT OF THE MONEY ARISING FROM THE SALE OF THE FISH.
Year. Boats. £ s. d.
1770 26 2401 2 2½
1771 26 3080 15 6½
1772 33 3179 5 1
1773 36 3374 15 6
1774 35 2012 13 0
1775 32 2441 5 2
1776 30 1595 17 8½
1777 20 1698 15 0
1778 21 1295 19 1½
1779 21 1618 4 6
1780 20 1559 3 10
In 1781, sixteen boats averaged £173 15s. 3½d. per boat.
In 1782, sixteen boats averaged £136 1s. 2d. per boat.
In 1783, sixteen boats averaged £189 1s. per boat.
In 1784, twenty boats averaged £119 5s. 11½d. per boat.
In 1785, twenty boats averaged £249 8s. 8½d. per boat. (Supposed to be
the greatest mackarel season ever known at Lowestoft).
In 1786, twenty-four boats averaged £146 7s. 9½d. per boat.
In 1787, twenty boats averaged £105 5s. per boat.
In 1788, twenty boats averaged £93 6s. 6d. per boat.
In 1789, twenty-six boats averaged £98 16s. 2¾d. per boat.
Total amount from 1770 to 1789 inclusive, £49,769 4s. 3½d. {55a}
As soon as the mackarels are brought on shore they are poured upon the
beach in heaps, each boat’s by itself. The beach being the place where
the fair for the fish is held; here it is that the padders and other
purchasers assemble for the purpose of buying them. The fish being thus
exposed for sale, are generally sold by private contract, though some
times by public auction; formerly by a man appointed by the merchants for
that purpose, but now many of the merchants sell their own fish.
The common markets for vending the mackarel are London, and the principal
towns in Norfolk and Suffolk, and the adjoining counties; they are sent
to the former place in small vessels, called cutters, employed by the
fishmongers in London; and to the latter places by carriers, called
padders who are employed by the fishmongers belonging to the several
towns to which the fish are sent.
There were formerly in this town two other fisheries, called the North
Sea and Iceland fisheries. These fisheries were in a flourishing state
about the middle of the last century, both here and at Yarmouth.
According to Swinden, the number of vessels employed in these fisheries
in the year 1644, by the town of Yarmouth only, numbered 205; in the
North Sea fishery, 182; in the Iceland fishery, 23; and it was at this
time that these fisheries appeared to be in the most flourishing state.
Afterwards they gradually declined; for the merchants proving
unsuccessful in their voyages, the number of adventurers decreased, and
some years after, the fisheries totally ceased. In the year 1740 there
was only one boat sent to Iceland from Yarmouth, which appeared to be the
last employed in this fishery. At Lowestoft there were about 30 boats
sent annually to the North Sea and Iceland; in the year 1720 they were
reduced to only five; and in 1748, Mr. Copping, an eminent merchant in
this town, was the last person who sent a boat from Lowestoft to the
North Seas, which proving unsuccessful, put a final period to these
fisheries, they being never attempted afterwards.
The first voyage to these seas was called the Spring voyage; after that
was finished they went a second voyage, but returned home again time
enough for the herring fishery; but those who were not engaged in the
herring fishery, attempted a third voyage. Cod and ling were the
principal objects of this fishery, and in a good season would catch about
400 each vessel.
The method of curing these fish was by pickling them in casks, and some
dry-salted; which, upon their return home, were exported to foreign
parts. The livers of these fish were a considerable article; these they
carefully preserved in casks, and the oil they extracted from them was
sold to a considerable amount. There is a trench still visible upon the
Denes, a little to the north of Lowestoft, in which stood the blubber
coppers, where they used to boil the livers of the fish when they
returned home from the voyage. They also traded with the natives of
Iceland, Shetland, Farra, etc., and imported from hence stockings,
blankets, caps, and other articles of the woollen manufactory.
The first decline of these fisheries may be attributed, in a great
measure, to the political animosities which subsisted between Yarmouth
and Lowestoft, towards the conclusion of the reign of Charles I; for as
Yarmouth, during the civil war, took an active part on the side of
Parliament, so Lowestoft was as much distinguished for its attachment to
the King. In the years 1643 and 1644 the inhabitants of Yarmouth
suffered so very much from losses at sea, in having their ships and
vessels taken and carried off by armed ships acting in hostility against
the parliament, that the town was greatly impoverished, and the fisheries
to the North Sea and Iceland much injured. From these circumstances, and
the great indulgence allowed the Roman Catholics in foreign parts, in the
observance of Lent and other times of abstinence, so prejudicial to
fisheries depending on a foreign consumption, the North Sea and Iceland
fisheries received so much discouragement, as never to recover it
afterwards.
A ship, laden with soldiers and ammunition, sent by the queen from
Holland, for the use of the King, springing a leak at sea was obliged to
put into Yarmouth, where she was seized for the Parliament and given to
the town, who equipped her and sent her to sea in 1645 as a man-of-war,
to take any vessels, etc., that were in hostility against the Parliament.
Amongst the prizes which she made was the Pink, Captain Allen (afterwards
Admiral Allen), of Lowestoft, who, it was said, was in rebellion against
the Parliament, of which ship he was the owner of one half part, and
which part was seized, and sold to Mr. James Wilde, of Lowestoft, for
£35.
Captain Allen and some others who had suffered the like oppressions
appear to have entered into a confederacy against Yarmouth, to retaliate
the injuries they had received from that town; and for that purpose
retired beyond sea, with the design of fitting out vessels to distress
the trade at Yarmouth; and, accordingly, we find that in the year 1644,
out of the twenty-three vessels employed by Yarmouth in the Iceland
fishery, only three of them escaped being taken.
The Yarmouth men being thus distressed, applied to Parliament for a
convoy to protect their trade; in consequence whereof, in 1645, three
men-of-war were sent, by order of the lord admiral, to convoy their
fishers and guard their coasts; who took several of their enemies who
were engaged in the confederacy, amongst whom were some Lowestoft men.
As soon as the parties concerned in this confederacy (who had retired
beyond sea) were informed of these proceedings on the part of Yarmouth,
they sent the town the following letter:
To THE BAILIFFS OF GREAT YARMOUTH, IN NORFOLK.
Right Worshipful,
We hereby give you to understand that those seamen of ours, which
your men-of-war have lately taken, or may hereafter take in prizes of
ours, be not imprisoned. And that you set at liberty all those that
are confined, otherwise you shall not have that usuage you formerly
had from us. Without delay let this be observed, else you will have
cause to repent. We have given you thousands of prisoners which we
might have endungeoned, nay hanged, but that rebellious ignorance
have pleaded their escape. Now we can, if you compel us, make a
hundred suffer for one. Our pleasures are commended to you, by just
and due observation, not to make the innocent suffer for the nocent.
Therefore we do daily set at liberty yours, supposing, that upon
receipt of these, you will do the same by ours; otherwise we shall
soon make known to you our intentions.
THOMAS ALLEN, WILLIAM COPE, GEORGE BOWDEN, JOHN DASSET,
RICHARD WHITING, PETER CLIFF, FRANCIS FOURTHER,
JONATHAN BANTER, BROWNE BUSHELL, JO. MERRITT,
DAN. WILKINSON, FRANCIS COLMAN.
Ostend, June 22nd, 1645.
The Yarmouth historian, speaking of this transaction, says, “Probably all
these (who had subscribed the above letter) were Englishmen, who had fled
for protection into foreign parts, and lived by plundering the Yarmouth
fisheries and others upon the high seas, under pretence of loyalty, and
serving their king and country.”
How far this censure is consistent with candour, I shall leave the
impartial reader to determine; the only observation I shall make on it is
this: that the town of Yarmouth having taken an active part in behalf of
Parliament, and the town of Lowestoft, being as warmly interested on the
part of the king; and the towns having also acted, for many years, as
rivals to each other in the herring fishery, we may consider them, in a
great measure, as inveterate enemies; whether we regard them in a
political or commercial point of view; and, consequently, may easily
account for their animosities, without having recourse either to censures
or misrepresentations.
Captain Allen, a few years after, greatly alarmed the town of Yarmouth
with the apprehension of an immediate retaliation of the injuries which
he and his associates had sustained; for on Sunday, January 13th, 1648–9,
he came into Yarmouth roads in one of the prince’s ships, and threatened
an immediate revenge on the town: but it appears, notwithstanding these
threats, that his humanity conquered his resentment; for neither history,
nor tradition informs us, that the town of Yarmouth ever received any
injury from him.
The only manufactory carried on at Lowestoft is that of making porcelain,
or china-ware; where the proprietors have brought this ingenious art to a
great degree of perfection; and from the prospect it affords, promises to
be attended with much success. The origin of this manufactory is as
follows:—
In the year 1756, Hewlin Luson, Esq., of Gunton Hall, near Lowestoft,
having discovered some fine clay, or earth, on his estate in that parish,
sent a small quantity of it to one of the china manufactories near
London, in view of discovering what kind of ware it was capable of
producing; which, upon trial, proved to be somewhat finer than that
called the Delft ware. Mr. Luson was so far encouraged by this success
as to resolve upon making another experiment of the goodness of its
quality upon his own premises; accordingly, he immediately procured some
workmen from London, and erected upon his estate at Gunton, a kiln and
furnace, and all the other apparatus necessary for the undertaking: but
the manufacturers in London being apprised of his intentions, and of the
excellent quality of the earth, and apprehending also, that if Mr. Luson
succeeded, he might rival them in their manufactory, it induced them to
exercise every art in their power to render his scheme abortive; and so
far tampered with the workmen he had procured, that they spoiled the
ware, and thereby frustrated Mr. Luson’s design.
But, notwithstanding this unhandsome treatment, the resolution of
establishing a china manufactory at Lowestoft was not relinquished, but
was revived again in the succeeding year by Messrs. Walker, Brown,
Aldred, and Richman, who, having purchased some houses on the south side
of the Bell lane, converted the same to the uses of the manufactory, by
erecting a kiln and other conveniences necessary for the purpose: but, in
carrying their designs into execution, they also were liable to the same
inconveniences as the proprietor of the original undertaking at Gunton
was; for being under the necessity of applying to the manufactories in
London for workmen to conduct the business, this second attempt
experienced the same misfortune as the former one, and very near totally
ruined their designs; but the proprietors, happening to discover these
practices of the workmen before it was too late, they took such
precautions as rendered every future attempt of this nature wholly
ineffectual, and have now established the factory upon such a permanent
foundation as promises great success. They have now enlarged their
original plan, and by purchasing several adjoining houses, and erecting
additional buildings, have made every necessary alteration requisite for
the various purposes of the manufactory. They employ a considerable
number of workmen; and supply with ware many of the principal towns in
the adjacent counties, and keep a warehouse in London to execute the
orders they receive both from the city and the adjoining towns; and have
brought the manufactory to such a degree of perfection as promises to be
a credit to the town, useful to the inhabitants, and beneficial to
themselves.
SECTION IV.
THE CONTEST BETWEEN YARMOUTH AND LOWESTOFT
RESPECTING KIRKLEY ROAD AND THE HERRING FISHERY.
IN order to discover the origin of those violent disputes and commotions
which subsisted so long between Yarmouth and Lowestoft, respecting
Kirkley road and the herring fishery, and to represent them in the
clearest and most impartial manner, it may be necessary to advert to a
preceding section, and to recapitulate from thence such circumstances as
may tend to the better understanding the various transactions of the
section we are now engaged in.
It was there observed, that in early ages, even before Yarmouth was
founded, it is probable, that Lowestoft was the general rendezvous of
both the northern and western fishers employed in the herring fishery;
because, until the sand whereon Yarmouth was afterwards built appeared
above the surface of the water and became firm land the fishermen that
resorted to these coasts for herrings must necessarily have a place more
southerly to assemble at. That as soon as the sand called Cerdick sand
had made its appearance, (the Saxons came first; afterwards the
portsmen), they found its situation so extremely convenient for drying of
nets, and the other necessary occupations of a seafaring life, that they
began soon after to erect temporary booths or tents there, as their
several circumstances would admit as well for the accommodation of their
persons as the security of their property. Soon after they had officers,
called bailiffs, deputed by the barons of the cinque ports, to
superintend the fishery for the space of forty days; afterwards they
began to erect houses, and at last was founded the burgh called Great
Yarmouth.
The burgesses of Yarmouth had a charter of liberties granted them by King
John; and the barons of the cinque ports had also certain liberties at
Yarmouth granted them by the same king or rather confirmed what they held
before by prescriptive right only: but these several liberties
interfering with each other gave rise to the most violent disputes and
depredations upon each others’ property, which continued, with some
intermissions, until the reign of queen Elizabeth, when a proposal for
conciliating these differences was offered, by making Yarmouth a member
of the cinque ports, but it failed of success: but in the year 1576 all
matters in dispute being adjusted to their mutual satisfaction it was at
the same time finally agreed, “That as every fishing vessel frequenting
this fair in antient times paid four pence, as a toll or custom, to the
bailiffs of the cinque ports; and that afterwards the said bailiffs
accepted from the bailiffs, of Great Yarmouth, in lieu thereof, the
annual sum of six pounds: Yet now, for the sake of restoring peace and
tranquility, it was further agreed by the said bailiffs of the cinque
ports to receive only three pounds ten shillings from the bailiffs of
Yarmouth, in full satisfaction for the above-mentioned toll.” Thus their
disputes being amicably adjusted, the contending parties preserved
afterwards a more friendly intercourse with each other, which continued
for some years, when the Yarmouth men refusing to pay the bailiffs of the
cinque ports the above-stipulated sum of three pounds ten shillings any
longer, the said bailiffs preferring peace to contention, and wishing to
avoid any farther disputes, discontinued coming to the fair at Yarmouth
in a public capacity any longer. {60}
The town of Yarmouth having now engrossed the whole of the herring
fishery usually carried on near their own town to themselves, it became,
in consequence thereof, the general rendezvous of all the vessels
employed in buying and selling those fish, of whom they demanded a toll
or custom; and having also obtained a charter, 46 Edward III for uniting
Kirkley road to the port of Yarmouth, and for extending their liberties
seven miles from the said port, were legally authorised to levy their
customs upon all such herrings as were bought and sold in the
above-mentioned road and within the said seven miles.
But the Yarmouth men, so far from being satisfied with the additional
emoluments arising from these acquisitions, envolved themselves in fresh
disputes with the men of Lowestoft, in the reign of Henry IV. respecting
their customs, which were revived again in the reign of queen Elizabeth,
(exclusive of the above-mentioned dispute with the portsmen in 1576), and
again about the year 1659, when they attempted to extend their liberties
beyond their legal bounds, and endeavoured to hinder the Lowestoft men
from purchasing any herrings either at or near their own town, unless
they paid the usual customs to Yarmouth; and grounded their claim on a
pretence, that the grant of the 46th of Edward III. which extended their
liberties seven leuks or miles from Yarmouth, was not to be measured from
the key of Yarmouth, but from the mouth of the haven; and consequently
would thereby wholly exclude the town of Lowestoft from buying herrings
even in the roads belonging to their own town, unless they first
submitted to pay such customs as should be claimed by the burgesses of
Yarmouth. They also endeavoured farther to show, that that part of the
sea called Kirkley road was opposite the parish of Kirkley, a town
situated about a mile to the south of Lowestoft, notwithstanding the real
name of that part of the sea is Pakefield bay; and that the seven leuks
prescribed in their charter as the boundary of their liberties, were not
miles but leagues.
These unreasonable and ill-grounded claims on the part of Yarmouth were
productive of a most violent rupture between the two towns; they even
proceeded so far (in order to defend what each of them thought to be
their just and legal privileges) as to fit out armed vessels, in
consequence of which many sharp engagements ensued, and much blood was
shed on both sides. At last the respective parties, being weary of
contention, agreed to lay the affair before the privy council, from
whence it was referred to the judges, and lastly to a hearing before the
house of lords where it was finally determined in favour of the town of
Lowestoft, as will be more fully shewn in the subsequent part of this
section.
The above circumstances being premised, I shall now proceed to make some
inquiries concerning the several charters granted to Yarmouth respecting
the herring fishery, how far the liberties contained in those charters
extended; and particularly, whether the charter which annexed Kirkley
road to Yarmouth haven tended to exclude the town of Lowestoft from the
privilege, which it had enjoyed from time immemorial, of buying and
selling herrings in the roads belonging to their own town.
I have observed before, that the great charter of liberties granted to
the town of Yarmouth, was that granted by King John, in the 9th year of
his reign. This king being distressed in fitting out a fleet of ships
for the recovery of his Norman dominions, lately lost, indulged them with
a charter, on condition, “that they should provide for him fifty-seven
ships for forty days, at their own charge, as often as the wars he was
engaged in should give him occasion to demand them.” {61a} By this
charter Yarmouth was created a free burgh, and the burgesses thereof were
invested with many immunities and privileges, to be held in fee-farm,
paying to him and his heirs, an annual rent of £55 for ever; for payment
thereof they were allowed only the customs arising out of the port; not
being authorised to receive any custom of goods bought or sold in the
market upon land at the time of the year. {61b}
In the reign of Henry III, when that prince exchanged the fee-farm of
Yarmouth and Lothingland with John de Baliol, for other lands in
Cheshire, which was very detrimental to the town of Yarmouth, on account
that ships with victuals might unlade on Lothingland side, and
particularly so, as fish was one of the principal articles from whence
their greatest profits arose; and, therefore, they petitioned the King in
the fortieth year of his reign, to grant them a new charter, whereby all
merchandise and wares, as well fish as other commodities, should be sold
at Yarmouth by the hands of the importers of them into the haven of
Yarmouth, whether found in the ships or without, etc.; which charter was
accordingly granted. But the Baliols (father and son) still continued to
take tolls and customs belonging to the port of Yarmouth, notwithstanding
its charters to the contrary, to the great prejudice of the burgesses,
who were either unable or unwilling to contest the matter with so
powerful an enemy as the King of Scots. But upon the said King
renouncing his homage to Edward I, all his English estates became
forfeited and, consequently, the said fee-farm of Yarmouth and
Lothingland, reverted again to the British monarch. The town Yarmouth
embraced this favourable opportunity of making an application to Edward
I. for a confirmation of the privileges granted to them by the charter of
Henry III, in which they were so fortunate as to succeed. Yet,
notwithstanding this charter of Edward I, it appears, by sundry records,
that their adversaries still persisted in their claims, and continued to
take customs, contrary to the liberties of the burgesses. The above
privileges were afterwards confirmed by Edward II, and also again by the
1st of Edward III; and in the 6th of Edward III. they were again
confirmed by a special charter, after a long and tedious suit with the
Earl of Richmond (the proprietor of the fee-farm of Lothingland, given to
him by Edward I) about levying the customs, etc., in the haven of
Yarmouth.
During these litigious disputes respecting the privileges of Yarmouth and
the customs to be levied on vessels frequenting that port, the haven
belonging to that town became so obstructed by sand-banks, formed at its
entrance by the easterly winds, that the mouth of it extended to the
south of Corton before it discharged itself into the ocean; and so many
shelves were formed therein, especially between the 10th and 20th of
Edward III., as rendered the navigation so very dangerous, that no ships
of any considerable burthen could enter it with safety; and therefore the
inhabitants of Yarmouth, in the 20th year of the reign of Edward III were
under the necessity of petitioning that King, viz., for liberty to cut a
new mouth to the haven nearer to Yarmouth, opposite to Corton, which
petition was immediately granted. This haven at a considerable expense,
continued the space of twenty-six years, viz., till the 46th of Edward
III, when it again began to be obstructed with sand banks that no ships
could enter therein, but were obliged to unlade their goods and
merchandise in an adjoining place called Kirkley road.
It was a matter of much controversy, during this contest, to ascertain
with certainty where the place called Kirkley road was situated. The
Yarmouth men insisting that it was opposite the village of Kirkley, about
a mile to the south of Lowestoft; and the Lowestoft men as strenuously
asserting, that the real name of that part of the sea near Kirkley was
Pakefield bay; that in consequence of the town of Kirkley having been
formerly a town of considerable trade in the herring fishery, it gave to
all the sea thereabouts, even as far as Yarmouth, the general name of
Kirkley seas; part of which, namely, that which was situated a little to
the south of where the haven’s mouth then was, was called Kirkley road,
and was then annexed to Yarmouth haven.
In the old manuscript view of Lowestoft referred to in a former section
(late in the possession of Thomas Martin, of Palgrave, in Suffolk)
Kirkley road is placed between Lowestoft and Corton; and in the old map
of the coast, given in Garianonum, the situation of Kirkley road is the
same.
It was also alleged by the Yarmouth men, that the seven miles, the
boundary of their liberties, granted by this new charter, was to be
measured, not from the key, but from the haven’s mouth, which would
exclude the town of Lowestoft from buying herrings, unless they paid the
customs to Yarmouth; the Lowestoft men insisting, that the seven miles
should be measured from the key at Yarmouth, and not from the haven’s
mouth.
These declarations on the part of Lowestoft will receive further
confirmation from the following extract from the town book, taken from
Cawden:
About the year of our Lord 1100, about 500 years past, it pleased God
to lay the first foundation of the east town of Yarmouth into firm
land, even out of the main sea. Which place was then called and
known by the name of Sardike sand, and Sardike shore; and in a short
time it proved to be a fit and commodious place for a town to be
built, meet for seafaring men to inhabit in. And by the permission
of many noble kings in this land, his majesties progenitors, many did
resort thither, and began to build the same, and to enclose it with a
stone wall on the east side of the town (the haven being on the west
side) inasmuch that within a short time the same grew populous.
And long before Yarmouth town was incorporated, the barons of the
five ports did yearly hold a free fair in the three towns of Yarmouth
(that is to say) Easton, Weston, and Southton, beginning the said
fair on the feast of St. Michael and so continued forty days
together.
And by the authority of the King, they did then use to make their
repair thither on purpose for the governing of the said fair. And in
those days was yearly sent from the brotherhood of the five ports,
and the antient towns, nine or ten bailiffs who governed the fair.
And it is to be noted, that long before any liberties were granted to
Yarmouth, the towns of Lowestoft and Kirkley in the county of
Suffolk, were built, and populously inhabited; and the then town of
Kirkley being the greatest town of account, and the most antient upon
the coast, and being a haven town, (the place now called Kirkley
haven was the antient haven), before that Yarmouth was Yarmouth, and
thereupon the whole fishing seas upon the confines of Suffolk and
Norfolk, take the name of Kirkley seas.
And to this day the seas upon those coasts are called or known by the
French fishermen coming there to fish, by the name of Kirkley seas.
And long since, before Yarmouth was incorporated there was such
trading and merchandising of herrings at Lowestoft, and the same was
by the Yarmouth men so much envied that civil wars subsisted for a
long time between them, with much bloodshed, until it pleased God to
take the matter into his own hands, who ended the strife with such a
great mortality of people, that there died of the plague in Yarmouth
7,000 persons, and then the wars ceased.
The dreadful pestilence here alluded to, first began in the northern
parts of Asia in 1346; from whence it passed into Greece, from thence
into Italy and France, and in the beginning of August 1348, broke out in
Dorsetshire: many who were well in the morning died before noon. About
the feast of All Saints it reached London, making dreadful destruction;
and about Christmas, Yarmouth and the neighbouring parts felt its direful
effects. It immediately spread itself over the nation, and raged so
violently in 1348 and 1349, that there scarcely remained the tenth part
of the people alive in most places.
His Majesty, Edward III. after being duly informed of the circumstance
relative to the affair of the Kirkley road, was pleased, after an
application of six years continuance, and after the greatest opposition
being made thereto from Lowestoft and other neighbouring towns, who
reaped great advantages from vessels discharging their goods in Kirkley
road, and were hitherto exempted from paying the customs to Yarmouth, to
unite the said road of Kirkley into the town and port of Yarmouth
(Kirkley road united to Yarmouth haven, 46 Edward III), upon paying him
and his successors one hundred shillings yearly; and to grant use to the
burgesses full power to receive the like duties there as at Yarmouth for
ever. {63}
It may be necessary here to inform the reader, that there are two
remarkable circumstances in this charter; the one is, that Kirkley is
there represented as a certain place in the high seas near the entrance
of the haven of the town; the other that the seven leuks to which the
liberties were then extended, are described as issuing from the town of
Yarmouth, and not from the haven’s mouth. It is proper to mention these
particulars because towards the end of this section it will appear that
there was much altercation between Yarmouth and Lowestoft respecting the
true situation of Kirkley road; and also, whether the seven leuks or
miles were to be measured from the key, or from the haven’s mouth.
The form observed by government, previous to their granting this charter,
was, first to issue a writ of _ad quod dampnum_, directed to the
escheator of Norfolk and Suffolk; then followed a mandate to the sheriff;
afterwards inquisitions were taken to examine the premises; and lastly
the charter itself was granted. Subjoin are the writ, the mandate, the
inquisitions, and the charter.
THE WRIT OF AD QUOD DAMPNUM.
Edward, by the grace of God, king of England and France, and lord of
Ireland, to his beloved and faithful John de Rockewode, his escheator
in the counties of Norfolk and Suffolk, Reginald de Eccles, and
Edmund Gurnay, greeting. Know ye, that we have assigned you, and two
of you, to enquire by the oath of good and lawful men of the counties
aforesaid, as well within the liberties as without, by whom the truth
of the matter may be better known, if it be to the damage or
prejudice of us or others if we grant to our beloved the burgesses
and good men of the town of Great Yarmouth, a certain place in the
sea, near the entrance of the haven of the same town, called Kirkley
road; so that after such our grant, that place to the said haven they
may annex and unite, and if so annexed and united, to hold and to
have of us and our heirs, as parcel of the same haven, together with
the haven aforesaid, to them and their successors, burgesses of the
same town, for relief of the town aforesaid, and for an aid of the
farm which to us and our heirs, they are holden, for the same town
and haven annually to pay, by the same services by which the town and
haven aforesaid were before holden of us; and that all ships and
boats to the same place of Kirkley road coming or to come, and from
thence going or to go, may there as freely lade or unlade, and the
customs and all other profits thereof receive and have, as before in
the said port they have done, had and received, or have been used or
ought to do, have and receive, without hindrance or impediment of us
or our heirs, or others whomsoever for ever. And also if it be to
the loss or prejudice of us or others, then to what loss, or what
prejudice of others, and of whom, and in what manner, how and of whom
the aforesaid place called Kirkley road is holden, and by what
service, and in what manner, and how; and how much it is worth by the
year in all issues and profits, according to the real value of the
same; and how far distant from the entrance of the haven aforesaid;
and who occupies or occupy that place, and receives and receive, the
issues and profits thereof; by what right, title, how, and in what
manner. And therefore we command you, that at certain days and
places which you or two of you shall appoint for this business, you
may make diligent enquiry, upon all and singular the premises in what
manner soever; and it distinctly and openly make to us, into our
chancery, under the seals of you, or two of you distinctly, and
openly send without delay, and this writ.
For we have commanded our sheriff of the same counties, that at
certain days and places which you shall make known to him, he cause
to come before you, so many, and so good and lawful men of his
bailiwick, as well within the liberties as without, by whom the truth
of the matter in the premises may be better known and examined into.
THE MANDATE TO THE SHERIFF.
Edward, by the grace of God, King of England and France, and lord of
Ireland, to the Sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk, greeting,—Whereas we
have assigned our beloved and faithful John de Rokewode, our
escheator in the counties aforesaid, Reginald de Eccles, and Edmund
de Gurnay, and two of them to enquire by the oath of good and lawful
men of the counties aforesaid, as well within the liberties as
without, by whom the truth of the matter shall be better known, if it
be to the loss or prejudice of us or others, if we grant to our
beloved the burgesses and good men of our town of Great Yarmouth,
that they, a certain place in the sea, near the entrance to the haven
of the town aforesaid, may annex and unite the same to the haven,
and, it so annexed and united, as parcel of the same haven, hold and
have to them and their successors, of us and our heirs for ever. And
also to do and accomplish some other things contained in our
commission to them thereof made, as in the same our commission it is
more fully contained. We command you, that at certain days and
places which the same John, Reginald, and Edmund, or two of them,
shall make known to you, you cause to come before them, or two of
them, so many, and such good and lawful men of the counties
aforesaid, as well within the liberties as without, by whom the truth
of the matter shall be better known, and inquired into, and have this
writ. Witness myself at Westminster, the 14th day of February, in
the 44th year of our reign of England, and of France the 31st.
THE FIRST INQUISITION.
An inquisition taken at Waybrede, in the county of Suffolk, on
Thursday next after the feast of St. James the Apostle, in the 46th
year of the reign of King Edward the Third, after the conquest before
Reginald de Eccles, and Edmund Gurnay, justices of the lord the king,
assigned by commission of the lord the king, to inquire if it be to
the damage or prejudice of the lord the king or others, that the lord
the king should grant to the burgesses and good men of the town of
Great Yarmouth, a certain place in the seas near the entrance of the
haven of the same town, called Kirkley road; by the oath of Theobald
Osborn, John Pynn, Thomas Crane, Bennett de Reading, Thomas Attie
Wood, William Child, William Nicholas, John de Ireland, Robert
Barker, William Danes, Richard Sallern, and Richard Allred, who say
upon their oath that it is not to the damage nor prejudice of the
lord the king nor others: that the lord the king should grant to the
aforesaid burgesses and good men of the town aforesaid, the aforesaid
place in the sea near the entrance of the haven of that town, called
Kirkley road, and that place to the said town and haven to be annexed
and united, and so annexed and united, to the haven aforesaid, to
have and to hold to them and their successors, burgesses of the same
town for ever; for the relief and support of the aforesaid town, and
aid of the farm of the same town which they have paid, and still do
pay, to the lords the king and his heirs annually. They say also,
that the said place is main sea, and nothing distant from the
entrance of the haven aforesaid, and so has been, from time
immemorial. And they say, that the said place is not holden of any
man, but has been the property of the lord the king, as main sea; nor
is there any profit thence to the lord the king or others annually
rendered.
And further they say, that it is not to the damage nor prejudice of
the lord the king, nor others, that all ships and boats to the same
place coming, or to come, or from thence, going, or to go, may there
as freely in every case, lade and unlade; and the customs and other
profits of the aforesaid burgh thence may receive and have, as
formerly in the said haven they have received and had; and to make
executions touching their liberties as freely as in the said haven
they have done, and used to do. And they say, that it is worth
nothing a year, since nobody has received, nor ever occupied any
customs or profits thereto, because it is in the high sea.
Being asked why it is not to the damage of the lord the king or
others, if the lord the king grant the place aforesaid in the manner
aforesaid? they answer, that the entrance of the haven aforesaid is
of late so dry that no ship laden there near the haven aforesaid can
enter, unless first in the place aforesaid, called Kirkley road, it
be unladed; nor will it there pay any customs to the lord the king or
others. And they say, that the said town of Great Yarmouth cannot be
supported, nor pay the farm to the lord the king, unless by the aid
of a grant of the lord the king, to receive customs of the ships and
boats in the said place, coming, entering, and going out, in the
manner wherein they have received them in the haven aforesaid. In
witness whereof the aforesaid jurors to these presents have put their
seals.
THE SECOND INQUISITION.
An inquisition taken at Attlebridge, in the county of Norfolk, on
Monday next after the feast of St. Peter in chains, in the 46th year
of the reign of king Edward the Third, after the conquest, before
Reginald de Eccles and Edmund Gurnay, justices by commission of the
lord the king, assigned to inquire, whether it be to the damage or
prejudice of the lord the king or others, that the lord the king
should grant the burgesses and good men of the town of Great
Yarmouth, a certain place in the sea, near the entrance of the havan
of the same town, called Kirkley road, by the oaths of Richard de
Martham, John de Westly, George Seafowl, John de Berking, Ralph
Noreman, William Arnold, Nicholas Bannok, John Baxter, James Atte
Church, Richard de Kent, John Dawys, and Edmund Cooke; who say, ect.
THE CHARTER FOR UNITING KIRKLEY ROAD TO THE
HAVEN OF YARMOUTH.
Edward, by the grace of God, king of England and France, and lord of
Ireland, and Duke of Aqitain, etc.—Know ye, that we, willing for the
aid and relief of the town of Great Yarmouth, to shew more abundant
grace to the burgesses and good men of the same town, have given and
granted for us and our heirs to the same burgesses and good men, for
an aid and relief of the same town, and for 100s. which they and
their successors, at the terms of St. Michael and Easter, by equal
portions (for an increment and augmentation of the farm of £55 which
the same burgesses and good men are holden annually to pay us and our
heirs, into the same exchequer, for a certain place in the high sea,
near the entrance of the haven of the town aforesaid), should pay
every year to us and our heirs, into the same exchequer, for a
certain place in the high sea near the entrance of the haven of the
town aforesaid called Kirkley road; and have annexed and united that
place to the said town and haven; to have and to hold unto the same
burgesses and good men and their sucessors, of us and our heirs, that
place, annexed to the said town and haven for ever. Willing and
granting, for us and our heirs, to the same burgesses and good men,
that they and their successors for ever may have in the said place of
Kirkley road, all and every the liberties and quittances by the
charters of our progenitors and confirmation of us to them formerly
granted, as they the same liberties and quittances in the said town,
by virtue of the charters and confirmation aforesaid, ought to have;
and may have and receive of all ships and boats which shall happen to
come to the said place of Kirkley road, and in part or wholly unlade,
the same customs which they, according to the liberties aforesaid,
should have, if they at the said town should arrive, and there in
part or wholly unlade. We have also granted, for us and our heirs,
to the said burgesses and good men, and for ever confirmed to the
same and their successors, that no ship, nor any boat, should be
laden or unladen at any town or place upon the sea coast, within
seven leuks distant from the said town of Great Yarmouth, by any
person whomsoever, of herrings or any other merchandises, unless the
ship, boat, or herrings, and also the merchandises, were that
person’s proper goods only and not any other’s, except at the said
town of Great Yarmouth, or in the haven of the same, or at the place
of Kirkley road above said. And also, that in the time of the
fishing and fair of herrings, no fair should be holden, nor any
selling or buying, on account of merchandising be made in any place
within the space of seven leuks about the town aforesaid, but only at
the same town of Great Yarmouth, or in the haven of the same town, of
herrings or other merchandise whatsoever. And we strictly prohibit,
for us and our heirs, that no one within the space aforesaid of seven
leuks, presume to lade or unlade any other ship or boat than his
proper own, and of his own proper herrings, and other merchandises,
anywhere, but only at the same town of Great Yarmouth, or in the
haven of the same, or at the place of Kirkley road, or in the time
aforesaid, to hold any fair, or to sell or buy any herrings or other
wares, on account of merchandising, but only at the said town of
Great Yarmouth, or in the haven of the same upon forfeiture of the
ships and boats so to be laded or unladed, or from that time to be
put to sale in such fairs or elsewhere, by way of merchandising,
contrary to the said prohibition, to be applied to the uses of us and
our heirs. Of which forfeitures aforesaid we will, and have granted,
for us and our heirs, that the bailiffs of the said, town of Great
Yarmouth, for the time being, may and shall enquire from time to
time, and take them into custody, and cause them to be kept for our
use, and answer to us and our heirs, thereupon into the exchequer
aforesaid, every year, at the term of St. Michael and Easter.
And all our letters whatsoever, to the town of Lowestoft or to the
men of the same, contrary to any of these premises, made by us, as to
such contrariety, we do revoke.
Witness myself, at Westminster the 22nd day of August, in the 46th
year of our reign of England.
By virtue of this charter, the Yarmouth men not only obtained the
privilege of having Kirkley road united to the town and haven of
Yarmouth, but also to receive the same customs there which had usually
been collected before in the port of Yarmouth, and were also farther
empowered to seize the ships, goods, etc., of such as bought or sold
within seven leuks of it, under certain restrictions mentioned in the
said charter.
The word leuk, leuga, or leuca, is liable to various definitions.
Blomefield says, that he has often rendered the word league, but must
inform his readers, that he does not mean by it our league of three
miles, nor agree with Mr. Bailey in making the distance one mile only
(though he says it is so used in Domesday), being almost certain, the
leuga in Domesday signifies two miles, or thereabouts, for that answers
to the generality of places that I have examined, as to the extent, which
to me seems the best way of judging such a point; and upon looking into
the various glossaries, I find that several of them concur in the same
opinion; for which reason, wherever the word occurs I mean by it two
miles and no more. Nevertheless, in the continuation of Blomefield, by
Parkin, vol. V. it is said, “In the rolls of the King’s Bench it appears
that the Bishop of Norwich had a fair at East Dereham, and that the town
was sixteen leuca distant from that city; by which it is plain that a
leuca was then (in 1277) accounted only one mile, Dereham being exactly
sixteen measured miles from Norwich.” But whatever may be the opinion of
Blomefield on this word, Swinden confines the admeasurement of a leuk to
be one mile only; probably upon the authority of Domesday and other
antient records. At the annual proclaiming of Yarmouth fair, the seven
leuks are denominated to be seven miles. And in the statute of the 13th
of Richard II. for the extent of the King’s Government, the word implies
a single mile. Also, in the patent of the Knight marshal, for the extent
of the government of the king’s household within the verge, the word
leuca stands adjudged to be miles, eight furlongs to every mile, and to
begin at the funnel of the chimney in the king’s lodging.
As the privilege which the town of Lowestoft and other places had long
enjoyed, of being exempt from the customs demanded for the herrings
bought and sold in Kirkley road (which would have been due had they
merchandised in Yarmouth haven), was now lost, they consequently suffered
much inconvenience from the granting of this charter, as they now became
liable to all the customs due to Yarmouth for buying and selling herrings
in Kirkley road, the same as though they were bought and sold in the
haven. The granting of this charter, therefore, excited much animosity,
and occasioned many disputes between Yarmouth and Lowestoft, as the
latter was unwilling to relinquish their antient privilege; and
accordingly, soon after, we find several men belonging to Lowestoft
indicted at Yarmouth for not complying with the charter. The Lowestoft
men, for trial of the premises, removed the suit, by writ of certiorari,
into the Court of Chancery, where the affair was finally determined in
favour of the burgesses of Yarmouth. The case was as follows:—
An indictment was brought by the burgesses of Yarmouth against John
Botile and others, of Lowestoft, for that they, on Friday next after
the feast of St. Luke the Evangelist, in the 46th year of the reign
of Edward III. bought of John Trample, of Ostend, an alien, in the
said place called Kirkley road, which is within seven leuks of Great
Yarmouth, twenty-five lasts of new herrings value fifty pounds.
Against this charge the defendants returned only evasive answers,
pretending that they knew not that the aforesaid place of Kirkley road
was annexed to the port of Great Yarmouth, nor that there was a fair kept
there, nor that the said place was in the county of Norfolk. However,
these were pleas which had too little the appearance of truth to be
admitted in their favour, and therefore they were found guilty of acting
contrary to the above charter, and of infringing on the liberties of
Yarmouth. Whereupon the said John Botile and others being convinced of
their error, in refusing or evading the payment of the legal customs due
to the town of Yarmouth, prayed the favour of the court, that the affair
might be ended; and putting themselves upon the grace of the lord the
king, they accordingly were fined and discharged.
In the year 1368, one John Lawes was hanged for exporting seven sacks of
wool out of Kirkley road without paying the custom to Yarmouth.
As soon as this contentious business was decided, the inhabitants of
Lowestoft, in the 50th year of Edward III., together with other commons,
petitioned the parliament then holden to have the said grant or charter
repealed; alleging that it opposed the common interest of the kingdom.
For this and other reasons specified in the said petition, the Parliament
repealed the charter for uniting Kirkley road to Yarmouth haven.
The grant of Kirkley road repealed the 50th of Edward III.
In the Parliament roll of the 50th year of Edward III. amongst the
petitions of the commonalty of England, is the following:—
Also be it remembered, that, as well, at the request of the commons
of England, as at the suit of certain people of the town of
Lowestoft, in the county of Suffolk, made in this Parliament, the
charter of our lord the king, whereby he has lately granted to his
burgesses of the town of Great Yarmouth, that a place in the sea,
called Kirkley road, should be united and annexed to the port of the
said town of Great Yarmouth for ever, be totally repealed and
revoked, in respect to that new grant, as the thing was done contrary
to the common profit of the kingdom; always saving entirely to the
said burgesses, and to their successors, all their other privileges,
franchises, and customs, granted and confirmed to them by the same
our lord the king, or any other of his progenitors, with the clause
of licet to them, granted by the same our lord the king.
Out of the roll of the parliament holden at Westminister, on Monday next
after the feast of St. George, in the 50th year of the reign of King
Edward III. is the following:
Also the commons of the counties of Suffolk, Essex, Cambridge,
Lincoln, Northampton, Bedford, Bucks, Leicester, and other of the
commons, pray, That whereas a greater scarcity and want of herrings
have been in the said counties, and elsewhere throughout the whole
kingdom, since your charter was granted to the burgesses of Yarmouth,
that no herrings, nor other merchandise whatever, should be sold
within seven leuks of the said town of Yarmouth, during the fair of
the said town, in the time of the fishery, than ever was before; and
because no herrings might be made and sold elsewhere but at the said
town, to which no cart nor horse can approach without passage twice
by water, {67} to the great hindrance of carriage; and the greatest
part of herrings has been taken by strange fishers, in the time of
the fishery, who would not come to the said town; because they could
not sell their merchandises but at the will of the said burgesses,
and that at a certain price and quantity. That it would please your
highness to command that the said charter be repealed; and that
herrings may be bought, made, and sold in places where it was wont
before the grant of the said charter; for having a better price in
time to come, and for common profit of the whole kingdom.
Whereupon the said charter was repealed, as appears by the following
letters patent:—
Edward, by the grace of God, King of England, etc.—Know ye, that we,
the liberties and privileges to the burgesses and good men of the
town of Great Yarmouth, lately so by us given and granted, at the
suit and voluntary clamour of certain people, alledging that those
liberties and privileges have been and are contrary to the profit of
the republic, and to us and our people prejudicial and hurtful, in
our parliament holden at Westminister, on the morrow of St. George,
in the 50th year of our reign, with the assent of the prelates,
earls, barons, nobles, and other great men, in the same parliament
being, have revoked, and totally made void.
Witness myself, at Westminister, etc.
Soon after the repeal of this charter, Edward III. died; and a commission
of _ad quod dampnum_ was sued out by the burgesses of Yarmouth,
concerning the said road, and directed to William de Ufford, earl of
Suffolk; John Cavendish, William de Witchingham, William de Elmham, John
de Sutton, Roger de Boys, and William Sibilys; dated 12th day of April,
in the 1st of Richard II. alledging, that they were unable to pay the
fee-farm rent tenths, and fifteenths, and to support the navy which they
maintained in time of war, etc., unless they enjoyed the liberties
granted to the burgesses by Edward, the late king of England. By virtue
of this commission, and in consequence thereof, an inquisition was taken
at Yarmouth, on Friday next after St. Faith, in the 2nd of Richard II.
which certified that Yarmouth was a place of defence, and able to resist
the enemies, if it be supplied with a sufficient number of forces; that
it is a good port for supplying vessels with provisions and necessaries
during the fishing season; and that the said town of Yarmouth hath a
certain port, the entrance of which is much in decay. There was also
another inquisition taken at Lowestoft the day following, which declared
that Lowestoft is situated upon dry land, by the sea, and is not
enclosed, nor has strength of itself to resist the enemies; but that the
uniting of Kirkley road to the port of Yarmouth was to the damage of the
men of Lowestoft. The result of these inquisitions was that a survey of
both the towns being taken by the commissioners, and laid before the
parliament held at Gloucester, the Wednesday before St. Luke, 1738, it
was presented, that, upon the whole, the uniting of Kirkley road to the
port of Yarmouth might be prejudicial to the neighbouring towns, yet it
would be advantageous to the community at large; and thereupon the former
grant, which had been repealed was again re-granted to Yarmouth, by a
private act or ordinance of his parliament, and confirmed by a charter
dated the 25th of November, in the 2nd of Richard II.
Upon proclaiming of this charter, by the under-sheriff of the county, at
Lowestoft, a riot was made by the inhabitants of that town; and in
consequence thereof, an inquisition was ordered to be taken, to enquire
into the causes of this disturbance, but it does not appear what ensued
thereupon.
Before the invention of printing, charters, statutes, etc., were
proclaimed by the sheriff in every county by the king’s writ.
An inquisition taken before John Harsyk, sheriff of Norfolk, on Monday
next after the nativity of the blessed virgin Mary, at Little Yarmouth,
in the second year of the reign of King Richard the second, after the
conquest by the oath of Roger de Hakenham, Walter Read, William Barker,
and other jurors, etc.
Who say upon their oath, that whereas the aforesaid sheriff had sent
certain liberties, granted by the aforesaid lord the king, to the
bailiffs and commonalty of the town of Great Yarmouth, by John de
Foxley, his under sheriff, by virtue of a certain order of the lord
the king, to him directed on that account, to cause them to be
proclaimed, viz., on the feast of the apostles Philip and James last
past: (commonly called May day, on which a fair at Lowestoft was
held, as it is also now); on which day the aforesaid under sheriff,
at Lowestoft intended to proclaim the aforesaid liberties according
to the form thereof, and there openly shewed the letters patent of
the lord the king; on that account came Martin Terry, Stephen
Shelford, Andrew de Lound, Robert Shincale, J. Cote, Roger Caley,
Richard Gall, Thomas Smyth, John Smyth, Thomas Murring, Thomas
Stoneman, and William his brother, Henry Freberne, and Emma his wife,
J. Keene, Henry Boocher, of Lowestoft; also John de Rookesburgh, John
Spencer, and Alice his wife, with a greater company of men and women
of the town aforesaid, of whose names they are ignorant, who, by the
abetment and procurement of William Hammell, John Blower, Thomas de
Wade, Richard Skinner, William Lacye, etc., they violently resisted
and hindered him; some saying to the same sheriff, they would not
suffer him to depart; others forcing his letters from him, and so
with dangerous and reproachful words, etc., saying that if he dared
to come there for any execution of the lord the king, he should not
escape. That for fear of death he durst not execute the writ
aforesaid. And they drove him then and there with a multitude of
rioters, with hue and cry, out of the town, casting stones at the
heads of his men and servants, to the pernicious example and contempt
of the lord the king and against his peace.
In witness whereof, etc.
It appears, that in the 4th of Richard II. the commons of Suffolk and
Norfolk, and all the other counties of England, petitioned parliament,
that whereas it had been formerly ordained by statute that every subject
of the realm might buy and sell without disturbance in city, burgh,
sea-port, and elsewhere, throughout all the kingdom; and if any charters
or patents were granted to the contrary, they should be holden null,
which statute was confirmed at the last parliament holden at Gloucester;
and notwithstanding the said statute, a charter in the same parliament
was granted to the people of Yarmouth, that none should buy or sell round
the said town by seven leuks, etc. These petitions had their desired
effect; for we find, that during the sittings of this parliament, the
inquisitions taken in the first and second of Richard II. were so far
reprehended, that an order was then given for a new commission, and that
it should be more uprightly conducted; and the burgesses of Yarmouth had
a penal command to make no disturbance in the mean time. Accordingly, in
the 5th of Richard II. a commission was solemnly awarded with a quorum,
and was set upon the Monday next after St. Matthew, the apostle, the same
year, in Suffolk and the Thursday after in Norfolk, by the then lord
chief justice of England and other great commissioners, who viewed the
place, and did take their inquisitions, the one held at Lowestoft, the
other at Norwich, before Robert Trisilian, John Argentium, and John
Holcome, on the oaths of divers, knights, and other special gentlemen of
both counties, whose presentment was certified in chancery, and
afterwards laid before the parliament held in November following; and an
act was made, that the new grants should be repealed for ever, and shall
never be re-granted; that the charter should be called in and cancelled,
and should also remain in the tower under special causes thereupon
written, why it was so cancelled. {69a} Notwithstanding this Act, the
burgesses renewed their petitions to have their charter re-granted:
insomuch, that Richard II. in the sixth year of his reign, in order to
form a new judgment of the affair, came to Yarmouth, and viewed the
premises himself; and soon after, namely, in the eight year of his reign,
the burgesses obtained a new grant, dated the 20th February, of all their
former privileges till the meeting of the next parliament.
As these inquisitions tend to cast considerable light on this complicated
affair, they are inserted hereunder:
The determinations of all the Inquisitions taken before Robert Trisilian,
{69b} John Argentium, and John Holcome, the one at the town of Lowestoft,
in Suffolk, and the other at Norwich, by the oaths of divers, knights,
and other great gentlemen of both counties.
THE FIRST INQUISITION,
TAKEN AT LOWESTOFT, THE MONDAY AFTER THE FEAST OF ST. MATTHEW
THE APOSTLE, 5 RICHARD II.
That the new liberties and privileges to the burgesses of Yarmouth in
a certain place called Kirkley road, is prejudicial and hurtful to
the commonalty of the counties of Norfolk and Suffolk, and all other
counties, etc.
1st. For that the liberties and privileges aforesaid be contrary to
common right, and also to the statute made for the common profit of
the realm of England; that is to say, that every one of the realm of
England may buy and sell without let in city, burgh, port of the sea,
and elsewhere, through all the realm of England: and if deeds or
patents be granted to the contrary, they shall be of no force; which
statute was confirmed in the last Parliament at Gloucester, holden in
the time of our lord the king that now is.
2nd. And also, that the ships anchoring in the said place of Kirkley
road, as often as a contrary wind come, they can by no means enter
into the port of Great Yarmouth; but are compelled to cast their
herrings into the sea.
3rd. And also for that the said burgesses of the town of Great
Yarmouth, by force of the said liberties and privileges to them of
new so given and granted, will not suffer the said commonalty of the
realm of England to buy or sell any victuals or merchandise, at any
time of the year in the said place of Kirkley road.
4th. And also the said commonalty do sustain and support great
griefs and hinderances by color of the liberties and privileges
aforesaid in this behalf.
5th. Also they say, that there is a great space of the high sea
between the said place called Kirkley road, and the entry of the said
port of Yarmouth, by reason of which space many ships may come from
the main sea into the said port of Great Yarmouth at their liberty,
and also go out; which place called Kirkley road, is in the county of
Suffolk, and before the grant of the liberties and privileges
aforesaid, was, and yet is, parcel of the same manor, etc.; and by
all the time aforesaid have, used to have, and of right ought to
have, all the wreck of the sea happening in the said place called
Kirkley road. Also they say, that the ships loaden with herrings can
return twice from Kirkley road into the sea to fish, whilst the chips
loaden with herrings going to the town of Yarmouth can but one in the
same time unload an return into the sea to fish.
6th. Also they say, that before the new grant of the liberties and
privileges aforesaid, all the ships and boats loaden with herrings,
and other victuals and merchandise, have used at their pleasure to
come as well to the port of the town of Great Yarmouth, as to the
said place called Kirkley road, without any manner of let, and to
unload their herrings, victuals, and other merchandise, as will in
one place as in the other; and have sold the same unto any man of the
realm of England willing to buy freely without any let or challenge
of any man.
7th. And at the same time it was the common profit, as well of the
commonalty of the realm of England, as of the said town of Yarmouth.
8th. Also they say, that the greatest commodity should be to all the
commonalty of the realm of England; that all ships and boats laden
with any victuals and merchandise might come as well to the port of
the town of Yarmouth, as to the said place of Kirkley road, freely at
their wills; and their victuals and merchandise might unload as well
in the one place as in the other; and the same without let of any
person, might sell to any of the realm of England that would buy the
same.
9th. And they further understand, that the men of Great Yarmouth may
sustain and bear towards our lord the king all charges which they did
sustain and bear before the granting of the liberties and privileges
aforesaid, and maintain the said town, although the same liberties
and privileges shall be revoked.
In witness, etc.
THE SECOND INQUISITION,
TAKEN AT NORWICH THE THURSDAY BEFORE THE FEAST OF ST. MICHAEL,
5 RICHARD II.
That it should be to the commodity of the commonalty of the counties
of Norfolk and Suffolk, and all other counties of the realm of
England:
1st. That all the ships and boats laden with herrings, and other
victuals and merchandise, coming to the parts of Norfolk and Suffolk,
upon the sea coast might unload their herrings, victuals and
merchandise, wheresoever they please, and the same without let of any
person, to sell to any of the realm of England that will buy the
same.
2nd. And that all the realm might lawfully buy the herrings,
victuals, and merchandise aforesaid, wheresoever within the counties
aforesaid. Also they say, that the burgesses of the town of Great
Yarmouth, by force of the liberties and privileges aforesaid, to them
of new so given and granted, do not suffer the said commonalty of the
realm of England, at any time of the year, to buy or sell any
victuals or merchandise in the said place of Kirkley road.
3rd. And that whensoever any ships or boats apply themselves into
Kirkley road, laden with herrings, they may twice unlade again and
return to fish; whereas the ships or boats applying into the port of
the town of Yarmouth, they can but once in the same time unload and
again return to sea to fish.
4th. Also they say that the commonalty do sustain and bear very
great griefs, damages, and hindrances, by colour of the liberties and
privileges aforesaid.
5th. Also they say, that the said place of Kirkley road lyeth in the
main sea over against the town of Lowestoft, in Suffolk, and is
distant from the town of Yarmouth ten miles.
6th. Also they say, that all the ships and boats laden or unladen,
often, and when they come into the sea between the entry of the port
of Yarmouth and the place of Kirkley road, if the wind be not
contrary, they may at their wills enter into the port and also the
said place of Kirkley road.
7th. Also they understand, that the men of Yarmouth may sustain and
bear all charges towards our lord the king, which before the granting
of the liberties of the new charter aforesaid they did bear, and
maintain their town, besides that charge that they render yearly for
the said charter to them newly granted, although the said charter be
revoked and made void.
8th. Also they say, that if the wind do serve for the ships, that
they cannot come to the said town of Great Yarmouth, sometime it
happeneth that they must cast their herrings into the sea for
oldness, if that they may not lawfully deliver their herrings at the
place of Kirkley road.
In Witness, etc.
The charter for uniting Kirkley road to Yarmouth Haven was repealed the
second time, the 5th of Richard II. The grant restored again till the
meeting of Parliament to consider of it, the eighth of Richard II.
At the meeting of parliament, which was in the ninth of Richard II. the
last grant of the eighth of Richard II. was, by an ordinance of that
Parliament, dated the 18th day of December, in the ninth of Richard II.
annulled, and the act of repeal, in the fifth of Richard II. continued in
force.
The last grant annulled the ninth of Richard II. and the repeal of the
fifth Richard II. continued in force.
But notwithstanding all the allegations, statutes, etc., to the contrary,
the burgesses of Yarmouth, by their petitions, etc., in the subsequent
Parliament, holden at Westminster, in the tenth of Richard II, recovered
all their former liberties and grants, by an act or ordinance of
Parliament, which privileges, etc., were confirmed by a charter under the
great seal of England, which charter has never since been repealed, but
continues in force to this day.
After the re-granting of the said liberties and customs to the town of
Yarmouth, by parliament, and confirmation of the same by charter, under
the great seal of England, the burgesses collected the same customs in
Kirkley road that had been usually paid in the port and haven of
Yarmouth, without any molestation or interruption whatever. For after
this legal decision of this litigious and long-contested dispute, the
Lowestoft men were compelled peaceably to submit to any inconvenience it
might subject them to and, consequently, were under the necessity of
farming of the town of Yarmouth the customs belonging to Kirkley road, at
a certain annual rent, as the safest and most advantageous mode of
proceeding.
FARMERS OF KIRKLEY ROAD.
Rent per Annum.
£. s. d.
1393. In the 17th of Richard II. the 23 0 0
men of Lowestoft paid
1394. In the 18th of Richard II. the 26 0 0
farmer not recorded paid
1396. In the 20th of Richard II. 26 0 0
William Spencer paid
1408. In the 20th of Richard II. a 1 0 0
fisher of Flanders paid for a
forfeiture in Kirkley road
1410. In the 10th of Henry IV. the 8 0 0
farm of Kirkley road was paid
weekly by Simon Thirkeld,
bailiff of Kirkley road
1414. In the 2nd of Henry V. John 8 0 0
Waller paid
1417. In the 5th of Henry V. the men 8 0 0
of Lowestoft paid
1420. In the 8th of Henry V. Thomas 4 0 0
Couehithe’s hosts, for a
trespass and rescue committed in
Kirkley road paid
1433. In the 12th of Henry VI. the 4 0 0
farmer’s name not recorded paid
1434. In the 13th of Henry VI. the 3 16 8
farmer’s name not recorded paid
1438. In the 17th of Henry VI. John 3 0 0
Davy, merchant, paid
1442. In the 21st of Henry VI. John 7 6 8
Folvile, of Lowestoft, paid
1445. In the 24th of Henry VI. 4 13 4
farmer’s name not recorded paid
Sometimes the water-bailiff collected the rents, but it does not appear
that Kirkley road was ever farmed during the reign of Queen Elizabeth, or
afterwards.
Nevertheless, about the beginning of the reign of Henry IV. fresh
disputes arose between the said towns, respecting the manner of
collecting the said customs; the Lowestoft men endeavouring to deprive
the burgesses of Yarmouth of their just and legal dues; and also indicted
several officers and others belonging to Yarmouth, and carried the suit
into the Court of Chancery, where it continued till an agreement between
the contending parties was made by the King and his council, in the
second year of his reign. And in the following year another order was
issued by the kings’ council, whereby an accord or composition, and final
decision was settled and agreed upon between Yarmouth and Lowestoft, that
the latter might buy herrings in Kirkley road under certain conditions
therein specified. And these decisions, the Yarmouth men were once more
restored to their usual privileges, and for some time were permitted
peaceably to collect their lawful customs in Kirkley road, and to
proclaim their free fair there as usual as well as at the other stated
places in the town and haven.
But, notwithstanding this seeming amicable adjustment, many fresh
disputes arose soon after between the towns, which occasioned many
interruptions, and at last frequent depredations on each other’s
property; for the Yarmouth men would frequently make seizures of boats,
etc., belonging to Lowestoft, under pretence of non-compliance with the
last-granted charter; and not only continued to do so till the year 1595,
the 37th of Elizabeth, but endeavoured also further at that time to
extend the boundary of their liberties beyond the limits by the
prescribed charter, which gave but too much reason for fresh complaints
being exhibited against them.
Before proceeding any further in investigating the causes which produced
the various disputes between Yarmouth and Lowestoft, concerning the
herring fishery, it may be observed that the burgh of Yarmouth held its
charter upon paying the fee-farm rent of £55 per annum, to King John and
his successors; which rent they were empowered to raise by levying a toll
or custom upon vessels bringing herrings and other merchandise into the
port of Yarmouth, to be bought and sold there; but as the entrance into
the haven leading to the port of Yarmouth having, in consequence of the
sand banks that were formed there, extended itself as far as Corton, and
was also so choaked up that vessels could not enter therein, but were
obliged to sell their goods in an adjoining place called Kirkley road, by
which means the burgesses of Yarmouth lost their customs, and were
rendered incapable of paying their fee-farm rent; they therefore
petitioned to have the said road united to their haven, which accordingly
was granted, upon condition that the above annual rent of £55 was
advanced to £60. Thus for the proceedings on the part of Yarmouth were
just and reasonable; and the riotous and illegal behaviour of the
Lowestoft men, by refusing or evading the payment of the customs
belonging to the port of Yarmouth, was very unjustifiable and
reprehensible. The point, therefore, which rendered the burgesses of
Yarmouth so very blameable in this affair, was their attempting under the
pretence of claiming their just rights and liberties granted them by
their charter, to extend them much further than they were authorised to
do; for they pretended that Kirkley road was situate to the _south_ of
Lowestoft; that the seven leuks or miles, the boundary of their
liberties, was to be measured from the mouth of the haven and not from
the key or port of Yarmouth: and also, that the said leuks were leagues
and not miles; and, consequently, had they succeeded in their designs,
the town of Lowestoft must either have been wholly excluded from the
fishery, or become tributary to the port of Yarmouth, from being liable
to the above customs. These proceedings on the part of Yarmouth were
illegal, and therefore justly opposed by the town of Lowestoft. The
methods made use of in those early times by the merchants at Lowestoft to
supply themselves with herrings, were very different from what it is at
present; for now they are furnished with herrings by their own boats; but
then, in general, they were obliged to repair to the port of Yarmouth
whilst it was open, and afterwards to Kirkley road (as the place of
general rendezvous for buying and selling herrings), in order to supply
themselves with fish, they having but few, if any boats of their own at
that time. Whilst the Lowestoft men repaired to the port of Yarmouth to
buy herrings, they had a just right to pay the customs that were due
there, and also the same in Kirkley road, when it was united to the
haven, and therefore were blameable in either refusing or evading them;
what, therefore, rendered the burgesses of Yarmouth so very culpable was,
their unjust and illegal attempts above mentioned (about the 37th of
Elizabeth, and again in 1659) wholly to exclude the town of Lowestoft
from the herring fishery, and to monopolise it to themselves. The
proceedings relative to these designs will appear in the subsequent part
of this section.
The first complaint against the Yarmouth men was that made to the lords
of the privy council, in the year 1595, by the bailiffs and other
inhabitants belonging to the several towns of Ipswich, Colchester,
Dunwich, Orford, Aldborough, Southwold, and Manningtree, in behalf of the
ketchmen, who resorted to Kirkley road and parts adjacent to buy
herrings; signifying the many hardships and inconveniences which they
laboured under from being deprived by the burgesses of Yarmouth of the
ancient privilege they enjoyed, and the great injury they were liable to,
in consequence thereof.
The ketchmen were those vessels which frequented these coasts in the
fishing season for the purpose of buying and selling herrings, which they
transacted in the open sea; but now Yarmouth men were for compelling them
to resort to Kirkley road, in order that they might receive the customs,
grounding their claim upon a grant of Queen Elizabeth.
THE COMPLAINT OF THE KETCHMEN AGAINST YARMOUTH.
Whereas there is a certain grant passed from her majesty to the
township of Great Yarmouth, in the county of Norfolk, as we are
credibly informed, and as the township of Yarmouth aforesaid have
given out speech and reported, That no fishermen, after the feast of
St. Michael, by the space of forty days, should utter or sell any
herrings within the compass or limit of seven miles of the said town,
to any person or persons; but that the said fishermen should be
constrained and urged to utter and sell all such herrings as should
be by them taken within the time before limited at the town of
Yarmouth aforesaid, and there to take and abide their market and
utterance of the same herrings, and not elsewhere. We, therefore,
which hereunder have subscribed, having had due consideration of the
premises, and seeing and proving not only the great damage and
inconvenience that the same will bring to the whole commonwealth of
this realm, but also the utter ruin and destruction that will fall
upon a number of poor ketchmen which be in trade with the said
fishermen, whereby the said ketchmen, their wives and families, as
also a great number of others who are thereby supported, sustained,
and upholden, do think the said grant to be very unprofitable and
inconvenient. The reasons that do move us thereto are these; that is
to say, If the fishermen, after the taking of the said herrings,
shall be constrained to repair, abide, and make their market and
sales at Yarmouth aforesaid, they shall within that time lose the
benefit of the taken twice so many herrings or more, as they shall
utter and sell, and not the half part of the herrings taken that
might be taken if they might abide and make their market at sea. And
also, if the said ketchmen shall be dismayed from buying of herrings
of the said fishermen, the most parts of the realm during that time
shall be unserved and unprovided for, and the queen’s highnesses,
poor distressed people and others would be unrelieved, which were a
most pityful and lamentable thing. And finding also, as we are
credibly informed, and some of us of our own knowledge do know, that
the bailiffs of the said town of Yarmouth have taken seven men’s
goods, which they have brought thither to be sold, and have committed
the owners thereof to prison, and constrained them to buy their own
goods again. (All which inconveniences, discommodities, and hard
dealings being considered.) We doubt not but that their godly
wisdoms to whom these presents shall be committed, will have due
regard and consideration thereof, as well for the benefit and
maintenance of the common wealth of this realm, as also for the
maintenance and relief of the poor distressed therein. And thus
thinking it our duties to certify our knowledge therein, we most
humbly take our leaves, the seventh day of August, 1595.
Signed at IPSWICH—EDWARD GOODYNGE, WILLIAM MYTUAL, Bailiffs
and 46 inhabitants. SOUTHWOLD—27 ditto. MANNINGTREE—10 ditto.
DUNWICH—ROBERT SWOTCHETT, JOHN ALLEYN, bailiffs and 20
ditto. COLCHESTER—22 ditto. ALDBOROUGH—FRANCIS JOHNSON,
JOHN JEAMES, bailiffs and 25 ditto. ORFORD—5 ditto.
The only grant made to Yarmouth in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, was a
charter, in the first year of her reign, which empowered them to hold a
court of admiralty, to try all maritime causes whatsoever, piracy only
excepted; and wherein the boundaries of their liberties were restrained
within the limits of seven leuks of the town, haven, or Yarmouth roads,
and not from the haven’s mouth, or Kirkley road; without adding any
additional privilege tending to justify this encroachment on the
liberties of the ketchmen.
Another complaint made also at the same time against the burgesses of
Yarmouth was one from the town of Lowestoft; for the town of Yarmouth
pretended that the seven leuks or miles which bounded their liberties was
not to be measured from the key or port of Yarmouth but from the haven’s
mouth; whereas the Lowestoft men affirmed that the said admeasurement
ought to be made from the key or port of that town; otherwise the
fishermen of Lowestoft would be excluded the indisputable privilege of
buying herrings in the open road before their own town, which hitherto
they had always enjoyed.
In consequence of these complaints, their lordships after hearing what
each party had to alledge in its own defence; referred the further
consideration thereof to three judges of the realm, viz., the right
honourable Sir John Fortescue, knight, one of Her Majesty’s privy
council; Mr. Justice Clench, and Mr. Justice Gawdye, in order that they
might certify to their lordships in what manner the dispute between the
said towns might be fairly and equitably adjusted to the reasonable
satisfaction and advantages of both parties.
A LETTER of REFERENCE to SIR JOHN FORTESCUE, Knight, MR. JUSTICE
CLENCH, and MR. JUSTICE GAWDIE.
After our hearty commendations.—The inhabitants of the town of
Lowestoft, in the county of Suffolk, have exhibited a complaint unto
us against the towne of Great Yarmouth, in the county of Norfolk,
shewing, that by some unlawful courses held by the townsmen of
Yarmouth, they are deprived of their antient trade of buying of
herrings of fishermen in an open road before the town of Lowestoft;
whereupon we have called before us of each town some two or three,
with intention to make order in the controversie between them. And
because the affair do consist of many points and proofs by charters,
and by special statutes we have thought good to be assisted therein
with the opinions of some learned in the laws, and therefore have
thought good to join with you Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, you
Mr. Justice Gawdie {74}—and you Mr. Justice Clench. And do hereby
heartily pray and request you, at some convenient time this term, to
call the parties before you, and effectually to appease the griefs of
the plaintiff, and the answers to the other, and to hear and consider
their allegations and proofs, to be delivered either by the parties
themselves, or by their learned council thereupon; we pray you to
certify unto us what you shall find, and with your opinions prove
their differences may in equity be duly and orderly ended and
compromised to the reasonable benefit of either; which we earnestly
recommend unto you, and so bid you each heartily well to fare. From
the Star-Chamber the second of July, 1595.
Your very loving friends,
L. ARCHBISHOP, L. ADMIRAL,
L. KEEPER, L. COBHAM,
L. TREASURER, L. BUCKHUST,
Mr. VICE CHAMBERLAIN.
Con cordat cum origine,
THOS. WILKES.
Accordingly, soon after it was certified to their lordships by the
judges, that after due consideration of the premises, and hearing the
several allegations advanced by both the said towns, and their learned
council, they were of opinion, that by a statute of 31st of Edward III,
no persons were legally authorised to hang herrings within seven miles of
the haven of Yarmouth, viz., South Town; East Town; and West Town, unless
the said herrings were of their own catching.
A CERTIFICATE FROM SIR JOHN FORTESCUE, JUSTICE CLENCH, AND JUSTICE
GAWDIE, CONCERNING THE CONTROVERSY BETWIXT THE TOWN OF YARMOUTH AND
THE TOWN OF LOWESTOFT.
Whereas your lordships did direct unto us your letter dated the
second of July last past, to examine and understand the griefs and
controversies between the inhabitants of the town of Great Yarmouth,
in the county of Norfolk, touching the trade of buying herrings: and
to certify unto you our opinions how their differences might in
equity be duly and orderly ended and compounded; we have accordingly
called before us divers of the inhabitants of either of the said
towns, and heard their allegations alleged by themselves, and their
council learned on both sides. And it doth appear into us, that this
condition between the said towns hath depended of very long time; and
divers statutes hath been made in this case by parliament for the
town of Yarmouth, and repealed again for the town of Lowestoft. And
divers ordinances and inquisitions have been made by the king’s
commission, directed to men of great authority, and afterwards
revoked, and altered again by the same authority. But there was one
statute made in the 31st year of Edward III, whereby, amongst other
things, it is provided, that none shall hang herrings about the haven
of Yarmouth by seven miles, but in the three towns of Yarmouth,
except the said herrings be of their own fishing. And another Act,
made in the 10th of Richard II. for revising of divers former
repealed charters made to Yarmouth, in which, amongst other things, a
certain place in the main sea, then by the mouth of the haven of the
said town of Yarmouth, called Kirkley road, was united to the said
town of Yarmouth, and by which it is provided, that none shall buy or
sell herrings by way of merchandize in time of their fair, within
seven miles of the said town, but only in the said haven and road.
Which said two statutes we do think by the law stand still in force
at this day, not repealed, nor avoided touching these points. But
for unity to be made between the said towns, and for the good and
common wealth of her majesty’s subjects in the counties of Norfolk,
Suffolk, Essex, and the city of London, We do think in our opinions,
it were good and convenient (if it may so seem good to your
lordships), that orders might be given to have the said seven miles
measured, to begin at some such place in Yarmouth town as your
lordships shall think meet; which we think, for our parts, to be the
key, where the fair of herrings is kept, and so to go towards
Lowestoft; and where the said seven miles do end, to set up some
apparent thing to make it known. And this being done we think it
would make some quietness, because there is great contention now in
this point. Also we do think it fit, that all pikers and ketches,
being English, might buy upon the main sea, or coasts thereof, and
also in Kirkley road, of the fishermen, fresh herrings at their
pleasure, to be by them carried to what place of the realm they think
good, without any let or disturbance of Yarmouth men, according to
the true meaning of the statute of the 31st of Edward III, which we
think would be very profitable for the fishermen, and very beneficial
for her majesty’s subjects. Also we think it would make great
quietness in this contention, if, by some commission or other, (as it
shall seem to your honourable lordships), it might be certainly set
down where Kirkley road is, and how far it doth extend. November
28th, 1595.
Concordat cum Registro Exor.
JOHN WOLLEY,
Keeper of the Records of the Councell Chamber.
* * * * *
THE OPINION OF THE LOWESTOFT COUNSEL TOUCHING THE CONTROVERSY BETWEEN
YARMOUTH AND THE SAID TOWN.
A brief being made upon the allegations of the Yarmouth men, and
delivered to the judges in writing (which such allegations, in truth,
were not under the hands of their councel, though they proceeded from
their councel), shewing that the judges should have delivered a
certificate of their opinions to the Council-Table before the
Yarmouth men were gone out of London, although the judges had not
sufficient time for that purpose, the Yarmouth men not presenting
their allegations till the last day of term, and then deferred it
till the judges were going to supper; therefore the Lowestoft men
have retained Mr. Sergeant Drewe and Mr. Bargrave, her majesty’s
attorney, together with Mr. Councellor Bacon, to consider the whole
state of the matter, and that their opinion might be shewed as
occasion should require, they have subscribed to the same, as
followeth: “That by the statutes and charters aforesaid, any man may
sell and buy herrings in the road called Kirkley road, or elsewhere,
without the lawful let or hindrance of the town of Yarmouth; and if
any proclamation be made by the said men of Yarmouth, or any other of
the subjects of this realm, to the contrary, the same, in our
opinion, is unlawful, whether it be within or without the time of the
fair.”
CHAR DREW, JA. BARGRAVE, FR. BACON.
In order to form the better judgment of this intricate and much disputed
affair, it may be necessary to observe, that by the statute of the 9th of
Edward III it was enacted, “That every subject of the realm might buy and
sell herrings without disturbance in city, burgh, sea-port, or elsewhere
throughout the kingdom; and if any charters and patents were granted to
the contrary they should be holden null; which statute was confirmed in a
subsequent parliament.” Probably from some abuse of this privilege, it
might become necessary afterwards to lay it under some restrictions, in
view of preventing those infringements which interested persons, from
lucrative motives, had made on the rights and privilege of others; and
therefore to redress this grievance, the following statute of the 31st of
Edward III was granted, on which the Yarmouth men grounded part of their
claim, and is the statute referred to in the certificate of the judges.
STATUTE OF THE 31ST OF EDWARD III.
Edward, by the grace of God, king of England and France, and lord of
Ireland—To our bailiffs of the cinque ports, and the burgesses of our
town of Yarmouth, keepers of the said town, greeting, etc.
A certain concord by us and our council, made within the time of the
present fair of the said town, we will have kept, etc.
That none shall go by boat nor bridge into the sea, nor unto the road
of Kirkley, for to meet the fishers, to compel them, or to capture
them to sell them herrings in the road of Kirkley, to the disturbance
of the said fair, upon the same pain, etc.
But if the said fishers be disposed and willing to sell their
herrings in the said road after that they be anchored there, it shall
be lawful to the merchants of Lowestoft and Winterton, to buy any
herrings in Kirkley road and Winterton, of ships so anchored there,
as freely as the pycards do load their carts and horses there, which
come thither from divers counties, and to hang there, provided that
they sell no herrings therefore towards the sea, upon pain aforesaid,
etc.
And in case that any fishers ships charged with one last and a half
of herrings, or less, come into the road of St. Nicholas, and will
not come into the haven for the charge thereof, and will sell the
same herrings in the road that it shall be lawful for him to set up
his sign, and sell the said herrings there to the merchants that will
buy them.
When the judges delivered their opinions, that by this statute none
should hang herrings about the haven of Yarmouth, by seven miles, etc.,
they meant that port of the haven near the key where the fair was kept,
and not the mouth of the haven. The Yarmouth men on the contrary,
insisted that the words in this statute, “and to hang there,” implied,
not to hang anywhere else but near the said haven, thereby endeavouring
to exclude the town of Lowestoft from the privilege of curing herrings.
But the opinion delivered by the judges being found just and reasonable
it was confirmed by an order of council as will be afterwards more
clearly shewn. Nevertheless, it may be observed that the disputes which
these statutes principally refer to, and are alluded to by the judges are
those which relate to the extent of the liberties of Yarmouth. For the
charter which united Kirkley road to Yarmouth haven was not granted until
the 46th of Edward III. which was fifteen years after the passing of the
preceding statutes.
And by an Act passed in the tenth year of the reign of Richard II (which
confirmed the Act of the 46th of Edward III) it was enacted, that a
certain place in the main sea, called Kirkley Road, should be united with
the said town of Yarmouth; and by which Act it was provided, that none
should buy or sell herrings, by way of merchandise, in time of their
fair, within seven miles of the said town, but only in the said haven or
road. Which two statutes they thought were still in force, and
unrepealed; but yet for the sake of restoring peace and harmony between
the said town, and promoting the common benefit of the kingdom in
general, they recommended it to their lordships, that the said seven
miles which circumscribed the liberties of Yarmouth, should be measured
from the key of the said town where the herring fair is always held,
towards Lowestoft; and at the termination thereof some apparent mark
should be placed, in order to ascertain the exact boundaries of their
liberties, and to prevent any farther disputes. And also, that they were
of opinion, that by virtue of the statutes of the 31st of Edward III all
English vessels were entitled to the privilege of buying fresh herrings
in the middle of the sea, or coasts thereof, and also in Kirkley road,
without any let or hinderance from the men of Yarmouth. And lastly, that
they thought it very advisable, that a commission might be appointed to
consider the premises, and to ascertain with precision the true situation
of Kirkley road, in order to adjust the present differences, and to
prevent any future contentions between the said towns.
This opinion of the judges was no sooner delivered, than it was opposed
by the burgesses of Yarmouth with the utmost vehemence, and every method
was made use of to conceal its reasonableness, and to divert its
consequences, the Yarmouth men still persisting that the seven miles
which terminated the boundaries of their privileges, were to be measured
upon the sea, and not to be contracted by the numerous windings that
would necessarily attend an admeasurement taken upon land.
Upon the starting of these objections by the burgesses of Yarmouth, their
lordships were pleased to issue orders for a re-hearing of the case,
which was appointed to be held before Sir John Forteseue and the other
judges; who after hearing and examining what the learned counsel employed
by each party had to advance in support of the demands of their
respective clients, and duly considering how far their several
pretensions were just and reasonable, they certified to their lordships,
that they were unable to discover any legal or equitable reason why they
should depart from their former opinion.
A SECOND CERTIFICATE FROM SIR JOHN FORTESCUE, JUSTICE CLENCH, AND
JUSTICE GAWDY, CONCERNING THE CONTROVERSY BETWEEN THE TOWN OF
YARMOUTH AND THE TOWN OF LOWESTOFT.
Whereas, upon the return of our first certificate, the men of
Yarmouth opposed it, as discontented with some things therein
specified: whereupon it pleased your lordships to re-commit to us the
hearing of both parties; and having accordingly heard both they
themselves and their learned council, at Serjeants Inn, in Chancery
Lane, we do further certify, that we find no cause to alter the said
certificate.
CONCORDAT CUM RESISTRO
EXOR
JOHN WHOLLEY,
Keeper of the Records of the Council Chamber, April 30th, 1596.
In consequence of this second certificate of the judges, their lordships,
on the 16th day of May, 1596, issued an order that an actual
admeasurement of the said seven miles should be immediately carried into
execution, and at the termination thereof towards Lowestoft, some
apparent mark should be affixed, to point out the boundaries of the
liberties of Yarmouth; and that the same admeasurement should commence at
Yarmouth key, the place where the herring fair is usually held; and also
further to ascertain the true situation of the place called Kirkley road;
and accordingly a commission was granted to Sir Arthur Heneningham, Sir
Henry Woodhouse, Knight, and Henry Gawdy, Esq., {78} on the part of
Yarmouth; and to Sir Robert Jermyn, Sir John Higham, Knight, and Anthony
Wingfield, Esq., on the part of Lowestoft, or any five or four of them,
to superintend the said admeasurement, to affix the said mark, and to
point out the precise situation of Kirkley road, where it beginneth, and
how far it extendeth.
AT THE COURT AT GREENWICH, the 16th of May, 1596.
Present,
LORD ARCHBISHOP, LORD CHAMBERLAIN, LORD BUCKHURST,
LORD KEEPER, LORD COBHAM, SIR JOHN FORTESCUE.
This day John Felton and Thomas Dannett, burgesses of the town of
Yarmouth, and William Wild and Thomas Ward, inhabitants of the town
of Lowestoft, having been before the lords of the council, and
presented to them the certificate sent down by Sir John Fortescue,
Justice Clench, and Justice Gawdy, signed with their own hands,
concerning the controversy before referred to them by their
lordships, between the towns of Yarmouth and Lowestoft, concerning
the trade of buying herrings. Their lordships having perused the
said certificate, and deliberately considered of it, have approved of
it in these two points: first, for the privilege of seven miles; and
secondly, for a commission to be granted for finding of the right
place of Kirkley road (leaving the other matter of the pikers and
catchers, mentioned in the said certificate, by consent of both
parties themselves). And because the question between them is
concerning the measuring of seven miles where the same ought to begin
(the one part saying that it should begin at the haven’s mouth, the
other at the key, where and about which place, the fair is usually
kept), their lordships do approve of the judgment and certificate of
the said judges, that it ought to be taken from the said key, or
place of their fair, in Yarmouth town; and have therefore ordered,
that letters should be written and directed from their lordships unto
Sir Arthur Heneningham, Knt., Sir Henry Woodhouse, Knt., and Henry
Gawdy, Esq., for the town of Yarmouth; and for the town of Lowestoft
Sir Robert Jermyn, Knt., Sir John Higham, Knt., and Anthony
Wingfield, Esq., or any five or four of them, to undertake the
measuring of the seven miles from the town of Yarmouth, according to
the intention of the privilege claimed by the town of Yarmouth by
their charter; and at the end of the said seven miles so measured, to
affix and set down an apparent mark; and upon good examination and
enquiry, to set down and define the place where Kirkley road is,
which the charters of Yarmouth mentioneth; where it beginneth, and
how far it extendeth.
Ex. Sipe. THO. SMITH.
* * * * *
FROM THE COURT AT GREENWICH, the 16th day of May. 1596.
Present,
JOHN CANTERBURY, WM. CEICELL, THO. BUCKHURST.
THO. EGERTON, WM. COBHAM, J. FORTESCUE.
To our very loving friends, Sir Arthur Heneningham, Sir Henry
Woodhouse, Sir Robert Jermyn, Sir John Higham, Knts., Henry Gawdy and
Anthony Wingfield, Esqs., or to any five or four of them.
After our hearty commendations.—Whereas, upon some controversy
between the towns of Yarmouth and Lowestoft, concerning the trade of
buying herrings, we have referred the consideration thereof to our
very loving friends Sir John Fortescue, Knt., Justice Clench, and
Justice Gawdy, who have accordingly returned certificates of their
opinions of the matter, which herewith we send unto you; we have now,
by the consent of both parties, made choice of you, as fit persons to
execute the determination of the said certificates and do therefore
pray and request you, or any five or four of you, with all convenient
expedition to undertake the pains of measuring the seven miles from
the town of Yarmouth sideway {79} according to the intention of the
privilege claimed by the town of Yarmouth, by their charters; and at
the end of the said seven miles so measured, to fix and set down
apparent marks; and also upon good examination and inquiry to set
down and define certainly where Kirkley road is which the charter of
Yarmouth mentioneth; where it beginneth, and how far it doth extend.
And of these two material points, and to certify your opinion and
proceedings there upon such further orders shall be given therein as
we shall think requisite. And so we bid you heartily farewell.
From your loving friends, etc.
But the burgesses of Yarmouth being conscious that they were prosecuting
a claim for which they had neither a legal nor equitable pretension; and
being also apprehensive, that if the affair was carried before the said
commissioners, and submitted to a strict and impartial investigation, it
would terminate greatly to their disadvantage; therefore they resolved as
there was but little prospect of being successful in the enquiry, they
would exert every effort in their power to retard and embarrass it; and
that the most effectual mode for accomplishing their designs would be to
counteract the commission; and accordingly, in a subsequent application
to the Privy Council for redress of grievances, they transmitted such a
partial representation of the case, as to obtain from their Lordships an
order for a new commission. In this second commission we find, that an
alteration was made in the appointment of commissioners; for in the place
of Anthony Wingfield, Esq., one of the commissioners nominated in the
first commission on the part of Lowestoft, William Rowse, Esq., was
appointed in this second commission, a person partially attached to the
interest of Yarmouth. And whereas, by the first commission, any four or
five of the commissioners had a power of deciding any point relative to
the dispute; but by the second commission it was ordered, that they
should be unanimous; and also it was further directed by the first
commission, that the inquiry should determine the two principal points in
dispute, viz., the admeasurement of the seven miles and the true
situation of Kirkley road; whereas the burgesses of Yarmouth, by this
second commission so ordered the business, that when the parties appeared
before the commissioners, they confined the inquiry solely to the
situation of Kirkley road, and withheld from them every information that
related to the admeasurement of the seven miles; and also had given
previous directions for Mr. Rowse to be absent from the meeting, which
consequently rendered every resolution of the Commissioners void, as by
the commission they were directed to be unanimous.
To Sir Arthur Heneningham and Sir Henry Woodhouse, Knts., and Henry
Gawdy, Esq., and to Sir Robert Jermyn, and Sir John Higham, Knts.,
and William Rowse, Esq.
Whereas, we gave orders and directions unto you, for the appeasing of
the controversy between the town of Yarmouth and Lowestoft,
concerning their liberties, to measure the seven miles claimed by
them of Yarmouth for their jurisdiction, from the key of Yarmouth;
whereby they pretend the same will be very prejudicial to their
charter, antient liberties, and other rights. And they also alledge,
that by a statute of the 31st of Edward III, the said seven miles
ought to be accounted from the uttermost bounds of the haven (_i.e._
from the mouth), which hath been extended, in memory of man, a mile
further towards the south than it is now. These, therefore, shall be
to require you, that according to your former directions you will
cause seven miles to be measured from the key at Yarmouth, and
likewise seven miles to be measured from the uppermost bounds of
their haven; and to be unanimous in your opinion, and to certify unto
us how far each admeasurement doth extend; and in the mean season to
forbear setting up any marks or bounds until we shall consider of the
same, and give such further orders therein as shall be agreeable to
reason and equity, and satisfaction of both parties.
LORD KEEPER, LORD TREASURER, LORD COBBHAM, LORD BUCKHURST, MR.
SECRETARY, MR. CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER.
Concordat cum Registro Exor.
JOHN WOOLEY.
Keeper of the Records of the Councell Chamber. 8th July, 1596.
On the 4th day of August, 1596, all the Commissioners nominated in the
first commission, together with the bailiffs and principal inhabitants of
Yarmouth assembled at Lowestoft; and the Commissioners, as directed by
their commission, intended to have made the admeasurement of the seven
miles the first object of their inquiry; but the Yarmouth men objected
against this mode of proceeding, and insisted upon inverting the order of
the enquiry, and that the ascertaining of the true situation of Kirkley
road ought to be the first business that engaged their attention. The
Commissioners so far acquiesced in this unreasonable demand, as to employ
about four hours in investigating the exact situation of Kirkley road,
and limiting its boundaries; but when the Yarmouth men began to discover
that the result of the inquiry would be prejudicial to their interests,
as well as contrary to their expectations, they then produced the new
commission, which effectually answered all the purposes they had been
aiming at; and notwithstanding the Commissioners made a proposal of
sending for Mr. Rowse, the absent Commissioner, and also of suspending
any further proceedings till he should arrive and concur with them in
their deliberations, yet all these offers proved wholly unavailable, and
nothing would satisfy the desires of the Yarmouth men but an acquiescence
on the part of Lowestoft in such a decision respecting the situation of
Kirkley road and the extent of its boundaries, as the bailiffs themselves
thought proper.
In consequence of these illegal and unreasonable proceedings on the part
of Yarmouth, the commission was dissolved. Nevertheless the
Commissioners on the part of Lowestoft were so perfectly convinced of the
oppressive designs of the Yarmouth men, as well as apprehensions of the
inevitable ruin that would ensue to the inhabitants of Lowestoft, that
before they broke up, they unanimously resolved to present a certificate
of their proceedings to the Lords of the Privy Council, both for
remonstrating against the unjust and unlawful proceedings of the Yarmouth
men, as also to represent to their lordships, the apparent poverty and
distress which threatened the town of Lowestoft.
THE CERTIFICATE OF SIR ROBERT JERMYN AND SIR JOHN HIGHAM, KNTS., AND
ANTHONY WINGFIELD, ESQ., ON THE PART OF LOWESTOFT; SHEWING THE
UNNECESSARY SHIFTS, DELAYS, AND HARD DEALINGS OF THE YARMOUTH MEN AND
THE NECESSITY OF ENDING THE CONTROVERSY:
Our humble duties to your honours remembered.—May it please the same
to be advertised, That by authority of your lordships’ letters to us
and others directed, concerning the deciding of the controversies
arisen between the township of Yarmouth, and the inhabitants of
Lowestoft, proceeding from the certificate of the Honourable Sir John
Fortescue, knt., Justice Clench and Justice Gawdy, we met together at
the town of Lowestoft, whither the Commissioners named for Yarmouth,
together with the bailiffs and chief inhabitants of Yarmouth, did
also make their repair; and upon our meeting we desired that we might
employ ourselves about the measuring of seven miles from Yarmouth to
Lowestoft; but that would not be allowed of, but only to search and
try out where, and how far Kirkley road did extend, upon which two
points the whole of your honours’ commandment did consist, in which,
after hearing the learned councell on both sides, we had spent at the
least four hours about the extent of Kirkley road only, and had heard
the effect of sundry affidavits taken and returned upon several writs
of ad quad dampnum, mentioning the said Kirkley road: at length the
bailiffs of Yarmouth delivered to us and the other Commissioners, a
letter of your honours, which they had kept in their hands at the
least five days, and had suffered some of us not only to travel
almost fifty miles, but also to spend so many hours as we have before
expressed, about a question, which upon the receipt of this your
honours’ second letter, we had no authority to deal in; namely, the
second point, or to describe the situation of Kirkley road. Also, in
the proceeding of that letter, they omitted the name of Anthony
Wingfield, Esq., who was then absent and had caused the name of
William Rouse, Esq., to be put in; and also had gotten the letter so
indited, as that the whole number of the said six commissioners must
need agree to the measure of the said seven miles, and which could
not be done by reason Mr. Rowse was absent; and although an offer was
made to send for Mr. Rowse, and so to proceed to the admeasurement,
yet in the end they would not proceed to it, except the Lowestoft men
would confess that Kirkley road extended as far as the Yarmouth men
would have it. All which proceedings we are bold to signify to your
honours to prove the unnecessary delays, and hard and unjust
proceedings of the Yarmouth men, and the desire they have to enjoy
their private gain in the herring fishing shortly approaching, to the
utter impoverishing and undoing of the poor inhabitants of Lowestoft,
if by your honours’ favours they be not relieved; and whose
lamentable estate, arising from the hard measure and unjust delays of
the said Yarmouth men, do move us, in consideration of them, to be
bold to offer to your lordships’ view, the hard dealings in this
cause; and in their behalfs humbly to entreat your most honourable
and speedy relief in this their grievous distress. And thus very
humbly we take our leaves of your good lordships.
ROBERT JERMYN,
JOHN HIGHAM
ANTH. WINGFIELD.
From Somerleyton, the 4th August, 1596.
The Lowestoft men were so far from being dispirited by these illegal
proceedings of the burgesses of Yarmouth, that, on the contrary, from the
favourable representation of their case, made to the Privy Council by the
Commissioners, they received so much encouragement as to renew their
application to their Lordships for relief; and petitioned that they might
be indulged with re-hearing of their cause. {81}
In consequence of their application, their lordships immediately sent
letters to the several Commissioners nominated in the first Commission,
informing them that as the differences subsisting between Yarmouth and
Lowestoft were become a matter of great difficulty, and that some certain
points of law were so connected therewith as to require explanation, they
were under the necessity of referring it to the judges for their opinion
thereon; and in the mean time requesting that the herring fishery and
fair at Yarmouth might be conducted as usual and without any
interruption, until the said judges had certified their opinion.
To SIR ROBERT JERMYN, SIR JOHN HIGHAM, SIR ARTHUR HENENINGHAM and SIR
HENRY WOODHOUSE, Knts., and ANTHONY WINGFIELD, and HENRY GAWDY, Esqs.
After our hearty commendations.—We have received the letters
severally sent unto us from you that were appointed to be the
Commissioners on both sides for certain controversies between the
towns of Yarmouth and Lowestoft. And because we find by your several
reports, that it will be a matter of great difficulty for you to set
in order those differences, some proceedings depending upon matter of
law, and are to be decided by certificate from the judges, we have
thought good to respite the same until next term; and in the mean
season to request you, that those of Yarmouth may not be interrupted
in their fair and herring fishing this season, but that they may use
the same in such sort as the same has usually been, until there shall
be a final end made in those matters now depending between them. So
praying you to take thorough hearing accordingly we bid you farewell.
JOHN CANTERBURY, LORD KEEPER, LORD BUCKHURST, LORD TREASURER, LORD
CHAMBERLAIN, LORD BUCKHURST, MR. SECRETARY, MR. CHANCELLOR OF THE
EXCHQUER.
From the Court at Greenwich, the 17th August, 1596.
Thus was this long-contested affair brought the third time before the
judges, who, after duly weighing every circumstance respecting the same
delivered their opinion, “That as the matter in dispute was become so
exceedingly intricate and perplexed, and entangled with such numerous
difficulties as to make them despair of accommodating the differences to
the mutual satisfaction of both parties, they therefore have thought it
more advisable to refer the decision thereof to the determination of
parliament.”
Whereas it hath pleased the right honourable the lords of her
majesty’s most honourable privy council, upon the humble petition of
the inhabitants of Lowestoft, in the county of Suffolk, to remit to
us now this third time the controversy now depending before their
lordships, between the bailiffs, burgesses, and community of the town
of Great Yarmouth, in the county of Norfolk, of the one party, and
the said town of Lowestoft of the other party, touching the trade of
hanging and making of red herrings, and also the procuring of white
herrings, for victuals of store, to be merchandised: we see no
decisive course therein can be taken by us, to compound their
controversies and adjust their differences, whereby to bind both
parties, as is most necessary and convenient (their differences being
of such great difficulty); and therefore we think it fit that the
cause be respited, and referred unto the next parliament; at which
time, upon supplication and complaint of those that shall find
themselves aggrieved, the cause may receive hearing and due remedy.
J. CLENCH, FRANCIS GAWDY.
Given this 29th day of April, 1597.
But notwithstanding the judges declined passing a final decision upon
this long-contested affair, but referred it to parliament, yet the
Yarmouth men still continued to pursue the inhabitants of Lowestoft with
the utmost rancour, and came shortly after into Lowestoft roads with two
armed vessels, and under a pretence of being within the liberties granted
by their charter, demanded anchorage; in consequence whereof a battle
ensued, and much blood was shed on both sides; and though a complaint was
lodged by the Yarmouth men in the star Chamber, against Lowestoft, yet
their accusations appeared so frivolous and ill-grounded, that their
cause was dismissed, and instead of recovering any damages, were fined
twenty marks.
In consequence of this reference, an Act of parliament was passed in the
year 1597, directing that an actual admeasurement of the said seven miles
(eight furlongs to every mile) should immediately take place, and begin
to be measured from the crane key in Yarmouth, and to proceed the
directest way towards the roading place, near the sea shore, where the
fishermen usually anchor for the sale of their herrings; and at the end
of the said seven miles, a post or some other apparent mark, should be
erected near the sea shore, to signify to all persons whom it may concern
the termination of the said seven miles, prescribing the boundary of the
liberties of Yarmouth. {82}
In this defence of their rights and liberties, the town of Lowestoft
expended £120 which was collected from a voluntary subscription of the
inhabitants; some subscribing £10, some £6, some £4, and others lesser
sums, according as their abilities enabled them. But exclusive of the
above expenditure, the inhabitants were under the necessity of
contracting a debt of upwards of £50 which, by reason of their distressed
situation they were utterly unable to discharge any other way than by
appropriating a part of the rents and profits of the town lands; for it
had always been an established maxim of the town to support and maintain
the free trade of buying and selling herrings in Lowestoft roads;
therefore, at a general meeting of the inhabitants, it was resolved that
as a large sum had already been expended in support of this right, that
out of 200 persons who reaped advantages from this fishery, many were
unable to contribute towards the above expense; and that if the fishery
was not supported, the town would be inevitably ruined. Therefore, the
state of the town being thus considered, and the affair regarded as a
case of necessity and charity, and of the utmost utility to the
inhabitants; they agreed, That, it was a very justifiable application of
the rents of the town lands, in the present emergency, in discharging the
said debt.
An Act of the 39th of Elizabeth, for the measuring of seven miles from
the town and haven of Great Yarmouth, in the county of Norfolk, mentioned
in the statute made in the 31st year of King Edward III, and certain
letters patent, granted by the same king unto the bailiff and burgesses
of the said town of Yarmouth.
Whereas, King Edward the Third, at the parliament holden at
Westminister the Monday after the week of Easter, in the 31st year of
his reign, amongst other things, ordained, that none hang herrings in
no place about the haven of Yarmouth, by seven miles, except in the
three towns of Yarmouth, that is to say, Easton, Weston and Southton,
unless it be the herrings of their own fishing. And whereas, the
said King, by his letters patent, in the 46th year of his reign,
among other things did grant unto the bailiffs, burgesses, and good
men of Great Yarmouth, in the county of Norfolk, in the time of
herring fishing, no fair should be kept, nor buying nor selling by
way of merchandise, should be had anywhere within the space of seven
miles about the said town, of herrings or other merchandise. The
which letters patent and grant were afterwards revived and confirmed
by act of parliament in the 10th of Richard II. And by colour and
pretence of the aforesaid statute and letters patent the aforesaid
bailiffs and burgesses of the said town of Yarmouth, have of late
years, practised, in the principal time of herring fishing viz., from
the feast of St. Michael the Archangel, forty days then next
following, to restrain buying and selling of herrings, and making of
white and red herrings, in other towns and places on the sea cost of
Suffolk and Norfolk, above seven miles from the said town, and the
place where the fair of herrings is yearly kept, contrary to the true
meaning of the statute and letters patent above mentioned; by means
whereof great debates and controversies have been moved, the trade of
taking herrings greatly decayed in the coast of Suffolk and Norfolk,
and likewise the trade of making of red herrings, which was more
proper to that part of the realm than to any part of the world else,
is now transferred into the parts beyond the seas, to the great hurt
and undoing of the inhabitants of divers coast towns in the said
counties, and to the general hurt of all fishermen using the trade of
herring fishing; for that by means of this restraint there is nothing
so many herrings taken as otherwise might be; and of these that be
taken, the fishermen, to avoid this restraint, endeavour themselves
to utter some greater quantities of herrings unto Hollanders,
Zealanders, and Frenchmen, than they were wont to do, whereby the
price of herring, red and white, is more than double increased, to
the hurt of all the commonalty of the realm of England. Now,
therefore, for the avoiding of the above mentioned and other
inconvenience that in time to come may ensue, if remedy be not herein
provided, be it enacted by the queen’s most excellent majesty, the
lords spiritual and temporal, and the commons in this present
parliament assembled and by authority of the same, that the aforesaid
seven miles, mentioned in the aforesaid statute, shall be measured
from that part of the said town of Yarmouth whereabout the fair of
herrings is kept, which is the crane key, within the said town; from
thence the usual ways southwards and northwards by the sea shore; and
at the end of either of the said seven miles, apparant marks shall be
fixed, such as may be seen as well upon the sea as upon the land, as
a manifest declaration how far the liberties claimed by bailiffs and
burgesses of Yarmouth shall extend upon the sea coast of Suffolk and
Norfolk, either by sea or by land, concerning the buying, selling and
hanging of herrings; and that either of the said seven miles shall be
accounted to contain eight furlongs, and every furlong to contain in
length, forty poles or perches, and every pole or perch to contain
sixteen feet and a half; and that the high sheriffs of the counties
of Norfolk and Suffolk, or their deputies, shall before the feast of
St. Batholomew the apostle, now next coming, measure seven miles, in
manner and form aforesaid from the said crane key, over the haven,
thence southwards, and at the end of the said seven miles six
apparent marks as aforesaid; and so before the said feast of St.
Batholomew, measure seven miles in manner and form aforesaid, from
the said crane key and at the end of the said seven miles six
apparent marks as aforesaid; and that either of the said sheriffs of
the said counties of Suffolk and Norfolk, for the time being, shall
take such orders from time to time in their several counties, that
the said marks shall be continued for ever. And the aforesaid
bailiffs, burgesses, and community of the said town of Yarmouth, or
the barons of the five ports, or any of them, shall not, at any time
hereafter by colour of any manner of liberties, jurisdictions or
privilege, claimed to belong to them or any of them, by reason of the
aforesaid statute or letters patent, or any other statute, charter,
usage, or rescription, restrain or inhibite any person whatsoever,
buying, selling, changing, or discharging of herrings, in any place
or places whatsoever, being without the compass of the said seven
miles.
Thus was this litigious and long-disputed difference, which had subsisted
between Yarmouth and Lowestoft for a great many years, and had been
prosecuted with the utmost vehemence, at length happily concluded.
Nevertheless it afterwards appeared, that during these dissensions the
seeds of animosity had been so profusely scattered and became so deeply
rooted in the breasts of the contending parties, that it was impossible
to eradicate them even by the most lenient and conciliating measures;
and, consequently, the apparent reconciliation proved, in reality, little
better than a truce, in order that the parties might be enabled to renew
their differences with greater vigour.
In the year 1659 we find, that the former disputes between Yarmouth and
Lowestoft respecting Kirkley road and the admeasurement of the seven
miles, the boundary of the liberties of Yarmouth, were again revived.
During the further prosecution of this affair, the burgesses of Yarmouth
traversed the same ground as they had done before; and insisted that
Kirkley road, which was united to their haven by the statute of the 46th
of Edward III. was opposite to the town of Kirkley, and consequently to
the south of Lowestoft; and that the seven miles which circumscribed
their liberties were not to be measured from the Crane quay, but from the
haven’s mouth; and the better to obviate every objection that might be
alleged against them, and that their new pretensions might carry the
greater appearance of justice, they had provided, that in the recital of
the statute of the 46th of Edward III, in the renewal of their charter in
the reign of James I. to have the situation of Kirkley road described as
opposite to the town of Kirkley, notwithstanding it is represented in the
original statute as being contiguous to the haven’s mouth; and having
thus removed the greatest obstacle to a successful renewal of their
pretensions, they only waited for a favourable opportunity of carrying
their designs into execution. In the year 1659, this desirable and
much-wished-for opportunity presented itself. A time when the
inhabitants of Lowestoft were overwhelmed with the greatest misfortunes;
when their unshaken loyalty, during the late rebellion, had exposed them
to all the distresses which soldiers living in free quarters could
involve them in; when their principal inhabitants (whom they wanted to
defend their rights) were employed as commanders of the royal navy, and
their sailors were absent in manning the fleet; when they were reduced to
the greatest poverty and distress by a terrible fire, which consumed in
the town, houses and merchandise to the amount of £10,000; whilst they
were thus struggling under the accumulated miseries of war, fire, and
oppression, and sinking under the insupportable burden of those grievous
calamities, then it was that the Yarmouth men, imagining that the happy
period had arrived when they might renew their pretensions without
opposition, and pursue them with success, contrary to all legal
authority, renewed their unjust and unreasonable claims, and attacked the
almost-ruined and defenceless town of Lowestoft with an armed vessel,
which was termed a man-of-war.
In this unhappy situation, when almost every avenue to redress was shut
against them, and nothing but the ghastly spectres of poverty and ruin
were continually presenting themselves to their alarmed imaginations, no
other remedy was left but to implore the assistance of the legislative
powers of their country, and to lay before them a true representation of
their unfortunate state, which was done in the following complaint,
shortly after presented to the lords of the privy council.
A COMPLAINT OF THE TOWN OF LOWESTOFT IN THE COUNTY OF SUFFOLK, TO THE
LORDS OF THE PRIVY COUNCIL.
Whereas the Yarmouth men under pretence of a privilege granted them
in their charter, that no fishers should deliver any herrings within
seven miles of their town during the time of their free fair, which
beginneth at Michaelmas, and continues till Martinmas, have, on one
day of the year, come rowing in small boats into the roads before
Lowestoft, and there have exacted anchorage, although eight or nine
miles distant from Yarmouth; and if they refuse to pay it they
violently take their goods, cruelly beat the fishermen and their
assistants, confiscate their vessels and set grievous fines on them,
on purpose to prevent their delivering any herrings at Lowestoft to
the great damage of the poor fishers and injury of the said town;
who, if compelled to deliver all their herrings at Yarmouth, must
lose at least one third part of their time; and when they do proceed
to Yarmouth, by an ordinance of that town, the first freeman that
comes on board must be his host, and will set the price of the
fisher’s herrings without their knowledge or consent, which commonly
is 20s. to 50s. a last cheaper than they give to their own townsmen,
which the fishers are ready to make appear by certificates, or other
ways; whilst at this town they are free to sell to whom they please,
and are furnished with such necessaries as they want; and if they
like not this market, they are free to sell their fish to any other,
and return to sea again at their own pleasures.
* * * * *
OBSERVATIONS ON THE ADMEASUREMENT OF THE SEVEN MILES AND THE PLACE CALLED
KIRKLEY ROAD.
The Yarmouth men alleged that Lowestoft south road was within the
compass of seven miles from the town and herring fair of Yarmouth,
although upon an admeasurement it was found, that only Corton road
and part of Lowestoft north road were within the limits of the said
seven miles and that the greatest part of even Lowestoft north road
is beyond the said seven miles, the boundary of the liberties of
Yarmouth, yearly proclaimed. Yet, notwithstanding, the Yarmouth men
have made a practice of coming one day in the year, in the time of
their fair, only into Corton and Lowestoft north road, but also into
Lowestoft south road and have there unjustly extorted anchorage under
the colour of a grant of Kirkley road being united unto their town
and haven, and was situated off the town of Kirkley, which place so
granted was found (before the granting), by two inquisitions of
record, to be at the mouth of the haven of Yarmouth, and nothing
distant; which inquisitions agreed with no other place but that now
called Yarmouth road; and there they have enjoyed all those things
mentioned in the said inquisitions, and grant of the 10th of Richard
II. until the first of Queen Elizabeth, and then they obtained a new
grant of Yarmouth road which until that time they held by the name of
Kirkley road, and by no other name or grant; and though they have
come wrongfully into the roads of Lowestoft one day in the year,
exacting anchorage, they leave all other profits, jurisdictions, and
government, all other parts of the year, unto the Vice-Admiral of
Suffolk; for admiralty causes, and concerning wreck of the sea,
things found in the roads, flotsom and jotsom, and all other
casualties in the said roads and shores of the same, all that they
leave to the lord of the manor of Lothingland, Lowestoft, and Mutford
all along the shores as far as Kessingland, which is three miles
southward of Lowestoft; but they never had any part of the same in
use or possession but as before mentioned. It appears by copies of
letters patent in the 9th of Richard II. and by an edict of the
extent of the manor of Lowestoft, taken the 10th of Richard II. and
returned into the Exchequer in the term of St. Michael, that the
lords of the manor of Lowestoft have had and enjoyed from time to
time in the roads before Lowestoft, and all shores of the same; and
also had, and still have, all petty customs of all goods there
landed, (which was much in those days), and all casualties happening
in the said roads, and upon the shores thereof; and the trade of
merchandising herrings and other merchandise have continued ever
since; as the great number of herring houses, warehouses, and other
buildings do now remain, as monuments, to prove the use of the said
trades at Lowestoft. And likewise there have been of antient time,
and still continue, officers for the collecting such customs as
should be due to the lord, etc., and a deputy searcher for the king’s
customs; and although the aforesaid trade of merchandising, loading,
and unloading of ships and boats continued there, and never any of
the customs claimed by the town of Yarmouth were either taken or
demanded for such loading or unloading; and although the statute of
the 31st of Edward III. concerning the prohibition of discharging any
more herrings in the road of Kirkley, but for the charge of the
pickers, was never in use etc., yet, under the pretence of the grant
(46th Edward III.) of a place in the sea, then called Kirkley road,
which no ways agreeth to be Lowestoft roads, they have of late used
to come into the said roads before Lowestoft, which is above seven
miles from the town of Yarmouth, and fair of herrings kept in the
said town; and have compelled the fishers to sail to Yarmouth and
sell their herrings, etc.; and likewise have exacted anchorage,
tending greatly to the breach of the peace, and without any material
profit to Yarmouth, and which tends only to the disturbing and
diminishing of the trade of merchandising herrings at Lowestoft.
But now the Yarmouth men, as if all their former injuries were not
sufficient, have sent a vessel, a man-of-war ship as they term it,
with a flag on the main-top-mast head, having 25 men aboard, armed
with swords, half-pikes, muskets, and great store of stones, which
sail into the roads of Corton, Lowestoft and Kirkley, to ride there
at anchor, and to act as above by virtue of a commission under the
hands of the bailiffs and three justices of the Peace, and the seal
of the said town, so that the fishers may not deliver any herrings at
all, which before they never practised.
* * * * *
THE AFFIDAVIT or JAMES MUNDS, OF LOWESTOFT.
James Munds, of Lowestoft, Suffolk, fisherman, aged sixty years and
upwards, maketh oath, that he has used the trade of fishing
forty-five years and upwards, last past, upon the coasts of Norfolk
and Suffolk; and that the western fishermen and strangers have
constantly, during the time of the free fair kept at Yarmouth,
delivered herrings in the roads of Lowestoft aforesaid, to several
merchants inhabiting in the said town, without any disturbance or
molestation, till this last year the men of Yarmouth sent out a
vessel, which they called a man-of-war, furnished with five and
twenty men, and several weapons of war, which anchored in the roads
of Lowestoft the chiefest part of the season, daily chasing the
fishermen, so that none durst deliver any herrings, to their great
damage, and, if not timely prevented, to their utter ruin and
undoing.
JAMES MUNDS.
Prob. 30th die Januarii, A.D. 1660, Corum me in Cancell. Magistro,
THOMAS ESCOWTR.
* * * * *
THE AFFIDAVIT OF ROGER HOOPER, OF RAMSGATE.
Roger Hooper, of Ramsgate, Kent, aged forty-six, or thereabouts,
maketh oath that he hath used the trade of herring fishing four and
thirty years, last past, upon the coasts of Norfolk and Suffolk; and
that the western fishermen, his neighbours, and others, and also
strangers, have constantly, during the time of the free fair kept at
Yarmouth, delivered herrings in the road of Lowestoft aforesaid, to
several merchants, inhabitants there, without any molestation, until
this last year, when the Yarmouth men sent out a vessel, which they
called a ‘man-of-war,’ to ride in the roads of Lowestoft the chiefest
part of the season; which man-of-war threatened him, that if he
delivered any herrings at Lowestoft, they would seize him. So that
none dare deliver any herrings, to their great damage, and, if not
timely prevented, to the utter undoing of their voyage.
ROGER HOOPER.
Prob. Febru. 1660. Corum me in Cancell. Magistro.
BYRED.
Having been grievous sufferers for our constant fidelity to his
sacred Majesty; several times plundered, grievously burthened with
taxes above the neighbouring towns, soldiers living at free quarters,
great losses by sea, depopulated of our principal inhabitants by
their being engaged in his majesty’s service, as Captains Allen,
Utber, Canham and Whiting, besides a great number of our common
seamen, and many who have lost their lives in contending with these
oppressors, and also a most lamentable fire in this town, which
consumed 140 houses, together with tackling and goods to the amount
of ten thousand pounds and upwards, for which we never had any
favour. And now having made large provisions for the fishery of all
sorts, as also for the receiving, salting, and drying such herrings
as they should bring in being able to hang in this town about 700
lasts, which time out of mind, have been the sole subsistance of this
town, are now bespoiled at once, and like to perish, if speedy remedy
be not obtained, being no ways able to wage war with them, for
reasons above.
We therefore humbly pray, etc.
* * * * *
THE SECOND ORDER OF THE TOWN OF GREAT YARMOUTH TO THOMAS ALLEN TO
ENTER CORTON ROAD, LOWESTOFT ROAD, AND KIRKLEY ROAD, TO PROTECT THE
LIBERTIES OF THE SAID TOWN OF GREAT YARMOUTH.
Whereas Thomas Allen was late ordered by us, the bailiffs and
justices of the burgh and town of Great Yarmouth, in the county of
Norfolk, her under named, to go into Corton road, Lowestoft road, and
Kirkley road, Suffolk, with a vessel and a convenient company, to
take notice of such persons, strangers and others, as shall there
deliver any herrings or other merchandise, during the time of the
free fair here at Great Yarmouth, contrary to our liberties and
charters; and to seize such vessels and merchandise, as forfeited to
the king’s majesty, and to bring the same into the haven of this
town. And we did also order the said Thomas Allen, with his company,
to demand and take in the said several roads such duties as were or
should be due to this town of Great Yarmouth for anchorage of ships
and vessels in these roads, or for any other cause, which said orders
by us so given unto the said Thomas Allen, were done by virtue of an
act or ordinance of common councel of the said town of Great
Yarmouth. And whereas the said Thomas Allen, by virtue of our said
order unto him given, did go into the said road of Lowestoft, with a
convenient vessel and competent number of men, to execute the orders
by us given unto him; and was there opposed by the chief men of the
said town of Lowestoft, who came upon the said Thomas Allen and his
company in the road of that town, violently and riotously in boats,
and with force of arms, etc., drave him and them out of that road,
threatening them otherwise to fire their vessel; whereby the said
Thomas Allen, with his vessel and company, was enforced to come away
without doing anything. Now, therefore, we the said bailiffs and
justices, do again order, authorise, and appoint the said Thomas
Allen to go with a competent vessel and company of men, and with
convenient weapons for their defence into the said roads of Corton,
Lowestoft, and Kirkley, from time to time, during the time of the
free fair here at Great Yarmouth, and there to do and execute all
things, specified in our former order given unto him. In witness
whereof we the said bailiffs and justices have hereunto set our hands
and seals this fifth day of October, in the year of our Lord, one
thousand, six hundred and sixty.
NICHO. CUTTINGE, JAMES SYMONDS,
(_Bailiffs_.)
JOHN CARTER, GEORGE ENGLAND.
JO. WODROFFE.
The adjoining towns of Pakefield and Kirkley also lodged complaints
before the Privy Council, against the Yarmouth men, similar to those from
Lowestoft, so did likewise Hastings, Dover, Rye, and other towns of the
western coast; and afterwards some private adventurers in those parts of
England did not scruple, on this important occasion, to petition the
throne to protect them from the despotic designs of the Yarmouth men.
TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE THE LORDS OF HIS MAJESTY’S MOST HONOURABLE
PRIVY COUNCIL.
THE CERTIFICATE OF THE SEA COAST TOWNS OF PAKEFIELD AND KIRKLEY, IN
THE COUNTY OF SUFFOLK.
Humbly certifying,
That the said towns are joining upon the sea, and divided by one
street, subsisting chiefly by the fishing trade. And that we never
knew, or heard our forefathers speak of any roads lying against or
near the said town, called by the name of Kirkley road, but Pakefield
bay or hithe, and Lowestoft roads; nor was there ever any road near
our said town so called, but by the men of Yarmouth, on purpose to
engross the whole of the fishery; and monopolise the whole trade to
themselves; whilst, in truth, our town of Kirkley is near three miles
southwards of the pole set up to the northward of Lowestoft, always
accounted the boundary of the seven miles granted to the town of
Yarmouth, measured from their crane key, and to be the uttermost
extent of their privileges. Nevertheless, in the year 1657, two or
three days after Michaelmas, as Thomas Fowler the elder, and Thomas
Fowler the younger, of our said towns, were, for delivering of
herrings betwixt our town of Kirkley and Lowestoft, at their next
going to Yarmouth, had before the bailiff, who set a fine upon each
of them, of £40 a-piece, which they were commanded to pay, or else
their boats and tackling would be confiscated. But after alleging
their poor condition, they mitigated it to £30, and at last to £20 a
man, which they were compelled to lay down upon the table; and large
writings were produced for them to sign and seal, to indemnify the
said bailiff, which if they would do, they would take but £5 a man;
but one of the Fowlers desiring to understand the contents of the
writings, and beginning to read, Mr. Bailiff England interrupted him,
and said that if he would not seal it, he should pay the whole £20;
so that they were obliged to seal they knew not what, and were
dismissed by each of them paying £5. Such is the great bondage of
the poor fishermen. In testimony of the truth, we the inhabitants of
the said towns have hereunto subscribed our names this 14th day of
January, 1660; and are ready to aver the same upon oath when we shall
be thereunto required.
ROBERT BRONSBY, WILLIAM RICHMAN, WILLIAM GOGOE,
THOMAS COLBY, WILLIAM THURKITTLE, THOMAS FOWLER,
MICHAEL FOWLER, WILLIAM WOODS, THOMAS ERTIS,
JOHN COLBY, JOHN SWATT, JOHN SETTAVAYE,
FRANCIS DURRAND, WILLIAM ERTIS, WILLIAM ROUSE,
ABELL HOULSWORTE, THOMAS MASON, JOHN MASON
HENRY CROSS, WILLIAM BROWN.
* * * * *
TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE THE LORDS OF HIS MAJESTY’S MOST HONOURABLE
PRIVY COUNCIL.
THE CERTIFICATE OF THE FISHERMEN OF THE TOWNS OF BRIGHTHELMSTONE,
HASTINGS, RYE, DOVER, RAMSGATE, AND THE REST OF THE WESTERN FISHERY.
Upon perusal of a petition presented unto the king’s most excellent
majesty by the town of Lowestoft, in Suffolk, representing the
injurious proceedings of the town of Yarmouth to them, and also the
whole Western Fishery; and his majesty’s gracious reference thereupon
unto the right honourable the Lords and others of his Majesty’s most
honourable Privy Council for satisfaction and relief therein,
We do humbly certify unto your Lordships,
That the Western Fishery, has time out of mind, sold and delivered
herrings in the roads of Lowestoft, until this last year, when the
Yarmouth men sent forth a man-of-war (as they term her) not only to
affrighten them and others from delivering herrings in the said
roads, but also to prevent any that should offer to deliver herrings
there. And in case they should presume to deliver any, to seize upon
them, and bring them into their haven, to be dealt with accordingly
(as by the commission granted to the commander or captain of the said
man-of-war may appear); which they have done, not only to the great
loss of some particular men, imposing great fines upon them, which
they were forced to pay, but also the great discouragement, (and if
not in time prevented) the ruin of the whole Western fishery. For if
we be forced to deliver our herrings only at Yarmouth, we shall lose
at least one-third part of our time, the winds falling so as that
sometimes we lye through three or four days before we can get to sea
again. Besides, having that advantage, they will give only what they
please, which will amount to the loss of near half our time and
profit, and will be much to the disadvantage of his Majesty’s
subjects in trading, both at home and abroad. Whereas at Lowestoft
we have the privilege to make the best of our market, and can go to
sea when we please, furnished with all necessaries as plentifully as
we can at Yarmouth. The truth of all which we do attest under our
hands, humbly praying relief therein.
Signed at Bradstow, Foulstone, Hastings, Ramsgate, Hyde, Dover, Rye,
Brighthelmstone, by 469 Western fishers, and others.
* * * * *
Lowestoft answereth, That the said statute of 31 Edward III. is
repealed by the statute of 2 Richard II., cap. i.: which grants a
free trade for all persons to buy and sell at any place within the
realm, notwithstanding any statute, grant or usage to the contrary;
and by 46, Edward III., which united Kirkley road to Yarmouth Haven.
Yarmouth alleges, That the anchoring place opposite the town of
Kirkley, and the road before the town of Lowestoft, is that Kirkley
road mentioned in the grant of 46 Edward III., which united Kirkley
road to Yarmouth haven.
Lowestoft answers, That the town of Lowestoft is situated eight or
nine miles to the south of Yarmouth; and that a mile further to the
south is a village called Kirkley, joining to the head town called
Pakefield; before which towns the anchoring places have always been
called Pakefield bay or hithe, as by a certificate under the hands of
the principal inhabitants of both those said towns doth appear.
Yarmouth says, That the seven miles, which bound their liberties,
begin at the haven’s mouth.
Lowestoft answereth, That by the charter of 46 Edward III. the seven
miles were confined to the town of Yarmouth.
Yarmouth declareth, That Kirkley road lies at a considerable distance
from the haven’s mouth.
Lowestoft answereth, That the situation of it was contiguous to the
mouth of the haven at the time when the haven discharged itself into
the sea to the south of Corton, 46, Edward III., when the charter was
granted for uniting Kirkley road to Yarmouth haven.
Yarmouth affirms, That the power and authority derived to them by
extending their liberties to the distance of seven miles, were not
detrimental to the nation in general, nor to Lowestoft in particular.
Lowestoft answereth, That it is prejudicial to both of them; and
grounded their reasons on the two inquisitions held during 5 Richard
II.
Yarmouth denieth. That the statute 31 Edward III. was repealed by
the general statute 2 Richard II., and also insists, that by the
charter 46 Edward III, for uniting Kirkley road to Yarmouth haven,
their liberties were to extend seven miles from the said haven.
Lowestoft answereth, That the said charter 46 Edward III was repealed
by an act 50 Edward III (though the judges declared that the statute
31 Edward III was not repealed) and that the statute 2 Richard II was
prejudicial to the kingdom in general: and therefore a complaint was
made thereof, in the parliament holden 4 Richard II, and an
inquisition was taken by three judges of the realm, who surveyed the
premises, and declared, that to extend the liberties of Yarmouth
seven miles from the haven’s mouth, was against common right, and
that the said statute 2 Richard II was hurtful to the commonwealth;
and, consequently, by the statute 5 Richard III, the statute 2
Richard II was repealed.
Yarmouth declareth, that by the statute 10 Richard II all their
privileges were confirmed to them, and again by statute 1 queen
Elizabeth.
Lowestoft alloweth, that the liberties granted to Yarmouth, 46 Edward
III were confirmed by statute 10 Richard II; but concerning the
statute 1 Queen Elizabeth that did not relate to the herring fishery,
except confining their liberties to seven miles from the town, but to
the establishing a court of admiralty at Yarmouth; and, therefore,
though the town of Yarmouth, under a pretence of being authorised by
that grant, made considerable encroachments on the privileges of
Lowestoft, and insisted that their privilege of seven miles was to be
measured from the haven’s mouth, and not from the key of Yarmouth,
thereby attempting to exclude the town of Lowestoft from the fishery;
yet, on complaint thereof being made to her majesty’s privy council,
who referred it to the judges, Sir John Fortescue, Justice Clench,
and Justice Gawdy, they certified, that it was their opinion, that
the seven miles should be measured from the crane key in Yarmouth,
towards Lowestoft, and at the termination thereof a post, or some
other mark should be erected to denote the same. Whereupon the Lords
of the Council, on the 16th May, 1596, after referring the case again
to the judges, laid it before the Parliament, who issued an order, in
1597, to Sir Arthur Heneningham, Sir Henry Woodhouse, and Henry
Gawdy, Esq., on the part of Yarmouth, and to Sir Robert Jermyn, Sir
John Higham, and Anthony Wingfield, Esq., on the part of Lowestoft,
to undertake the admeasurement of the said seven miles; accordingly
the said admeasurement was actually made, and a great post, denoting
the boundary of the liberties of Yarmouth, was erected, which
remained unto that day.
Yarmouth insisteth, That a Charter of confirmation, granted to them
in the reign of James I., Kirkley road is expressly described as
opposite to the town of Kirkley; and that their jurisdiction shall
extend from Winterton Ness in Norfolk, to Easton Ness in Suffolk,
which is twenty-four miles, and includes the town of Lowestoft, which
is only eight or nine miles from Yarmouth; and that by virtue of this
jurisdiction, they justify their interruption of the herring fishery
at Lowestoft, and all other trades within the extent of their said
liberties.
Lowestoft answereth, That such a charter as the Yarmouth men pretend
to have obtained, would be a monopoly, and contrary to the common
rights of the Kingdom in general. That such a charter, if it was
really granted, was obtained privately; that no writs of ad quod
dampnum were issued, so that it is evident that they had imposed upon
his majesty. That it would be prejudicial to the commonwealth, and
the utter ruin of the western fishery, as is testified by above 3000
fishermen, who have subscribed a petition which certifies the truth
of this assertion, and prays for relief. That it relates chiefly to
the jurisdiction belonging to their court of admiralty, as is evident
by their coming with a boat into Lowestoft roads, and demanding
sixpence for anchorage. And lastly, That the artifice of having
Kirkley road represented in this charter as situated opposite to the
town of Kirkley, merely with a design of furnishing themselves with a
plausible pretence for extending their liberties beyond the town of
Lowestoft, towards the south, and thereby to exclude them from the
herring-fishery, was a fraudulent imposition, and a manifest
perversion of the Charter 46 Edward III, which represents it as
situate near the entrance of Yarmouth haven.
Previous to the report of the attorney-general, a certificate was
presented to him from James Wild and Samuel Pacy, two eminent
merchants at Lowestoft {90} asserting the reasons why the seven
miles, the boundary of the liberties of Yarmouth, ought to be
measured from the crane key belonging to the said town of Yarmouth,
where the herring fair is usually held, and not from the haven’s
mouth.
* * * * *
To the Honourable Mr. ATTORNEY GENERAL
The humble CERTIFICATE of the INHABITANTS of the town of LOWESTOFT,
in SUFFOLK, shewing the reasons why the seven miles, the extent of
the liberties of Yarmouth, in Norfolk, ought to be measured from the
crane Key, and not from the haven’s mouth.
1st.—That their fore-fathers being obstructed in their fishing by the
Yarmouth men (which time out of mind they had enjoyed), had appealed
to her late majesty, queen Elizabeth, to her parliament, and privy
council, and obtained an order for setting bounds to the seven miles
granted to Yarmouth.
2nd.—In consequence whereof an order was also obtained from the lords
of the council, directed to several men of authority in both
counties, to make due enquiry concerning the controversy, and survey
the premises, in order to ascertain the place from whence the
admeasurement ought to begin, which was certified to be from the
crane Key in Yarmouth, where the herring fair was usually held. And
though the Yarmouth men, thinking themselves aggrieved obtained a
second survey to be made, yet was it certified by the inquiries a
second time, that they found no reason to depart from their former
opinion. The reasons which they assigned, were that it was
beneficial to her majesty’s good subjects in general, and the
encouragement of the herring fishery in particular.
3rd.—That the order from the council, for the admeasurement of the
seven miles, was never revoked, as the Yarmouth men falsely
suggested, but only suspended, as by the copy of their letters
appears, and though by indirect means they occasioned a delay, and
endeavoured to weary the commissioner appointed to settle the
controversy with frivolous evasions, yet it was agreed, that the
seven miles should be measured from the crane Key, in Yarmouth,
directly towards Lowestoft, and a great post should be set up at the
end thereof, to denote the same, which remaineth to this day.
4th.—That ever since that time (which was in the year 1595 and 1596)
the fishers have freely delivered their herrings in Lowestoft roads,
in the time of the free fair at Yarmouth, without any molestation,
until this last year, 1660, when they were interrupted by a vessel,
called a man-of-war, employed by the Yarmouth men for that purpose.
May it therefore please your honour,
That as this controversy has been for so long standing, and it
plainly appearing that no remedy can be obtained but by another
admeasurement; that your honour will give credit to the orders and
certificates lately pleaded before his majesty in council, as also to
the certificates of several thousand fishermen belonging to the
western fishery, then produced, shewing the inevitable ruin and
destruction both to them and their families, that would immediately
ensue, if prevented from delivering their herrings at Lowestoft, as
from time immemorial they have been accustomed to do, which
certificates have been since confirmed by a petition from Captain
Tattersell, to his sacred majesty; and that your honour would be
graciously pleased to report your sense of this difference concerning
the admeasurement as soon as possible; for that the Yarmouth men will
continue to claim the same privileges, or greater, than they did in
the year 1595; and exercise the same ruin to our poor town, as in the
last year (1660), with their armed vessel called a man-of-war.
Neither do the Yarmouth men desire that the controversy should be
brought before the parliament, but to weary us out with delays and
expense, well knowing how unable we are to wage law with them, and
that unless they persist in opposing us, it will end in an
admeasurement. We therefore humbly pray your honour, that you will
be pleased to consider the equity of our case; the great expense,
travail and loss of time we have been at; and with due regard to our
poor condition, speedily to report the state of the whole matter to
his majesty in council, that so we may be no longer delayed, but
repair home to follow our lawful callings; and we shall, as in duty
bound, for ever pray, and remain, your honours most humble and
grateful servants,
JAMES WILD,
SAMUEL PACY.
The attorney-general, in pursuance of the order of council, paid due
attention to the allegations of both parties; and after hearing what each
of them had to advance in support of their several pretensions, together
with the opinion of their learned council, delivered a report to his
majesty; wherein, after reciting the many charters which had been granted
to the town of Yarmouth, and afterwards repealed; and the various
ordinances and inquisitions issued and taken by the King’s commission in
preceding reigns, and revoked by the same authority; declared that he had
considered the statute 31 Edward III, the different opinions of the
several judges thereupon, and the orders of her late majesty queen
Elizabeth and her privy council, in consequence thereof, which were, that
seven miles should be measured from the Key of Yarmouth, and also from
the utmost bounds of their haven, and that a certificate should be
presented, declaring how far each of the said admeasurements extended;
and that during the interval, they should forbear to erect any marks or
bounds, pointing out the termination of the said admeasurements, until
further orders were issued; but that it did not appear to him that the
said seven miles were actually measured by any order for that purpose.
It is evident that the attorney-general had not perfectly informed
himself of all the circumstances of this dispute, or else they were
misrepresented to him; for in 1596 an order in Council was given for
seven miles to be measured from the key of Yarmouth towards Lowestoft,
and at the end thereof to set up some apparent mark; and in that
remarkable commission, which had all the appearance of being fraudently
obtained, is contained directions for the two admeasurements, and the
suspension of the order for erecting a mark pointing out the extent of
the liberties of Yarmouth. Nevertheless the inhabitants of Lowestoft did
affirm, and it was certified by great numbers of the Western fishermen,
that the said Western fishery had ever since the recited order (as they
did before), sold and delivered herrings in the roads of Lowestoft till
this last summer, without any disturbance or molestation from the town of
Yarmouth.
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S FIRST REPORT.
May it please your most excellent Majesty.
In obedience to your Majesty’s order in council, of the 25th January
last, I have heard the inhabitants of the town of Lowestoft, in the
county of Suffolk, and also the inhabitants of Great Yarmouth, in the
county of Norfolk, and their learned counsel on both sides; and do
find, that the contention between the said towns concerning the
herring fishery, hath depended for a very long time. And that divers
statutes have been made in this case by parliaments, and again
afterwards repealed. And also divers ordinances and inquisitions
have anciently been made and taken, by the king’s commission directed
to men of great quality, and afterwards altered and revoked again by
the like authority. But there was one statute made in the 31st
Edward III, whereby amongst other things it is provided, that none
shall sell herrings in any place about the haven of Yarmouth, by
seven miles, but in the three towns of Yarmouth, except the said
herrings be of ‘their own fishing.’ And I have likewise seen the
opinions of several learned judges, some of them conceiving, that the
said statute, 31 Edward III is repealed; and others, that the said
statute, and also one other Act made in the tenth year of Richard II,
for reviving divers former repealed charters, made to Yarmouth, stand
still in force bylaw, and are not repealed. And those judges who
were of opinion that the same were not repealed, did think it good
and convenient to have the seven miles measured, and to begin at the
crane key in Yarmouth, where the said fair of herrings is kept (to
which place the fishers who sell their fish at Yarmouth must first
come, and their cable draw to land, before they deliver their
herrings), and so go towards Lowestoft, and where the seven miles do
end, to set up some apparent mark to make it known; and did certify
the same accordingly to the lords of Queen Elizabeth’s privy council.
But the inhabitants of Yarmouth being discontented with the first
certificate of the said judges, did procure a rehearing of their
cause before them, who having accordingly heard them and their
learned counsel, did certify that they did find no cause to alter
their former certificate; yet the admeasurement was suspended by
reason of the Yarmouth men alledging, that the admeasurement of the
seven miles from the key of Yarmouth would be prejudicial to their
charters and liberties; and that by the said statute, 31 Edward III,
the seven miles ought to be accounted from the utmost bounds of the
haven, which they affirmed to have been extended, in the memory of
man, a mile beyond where it was then; so that it was directed by the
lords of her said late majesty’s most honourable privy council, that
there should be seven miles measured from the key at Yarmouth and
from the utmost bounds of their haven, where the five ports begin
their jurisdiction, and that it should be certified unto them how far
each admeasurement did extend; and that in the mean time they should
forbear to set up any marks or bounds, until such further orders
should be issued therein as might be just and reasonable, and to the
mutual satisfaction of both parties. But there is nothing appears to
me, that the said seven miles were measured as the said last-recited
order did direct. Yet, notwithstanding, the inhabitants of Lowestoft
do affirm, and it is certified by great numbers of fishermen, that
the western fishery has been ever since the said recited order (as
they did before) sold and delivered herrings in the roads of
Lowestoft, till this last summer without the disturbance of the
Yarmouth men.
All which I humbly submit to your Majesty’s great wisdom.
It also appears that the Attorney-General, upon further consideration of
this contested difference, presented an additional report to his majesty,
wherein he represented, that since his former report he had seen the
certificate of the two learned judges, dated April 29, 1597, subsequent
to the certificates mentioned in his first report, in which they declared
that they could not see how any method could be taken for compromising
the differences between the two towns, but by referring them to
Parliament.
THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL’S SECOND REPORT.
May it please your most excellent Majesty.
In obedience to your Majesty’s order of council of the 25th of
January last, concerning the matter of difference between the
inhabitants of the town of Lowestoft, and the inhabitants of the town
of Great Yarmouth, I lately made certificate to your majesty
according to the truth of what was then produced before me. But
since that time there hath been produced to me a certificate under
the hands of the learned judges, dated the 29th of April, 1597,
subsequent to those mentioned in my former certificate, wherein they
did declare, that they did see no other course could be taken by
them, in order to compound their controversies and decide the
differences between the said towns, and whereby they could bind both
parties in such a manner as was most fit and convenient (their
differences being of such great difficulty), and therefore they
thought it fit, that the cause should be respited, and referred to
the next parliament. At which time, upon supplication and complaint
of those that should find themselves aggrieved, the cause might
receive hearing and due remedy.
And I humbly crave liberty to certify to your Majesty, that by the
word “crane” key, in my former certificate, I did intend the key of
Yarmouth, that is known by that name, without any the least prejudice
to either party thereby, in relation to the admeasurement mentioned
in the same certificate, further or otherwise than the truth of the
cause would bear.
All which I humbly submit to your Majesty’s great wisdom.
At a council held at Whitehall the 10th of April, 1661, at which were
present his Majesty, and the Duke of York, and many of the first
nobility, these reports of the attorney-general were presented and read;
and it was accordingly ordered by the council, that by reason of his
Majesty’s approaching coronation, they were unable to pay such proper
attention to the complaints of the respective parties, as their cases
required; therefore the affair must necessarily be suspended a short time
longer; and that both parties do attend the Board on Friday three weeks,
the third of May next ensuing, at three in the afternoon, for the further
hearing and determining of this matter.
Upon the issuing of the order for deferring the hearing of the cause to a
subsequent council, the Lowestoft men presented another petition to His
Majesty, beseeching him that as it was the opinion of the judges, and
also of the Attorney-general, that the only method which could be taken
for compromising the differences so long subsisting between these two
towns, would be to consider seven miles to be measured from the key of
Yarmouth, towards Lowestoft, in order to ascertain the boundary of the
liberties of the former place, and secure the privilege of a free fishery
to the latter, and at the end thereof to have some apparent mark erected,
to denote the same; that his Majesty would be pleased to order the said
admeasurement to be immediately carried into execution; or otherwise, by
reason of their many misfortunes and losses, they must be involved in
inevitable ruin.
TO THE KING’S MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY, THE HUMBLE PETITION OF THE
INHABITANTS OF THE TOWN OF LOWESTOFT, IN THE COUNTY OF SUFFOLK,
Sheweth,
That your majesty having been graciously pleased, at the humble suit
and prayer of your petitioners, to hear the complaint of your poor
petitioners, against the rich inhabitants of the town of Great
Yarmouth, in the county of Norfolk, before the right honourable the
lords of Your majesty’s privy council, touching the free trade of
herring fishery, which hath of long time been in controversy between
them; and upon a full hearing, did order both parties to attend your
majesty’s attorney-general, that he, upon due consideration and
hearing of all parties, should report to your majesty the true state
of the whole matter of fact accordingly: whereby it appears, that the
opinion of all the reverend judges, and such other worthy gentlemen
of quality to whom the matter hath been formerly referred, is, ‘That
there is no other visible way to end their controversies, and to
procure unity between the said towns, but by an admeasurement of
seven miles from the crane key of Yarmouth towards the town of
Lowestoft.’ And whereas your petitioners are exceedingly
impoverished by reason of their said controversy, and their
sufferings during the late troubles, their affections to your
majesty’s late royal father, of ever blessed memory, having been
plundered by Oliver Cromwell and the said inhabitants of Yarmouth,
who were instrumental with, and assisting him in the same; and since
that time have been almost ruined by a sad and lamentable fire which
happened in their said town, whereupon inevitable destruction will
follow, except a speedy and effectual end be put to their
differences, and that they may have free liberty to use their trade
of herring fishery.
Your petitioners therefore humbly pray, That your majesty would be
graciously pleased, upon the report of Mr. Attorney-General, as also
the reports and certificates of former learned judges and justices of
the peace of both counties, by your royal command to declare and
publish, that seven miles may be measured from the crane key of
Yarmouth aforesaid, towards the town of Lowestoft, and not from their
pretended utmost bounds of their haven, which is uncertain, and by
which means they would destroy your petitioners said fishing trade.
And that a post, or some other apparent mark, may be set up at the
end thereof, so that the trade of herring fishing may be used during
the time of their free fair at any place without the said post or
mark, without the molestation of the said inhabitants of Yarmouth,
whereby your petitioners, and many thousands of your majesty’s poor
western fishermen, may live and subsist by their said trade of
herring fishing, as time out of mind they have done; which otherwise
will be their utter ruin and undoing, as appears by their humble
certificate and remonstrance to your sacred majesty.
And your petitioners as in all duty bound, shall ever pray, etc.
Petitions were also at the same time presented by the Lowestoft men to
Lord Chancellor Hyde and the Duke of Albemarle, entreating their interest
and authority at the privy council intended shortly to be held for the
further discussion of this litigious contest; also that an order might be
obtained for the admeasurement of the said seven miles from the crane key
at Yarmouth, and that the same admeasurement should not be made from the
haven’s mouth, as thereby the town of Lowestoft would be excluded from
their indisputable claim to the privileges belonging to the herring
fishery.
A petition was also presented to his majesty, praying that his majesty
would graciously please to be present in his royal person at the council
appointed to be held on Friday the third of May next ensuing, for
deciding this long-controverted difference.
In consequence of this appointment a privy council was held at Whitehall
on the third of May, 1661, at which were present his majesty, the duke of
York, many of the great officers of state, and others of the nobility;
when, after hearing the learned counsel on both sides, and after full
debate on the several complaints and allegations advanced by the
respective parties, it was ordered by his majesty in council, that as the
determination of the differences between the said towns of Yarmouth and
Lowestoft depended upon the validity of several charters, acts of
parliament, and orders of council, that the inhabitants of the town of
Lowestoft should make application to the right honourable the House of
Lords, shortly to be assembled in Parliament, who would consider their
complaints and afford them such redress as their lordships, upon due
examination of the whole matter, should think just and reasonable.
The Lowestoft people having conceived the highest expectations of an
amicable adjustment of their differences with Yarmouth at the late
hearing of their cause before the privy council, were extremely chagrined
and disappointed at its being referred to the House of Lords; especially
as their inability (from their late misfortunes) to continue the contest,
and the continual interruptions and depredations of the Yarmouth men, had
rendered a final decision of the affair absolutely necessary. In this
critical situation of their affairs, they thought it necessary, as
preparatory to the introduction of their cause before the House of Lords,
to present a petition to their lordships informing them, that whereas,
from time immemorial, they had enjoyed the free trade of buying herrings
of the western fishers in the roads of Lowestoft; but that the Yarmouth
men, taking advantage of their late misfortunes by fire and civil wars,
had greatly interrupted and annoyed them, and threatened them with the
total destruction of their fishery, and, consequently, with the utter
ruin of their town. That they had laid their case before his majesty and
the privy council; that it had been referred by them to the
attorney-general, that the opinion of the attorney-general had been laid
before his majesty and the privy council; who, after due examination of
the premises, were pleased to refer a further investigation thereof to
their lordships, recommending such redress of the grievances complained
of as they should think just and equitable. Therefore the said
petitioners humbly besought their lordships, that they would be pleased
to take the matter into consideration, and afford them such immediate
relief as would prevent the annihilation of the fishery, the ruin of the
town, and the great loss and inconvenience of the nation in general.
On reading of the above petition before the house of lords, their
lordships ordered, that the cause so long depending between the said
towns should be heard at the bar of that house by such counsel as should
be retained on each side, on the seventh of June, 1661; and that the said
petitioners should give timely notice thereof to the inhabitants of
Yarmouth, and that both parties do attend the same hearing.
DIE SABBATHI, 25º MAIJ, 1661.
On reading the petition of the inhabitants, of the town of Lowestoft,
in the county of Suffolk, this day in the house, concerning a free
trade of fishing, which the petitioners complain they are molested in
by the inhabitants of Great Yarmouth, it is ordered, by the lords in
parliament assembled, that the cause shall be heard at this bar, by
counsel on both sides, on the seventh day of June next. And that the
petitioners, or some of them, shall give the said inhabitants of the
town of Yarmouth, timely notice thereof, and that both the said
parties do attend the said hearing accordingly.
JOHN BROWNE, Cleric. Parliamenti.
The state of the town of Lowestoft, and the herring fishery, on which it
solely depended, were now become truly alarming; the towns of Ipswich,
Orford, Alborough, and Dunwich apprehended also their being involved in a
share of the calamity; and the company of fishmongers in London, as well
as the numerous body of fishermen on the coasts of Sussex and Kent,
evidently foresaw the distress and inconveniences which must inevitably
ensue should the town of Yarmouth be permitted to monopolise the whole
trade of the herring fishery to themselves. Alarmed with these
apprehensions, and stimulated with the desire of independence, they
united their utmost efforts in one common interest, in guarding
themselves against the oppressions of the Yarmouth men, which, it was too
evident, they were most industriously endeavouring to burden them withal.
The first who offered their assistance to the Lowestoft men in this
difficult but necessary undertaking, were the fishmongers of London.
They presented a certificate to the house of Lords; wherein after
premising that several petitions had been presented to his majesty and
the privy council, from the town of Lowestoft, representing the injurious
proceedings of the town of Yarmouth; and also his majesty’s reference of
the case to their lordships they further certified, to the house of
Lords; wherein, that Lowestoft was a very antient town; had always
subsisted chiefly by the herring fishery; that they had, from time
immemorial, enjoyed the privilege of having herrings delivered in the
roads off that town until the last year, when they where interrupted by
the Yarmouth men, under a pretence, that by virtue of a charter they had
granted to them, no fishers were authorised to deliver any herrings
during the continuance of their herring fair, or from Michaelmas to
Martinmas, within the distance of seven miles from the mouth of their
haven; that were the Yarmouth men permitted to persevere in these
injurious proceedings, it would be attended not only with great prejudice
to the town of Lowestoft, but the utter ruin of the western fishery, and
would also be extremely detrimental to the nation in general, exclusive
of many other inconveniences.—Seventy-eight of the London fishmongers
attested the truth of the premises under their own hands and prayed for
relief.
A petition was also presented at the same time from the towns of Ipswich,
Orford, Alborough, and Dunwich, similar in general to the above petition
from the fishmongers of London; entreating their lordships, that the town
of Lowestoft may not only enjoy their ancient freedom of buying and
selling herrings on every occasion, but also be protected for the future
against the interruptions of the town of Yarmouth; and that each town
might enjoy the common right of the nation without any restraint or
limitation from each other, as the most effectual means of preventing a
monopoly, and rendering the herring fishery of more general utility.
TO THE HONOURABLE THE PEERS OF ENGLAND ASSEMBLED IN PARLIAMENT.
THE HUMBLE PETITION OF THE BURGESSES ETC., FOR THE TOWNS OF IPSWICH,
AND DUNWICH IN THE COUNTY OF SUFFOLK,
Humbly shewing,
That your petitioners being informed, that his majesty, together with
his council have recommended the case between the towns of Lowestoft
and Yarmouth, concerning the free trade of herring fishing, to your
lordships’ care and determination; your petitioners do think fit to
recommend some particulars to your lordships’ consideration.
1st. That the town of Lowestoft is more antient than the town of
Yarmouth.
2nd. That Lowestoft is in the county of Suffolk, and Yarmouth in the
county of Norfolk.
3rd. So that it seems unreasonable to us, that the town of Yarmouth
should infringe upon the town of Lowestoft, which is a more antient
town than Yarmouth, and in a distinct county, and full nine miles
distant, and thereby not only bring a prejudice to Lowestoft, but to
the whole coast of Suffolk, and consequently to the whole trade of
herring-fishing, by their destroying the common right which the
western fishermen and the city of London have enjoyed by trading with
our coast rather than Yarmouth, to the great advantage of the whole
nation; whereas such a monopoly as the town of Yarmouth pretends to,
would be destructive both to us and the town of Lowestoft.
Your petitioners therefore humbly pray, That the town of Lowestoft
may not only enjoy their antient freedom of buying and selling
herrings at all times, but that there may not be any encroachments by
the town of Yarmouth upon the town of Lowestoft, but that each town
may enjoy the common right of this nation without circumscription to
each other; whereby monopolies will be prevented, and the trade of
herring fishing become more advantageous to the nation.
And your petitioners, as in duty bound, shall ever pray, etc.
JOHN ROUS, RICHARD COOKE, FOR DULWICH. JOHN HOLLAND, {97} ROBERT
BROOKS, FOR ALBOROUGH. WALTER DEVERRIX.
Another petition was also presented by Captain Tettersall, a commander in
the British navy, a person firmly attached to the interests of the
western fishermen. This petition was addressed to the Knights and
burgesses of the counties of Sussex and Kent: wherein, after
recapitulating the oppressions of the Yarmouth men, and that this
long-contested difference had been referred by his majesty to the
decision of the house of lords, he informed them that many hundreds of
his friends, neighbours, and acquaintance, western fishermen of the said
counties, and who were greatly interested in the prosperity of the
herring fishery, had concurred with the town of Lowestoft in presenting a
certificate and petition to the lords of the privy council, respecting
the illegal proceedings of the Yarmouth men, and had requested their said
petitioner to appear in behalf of the said towns before the council, and
deliver the same, which office he had undertaken and executed. And also
further informed them, that an order had been issued by the House of
Lords, summoning both parties, with their counsel, to appear at the bar
of that house on the seventh of June next ensuing, being the day
appointed for hearing and determining their cause; and that their
petitioner being unable to attend the said hearing (he being a commander
in the navy), the decision whereof being pregnant with the most important
consequents both to the town of Lowestoft and the whole western fishery:
therefore, he humbly petitioned the knights and burgesses of the counties
of Sussex and Kent to unite their interests with those of the county of
Suffolk, in procuring a redress of those grievances which the town of
Lowestoft, and the said western fishermen were then labouring under; such
as the exigency of their situation required, and the wisdom of their
lordships should think just and reasonable.
TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE THE KNIGHT AND BURGESSES OF THE COUNTIES OF
ESSEX AND KENT.
THE HUMBLE PETITION OF CAPTAIN NICHOLAS TETTERSALL,
Sheweth,
That the town of Lowestoft, in the county of Suffolk, having been
interrupted this last year in their free trade of herring fishing, by
the inhabitants of Great Yarmouth in the county of Norfolk, tending
not only to the ruin of the said town of Lowestoft, but of the whole
western fishery; and seeking for remedy by their humble petition to
the king’s most excellent majesty, who referring it to the right
honourable the lords and others of his privy council, for
satisfaction and relief, many hundreds of his neighbours, friends,
and acquaintance, the western fishermen of both your said counties,
whom it so highly concern, did join with the said town of Lowestoft,
by their humble certificate and petition subscribed by them, and
requested your petitioner to appear on their behalfs before the said
lords, to affirm the said petition, which accordingly he hath done;
and several hearings have been before his majesty in council, held on
the third of this instant May, it was ordered, in regard that the
determination of the difference depended upon the validity of several
charters, acts of parliament, and orders of council, that the
complainants should apply themselves to the right honourable the
house of lords, speedily to be assembled in parliament, to consider
their complaint, and afford them such relief as their lordships
shall, on examination and consideration of the whole matter, find to
be just and fit. Whereupon, on the twenty-fifth of this instant May,
1661, the said complainants, on their humble petition to the right
honourable the lords assembled in parliament, obtained an order,
summoning both parties to appear at the bar of that house on the
seventh day of June next ensuing, together with their learned
counsel, in order for the hearing of their cause. And your
petitioner being in no capacity of serving his countrymen any longer
therein, by reason of his command in his majesty’s service at sea;
and because that apparent ruin must necessarily attend the said
fishermen, which of his own knowledge he doth affirm; and as by the
copy of their remonstrance and petition, hereunto annexed, and read
twice before his majesty and the privy council, doth plainly appear.
Your petitioner doth therefore, in their behalf, most humbly pray
your honours to join with the knights and burgesses for the county of
Suffolk, and as true patrons for your country’s good, be instrumental
that the poor complainants be no longer interrupted and distressed by
the rich inhabitants of Great Yarmouth; but that they may be heard at
the time appointed, in order to the adjusting of their differences,
and settling them by an act of Parliament, as the right honourable
the lords and commons in their grave wisdoms shall think to be just
and right.
And your petitioner, as in duty bound, shall ever pray, etc.
N. TETTERSALL.
In pursuance of the appointment of the House of Lords, for the hearing of
the cause depending between the towns of Lowestoft and Yarmouth, at the
bar of that house, on the seventh of June next following, notice thereof
was delivered to the bailiffs of Yarmouth, on the 30th May preceding,
requiring their attendance; but the inhabitants of Yarmouth pleading the
want of sufficient time to collect the necessary evidence upon such short
notice, petitioned the house, that the hearing of the case might be
deferred a short time longer; and accordingly their lordships gave
orders, that the said hearing should be postponed to the 20th of June
next ensuing; at which time all the parties concerned were to attend with
their counsel and witnesses, and to be otherwise duly prepared.
Die Mercurii, 5th Junij, 1661.
Upon the petition of the bailiffs of the town of Great Yarmouth, read
this day in the House, shewing that they were served with an order of
this Court, on the 30th of May last, for a hearing at this Bar on the
7th of this instant June, concerning a free trade of fishing between
the inhabitants of the town of Lowestoft, in Suffolk, and the town of
Yarmouth; it is ordered by the Lords in Parliament assembled, That
the said cause is hereby put off unto the 20th of this instant June,
peremptorily. And that then all parties concerned are to attend,
with their counsel and witnesses, and come fully prepared for a
hearing at this bar accordingly.
JNO. BROWNE, Cleric Parliamenti.
Accordingly, on the 20th June, the House of Lords being assembled, the
council for the respective towns was heard at the bar of that house; and
all the claims and privileges of the contending parties were carefully
scrutinised and debated, in order to terminate the dispute, and to
establish harmony and friendship between the said towns on a permanent
and lasting foundation; but at the conclusion of the hearing it appeared,
that as the principal point on which the whole controversy seemed to
turn, was whether the statute 31 Edward III, upon which the Yarmouth men
grounded their claim, was repealed by the statute 2 Richard II, as the
Lowestoft men affirmed, and being a point of law, their lordships were
unable to decide upon, therefore they referred it to the judges; and
ordered that the counsel belonging to both parties should attend the
judges at such time as they should appoint, who were to deliver their
opinion concerning this point as soon as conveniently they could; and
also ordered that the witnesses should be sworn and examined at the bar
of the house, on Thursday next, the 27th. of this instant June, 1661,
respecting such matters of fact as related to the present dispute; and
also it was further ordered on the 22nd instant, that John Humphrey,
Richard Gillam, Sidrich Seager, William Fox, and such other necessary
witnesses as the inhabitants of Lowestoft should have occasion to produce
in the cause now depending between them and the bailiffs of Yarmouth, and
to be heard in that house on Thursday the 26th June, 1661, do appear at
the bar of that house; and that the witnesses not therein named, have
their names delivered in writing to the clerk of the parliament before
the commencement of the said hearing.
The first step taken by the Lowestoft men after their cause was referred
by the House of Lords to the opinion of the judges, was to present a
petition to Sir Robert Foster, Lord Chief Justice of England; and also to
Sir Orlando Bridgeman, Lord Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas;
wherein they represented, that the House of Lords having referred to
their Lordships for their opinion, whether the statute of the 31st of
Edward III be repealed by the statute of the 2nd of Richard II, or by any
other statute; and that their poor petitioners having attended upon this
business for six months, were not able to support the expense thereof, or
to contend any longer with such powerful adversaries as the rich
inhabitants of Yarmouth, who endeavour to weary them out by delays, to
ruin their poor petitioners and the whole western fishery, and monopolise
the whole trade of herring fishing to themselves, to the great prejudice
of the kingdom in general, and of their petitioners in particular.
Therefore they humbly prayed that their Lordships would be graciously
pleased to appoint a day, in order to meet the rest of the judges, that
the counsel on both sides might attend their lordships, and a report of
their opinion be delivered to the parliament as soon as possible.
TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE SIR ROBERT FOSTER, KNT., LORD CHIEF JUSTICE
OF ENGLAND; AND SIR ORLANDO BRIDGEMAN, BART., LORD CHIEF JUSTICE OF
THE COMMON PLEAS.
THE HUMBLE PETITION OF THE INHABITANTS OF LOWESTOFT IN THE COUNTY OF
SUFFOLK,
Sheweth,
That your poor petitioners having had several hearings before his
Majesty in council, concerning the differences between them and the
rich inhabitants of Yarmouth, respecting the free trade of herring
fishery; who thereupon was pleased to refer the same to the right
honourable the Lords assembled in Parliament, who, upon a full
hearing thereof, were pleased to refer the matter of law to the
reverend judges, to consider whether the statute of 31 Edward III,
ch. i and ii be repealed by the statute 2 Richard II, ch. vii., or by
any other statute, and to report their opinion to the house
accordingly. And your petitioners having awaited six months for
relief, and being quite worn out with expense and attendance, and are
not able any longer to contend with such powerful adversaries, who,
by delays and all other possible means, strive to ruin your poor
petitioners and the whole western fishery, and to monopolise the
whole trade of herring fishing, to the great prejudice of the kingdom
in general, as appears by the certificate of many hundreds of the
western fishermen, the certificate of the fishmongers in London, and
a remonstrance of the burgesses of parliament for the sea coast towns
in the county of Suffolk.
They therefore most humbly pray, That your lordships would be
graciously pleased to appoint a day of meeting, with the rest of the
reverend judges; and that the counsel on both sides may attend your
lordships, so that in a convenient time you may report your sense to
their lordships in parliament, as is desired in their orders of the
20th of this present June.
And your petitioners, as in duty bound, shall ever pray.
A petition was also presented from the town of Lowestoft to the House of
Peers, wherein, after reciting the order of reference to the judges, they
doubted not but that their Lordships would evidently foresee the ruin
which threatened the town of Lowestoft, the western and northern fishery,
and the great damage that would accrue to the city of London and the
nation in general; as appears from the certificates of many hundreds of
fishermen, and the remonstrance of the fishmongers in London, and the
burgesses of the sea-coast towns in Suffolk, if the Yarmouth men were
suffered to persevere in the cruel depredations which they had lately
practiced; for, exclusive of distressing them in late unhappy wars,
assisting Oliver Cromwell in taking and plundering the town, imprisoning
many of their principal inhabitants, and causing others to fly beyond the
sea, they now distressed them again by sending a vessel, called a man of
war to ride in the roads before the town of Lowestoft during the whole
herring season, and not suffering the fishers to deliver any herrings in
those roads, but compelling them to go to Yarmouth, whereby their
petitioners and the western and northern fishermen were greatly injured,
and a thousand last of herrings were thereby prevented from being caught.
Therefore they humbly beseech their lordships to afford them such relief
as they in their great wisdom should deem meet and reasonable; that so
they might follow the trade of herring fishing as usual, and prevent
their becoming the most miserable people in his Majesty’s dominions.
TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE THE LORDS SPIRITUAL AND TEMPORAL IN
PARLIAMENT ASSEMBLED,
THE HUMBLE PETITION OF THE INHABITANTS OF THE TOWN OF LOWESTOFT, IN
THE COUNTY OF SUFFOLK.
Sheweth, That your Lordships having been graciously pleased, after
several hearings before his sacred Majesty in Council and your
lordships in Parliament to recommend the difference between your poor
petitioners and the rich inhabitants of Yarmouth unto the reverend
judges, to report to your Lordships their sense therein; we doubt not
but your Lordships will further understand the threatening ruin which
attends both them and the western and northern fishery the damage to
the city of London and to the kingdom in general, as appears by the
certificate of many hundreds of fishermen, the remonstrance of the
fishmongers in London, and the burgesses of this present Parliament
for the sea-coasts towns of the county of Suffolk, if the Yarmouth
men persevere in their cruel practices, as of late these have done,
by spoiling your poor petitioners, as in the late unhappy wars,
assisting Oliver Cromwell in taking and plundering the town,
imprisoning many of the chief inhabitants, and others, who left their
relations, fled beyond the sea into his Majesty’s maritime service;
and as if that were not sufficient, when upon his majesty’s most
happy restoration, your petitioners hope for a happy and comfortable
issue of all their calamaties, even then the men of Yarmouth, taking
advantage of your petitioners’ poverty, most cruelly practiced their
utter ruin, by sending a man of war as they called her, to ride in
the roads before the town the whole season of the herring-fishing,
not suffering the fishers to deliver any herrings in the said roads,
but forced them to carry them all to Yarmouth; whereby your
petitioners and the poor fishermen were despoiled of their trade, and
fewer herrings were taken that year by at least one thousand lasts,
than otherwise would have been.
And whereas his most excellent majesty, with the advice of his privy
council, hath been graciously pleased, by his royal proclamation, to
promote and encourage the trade of herring-fishery, as his royal
progenitors have done; and also sent forth a fleet of burses, which
must necessarily suffer proportionably with the other fishery, if the
Yarmouth men be suffered to continue such oppressive courses.
They therefore most humbly pray. That your lordships would be
graciously pleased, out of your great wisdom and pious regard to your
poor petitioners and the fishermen, to afford them such relief in
this their sad condition as in your grave wisdom shall seem just and
fit. That after their so great sufferings expense and delays, they
may not be rendered the most miserable people in all his majesty’s
dominions, but encouraged to follow their trade of herring-fishing
(which time out of mind, they have used as their sole subsistence,
and whereby many thousands of families may live and be maintained)
the fishery being the nursery of seamen, may be preserved, navigation
increased, to the great benefit of the kingdom in general, and the
freedom of your poor petitioners from inevitable ruin, and who are no
longer able to contend with such powerful adversaries.
And your poor petitioners, as in duty bound, shall ever pray, etc.
The House of Lords being assembled on the 27th of June, the witnesses
which were subpœned by the respective parties were called to the bar, to
make their several depositions.
THE DEPOSITIONS OF THE LOWESTOFT WITNESSES, JAMES MUNDES, RICHARD
GILLAM, SIDRICH SEAGER, JOHN GILL, WILLIAM FOX, AND JOHN HUMPHREY
DEPOSED,
1st. That the western fishers and others have frequently delivered
herrings in Lowestoft roads in the time of the free fair held at
Yarmouth, until this last year, when they were prevented by a man of
war.
2nd, That the fishers, if they be compelled to carry all their
herrings at Yarmouth, will lose a third part of their time, as well
as ruin their voyage; because Yarmouth is to the north of Lowestoft,
and the choicest sea for herrings is off Lowestoft, and to the
southwards twenty miles, so that of necessity the fishermen must come
first to Lowestoft, which they can oftentimes gain when it is
impossible to get Yarmouth, when the wind is against their course,
and may thereby save their night’s drift; but if compelled to go to
Yarmouth, must loss sometimes three or four nights, and lose the
taking a great quantity of herrings.
3rd. That the fishermen may have quicker dispatch at Lowestoft than
at Yarmouth, and herrings may be brought fresher to land, and better
to furnish the country; and also the ketches and pikers that
frequently lay for London, Colchester, Ipswich, and other places,
will meet with quicker dispatch than they had lately done.
4th. That although the fishers freely sell at Lowestoft, yet
Yarmouth may be sufficiently, and as plentifully served with herrings
as formerly they have been; and the whole coast may be well supplied,
to the great advantage of the nation, the benefit of the country, and
the supply of the city of London with fresh victuals. (The above
witnesses also proved the inconveniences which would attend the
fishermen in particular, as well as the kingdom in general, if there
be not free liberty to sell herrings in Lowestoft roads.)
5th. That when the fishers come first to Yarmouth, they must sell to
none but their hosts, who give them what price they please.
Mr. PALGRAVE deposed, “That the Yarmouth men frequently discharge
herrings out of the fishers before they come to the place where the fair
is kept.”
MR. PALGRAVE and MR. SAMUEL WILD proved the place where the fair is held,
and at what place proclaimed first.
MR. LOCKINGTON, MR. NOY, MR. GREEN, and the Fishmongers’ certificate also
proved the general damage which the fishmongers in London, as well as
several other places, and also the kingdom in general would sustain, from
their not being privileged to buy herrings at Lowestoft as well as at
Yarmouth, as they could not be had so good nor so cheap at the latter
place as at the former.
The fishermen’s and the fishmongers’ certificate do testify all the
aforesaid matters, and the burgesses in Parliament for the county of
Suffolk, do certify the same also.
After hearing the above evidence, their Lordships still declined passing
a final determination upon the affair, until the judges, to whom they had
referred for their opinion, concerning a point of law, had made their
report; and therefore a second order to the judges was issued by their
Lordships; wherein, after informing them that the witnesses belonging to
both parties in the cause between Lowestoft and Yarmouth having been
heard that day at the bar of that House, and being desirous to hear the
opinion of the judges, concerning the point of law referred to them,
before any resolution was formed, it was ordered, that the judges should
be as expeditious as possible in hearing the counsel on both sides
relative to the matter in reference, and make their report accordingly,
that so their Lordships might speedily terminate the business so long
depending before them.
DIE JOVIS, 27º Junij, 1661.
This day the witnesses on both sides, in the controversy between the
inhabitants of Lowestoft and the bailiffs of Great Yarmouth, were
heard at the bar, concerning the usage and custom of fishing and
selling of fish, and the House being desirous to hear the judges
opinions before any resolution be given between them; it is ordered
by the Lords in Parliament assembled, That the judges be desired to
expedite the hearing of the counsel on both sides upon the matter of
reference mentioned in the order of the 20th of this instant June,
and to make their report unto this House, with what convenient speed
they can; that so their Lordships may put an end to the business now
depending before them.
JO. BROWNE, Cleric. Parliamenti.
The judges returned for answer to their Lordships, that their attention
being wholly engaged with the great and important affairs of the nation,
and also that upon account of the approaching assizes, they were under
the necessity of setting off very shortly upon their circuit; therefore
they begged to inform their Lordships, that they were unable to deliver
their opinion concerning the matter of reference mentioned in the order
of the 20th instant, until the months of October or December next. Thus
the final decision of this long-contested difference was further
protracted, and the herring season being now nearly approaching, wherein
the Lowestoft men and also the northern and west country fishermen would
be exposed to the usual insults and depredations of the Yarmouth men they
were seized with the most alarming apprehensions that the moment was now
hastily approaching wherein they were to be sacrificed to the malice and
revenge of their inveterate enemies. In order, therefore, to divert the
impending ruin, and to guard against the danger which threatened them,
they once more made application to their former and only protectors, the
House of Lords; to whom they addressed themselves in a petition,
representing to their Lordships, that they had presented an address to
the judges, beseeching them to appoint a day for the counsel belonging to
the respective parties to attend them, but by reason of the great and
weighty affairs of the nation, and the approaching assizes, they could
not deliver their report before the months of October or December next;
but that lest, during the interval, their petitioners and the northern
and western fishermen should be interrupted in the free exercise of their
trade of herring-fishing, which was now approaching, as they were the
last year, by the outrageous violences of the Yarmouth men; they implored
their lordships, that they might be protected from the oppressions of the
enemies during the ensuing herring season, and also until such time as
the judges shall have made a report to their Lordships concerning the
point of law referred to them in the order of the 20th June last.
TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE THE PEERS OF ENGLAND, ASSEMBLED IN
PARLIAMENT.
THE HUMBLE PETITION OF THE INHABITANTS OF THE TOWN OF LOWESTOFT IN
THE COUNTY OF SUFFOLK,
Sheweth,
That your Lordships having been graciously pleased, upon the humble
suit and prayer of your poor petitioners, to hear the difference
between them and the rich inhabitants of Yarmouth, concerning the
herring fishing, and to refer to the judges for their consideration,
a matter of law, whether the statute of 31 Edward III, ch. i and ii
be repealed by the statute of 2 Richard II, ch. vii, or by any other
statute. And your petitioners having accordingly made their humble
address to their Lordships to appoint a day for the counsel on both
sides to attend them, who, by reason of the great and weighty affairs
of the nation, and the approaching assizes, and not answer your
Lordships’ desires therein before the months of October or December
next. And lest, in the meantime, your petitioners and the poor
fishermen should be disturbed in the free exercise of their trade of
herring-fishing now nearly approaching, to the threatening ruin of
them and their families, as the men of Yarmouth practised the last
year by force and violence.
They therefore most humbly pray, That your Lordships would be
pleased, out of your great wisdom and pious regard to your poor
petitioners, to afford them relief in this their so great sufferings
in the late war, a lamentable fire, and great expenses in this
unhappy contest, that they be not rendered the most miserable people
in his Majesty’s dominions; but that they may, by your Lordships’
protection, be encouraged to exercise their trade of herring-fishing,
without molestation from the Yarmouth men, the purchasing a present
subsistence for themselves and families, until the judges shall
deliver their opinion to your Lordships, in pursuance of your orders.
And your petitioners, as in duty bound, shall ever pray, etc.
In consequence of this petition, an order was immediately issued by the
Lordships, directing that town of Lowestoft, and also the northern and
west country fishermen, should be permitted to carry on the said fishery
as usual, without any interruption or molestation from the Yarmouth men,
until such time as the judges had delivered their report concerning the
statutes of 31 Edward III, and 2 Richard II.
DIE LUNÆ, 22º July, 1661.
Ordered by the Lords in Parliament assembled, that the northern and
western fishermen are hereby empowered to fish this season of the
herring fishery about the town of Yarmouth, as formerly they have
done, for three years before the last year, with a salvo to the said
town of Yarmouth and the town of Lowestoft; the right of which
fishing now depends before the Lords in Parliament.
JOHN BROWNE, Cleric Parliamenti.
THE ORDER.
Whereas there is a controversy depending in the House of Lords
assembled in Parliament, between the inhabitants of the town of
Lowestoft in the county of Suffolk, and the town of Great Yarmouth,
in the county of Norfolk, concerning the right and free trade of
herring fishing, and of buying and selling the said fish. And
whereas upon hearing of the counsel on both sides, it is ordered, by
the said Lords, That it be referred to the judges, to consider
whether the statute of 31 Edward III, ch. i and ii be repealed by the
statute of 2 Richard II, ch. vii, or by any other statute; and that
the judges are to deliver their opinion unto the said House of Lords.
And in regard much damage may arise, not only to the inhabitants of
the aforesaid towns of Lowestoft and Yarmouth, and also to the
northern and western fishermen, as well as to his Majesty’s kingdom
in general, if some course be not taken for the preservation of the
said free trade of herring fishing: be it therefore enacted, by the
King’s most excellent Majesty, with the Lords and Commons assembled
in Parliament, that fishermen from henceforth shall and may have free
liberty and full power to sell herring at all times, at their
pleasure, at the town of Lowestoft, or elsewhere, and shall not be
compelled to carry the same to Yarmouth; any statute, custom, or
usage to the contrary thereof, in any wise notwithstanding: provided
that this Act is only to continue and stand in force until the judges
have certified their opinions to the House of Lords as aforesaid, and
the said differences be settled, and the rights be established and
confirmed to such party as the same by law doth properly appertain.
The judges soon after returned from the circuit; but in consequence of
the many important affairs they were engaged in, respecting the nation,
they were unable to appoint a day for hearing the allegations of the
respective parties before the 4th December; when, at a meeting of their
Lordships for that purpose, they appointed the 24th of January next
ensuing, at three o’clock in the afternoon, for both parties, with their
respective counsel, to appear before them at Sergeants’ Inn Hall, in
Fleet street, in order to examine the complaints of the several parties,
and to hear what each of them had to advance in support of their
respective privileges and pretensions.
DECEMBER 4TH. 1661.
We do appoint Friday the 24th of January, next ensuing, at three of
the clock in the afternoon to hear the matter in difference between
the bailiffs of Great Yarmouth in the county of Norfolk, and the
inhabitants of Lowestoft, in the county of Suffolk; at which time
both parties are desired to attend us, with their counsel, at
Serjeant’s Inn Hall, Fleet Street.
R. FOSTER, ALAN BRIDGEMAN, MATTHEW HALE, THO. MALET, ROBERT HYDE,
EDWD. ATKYNS, THOMAS TWISDEN, THOMAS TYRREL, WM. WYNDHAM, CH. TURNER.
Com. Board.
In consequence of this appointment of the judges, both the parties,
with their counsel, appeared before their Lordships on the 24th of
January; who, after hearing what each party had to advance in support
of their several pretensions and also duly investigating their
respective claims and privileges, they soon after made their report
of the same to the House of Lords; and in consequence thereof it was
ordered by their Lordships, that the counsel belonging to each party
do attend at the bar of that House, on Wednesday, the 26th of that
instant February, at nine o’clock in the morning, in order to sum up
the evidence, given at a hearing of the cause, before their
Lordships, and to state the case to the House, that such a final
determination may be passed as their Lordships shall think just and
reasonable.
DIE SABBATHI, 20º FEBRY., 1661.
Upon the report of the Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas,
concerning the business relating to the towns of Yarmouth and
Lowestoft, concerning their fishing; and a petition of the
inhabitants of the said town of Lowestoft, read this day after the
report was made; it was ordered by the Lords spiritual and temporal
in Parliament assembled, That the Counsel on both sides are to be
heard at the bar on Wednesday next, the twenty-sixth of this instant
February, at nine of the clock in the morning, to sum up the evidence
formerly given at a hearing before their Lordships, and to state the
case to the House, that such determination may be given therein as
their Lordships shall think fit.
JO. BROWNE, Cleric. Parliamenti.
The House of Lords being assembled on the 26th February, 1661–2, the
Council on both sides were called to the bar of the House; when, after a
full hearing of their respective evidence, and duly weighing the report
of the judges, and after a long and serious debate amongst their
Lordships concerning the whole matter; it was resolved, declared, and
adjudged, by a vote of the Lords spiritual and temporal, that since the
judges, in their report, had given their opinion, that the statute of the
31st of Edward III, chap. I and it hath not been repealed by the statute,
but continues in full force and effect; but that concerning the principal
point in dispute, viz., From what place the seven miles, the boundary of
the liberties of Yarmouth, (and mentioned in the said statute of the 31st
of Edward III) was to be measured, had been left by the judges to the
determination of their Lordships. Therefore it was ordered by their
Lordships that an admeasurement of the said seven miles should actually
be made some time between that day and the 24th of June next, by the
several and respective sheriffs of the counties of Norfolk and Suffolk,
beginning from the _crane key_ in the haven of Great Yarmouth aforesaid;
and at the end thereof a new post should be erected, to denote the
termination of the same; and within which extent the said bailiffs and
corporation of Yarmouth were to enjoy their full privileges and
immunities as the said statute of the 31st of Edward III and their other
charters do afford them, and no farther.
DIE MERCURII, 26º Feby., 1661–2.
Upon hearing counsel on the twentieth day of June last, at the bar,
on the behalf of the inhabitants of Lowestoft, in the county of
Suffolk, plaintiffs; and the counsel for the bailiffs of Great
Yarmouth, in the county of Norfolk, on the behalf of themselves and
that corporation, defendants; upon their several petitions depending
before the Lords in Parliament, concerning the herring-fishing, and
buying and selling of herrings in the fair of Great Yarmouth
aforesaid; it was then ordered by this house to be referred to the
judges to consider whether the statue of the 31st of Edward III. ch.
i. and ii., be repealed by the statute of the 2nd of Richard II. ch.
vii., or by any other statute. And that the counsel on both sides
should attend the said judges in that behalf; and a report having
been since made unto this House by the Lord Chief Justice of the
Common Pleas, that he and others of the judges had, according to the
said order of the twentieth of June, heard the counsel on both sides,
and considered of the statutes therein referred to them; and that
they all are of opinion, that neither the statute of the 2nd of
Richard II. nor any other statute, had repealed the statute of the
31st of Edward III.; but that the said statute of the 31st of Edward
III., in that behalf, is in full force and effect. But as for the
great matter of the differences between the petitioners, and the town
of Yarmouth, concerning from what place the seven miles mentioned in
the said statute of the 31st of Edward III., was to be measured, the
judges had left that point to the determination of this House.
Whereupon the Lords this day heard the counsel on both sides at the
bar, in order to sum up the evidence formerly given before their
Lordships; who also stated the cause to the House. And after a long
and serious debate amongst their Lordships, it is resolved, declared,
and adjudged, by the votes of the Lords spiritual and temporal, in
Parliament assembled, That there shall be a measurement made between
this day and the 24th of June next after the date hereof, by the
several and respective sheriffs of the counties of Norfolk and
Suffolk, from the _crane key_ in the haven of Great Yarmouth
aforesaid, to extend seven measured miles from the said crane key,
and no farther; at which place a new post is to be set up, to bound
the limits aforesaid. Within which extent the said bailiffs and
corporation of Yarmouth are to enjoy their full privileges and
immunities, as the said statute of the 31st of Edward III. and their
charters do afford them, and no farther.
JO BROWN, Cleric. Parliamenti.
Thus was this great and litigious contest at length finally determined;
and therefore the next business necessary to be undertaken on the part of
Lowestoft, was to see that the order of the House was carried into
execution. In order to this purpose a letter, addressed to the bailiffs
of Yarmouth, was sent from the gentlemen concerned for Lowestoft,
acquainting them with the decision of the Lords; and also further
informing them, that as the time limited by their Lordships for making
the admeasurement would expire on the 24th of June next ensuing, they
requested that they would resolve upon a certain day, during that
interval, on which the men of Lowestoft, together with the sheriffs,
might attend them, and make the said admeasurement.
TO THE BAILIFFS OF GREAT YARMOUTH, NORFOLK,
March 4th, 1661–2.
GENTLEMEN,—There having been a controversy depending between the
towns of Lowestoft in Suffolk, and Great Yarmouth in Norfolk, for a
very long time concerning the herring fishing, which, after several
hearings the last year before his Majesty in Council, he was
graciously pleased to refer the matter to the Lords in Parliament,
who having heard at their bar the learned counsel on both sides, and
where the case was also stated; after a long and serious debate among
their Lordships, it was resolved, declared and adjudged, by the votes
of the Lords spiritual and temporal assembled, that there shall be a
measurement made between this day (the 26th of February) and the 24th
of June next after the date thereof, by the several and respective
sheriffs of the counties of Norfolk and Suffolk, from the crane key
in the haven of Great Yarmouth aforesaid, and to extend seven
measured miles and no farther; at which place a new post is to be set
up, to bound the limits aforesaid. And in order thereunto, we, whose
names are hereunto subscribed, do desire that you will affix a
certain time, when and where you will please to meet and make the
said admeasurement that accordingly you may be attended by,
Gentlemen, your Servants,
JOHN PETTUS, GEO. REEVE, RICHD. COOKE, JOHN BAYSPOOLE, HENRY FELTON,
JOHN ROUS, ROBERT BROOKE, THOS. WALDGRAVE, EDMUND POOLEY.
Accordingly the 27th of May was as agreed on by the respective parties to
meet and undertake the admeasurement of the said seven miles; but the
Yarmouth men being so much disappointed and chagrined at the late
decision of the House of Lords in favour of the town of Lowestoft, and
also perceiving that all their attempts for carrying into execution their
favourite and long-projected scheme of wholly excluding the town of
Lowestoft from the herring-fishery, and monopolising it to themselves,
totally frustrated, that they had recourse to stratagem, and endeavoured
to accomplish by artifice what they were unable to obtain by legal
proceedings. In order, therefore, to effect their designs, they
endeavoured to evade the order of the House, by attempting to prevent its
being carried into execution. For which purpose they not only prevailed
upon Sir Richard Bacon, the high sheriff of Norfolk, to be absent at
making the admeasurement, but also so far influenced the under sheriff,
Mr. Roger Smith, that when the gentlemen appointed to superintend it were
assembled at Yarmouth, in order to undertake it, the said under sheriff
absolutely refused to concur with them therein, expecting thereby to
render every measure that should be then taken, totally void and of none
effect. A circumstantial account of the proceedings in this very
extraordinary business, as well as the opinion and behaviour of the
Lowestoft people concerning the same, will more fully appear from the
following narrative of the case, as drawn up soon after by special order
and appointment:
A NARRATIVE
Concerning the proceedings upon an order of the House of Lords,
bearing date the 26th of February, 1661–2; wherein the determination
of the admeasurement of the seven miles from the crane key in
Yarmouth, towards Lowestoft, was referred to the two several and
respective sheriffs of Norfolk and Suffolk.
WE, whose names are underwritten (whereof seven of us are the next
adjacent justices of the peace, and of equal regard to the interests
of both towns—Sir John Playters, Sir George Woodhouse, Sir Henry
Bacon, Sir John Pettus, Sir William Coke, John Bedingfield, Esq., and
Thomas Scrivener, Esq., besides many other gentlemen of quality in
both counties), being solicited by the inhabitants of Lowestoft, and
also sensible of the great importance the adjusting of the
differences, and the admeasurement of the said seven miles is of, not
only to the peace and advantage of the respective parties in
particular, but to the fishery of this kingdom in general, did, on
the 27th of May, at nine o’clock in the morning, attend the arrival
of the sheriffs at the foot of the bridge entering the town of
Yarmouth, being the place and day appointed by the sheriffs.
And whereas about eleven o’clock the under sheriff of Norfolk
appeared, and made his excuse for the high sheriff, namely, “That he
was at his house, about thirty miles distant, and not in health.”
But that he, the under sheriff, was sufficiently empowered to
dispatch the business. Soon after the under sheriff appeared the
second time, and informed us that he expected the high sheriff, and
desired that his employment in this business might be suspended as
long as possible. So that, apprehending we should be disappointed of
both the high sheriffs, and conceiving the under sheriffs might
proceed in the undertaking, the town of Lowestoft desired (because
the day was far spent, and lest our journey and trouble might be to
no purpose) that the under sheriffs would undertake and begin the
admeasurement.
On this proposal, the under sheriff for Norfolk made several cavils
concerning the House of Lords, declaring that it was not of
sufficient validity to dispose of other people’s right; and that
there was no certain and legal mode of composing the differences, but
by a trial at common law.
On the other hand, the town of Lowestoft insisted on his obedience to
their Lordships’ order, and pressed him that he would undertake and
begin the admeasurement from the crane key, according to order. The
under sheriff replied, that the whole river, from the bridge to the
haven’s mouth, (which extends full two miles) was the crane key, as
he had been informed; and that the admeasurement might as properly
begin at the haven’s mouth as at any other place.
On this assertion, some of us (for better satisfaction) went into the
town of Yarmouth, and viewed the place; and found that there was no
other crane standing between the bridge and the haven’s mouth, but
only that which is mentioned in their Lordships’ order. And that
this key, upon which the crane now standeth, hath ever been called
the crane key, and no other; as was testified by several ancient
Yarmouth men. It is true that there are several other keys,
belonging to private persons, but those keys are maintained at the
particular charge of the owners. But this key whereon the crane
standeth is town ground, and doth solely belong to the town, and hath
been called so time out of mind, and is placed just opposite to their
Custom House. And the ground whereon their crane standeth is abutted
and bounded by Mr. George England’s key towards the south, and Mr.
James Johnson’s key towards the north, by the haven on the west, and
the Custom House on the east. And there is no crane upon any other
key; so that we affirmed that there could be no other crane key but
this, from whence the admeasurement ought to begin. But the under
sheriff told us, that he was not satisfied that he ought to begin at
that place, because the name of the key was so general;
notwithstanding, for above a mile and a half by the river, there is
no key, nor crane, but upon the aforesaid public key.
Whereupon we advised the under sheriff of Norfolk to begin where his
own reason dictated, and to certify the place to the House of Lords,
and the reasons for their begining there, and to leave the
determination thereof to their Lordships. But the under sheriff
refused to comply with this proposal, and still persisted to affirm
that there Lordships had no legal power to alienate any person’s
right to another. To which we replied, That their Lordships’ order
was not giving away another person’s right, but an explanation or
direction how that right might be enjoyed: and that it was not
intended that the least portion should be taken from the seven miles,
(which is all that the Yarmouth men have a just claim to), but to
point out where the seven miles ought to begin, and where to end,
according to their Lordships’ order.
But the under sheriff still continuing obstinate, retired from us
into the town, where he dined with the bailiffs, etc.
On the same day, the 27th of May, about three o’clock in the
afternoon, the under sheriff of Norfolk was again requested to concur
with the under sheriff of Suffolk, and assist in the said
admeasurement; but he not only refused to join with him in the
undertaking, but returned many unhandsome answers to some of the
justices who made the request. In consequence of the refusal, the
Lowestoft people entreated the under sheriff of Suffolk to engage two
surveyors, of honest reputation and sufficient abilities, and proceed
to the admeasurement. And although it had been more easy and
advantageous for the Lowestoft men to begin the admeasurement on the
other side of the crane key, or the opposite side of the water
(whereby they would then have walked wholly upon Suffolk ground),
yet, (that the town of Yarmouth might be privy, if they chose it, to
what so nearly concerned them) the said under sheriff for Suffolk and
the two surveyors (with some hazard to all our persons) began the
said admeasurement from the foundation of the crane, upon the public
town key, and continued to measure, in as direct a line as possible,
to the place where the boat was to conduct them over to the Suffolk
shore; and though they measured the breadth of the water which they
crossed over, containing eighteen poles in length, yet they did not
compute it in the admeasurement of the said seven miles.
It was near four o’clock when they began the admeasurement; and
notwithstanding the under sheriff of Norfolk exerted his utmost
efforts, and in the most public manner endeavoured to obstruct their
proceedings as far as the gate of the town, where he left us; and
afterwards the people of the town continued to pursue us in great
multitudes, with much insolence, provoking language, and many
disturbances, no magistrate appearing to disperse them, yet the under
sheriff at Suffolk, riding by the two surveyors, finished the
admeasurement about half-an-hour before sun-set that day; the period
of the seven miles falling short eighteen poles of the ancient limits
of the said seven miles, exclusive of the breadth of the haven before
mentioned, which was not computed in the admeasurement.
During this whole transaction, two of the justices, together with the
two surveyors, kept an exact account of the number of the length of
every chain: and to prevent any mistakes, on the conclusion of the
undertaking, the under sheriff, in the presence of the whole company,
with a sealed yard and two feet rule, measured the said chain; which
measure contained four poles, every pole being sixteen feet and a
half, according to the statute measure of the 35th of Elizabeth, ch.
vii. So that ten of those chains’ length made a furlong, and eight
furlongs a mile; and on the ending of the said seven miles thus
measured, the under sheriff hath ordered a post to be set up. In
testimony of the proceedings, we have set our hands this 28th day of
May, Anno Domi, 1662.
Jo. Playters, H. Bacon, Wm. Cooke, Jo. Bedingfield, Jo. Hall, Cyriac
Cooke, Tho. Leman, Rich. Palgrave, G. Woodhouse, Jo. Peltus, Wm.
Crane, Rich. Vyner, Tho. Scrivener, Tho. Plumstead, Antho. Jenkinson,
Wm. Gooch, Ja. Defebure, Jo. Pulham, Tho. Fulcher, surveyors; Jo.
Wythe, sub-surveyor.
THE TESTIMONY OF THE HIGH SHERIFF FOR SUFFOLK.
May 28th, 1662.
Coming the last night to Yarmouth (being the evening of the day
appointed, by mutual consent, for making the admeasurement), and from
thence this morning to Lowestoft, I found the persons above written
remaining there; who were pleased to give me this narrative of my
under sheriff’s proceedings, as above said. And I do hereby approve
of the said admeasurement, as conceiving it to be a means of
determining the differences of the said two towns.
ROG. WILLIAMS, High Sheriff for the county of Suffolk.
All the gentlemen who have signed the narrative, together with the other
persons of distinction who had attended the admeasurement, and also the
high sheriff and under sheriff for the county of Suffolk, were
entertained by the town the next day, viz.: the 28th May, at the Swan
inn, at Lowestoft. This house, at that time, was the principal inn in
the town; and was situated on the east side of the High street, on the
south side of the passage leading to the sea, called, from the adjoining
inn, the Swan score; as was also the opposite lane called the Swan Lane.
In an apartment in this inn Oliver Cromwell was entertained when he came
to Lowestoft.
On the evening of the 27th May, the gentlemen who had attended the
admeasurement, met the gentlemen of Lowestoft, at the Swan inn in this
town, and the next day was spent in great festivity and rejoicing, for
having so happily concluded this important undertaking; and on the 20th
of June following the post was erected, according to the order of the
House of Lords.
The next business which the Lowestoft men proceeded to examine into, was
the conduct of the under sheriff of Norfolk, respecting his contemptuous
behaviour at the late admeasurement to the order of the House of Lords;
and thereupon resolved to present a petition to their lordships,
complaining of the under sheriff’s conduct in that affair; and also of
the insults which they had received from the Yarmouth men during the late
herring season, notwithstanding their lordships’ orders to the contrary:
and therefore prayed their lordships to enforce their said order for the
admeasurement, and to issue such further orders for the future security
of their petitioners as might protect them against any insults or
interruptions of their powerful and malicious enemies.
To the right honourable the LORDS Spiritual and Temporal, in
Parliament assembled,
The humble PETITION of the INHABITANTS of the town of LOWESTOFT in
SUFFOLK,
Sheweth
That after several hearings before your lordships in Parliament
concerning the herring fishery, between your petitioners and the town
of Great Yarmouth, the matter of difference being from what place the
seven miles mentioned in the statute of the 31st of Edward III were
to be measured, your lordships were pleased, by your vote of the 26th
February, 1661–2, ‘To resolve, declare, and adjudge, That an
admeasurement should be made between that time and the 24th of June
following, by the respective sheriffs of Norfolk and Suffolk, from
the crane key of Yarmouth, and to extend seven miles towards
Lowestoft and no further. At which place a new post was to be set
up, to bound the limits aforesaid; and within which extent the
Corporation of Yarmouth were to enjoy their full privileges, and no
further. That thereupon your petitioners attended the said sheriffs,
who, in pursuance of your lordships said order, appointed the 27th of
May then next following, to meet at Yarmouth and make the
admeasurement accordingly. At which time their respective under
sheriffs did meet; but the under sheriff of Norfolk refused to join
to make the admeasurement, declaring that your lordships’ order was
not of sufficient validity to give away another’s right. That your
petitioners insisted on his obedience to your lord-ships’ order, and
requested the under sheriff of Suffolk (in case the other would not
join) to begin to measure the seven miles; who taking to him two
surveyors, did, in the presence of many justices of the peace and
gentlemen of quality, with a chain, measure from the said crane key,
seven miles towards Lowestoft; and at the end thereof caused a new
pole to be set up, and the high sheriff of Suffolk, under his hand,
approved thereof, as by a narrative hereunto annexed doth more fully
appear. That the town of Yarmouth (notwithstanding your lordships’
order) has since come with boats, during this last herring season,
and disturbed your petitioners and divers fishers, near three miles
beyond the said post towards Lowestoft, even in their south roads,
chasing the fishermen, and enforcing them to carry all their herrings
to Yarmouth; and by reason of the plenty thither carried, the
Yarmouth men have set the price of them from 50s. down to 30s. per
last, and some under; and some were enforced to throw their herrings
away. So that the poor fishers, by reason of the small price, did
not get a sufficiency to make good their tackling, to the apparent
ruin of the fishers, the great damage to the whole kingdom, and the
utter undoing of your petitioners; they being impoverished and
wearied out with the endless suits of their great and powerful
adversaries.
Wherefore your petitioners humbly pray, that your lordships would be
pleased to ratify and confirm the aforesaid admeasurement, made in
pursuance of your lordships’ order, and that out of your great
wisdoms you will be graciously pleased to provide for the future
security and quiet of your poor petitioners and fishermen; whereby
they may with peace and comfort use and enjoy their trade of herring
fishing, as formerly they have done, free from the disturbance of
their powerful and malicious adversaries.
And your petitioners, as in duty bound, shall ever pray,
In consequence of this petition, the House of Lords, on the 30th of
April, 1603, issued a warrant, directed to the Serjeant-at-Arms, to
apprehend the body of Robert Smith, late under sheriff of the county of
Norfolk, as a delinquent, for acting against the honour and dignity of
that house, and to bring him forthwith before the Lords in Parliament
assembled to answer for his said great offence.
DIE LUNÆ, 13º April, 1663.
The house being this day certainly informed by oath, that Roger
Smith, late under sheriff of the county of Norfolk, hath disobeyed a
judgment of this House of the 26th of February, 1661–2, concerning
the inhabitants of Lowestoft and the town of Great Yarmouth, by
forbearing to execute the same as was directed; and using flighting
words, in a most contemptuous manner, against the honour and dignity
of the House of Peers. It is ordered, by the Lords, Spiritual and
Temporal, in Parliament assembled, That the Sergeant at-Arms
attending this House, or his deputies, shall take the body of the
said Roger Smith, as a delinquent, and forthwith bring him before the
Lords in Parliament, to answer the said great offence. And this to
be a sufficient warrant in that behalf.
JO. BROWNE, Cleric Parliamenti.
To the Sergeant-at-Arms attending this House, deputy or deputies; and
to all Mayors, Justices, and others his Majesty’s officers, to be
aiding in the execution of his order.
It was further ordered that the admeasurement therein directed to be made
and performed, should be executed again by the present Sheriffs of
Norfolk and Suffolk, between the 15th of that instant April and the 24th
of June then next.
DIE LUNÆ, 15º April, 1663.
Upon the oaths of Sir Henry Bacon, baronet, and Sir John Pettus,
knight, made this day at the bar; and the reading of a narrative
subscribed by several Justices of the Peace, and many other gentlemen
of quality of both the counties of Norfolk and Suffolk, on behalf of
the townsmen of Lowestoft, in the said county of Suffolk. That on
viewing the premises they find, that this key whereon the crane now
standeth hath ever been called the crane key, and no other. And a
resolution, declaration, and judgment, passed by the vote of the
Lords Spiritual and Temporal, in the high court of Parliament
assembled, dated the 26th February, 1661–2, between the said
inhabitants of Lowestoft, and the bailiffs of Great Yarmouth, in the
county of Norfolk, for the measurement of seven miles from the said
crane key, in the haven of Yarmouth aforesaid, and to extend seven
measured miles from the said key and no further, hath been disobeyed,
and contemptuously neglected to be executed, by Roger Smith, the late
under sheriff of Norfolk, although he was earnestly pressed to yield
obedience, by making an admeasurement of the said seven miles, from
the said crane key, as in the said judgement is directed; of which
neglect and disobedience this House is very sensible. It is
therefore now ordered and declared, by the Lords Spiritual and
Temporal, in Parliament assembled, That a punctual obedience shall be
yielded unto their former judgment, and that the measurement therein
directed to be made and performed by the present sheriffs for the
said counties, be made between the date hereof and the four and
twenty day of June next ensuing.
JO. BROWNE, Cleric Parliamenti.
Pursuant to these orders, letters were immediately sent to the sheriffs
of Norfolk and Suffolk, from the gentlemen in the interest of Lowestoft,
informing them, that the House of Lords had voted the late under sheriff
of Norfolk, a delinquent, for his contempt of their order; and had
ordered him to appear at the bar of their House to answer for the same.
And that their Lordships insisted on a punctual obedience being paid to
their order of the 26th of February, 1661–2, for an admeasurement, and to
be carried into execution by the said sheriffs some time between the 13th
of that instant April, and the 24th June next ensuing.
TO THE SHERIFFS OF THE COUNTIES OF NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK,
London, 16th April, 1663.
GENTLEMEN, There having been a controversy depending a long time
between the towns of Yarmouth in Norfolk, and Lowestoft in Suffolk,
concerning the herring fishery; and after several hearings before his
Majesty in Council and their Lordships in Parliament; it was ordered
by the vote of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, the 26th February,
1661–2, That the privileges of the seven miles granted to Yarmouth by
the statute of 31 Edward III should be measured from the crane key in
Yarmouth, towards Lowestoft, and at the end thereof a new post should
be set up, which, accordingly was done. But the under-Sheriff of
Norfolk refusing to join and yield obedience to their Lordship’s
decrees, the under-Sheriff of Suffolk, at the importunity of
Lowestoft made the said admeasurement, and drew up a narrative of the
whole proceeding, which was subscribed by many gentlemen of quality
there present; which, with their petition, was read on the 13th of
this instant, April 1663, in the House of Lords; and Sir Henry Bacon,
Bart., and Sir John Pettus, knight, being called to the bar, affirmed
the same on oath. Whereupon their Lordships debated the matter, and
for the contempt of the under sheriff of Norfolk, it was then voted
by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, in Parliament assembled, That
the said under sheriff should be sent for as a delinquent; and that a
punctual obedience should be given and yielded to their former
judgment; and that the admeasurement therein directed to be made and
performed by the present sheriffs for the said counties should be
made between the date thereof and the 24th of June next ensuing. And
in order thereunto, we, whose name are hereunto subscribed, do
desire, that you will affix a certain time when and where you will
please to meet us, and make the said admeasurement, that accordingly
you may be attended by some of us, who are,
Gentlemen, your servants,
HEN. BACON, JOHN ROUSE, RICHARD COOKE, EDM. POTRE, E. BACON, GEORGE
REEVE. {110}
We desire that you appoint the time about the 21st or 24th of May,
and then we will be there to attend you.
But during the interval the said under sheriff presented a petition to
the House, informing their Lordships that in consequence of his being
taken into custody by the Sergeant-at-Arms, from a complaint being lodged
against him by the inhabitants of Lowestoft and divers gentlemen of that
neighbourhood, he had sustained great injury and inconvenience in his own
private affairs; and also, as receiver of the monthly assessments in the
county of Norfolk, and other monies belonging to his Majesty, his
confinement was extremely prejudicial to his Majesty’s service.
Therefore he prayed their Lordships either to discharge him from his
confinement or to grant him a speedy hearing, so that he might prove his
innocence, and discharge his duty to his Majesty.
THE HUMBLE PETITION OF ROGER SMITH, OF THE CITY OF NORWICH,
Sheweth, That upon a misinformation given to your lordships against
your petitioner, this honourable House was pleased, on the 13th of
this instant April, to order his being taken into custody by the
Sergeant-at-Arms; by virtue whereof he is now under restraint, to his
exceeding great damage, and the great neglect of the King’s Majesty’s
service; your petitioner having the receipt of the monthly
assessments in the county of Norfolk, and of other monies belonging
to his Majesty; and to the great prejudice of other your petitioner’s
weighty affairs.
Wherefore your petitioner most humbly prays your Lordships, that you
will be pleased either to discharge him from his said restraint, or
grant him a speedy hearing; whereby your petitioner may clear his
innocence, and betake himself to the discharge of his duty on his
Majesty’s aforesaid service, and the dispatch of other his great
employments.
And your petitioner, as in duty bound shall ever pray, etc.,
ROGER SMITH.
On the reading of this petition before this House, on the 20th of April,
and also the narrative subscribed by the gentlemen who attended the
admeasurement, it was ordered by their Lordships, that as the said under
sheriff denies the accusation contained in the said narrative, that he be
brought to the bar the next day morning at ten o’clock; and that the
persons who presented the said narrative, and attested the same on oath,
do also give their attendance at the same time, and make good their
charge, as they will answer the contrary thereof to that House.
Die Mercurii, 29th April, 1663.
On reading the petition of Roger Smith, late under sheriff of the
county of Norfolk, now in the custody of the Serjeant-at-Arms
attending this House, for his delinquency in disobeying a judgment of
this House, of the 26th February, 1661–2, concerning Lowestoft and
Yarmouth; and in reading a narrative subscribed by several justices
of the peace of Norfolk and Suffolk, setting out the said contempt:
It is ordered, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament
assembled, That the said Roger Smith (who denies the accusation of
the said narrative) be brought to the bar to-morrow morning, at ten
of the clock; at which time such as have appeared on bringing in the
said narrative, and have attested the same on oath, and to give their
attendance on this High Court, at the time aforesaid, to make good
the said charge. And herein obedience is to be given by such as are
concerned therein, as the contrary will be answered to the House.
JNO. BROWNE, Cleric. Parliamenti.
Accordingly, on the day following, the said Roger Smith, Esq., late under
sheriff, and his opponents, appeared before the House; when their
Lordships, after hearing what his accusers had to alledge against him,
and not being satisfied with such defence as he was able to make in
answer thereto, were pleased to order, That the said Roger Smith, for
refusing to execute a judgment of that House, dated 26th February,
1661–2, and also for uttering scandalous words against the honour and
dignity of that high court, should immediately acknowledge his fault, and
make submission upon his knees at the bar of that House, before their
Lordships, in the words following:
I do humbly beg your Lordships’ pardon, and express my hearty sorrow
for not executing your Lordships’ order, and for any unadvised words
uttered by me, which might have any reflection upon your Lordships’
judgment and order, concerning the matter in difference betwixt the
towns of Lowestoft and Yarmouth.
And it was further ordered by their Lordships, that the said Roger Smith
should make the like public submission in the face of the country, upon
the place, and at the time appointed by that House, for the
re-admeasurement to be made between the inhabitants of Lowestoft and the
bailiffs of Great Yarmouth, according to a late order of that House of
the 15th of that instant April; as he would answer for disobeying the
same. And lastly that the said Roger Smith be released from his
confinement, paying his fees.
DIE JOVIS, 30º April, 1663.
Whereas Roger Smith, late under sheriff of the county of Norfolk, was
this day brought to the bar as a delinquent, for refusing to execute
a judgment of this House, dated the 26th of February, 1661–2,
concerning the inhabitants of Lowestoft and the bailiffs of Yarmouth;
which was now confirmed upon oath by Sir Henry Bacon, Bart., and Sir
John Pettus, knt., who formerly did swear to the truth of a narrative
presented to their Lordships, subscribed by several justices of the
peace, and other gentlemen of quality of the counties of Norfolk and
Suffolk, relating to the said judgment. As also for scandalous words
spoken by the said Roger Smith against the honour and dignity of this
high court. It is therefore proposed by the Lords Spiritual and
Temporal, in Parliament assembled, That the said Roger Smith do
immediately make his submission upon his knees at the bar of this
House, before their Lordships, in these words following:
“I do humbly beg your Lordships’ pardon, and express my hearty sorrow
for not executing your Lordships’ order, and for any unadvised words
uttered by me, which might have any reflection put on your Lordships’
judgment and order, concerning the matter in difference betwixt the
towns of Lowestoft and Yarmouth.”
And it is further ordered by the authority aforesaid, That the said
Roger Smith shall make the like public submission in the face of the
country, upon the place, and at the time appointed by this House for
the admeasurement to be made between the inhabitants of Lowestoft and
the bailiffs of Yarmouth, according to a late order of this House,
dated the 13th of this instant April; and herein obedience is to be
given, as the contrary will be answered to this House. And lastly,
That the said Roger Smith shall be released of his present restraint
or imprisonment, paying his fees. And this to be a sufficient
warrant in that behalf.
JOHN BROWNE, Cleric. Parliamenti.
All differences being thus far settled and adjusted, the next business
which the inhabitants of Lowestoft proceeded upon, was to have the
gentlemen in their interest inform the sheriffs of the counties of
Norfolk and Suffolk that they appointed the 10th of June next ensuing,
about ten o’clock in the morning, for the day whereon to make the said
second admeasurement, and to have the same convenience at Yarmouth.
THE SHERIFFS ACCESSION TO THE APPOINTMENT FROM LOWESTOFT.
We do agree to the day and place appointed by mutual consent, between
the sheriffs of Norfolk and Suffolk and the inhabitants of Lowestoft,
for making the admeasurement between the towns of Yarmouth and
Lowestoft, according to the several orders in Parliament and to be on
the tenth day of June next, about ten o’clock of the morning, in
Yarmouth.
THO. MEADOWS,
JOSEPH BRAND.
22nd May, 1663.
In pursuance of this appointment, the order for the admeasurement was,
without any difficulty or interruption, immediately carried into
execution; and a certificate of the same was presented to the House of
Lords on the 19th of June, 1663, by the right honourable Earl Cornwallis,
attested by the sheriffs of Norfolk and Suffolk.
THE CERTIFICATE.
DIE 19TH JUIJ, 1663.
To the right honourable the LORDS Spiritual and Temporal assembled in
the High Court of Parliament.
We the several and respective sheriffs of the counties of Norfolk and
Suffolk, do humbly certify, to your Lordships, That, in obedience to
an order of your honourable House, bearing date on Monday the
fifteenth day of April last past, and of a former judgment of your
honours bearing date the six and twentieth day of February, in the
year of our Lord one thousand, six hundred and sixty-two, we have
measured from the crane key, in the haven of Great Yarmouth,
mentioned in your Lordships said last-mentioned judgement, seven
miles, extending towards Lowestoft, there likewise mentioned. And in
further pursuance of the said several orders and judgements, have, at
the end of the said seven miles, given orders to set up a new post
for the bounding of the limits, etc., according to your said orders
and judgements, this present Wednesday, being the tenth day of June,
in the fifteenth year of his Majesty’s reign.
JOSEPH BRAND, AND THOS. MEDOWES, Sheriffs.
Whereas James Wilde did declare, upon oath, at the bar, that the
handwritings wherewith the said certificate is subscribed, are the
hand-writings of the several sheriffs of the counties of Norfolk and
Suffolk, and that he, the said James Wilde, did see them write the
same.
JO. BROWNE, Cleric, Parliamenti.
Thus was this long dispute and sharply-contested law-suit between
Yarmouth and Lowestoft, respecting the herring-fishery, and which had
been prosecuted by the respective parties for upwards of four years with
the utmost vehemence, at length happily terminated by a decisive order of
the House of Lords. Too much praise for this important and happy event
can never be expressed by the inhabitants of this town on their worthy
and indefatigable townsmen Mr. James Wilde, Mr. Samuel Pacey, and Mr.
Thomas Mighells, who were the principal managers of this suit, and who so
generously exerted themselves, during the whole transaction, in promoting
the happiness of the place of their nativity, by defending its
indisputable rights and privileges, and rescuing it from the ruin which
threatened to overwhelm it. Consequently, their memories deserve to be
transmitted to the latest posterity with the highest respect, veneration,
and gratitude; and as their services for the interest of the town are too
beneficial and important ever to be forgotten, so they who obtained them
are deserving of every possible testimony of respect from their grateful
townsmen, who to this day, are enjoying the fruits of their generous and
unremitting labours for their benefit and happiness.
Soon after the settling of these differences, the town of Lowestoft sent
letters of thanks to the several members of the House of Lords, who,
during the debates, had interested themselves in defending and restoring
to the town the re-possession of her ancient rights and privileges;
namely, to Lord Hollis, the Earl of Anglesay, Earl Cornwallis, Lord
Roberts, Lord Privy Seal, Lord Lucas, Lord Devereux, Lord Ashly Cooper,
and others, acknowledging the many eminent services they had received
from them; and assuring them, that for their great goodness and
condescension, their Lordships would receive, as they were justly
entitled, the thanks and prayers of many hundreds of the poor inhabitants
of Lowestoft. The subjoined letter serves as a specimen of the whole.
To THE LORD ROBERTS, Lord Privy Seal.
London, 28th June, 1663.
My good Lord, I being prevented taking my leave of your Lordship at
my going into the country, do humbly beg your pardon. And by these
presents I presume to return your Lordship the most humble and hearty
thanks of the poor town of Lowestoft, and the fishermen thereof, for
your great condescension in appearing for them against their rich and
powerful adversaries of Yarmouth. For which your lordships will
assuredly have the prayers of many hundreds, and God’s acceptance of
so charitable a work; rendering your name and fame ever deep in the
memory of future ages. My Lord, it was my lot to follow the business
of that poor town, encouraged by the friends of our cause, amongst
whom your Lordship has been one of the most eminent. For which great
kindness I cannot express my thankfulness so sufficiently as I would,
being, alas!—Yet my good Lord, I shall presume to subscribe myself,
your Lordship’s ever most humble and grateful servant,
JAMES WILDE.
The expenses incurred by the town of Lowestoft in this suit with
Yarmouth, amounted in the whole to about six hundred pounds. It was
observed, in the former part of this section, that the town, in order to
defray the charges of the suit with Yarmouth in the reign of Queen
Elizabeth, respecting the situation of Kirkley road, had recourse to the
rents and profits of the town lands; but on this occasion they made use
of other methods, such as were judged the least burthensome to the town
in general, and most effectual for the purposes for which they were
wanted; such as levying a tax upon the herring fishery, and also upon the
brewers and coopers residing in Lowestoft. The first levy was made in
1660, at two shillings a last upon herrings, which raised £67 12s.; the
second levy was made in 1661, at five shillings a last upon herrings,
which raised £114 9s.; the third levy was made in 1663, in the same
manner as in the preceding year, which raised £159 2s. 3d.; the forth
levy was made in 1665, which raised £108; and the fifth and last levy was
made in 1674 (in order for a final discharge of all debts incurred by the
town in the prosecution of this suit), and was made after the rate of two
shillings upon every last of herrings, which raised £70. The levy made
upon the brewers and coopers raised the sum of £62 10s., and was also
applied to the purposes above-mentioned.
But notwithstanding this final decision of the House of Lords, in favour
of the town of Lowestoft, it appears that the burgesses of Yarmouth were
extremely unwilling to relinquish their former pretentions; and were so
attached to their former interest and practices, as shewed but too much
inclination to renew the disputes and disturbances which had agitated and
distressed the respective towns for many years past. For we find, that
about Michaelmas, 1663, (the first herring season after making the second
admeasurement) the Yarmouth men, with their boats, came into Lowestoft
south roads, and seized two vessels, the one a Dutch yagger, with red
herrings for Holland; the other a French fisherman; from the former they
took a barrel of red herrings, until he paid 14/- which they claimed as a
duty due to Yarmouth, the same as though the vessel had been laden in
their haven; from the latter they took their fish kettles, valued at 13s.
4d., under the same pretence. From these arbitrary and illegal
proceedings, the fishermen were so alarmed and intimidated, as to be
deterred from delivering their herrings at Lowestoft any longer, to the
great injury of the fishers, and detriment of the town, which was in
danger of being greatly impoverished thereby. To remedy this
inconvenience, Dr. Lewin, Judge of the Court of Admiralty in the county
of Suffolk, for his royal highness the Duke of York, called a court at
Lowestoft, in 1664, the jury whereof presented the Yarmouth men for
exceeding the bounds which had been lately prescribed them, and
fraudulently seizing the property of the fishermen. Shortly after Dr.
Lewin called a second court at Lowestoft, and the Yarmouth men were
summoned to appear, in order to make answer to the complaint of
Lowestoft. The Yarmouth men appeared accordingly, and pretended to
vindicate their proceedings upon the privileges of their charters. Dr.
Lewin being more inclined to compromise the affair than to involve the
parties in any fresh disputes, proposed, that if the Lowestoft men would
forbear to prosecute the affair any farther, he would bury in oblivion,
every appeal which had been made to that court; and therefore recommended
it to each of the parties to pay their respective fees, and to suffer
their differences, which only tended to revive their former animosities,
totally to subside; and it seems that they agreed to Dr. Lewin’s
proposal, and the difference was settled to their mutual satisfaction.
ARTICLES of AGREEMENT Between the Respective Parties on Terminating
the Dispute.
1st, That the admeasurement lately made, and the boundary mark that
is set up, be ratified and confirmed.
2ndly, That all fishers be free to sell their herrings in the roads
of Lowestoft, or in any other place beyond the said seven miles,
without any disturbance or interruption from the Yarmouth men.
3rdly, That if any disturbance or interruption should be made by the
Yarmouth men on the fishers or any others beyond the said seven
miles, that the said Yarmouth men should forfeit £500, one moiety
thereof to his Majesty, and the other moiety to —. Also the
offending party to suffer three months’ imprisonment, without bail.
And, lastly, that if the Yarmouth men shall at any time imprison,
either at their own town or in any other place, any of the fishermen,
for delivering their herrings at Lowestoft, or any other place beyond
the said seven miles, that the said Yarmouth men shall forfeit treble
damages to the party aggrieved, and be imprisoned three months
without bail.
However the Lowestoft men were so exceedingly alarmed at the late
infringement on their ancient privileges, and so very apprehensive of
being compelled to exhibit fresh complaints against the Yarmouth men,
before the House of Lords, that they had renewed their application to the
several peers of that House who had espoused their cause during the late
debate before that assembly, soliciting their interest, should they be
under the necessity of presenting to the House another petition relative
to the injurious proceedings of the Yarmouth men.
TO THE LORD ROBERTS, LORD PRIVY SEAL.
London, 16th April, 1664.
My good Lord, Your Lordship having been graciously pleased, from the
very first, to appear for the poor town of Lowestoft and the
fishermen, against their powerful adversaries of Yarmouth; for which
great condescension your Lordship has the prayers of many hundreds
depending upon the said fishery, and the most humble and hearty
thanks of that poor town, who implore the continuance of your
Lordship’s favour; humbly beseeching your Lordship to peruse this
short brief of the late pleadings before their Lordships in
Parliament, and the cause of our present complaint that we are going
up with to their Lordships, occasioned by the pride and malice of our
potent adversaries, who concluded we were so disabled by the great
charge of expense they had put us to, that we should never appear
further in this matter, especially as they dared to shew such
contempt for their Lordships’ order and judgment. But so it is, my
Lord, that unless your Lordship shall, upon our petition being read
in the House, be graciously pleased to plead for our future peace and
security, the poor fishermen and your petitioners must be inevitably
ruined. I beg your Lordship’s pardon for this presumption, which my
necessity enforces me to, and for the favour in having access to your
Lordship in this case, especially now in the absence of our
highly-honoured friend the Lord Hollis; and that I may subscribe
myself, my good Lord,
Your Lordship’s most humble and grateful servant,
JAMES WILDE.
* * * * *
To THE LORD CORNWALLIS,
London, 16th April, 1664.
My good Lord, Your Lordship having been graciously pleased to
understand the difference, and to appear for the poor town of
Lowestoft and the fishermen, against their rich and powerful
adversaries of Yarmouth, before the Lords in Parliament; for which
great condescension your Lordship has the prayers of many hundreds
depending on the said fishery, and the most humble and hearty thanks
of that poor town, who implore the continuance of your Lordship’s
favour. And although many persons of honour, out of a sense of the
equity of our case, have stood up in our defence, yet can we not
apply to any so properly, as those of our own county, amongst whom,
from an experience of your paternal care, I humbly beseech your
Lordship to peruse this short brief of the late proceedings before
your Lordship in Parliament, whereby your Lordship may easily discern
the pride and malice of our adversaries, who, to the amazement of all
our gentry, durst so slight the Lords’ late orders and judgments.
But their design was to spoil us at once; concluding, that we were so
disabled by the charge and great expense of the late suit they have
put us to, that we should never be able to stir any further in this
matter; as, in truth, they might well suppose, it having cost our
poor town, at least, upwards of £500, to the great impoverishment
thereof. Yet, so it is, my Lord, that should we desist in our
defence, no man of trade can stay to live in the town, except some
few to till the ground. So that unless your Lordship shall, upon our
petition, at the next sitting of the House, be graciously pleased to
afford us relief, and plead for our future peace and security, we
shall be inevitably ruined. I shall not dare your Lordship’s further
trouble at present, but beg pardon for this presumption, which our
necessities compel me to; and acknowledge the favour of having access
to your Lordship in this case, especially now in the absence of our
highly honoured friend Lord Hollis, and that I may subscribe myself,
as I am, my good Lord.
Your Lordship’s most humble and grateful servant,
JAMES WILDE.
A similar letter was sent by the same writer to the EARL of ANGLESAY.
By the constant irruptions of the sea about this time, on that part of
the coast whereon the post was erected which bounded the liberties of
Yarmouth, the said boundary-mark was washed down. And as the want of
some conspicuous object, to denote the boundary of the said liberties,
might possibly be attended with some disagreeable consequences, and
occasion fresh disputes; it was therefore thought necessary to solicit
the attendance of several gentlemen of distinction in the neighbourhood,
to superintend the re-placing of the said boundary mark, which was
necessary, both for the security of the privileges of Lowestoft, as also
for obviating any imputation of infringement on the liberties of
Yarmouth. Accordingly, on the seventh of February, 1676, the gentlemen
who were requested to be present at the re-placing of the said
boundary-mark, assembled for that purpose at Lowestoft, and executed the
same; the particulars of which proceeding are contained in the following
relation:—
Whereas, in obedience to an order of the Lords in Parliament, bearing
date the six and twentieth day of February, one thousand six hundred
and sixty-one, there was an admeasurement made by the Sheriffs of
Norfolk and Suffolk, from the crane key in Yarmouth, towards
Lowestoft, and no further. At which place a new post was set up, to
bound the limits granted by charters to the inhabitants of Yarmouth,
and in which extent the bailiffs and corporation are to enjoy their
full privileges, as the statute of 31 Edward III, and other charters
do empower them.
And whereas the said post or boundary-mark, by the incursions of the
sea upon that part of the coast whereon it stood, was in the late
tempestuous weather thrown down, and in great danger of being washed
away. Wherefore, at the humble request of the inhabitants of the
town of Lowestoft, for the securing of the said post or boundary-mark
from the danger of the sea; we, the gentlemen of the counties of
Norfolk and Suffolk, who have hereunto subscribed our names, do
humbly certify, that we were this day personally present at the place
where the post formerly stood, and finding the said post fallen to
the ground, being undermined by the sea, and not to be raised again
in the same place, to stand any ordinary rage thereof; for at the
very instant of time that we were there present, the sea came up to
the foot of the said post, as it then laid upon the ground.
Wherefore we advised, that a small post should be set up in the place
whereon the aforesaid boundary-post formerly stood; and to remove the
said boundary-post higher up, out of the danger of the sea, there to
affix it, by the help of a compass and line, at the same distance
from the crane key of Great Yarmouth as it formerly stood; which we
did then see performed accordingly. Dated this seventh day of
February, in the nine and twentieth year of the reign of our
sovereign Lord Charles the second, by the grace of God, of England,
Scotland, France, and Ireland, king defender of the faith, and so
forth; and in the year of our Lord one thousand six hundred and
seventy-six.
(Signed)—Hen. Bacon, Lionell Playters, Tho. Loud, Jas. Febure, Hen.
Wotton, Jas. Catelyn, John Walne, Neville Catebyn, Richd. Bacon, J.
Porter, Edwd. Paxton, Tho. Cloumstead, Jas. Reeve, John Playters,
Edw. North, Tho. Leman, Richd. Vesy, Phil. Hayward, Robt. Selling.
After these affairs were all fully settled and adjusted, the towns of
Yarmouth and Lowestoft appear to have conducted the herring fishery on
more amicable terms; and the latter continued the enjoyment of their
rights and privileges, without interruption from the former, until the
year 1729, when the burgesses of Yarmouth once more attempted to revive
their former pretensions to an exclusive right to the herring-fishery;
and, as a prelude to their carrying those pretensions into execution, had
formed a resolution to seize all such fishing vessels fitted out at
Lowestoft (called yaggers) as were employed by the merchants of that town
to go out to sea to purchase herrings of the northern and west country
fishers. But all these designs of the Yarmouth men were entirely
frustrated by the speedy and vigorous exertions of the Lowestoft
merchants; who, on the first alarm, immediately opened a subscription for
raising a fund, in order to defend their ancient rights and privileges,
which so far discouraged their adversaries, that they immediately
relinquished every farther proceeding in the affair, and, consequently,
were prevented from carrying their designs into execution.
The following is a copy of the ORIGINAL INSTRUMENT drawn-up on this
occasion, and signed by the principal merchants of the town:
Whereas we, whose names and seals are hereunto subscribed and set,
are all, or most of us, persons concerned in the herring-fishery.
And do intend to employ and send out yaggers to sea, to buy herrings
for this herring-fishing season, and to all other subsequent
herring-fishing seasons, during our respective lives. And whereas
the Corporation of Great Yarmouth, in the county of Norfolk, do give
out speeches, and threaten, that in case we, or any of us, do so buy
herrings at sea, that they will commence and prosecute one or more
suit or suits against us, or him, or them of us, who shall so buy
herrings at sea. And whereas, in case any suit or suits shall be
brought, begun, commenced or prosecuted against us, every, or any of
us, for our, every, or any of our buying herrings at sea, during this
or any other subsequent herring-fishing season, we are unanimously
resolved to defend such suit or suits. And in order to defray the
charge and expense of such suit or suits, we, and every of us, whose
names and seals are hereunto subscribed and set, do hereby severally
and respectively, each one for himself, and for his own heirs,
executors, and administrators, and not jointly, or one of us for
another, covenant, promise and agree, to, and with, John Tanner, of
Lowestoft aforesaid, clerk, his executors, and administrators, in
manner and form following, (that is to say), That we, and every of
us, shall, and will, within seven days next after any suit or suits
shall be brought, begun, or commenced against us, every, or any of
us, by the said corporation of Great Yarmouth, or by any person or
persons whomsoever, for our, every, or any of our, buying herrings at
sea as aforesaid, well and truly pay, or cause to be paid, this
several sum and sums of money by us severally subscribed or set down
at or near the end of our respective names, into the hands of such
person or persons as the majority of us whose names and seals are
hereunto subscribed and set, shall, by any writing, to be signed by
such majority in the presence of two credible witnesses, direct and
appoint. And that such suit and suits shall be defended during the
pleasure of the majority of us. And also, that it shall and may be
lawful to and for the person or persons into whose hands the majority
of us shall so, as aforesaid, direct and appoint the said several sum
and sums of money so, as aforesaid, by us severally subscribed to be
paid, out of the same moneys, to pay not only such costs and charges
and other moneys as may happen to be obtained or recovered against
us, every, or any of us, in any such suit or suits. And that we, and
every of us, shall and will, out of the same moneys so, as aforesaid,
by us subscribed, bear a proportionable part, with respect only to
our several subscriptions, as well as of all such costs and charges
and other moneys as may happen to be obtained or recovered against
us, every, or any of us, in any such suit or suits as aforesaid, as
also of the charges in defending such suit or suits. And so,
likewise, in case the corporation of Great Yarmouth shall act in any
such manner as to make it necessary for us to commence and prosecute
any suit or action against them, it is hereby agreed, That the money
underneath subscribed shall be liable to be employed as well in
bringing and prosecuting any such suit or action as the majority of
us shall think necessary to commence and prosecute against them, as
in defending any such suit or action as they shall commence and
prosecute against us. And likewise to make good to any particular
person the loss he may sustain by his vessel being seized and
detained by the said corporation, on account of his buying herrings
at sea as aforesaid. Provided always, and it is our and every our
intents and meanings, that in case any of us shall happen to depart
this life before any such suit or suits shall be brought, begun, or
commenced against us, or any of us, that then the sum and sums of
money subscribed by him and them of us who shall depart this life as
aforesaid, shall not be paid. And that then, and in such case, the
executors or administrators of him or them of us so dying shall not
be any way concerned in any such suit or suits, any thing herein
before mentioned or contained to the contrary thereof, in any wise
notwithstanding. In witness whereof we have hereunto set our hands
and seals, this two and twentieth day of September, in the third year
of the reign of our sovereign lord George the second, by the grace of
God, of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, King, defender of the
faith, and so forth, and in the year of our Lord one thousand seven
and twenty-nine.
John Jex, £50; William Balls, £30; James Reeve, £20; Thomas Manning,
£20; Samuel Adams, £20; John Arnold, £5; Robert Hayward, £35; John
Fowler, jun., £25; Robert Payne, £15; Samuel Church, £25; Thomas
Landifield, £25; Daniel Long, £20; John Ibrooke, £5; John Barker,
jun., £30; John Ellis, £20; John Munds, £20; Charles Boyce, £20;
Matthew Arnold, £25; Thomas Watson, £5; John Brame, £20; Robert
Dixon, £10.
Thus was the last effort of the Yarmouth men to monopolize the
herring-fishery totally frustrated, and the Lowestoft people have enjoyed
the free exercise thereof, without any interruption ever since.
How far the disputes between Yarmouth and Lowestoft had engaged the
attention of the public, will, in some measure, appear from the following
circumstance:—
About the beginning of the reign of Charles I, lived Thomas Nash, who was
born at Lowestoft, and was a sharp satirist. He wrote a play called
“Lenton-Stuffe; or, The Praise of the Red Herring,” published in 1599, in
4to. Also another play called “The Isle of Dogs,” together with other
works. His writings relate chiefly to the disputes between Yarmouth and
Lowestoft, the former of which places he attempted much to ridicule.
Swinden says, “The facetious Nash designed nothing more in Lenton-Stuffe
than a joke upon our staple—red herrings; and being a Lowestoft man, the
enmity between the two towns led him to attempt that by humour which more
sober reason could not accomplish.”
SECTION V.
OF THE CHURCH.
LOWESTOFT is a vicarage endowed with great tithes. In the reign of Henry
I the impropriation of this parish was given by that king towards
augmenting the endowment of the priory of St. Bartholomew, in London, and
continued in the possession of that house till the dissolution of the
monasteries, in the reign of Henry VIII; when the site of this priory
being granted to Sir Richard Rich, afterwards Lord Rich, probably the
impropriation of Lowestoft, as part of the endowment of the priory,
devolved to Sir Richard and his family. How long it continued there, or
into whose hands it came afterwards, is now uncertain; the most material
information obtainable concerning it is, that about the year 1719 the
impropriation was the property of three grand-daughters of one Mr.
Church, at Pakefield, whose names were Fowler, Landifield, and Warwick;
and was purchased of them soon after by the Rev. Tanner, vicar of the
parish, at the price of £1050, which money was raised by Mr. Tanner by
subscription. In gratitude to the memory of those who so generously
contributed to the purchase of this impropriation, Mr. Tanner caused a
list of their names to be entered upon two tables, and affixed to the
north side of the chancel, together with the several sums they severally
subscribed. Between these tables of impropriation benefactors is a neat
marble tablet with the following inscription:
A.D. 1720.
Two Hundred Pounds of Queen Anne’s Bounty were given
towards purchasing the
Impropriation of Lowestoft, for the benefit of the Vicar.
Mr. Tanner, previous to the subscription for purchasing the
impropriation, distributed among his friends, and the neighbouring
gentlemen, a printed representation of the vicarial tithes and the state
of the living; and wherein it appears that the income was very small.
THE REPRESENTATION.
The parish of Lowestoft, in Suffolk, is a large parish, consisting of
about three or four and twenty hundred souls; and the living, which
is a vicarage only, is but meanly endowed; there being no house, and
but one acre of land belonging to it, and out of that piece of land
the crown claims a pension of 3s. 4d. per year, and 8d. for an
acquittance; the vicarage tithes are not worth above £20 per year,
one year with another; and all the rest of the minister’s income
depends on the offerings, surplice fees, and fisheries, which are
very precarious and uncertain. And as the number of the poor
increaseth greatly in the said parish (the poor’s rate, which about
35 years ago came only to £13 a quarter, cometh now to £63 per
quarter, besides a great deal that is paid to the poor out of the
town lands), so doth the number of the inhabitants in general
increase too (several families coming to us almost every year from
other places, and the number of our christenings exceed the number of
our burials); so that the duty of the minister is plainly increasing,
whilst his revenue must as certainly decrease as the poor increase.
But under this melancholy prospect it hath pleased God to order
things so that the great tithes of the said parish are to be sold, by
a decree in Chancery, to the highest bidder; and to put it into the
hearts of several, both in the parish and places adjoining, to
contribute according to their abilities, towards purchasing the said
tithes for the benefit of the vicar for the time being, for ever.
But as all that can be raised hereabouts will go but a little way
towards so large a purchase, we are forced to ask the assistance of
charitable and well-disposed persons further off, hoping they will
not be backward in promoting so good a work.
It is thought that these tithes will cost £1,800, which being a
larger sum than can possibly be raised by benefactions; the method
proposed is, to raise as much as we can by benefactions, and to
borrow the rest of the money; and to have the tithes conveyed to
divers persons, in trust for payment of the money borrowed; and when
both principal and interest of that is paid off, then to be for the
use and benefit of the minister for the time being, for ever. So
that it is uncertain whether the present minister will ever have any
benefit of it. And therefore he hopes that all whom he applies
himself to on this account will believe that he acts more, in what he
herein doth for the good of the church than out of any principle of
self-interest.
It is apprehended that the acre of land referred to by Mr. Tanner, (on
which formerly was built a messuage or tenement, since decayed) for which
the vicar of the parish paid to the crown the annual sum of 3s. 4d, and
8d. for an acquittance, was given by some pious person, to support a
light before the image of St. Roche. {119} Where this image was placed,
whether in the church or in one of the chapels, is now uncertain; though
most probably in the church; as this acre of land lies next the quarter
of an acre at the south-west corner of the churchyard, on which the
vicarage-house stood that was destroyed by fire in 1546. Probably at the
dissolution, the premises came into the hands of Government, and as the
vicar enjoyed them, he became subject to the above annual payment. A
discharge of the above-mentioned payment was purchased of Government in
1788, by the Rev. John Arrow, late vicar of this parish, at the expense
of £5 as appears by the following certificate:
BY THE COMMISSIONERS OF THE LAND REVENUE.
These are to certify, that the said commissioners have contracted and
agreed with the Reverend John Arrow, vicar of Lowestoft, in the
county of Suffolk, clerk, for the sale to him of all that yearly rent
of three shillings and fourpence, due and payable to his Majesty by
the said John Arrow, as vicar of Lowestoft aforesaid, for or in
respect of a certain messuage or tenement and pightle of land, called
St. Roch’s Light, situate and being at Lowestoft, with the
appurtenances thereof, at or for the price or sum of five pounds of
lawful money of Great Britain, to be paid by the said John Arrow into
the Bank of England, in the name of the said Commissioners. Which
said rent, from and immediately after the payment of the said sum, in
manner aforesaid, and the inrollment of this certificate with the
receipt of the said purchase-money, in the office of the auditor of
the land-revenue for the county aforesaid, shall be adjudged, deemed,
and taken to be absolutely vested in the said purchaser and his
successors, vicar of Lowestoft, for ever by virtue of an Act passed
in the twenty-sixth year of the reign of his present Majesty King
George the Third, intitled, “An Act for appointing commissioners to
inquire into the state and condition of the woods, forests, and
land-revenues belonging to the crown, and to sell or nalieate
fee-farm and improveable rents.”
Given under the hands of the said Commissioners, the twenty-ninth day
of Feburary, one thousand seven hundred and eighty eight.
CHARLES MIDDLETON, JOHN CALL, JOHN FORDYCE.
Witness to the signing, by the said Commissioners,
WILLIAM HARRISON.
Received the 6th day of March, 1788, of and from the above-named, the
Rev. John Arrow, the sum of five pounds, of lawful money of Great
Britain, being the consideration-money expressed in the above
certificate.
Witness my hand, for the governor and company of the Bank of England,
J. PADMAN, cashier.
Inrolled the 6th day of March, 1788, before me,
JOHN HOSIER, dep. aud.
Paid for the conveyance of the premises £0 11s. 8d.; Paid into the
Bank of England, for purchase of ditto £5; Paid for inrolling ditto
at the Auditor’s office, New Palace Yard, Westminister 10s. 0d.;
Total £6 1s. 8d.
Mr. Tanner was greatly encouraged in this undertaking by Mr. Thomas
Mighells, of Lowestoft, merchant {120a} and assisted by the Rev. Gregory
Clarke, rector of Blundeston.
It appears that there was a suit in chancery respecting the impropriation
of Lowestoft, and that it was obliged to be sold by order of a decree of
that court. Mr. Tanner alludes to this suit in the following letter
addressed to Mrs. Dorothy Mighells, Burlington Key, Yorkshire:
Madam, The suit which was begun in chancery two or three years ago,
concerning the great tithes of this parish, is now brought so near to
an end that ’tis thought they will be sold before harvest; so that we
are now making all the interest we can to get them. And to that end
Mr. Clarke and I are to ride about the country two or three days
every week a-begging; and, God be thanked, we have made a pretty good
beginning. As you were pleased to tell me more than once that you
would give £5 towards it, I have presumed to put you down so much,
for an example and encouragement to others; and also have sent you a
copy of the paper which we have printed and sent to such as we cannot
well get to.
I am, your most obliged Kinsman,
J. TANNER. {120b}
Lowestoft, 21st May, 1719.
The undertaking of the Rev. Tanner proved so successful in the
subscription, as to enable him to complete the purchase, and consequently
endowed the vicarage of Lowestoft with the impropriation of the great
tithes in the manner inserted under:
IMPROPRIATION OF LOWESTOFT.
The impropriation of the parish of Lowestoft, being to be sold in the
year 1719, John Tanner, then vicar, being greatly encouraged by Mr.
Thomas Mighells, of Lowestoft, merchant, and very much assisted by the
Rev. Gregory Clarke, rector of Blundestone, solicited contributions from
the tradesmen and gentlemen of the country, and obtained Queen Anne’s
bounty towards it; and got conveyances thereof to him the said John
Tanner, about Christmas, 1719; but several difficulties arising, it could
not be finally settled till 1721; when the great tithes of all the lands
lying on the north, or right-hand part of the highway leading from the
Swan Lane to Mutford Bridge, were settled (in conjunction with the
govenors of Queen Anne’s bounty, who have all the writings relating to
this purchase) on the then vicar immediately, and his successors for
ever, without any condition but that of paying thirty shillings per year
towards repairing the chancel. And in November, 1721, the said John
Tanner conveyed the other moiety, or the great tithes of all those lands
lying upon the south, or left-hand part of the aforesaid highway, unto
Mr. Thomas Mighells, Mr. Stephen Buxton, Mr. John Barker, jun., Mr.
Robert Hayward, and Mr. John Durrant, of Lowestoft; to the Rev. Clarke,
of Blundestone; Mr. Burton, of Gisleham; Mr. Richardson, of Pakefield;
Mr. Camell, of Bradwell; and Mr. Woolmer, of Carleton; and their heirs
for ever. That out of the profits of the same the sum of our hundred and
forty pounds (which being wanted to complete the purchase, was kindly
lent by the Rev. Dr. Thomas Tanner, a Chancellor of the Diocese of
Norwich) might be repaid with interest; and after the said £440 was
repaid, then to be for the benefit of the Vicar of Lowestoft for the time
being for ever, in the following words:—
And from and after he the said Dr. Thomas Tanner, his executors,
administrators, or assigns, shall be fully reimbursed and repaid the
said sum of £440 of good and lawful money of this nation, and also
all interest for the same, to become and grow due; and also all
costs, charges and expenses which he or they shall be put unto for or
by reason or means as aforesaid. That then the said Thomas Mighells,
Stephen Buxton, John Barker, Robert Hayward, John Durrant, George
Clarke, Joshua Buxton, Philip Richardson, Robert Camel and Robert
Woolmer, and the survivors or survivor of them, and the heirs and
assigns of the survivor of them, shall stand be seized of the said
tithes of corn and grain, in that part of the said parish above
particularly described, to the only use, benefit and behoof of the
Vicar of Lowestoft aforesaid for the time being for ever. So as, and
upon this express proviso and condition, nevertheless, That such
Vicar for the time being, and all and every his successors, vicars of
the said parish of Lowestoft, shall, for rightfully qualifying him or
themselves to take and enjoy such tithes, or the rents and profits
thereof, reside within the said parish of Lowestoft for the space of
eight kalendar months, or five and thirty weeks in every year to be
computed from Midsummer to Midsummer wherein he shall have or claim
such tithes, or the rents and profits thereof. And by himself, or
his sufficient curate or curates, read divine service and preach
twice every Lord’s day, commonly called Sunday, and read prayers
every Wednesday and Friday weekly, and also on every holy day; and
publicly administer the holy sacrament of the Lord’s supper in the
said parish church at Lowestoft, in every year at least six times, as
now within the said parish is accustomed to be done. And so as such
person or persons who shall, by virtue of these presents, become
entitled to the said tithes of corn and grain in that part of the
said parish of Lowestoft, herein before particularly mentioned or
described, or the rents and profits thereof, shall from time to time,
and at all times for ever hereafter, maintain, repair, and keep the
whole chancel of the church of Lowestoft aforesaid in good and
tenantable repair, being yearly and every year allowed towards the
doing of the same, the sum of thirty shillings, by or from such
person or persons as shall rightfully have claim, receive or take the
tithes of corn and grain growing or arising, or to be received in
that part of the said parish as lyeth on the north or right-hand side
of the said score, lane, way or road, before herein particularly
described and distinguished from the other part on the southern part
thereof. Provided always, and upon this further condition, that if
the said Vicar for the time being, or his successor or successors,
vicar or vicars of the said parish of Lowestoft shall, after the
first Midsummer after the institution and induction of such vicar or
vicars, unto and into the said parish church, be absent from the said
parish by the space of four kalender months, or seventeen weeks in
any year, to be computed from Midsummer to Midsummer; or shall
neglect to perform, or cause the said duties to be performed, in any
manner that shall be judged wilful negligence, and not casual,
undersigned, or allowable omitance, by the chancellor of the diocese
of Norwich, or any other person or persons deputed by him (whose
sentence shall be final.) Then for every year the vicar is negligent
or absent as aforesaid (after the said sums repaid and re-imbursed
unto the said Dr. Tanner, his executors, administrators or assigns),
it shall and may be lawful for the churchwardens of the said parish
of Lowestoft, and the schoolmaster of the free school of the
foundation of Mr. Annott in Lowestoft to take, collect, and receive
the said tithes of corn and grain in that part of the said parish of
Lowestoft herein particularly mentioned and described, for the use
and benefit of the schoolmaster of the said free school; upon this
condition nevertheless, that the said schoolmaster shall for every
year’s profit that shall by this means fall to him, teach six such
poor children as shall be sent unto him by the churchwardens of
Lowestoft aforesaid for the time being for the space of three years.
And whereas it may so happen, that he that is schoolmaster of the
said free school, when the vicar is thus absent, may be removed
within three years afterwards: it is hereby directed and appointed,
that the monies arising by and from the said tithes shall be laid up
in the hands of the churchwardens, or one of them, or such other
person or persons as the said schoolmaster shall appoint and approve
of, who shall give sufficient security to the satisfaction of the
said schoolmaster, to pay the sixth part of it every half-year to the
schoolmaster of the said free school for the time being, for teaching
such six poor children as shall be sent thither as aforesaid;
exclusive of such part or parts thereof as shall be for the repair of
the said chancel, having such allowance as aforesaid. And so shall
every year that the vicar is absent or negligent, as aforesaid. And
when the vicar is resident, and performs, or causes the duties
aforesaid to be performed, within the said parish, by the space of
eight kalendar months, as aforesaid, then the same is to be for the
use of the vicar only, anything herein before mentioned to the
contrary thereof, in any wise notwithstanding.
In witness whereof, etc.
That the above £440 and interest was (after a great deal of money laid
out about the chancel etc.,) cleared off and discharged about Lady Day,
1742, by the above twenty years care and trouble of the above John
Tanner, vicar of the said parish of Lowestoft, who besides his
contribution of eighty pounds, given by him when the subscription was
first opened, gave likewise afterwards twenty years’ profits of that part
of the tithes, which was settled on the vicar by the govenors of Queen
Anne’s bounty, in the year 1721; disclaiming at the same time all merits
to himself, and attributing it solely to the bounty and goodness of the
Supreme Being, saying
At non nobis, Domine, sed nomini tuo sit Gloria. Amen.
Not unto us, O Lord, but to thy name be the Glory. Amen.
With the impropriation there was likewise purchased a large barn (to lay
the tithes in) copyhold, on which barn there was left unpaid £50. This
money was also paid off at Michaelmas, 1745, by the care and good
management, and bounty of the above worthy vicar John Tanner. This barn
was surrendered, a little before the Mortmain Act took place, to Mr.
Woolmer, of Carleton: Mr. Robert Hayward, jun., and Mr. John Durrant of
Lowestoft; in trust, for the use of such person and persons as, from time
to time, shall be entitled to the great tithes. It pays a quit rent of
1/8 to the Manor of Lowestoft.
The value of the living is also further increased from the fisheries.
The Vicar receives from the owner of every boat employed in the herring
fishery half a guinea, and for every boat employed in the mackarel
fishery half a dole. When the North sea and Iceland fisheries flourished
at Lowestoft, the Vicar was not allowed half a dole for every vessel sent
upon those fisheries, but for every voyage which they made annually to
those seas, which were not only one, but sometimes two, three and even
four voyages. In the begining of the reign of Queen Elizabeth, about
fourteen of these vessels, called doggers, were employed by this town in
the North sea and Iceland fisheries, which paid a considerable sum
annually to the Vicar. But these latter fisheries are now entirely
ceased at Lowestoft, and have been so for many years.
This custom of allowing the vicar half a dole is a very antient one, but
how long it has subsisted at Lowestoft is uncertain. At Yarmouth, in the
year 1484 the half doles of fishing voyages were granted by the assembly
to the use of the haven; but this custom, called the half-doles, had been
before that time paid to the town even from time immemorial; for the
fishermen had always given a whole dole, namely, half a dole to the use
of the church, and the other half to the use of the town; and because one
half part of the dole was given to sacred purposes, it was called
Christ’s dole. Probably the payment of the half dole by the fishermen at
Lowestoft to the same sacred use, is as antient as that at Yarmouth.
What is meant by a dole is this: from the amount which each boat raises
by the sale of mackarel, during the voyage, a sum is first deducted for
provisions and incidental expenses; the residue is divided into shares or
doles of which the owner of the boat has a certain number, and the net
owner the like for his nets, and the remainder is distributed among the
boatmen according to their several stations, including the minister’s
half dole. Thus, if a boat raises £100, take for provisions, etc., £25,
then the residue, £76, will be the sum to divide into doles; and if the
number of doles for boats, nets and men, together with the half dole to
the Vicar, be 150, then the division will be 10s. per share or dole; and
consequently, in that case, the Vicar will be entitled to 5s. for his
half dole for that boat.
There not being any antient records now remaining, respecting the origin
of this noble and beautiful structure, the church at Lowestoft, they
being all burnt in the year 1606, when the dwelling-house belonging to
Mr. Glesson, vicar of this town, was destroyed by fire, we are unable to
ascertain with certainty the exact time when this building was erected;
and consequently all the investigations in pursuit of this discovery must
be attended with much difficulty and enveloped in the obscurity of
probable conjecture.
It is evident, from what has been already observed at the begining of
this section, respecting the grant of Henry I that there was a church
belonging to this parish in the eleventh century, but how long it had
been erected before that period is now uncertain, probably soon after
Christianity was first introduced into the kingdom of the East Angles.
In those early ages the generality of our English churches were
undoubtedly very ordinary buildings; they were of Saxon origin, some few
were built with stone, but the greater part of wood only, and
consequently were much inferior to the stately edifices that were erected
after the Norman conquest. To determine therefore, what kind of church
it was that they had at Lowestoft at that early period is now impossible;
all that can be advanced on the point is, that when we consider the
barbarous taste which prevailed in that uncivilised age, the infant as
well as the persecuted state of Christianity, and the violent commotions
which at that time agitated this part of the kingdom, it may be concluded
that it was but a mean building, and bore but a small resemblance to the
size and elegence of the present structure.
But it may be asked, that if the original church at Lowestoft was a
building of that inferior kind as is above represented, by what means was
it that the present large and elegant structure came to be erected; since
it is evident, that the ability of the inhabitants at any one period was
never equal to the accomplishing such an expensive undertaking?
In answer to the question it may be observed that the church belonging to
the impropriation of this parish, which made part of the endowment of the
priory of St. Bartholomew, by Henry I, was the old original building,
which was then standing, and not the present structure. The former of
these buildings, was of very ancient date, probably soon after the
establishment of Christianity in the Kingdom of the East Angles;
therefore it may reasonable be supposed, that at the time when the grant
of it was made, namely, in the reign of Henry I, it must be in a very
decayed and ruinous state. This grant of Henry I was confirmed by a
charter from Henry III, in the year 1230. When, therefore, the priory of
St. Bartholomew was in full possession of the church and impropriation of
this parish, by virtue, of this charter, they, in consequence of their
zeal, or rather religious frenzy, for erecting churches and founding
religious houses, which at that time so universally prevailed, the old
ruinous church at Lowestoft was entirely taken down, and the present
elegant structure erected in its place, through the munificence of the
priory and pious ostentation of the times.
Tanner, in his Notitia, says “That Henry I gave churches in Suffolk to
the priory of St. Bartholomew, without specifying the names of those
churches; yet it may reasonably inferred that the church at Lowestoft was
one of them; because, when the grant was confirmed by the charter of
Henry III, this church was particularly mentioned.”
It is certain that the present church at Lowestoft was erected prior to
the year 1365, because Weever has given an inscription which he found in
the church, namely,
ROBERT INGLOSSE, Esquyer,
which died in Anno 1365.
Therefore, it is evident, that the old church at Lowestoft was standing
in the year 1230, when the grant of Henry I was confirmed by the charter
of Henry III; and as it is equally evident, from the above inscription,
that the present church was erected before the year 1365, it makes it
clearly manifest that the present building was erected some time in the
interval between the years 1230 and 1365; and consequently, that the
present church of Lowestoft has been built 500 years.
After the church came into the possession of the priory of St.
Bartholomew, it was found to be so old and mean a building, and in such a
ruinous state, that it was necessary to take it entirely down and rebuild
it, and which was accordingly done in its present noble and elegant
style. The nave, the south aisle, and the chancel were the first parts
that were taken down; but the north aisle was not re-built till some time
after. This is evident, from the difference which may be observed in the
form of the windows belonging to these aisles; the former being more
acute than the latter, which points out a more ancient construction.
An ingenious writer has said that the very obtusely-pointed arches of the
windows of our churches, shew, at first sight, that they are of no very
great antiquity; for the very sharply-pointed arch, which succeeded the
circular one about the year 1200, expanded itself by degrees, and grew
more and more obtuse till, towards the reign of Henry VII. it approached
the segment of a great circle. This observation tends to confirm what
has been previously advanced, namely, that the present church at
Lowestoft was wholly re-built at the same time, but that the north aisle
was built some time after the other parts of the building. The walls
belonging to the south part of this beautiful structure are at this time
much inclined from the perpendicular; owing, probably, to the absurd and
injurious practice of open graves, both within and without the building,
too near the foundations a practice which too much prevails in other
places.
[The south wall was rebuilt in 1871.]
The present church was erected chiefly through the munificence and
liberality of the priory of St. Bartholomew of London; and, it is also
probable that it was indebted to the same society afterwards for keeping
it in repair, for when all supplies from those resources were entirely
withdrawn, in consequence of the dissolution of the monasteries, in the
reign of Henry VIII., the churches that were dependent on those
foundations soon fell into decay, as the parishes to which they belonged
were unable to support the expense of repairing them. Sometimes the
Lords of the Manors belonging to parishes whose churches have been
rebuilt, have been liberal benefactors on these occasions, especially
about the time when the re-building of Lowestoft church was undertaken.
John de la Pole, Lord of Wingfield Castle, was one of the principal
benefactors, when that noble tower belonging to the church at Redenhall,
in Norfolk was erected; and as the town of Lowestoft and the island of
Lothingland were part of the estate of the De la Poles, in the reigns of
Henry IV. and V., it might be supposed that this family contributed also
to the rebuilding of Lowestoft Church; but not anything appears to
confirm this supposition. No leopard’s faces (the badge of the De la
Poles) are visible in any part of the building, as they are in many
places in the tower at Redenhall. The building of this tower was begun
about the year 1460, and finished in 1520; but the church at Lowestoft
was not re-built till between the years 1230 and 1395; it is therefore
probable that the De la Poles were not the proprietors of the town of
Lowestoft and the island of Lothingland till after the rebuilding of
Lowestoft church. This was the case at Corton and Kessingland, near
Lowestoft, after the dissolution of Leystone abbey, and the abbey of the
Minorisses, in London; and the church at Lowestoft would have experienced
the same misfortune, after the suppression of the priory of St.
Bartholomew, had not the town at that time prevented the lands which had
been given many years before, for the sole use of this church, being
alienated with the impropriation of this parish, and the other endowments
of the priory, in the grant which was made to Sir Richard Rich, in the
36th of Henry VIII.
Probably Corton and Kessingland were not altogether in the same
predicament as Lowestoft. For as the abbeys to which they belonged were
in possession of their impropriations only, their churches were repaired
out of the common revenues of those abbeys; whereas the priory of St.
Bartholomew had not only the impropriation of Lowestoft, but was also,
probably in possession of the lands which had been given for the sole use
of the church; which lands were recovered again after the dissolution of
the monasteries, for their original purposes. For it appears that the
church lands belonging to this parish were never under the absolute power
of the priory as the impropriation was, although it might have great
influence concerning them; this is evident, by the feoffment of the said
lands in the reign of Henry VII A.D. 1503, which shews that the right was
not in the priory of St. Bartholomew; and consequently, might be the
reason of their being recovered again by the parish soon after the
dissolution.
But notwithstanding the recovery of the church lands, it appears that the
town was much distressed after the dissolution of the monasteries, in
keeping the church in decent repair. For in the year 1592 the church was
in such a ruinous state that it cost upwards of £200 to repair it; out of
which sum £68 18s. 8d. was collected of the inhabitants; £100 were
borrowed of Mr. Bartlemewe, of Yarmouth, and the remainder was raised
(including a provision for discharging the debt) from premiums by
granting leases of the town lands under their full value; the situation
of the inhabitants at this time obliging them to have recourse to these
methods for repairing the church. It also appears that there had been
paid by the churchwardens, towards repairing the church, of hayning-money
collected in the roads, the sum of £63 18s. 3d. when the lands were
unable to discharge the expenses of the repairs and other necessary
expenses of the town, exclusive of money collected of the inhabitants.
The church has also cost the parish several considerable sums since that
time for repairs; so that, had not the town been assisted in repairing
this building by the rents and profits of the church lands, that
venerable pile had many years since fallen into decay, and mouldered into
irreparable ruin.
The ruinous state of the church at this time arose, probably, from the
profits of the lands given for keeping it in repair, being applied to
other purposes. From the decree of the Court of Chancery, in 1616,
respecting the town lands, it appears, that that decree was grounded on a
complaint of the inhabitants that the rents and profits of those lands
had been alienated to purposes not intended by the donors. That the
lands called French’s, given for the use of the poor of this town were
worth £20 a year, but that the poor received little more than 13d. a week
from them. That the lands given for the use of the church were worth £40
a year, but that £10 a year only had been applied to that purpose; and
that the overplus of all these lands had been expended in law-suits and
divers other business of the town; contrary to the designs of the donors.
It was also further complained, that the churchwardens had let the said
lands at rents considerably below their value, in order to obtain fines
and incomes, which amounted to £210 and upwards. And as the burthen of
repairing the church, in consequence of these alienations, fell, in great
measure, upon the inhabitants it occasioned an application to the Court
of Chancery for redress. Nevertheless, if the distressed condition of
the town at this time is considered, as being obliged to raise £120 in
1591, to defend their rights to Annott’s school; to raise £120 in 1597,
to defend their rights against Yarmouth, respecting the herring fishery;
to raise £200 in 1592 lo repair the church; also £114 in 1616 to
discharge the expenses of the above suit in chancery; may easily account
for some measures having been pursued which were not altogether
justifiable, but were adopted through absolute necessity.
That part of the town lands which was given for the use of the church,
and is chiefly appropriated towards keeping it in repair, and furnishing
it with decent ornaments, is the gift of some charitable and religious
persons, whose names, at this distant period, are wholly unknown; but,
whoever they were, they are justly entitled to the grateful
acknowledgments of the parish, as having been the means of preserving it
from a burthen which at all times would have been inconvenient.
Under the general denomination of town lands belonging to this parish,
are included, not only those above-mentioned, consisting of sixty-seven
acres of land, divers tenants, a wind mill, and dole lands, and which
were given for the use of the church, but also those that were given for
the benefit of the poor. Concerning the lands given to the church, the
donor is not only unknown at the present time, but was also unknown in
the year 1552, the sixth of Edward VI, when one, John Jetter, the only
surviving feoffee, made a new feoffment of the premises, dated 20th June;
and who therein said “That he together with divers persons deceased, had
them by the feoffment of Nicholas Hughson and William Fly, bearing date
10th November, 1503, 19 Henry VII.”
On the 12th June, 1644, when Francis Jessope, under a commission from the
Earl of Manchester, pillaged this church of almost all the brass
inscriptions, he took up, in the middle isle, twelve pieces belonging to
twelve several generations of the Jetters. Margaret Jetter, 1573, widow,
laid in the churchyard. The mother, probably, of Anthony Jetter, of
Lowestoft, merchant, who was living in the 8th of Queen Elizabeth.
The feoffees named in the feoffment, dated October 14, 1678, are: John
Arrow, vicar; Aldous Arnold, gent.; Samuel Barker, merchant; Samuel
Barker, jun., Hewlin Luson, jun., Dan. Ketteridge, merchant; John Peache,
merchant; William Bell Parker, clerk; John Jex, gent.; William Slop,
draper; Robert Reeve, gent.; Samuel Collett, draper; Henry Roman, baker;
James Harman, merchant; James Brame, baker; William Pashley, merchant;
Thomas Brame, gent.; Aldous Arnold, surgeon; Obed Aldred, bricklayer;
John Stannard, rope maker; Thomas Smith, beer brewer; Coe Arnold, beer
brewer; Philip Walker, gent.; John Howard, grocer.
The other part of the town lands given for the use of the poor, called
French’s, consisting of twenty-one acres and a half, were purchased with
sixty pounds left by William French, by will, dated April 14, 1529, to
buy free lands for the use of the poor; the profits of which lands were
to be distributed in the following manner: to thirteen poor people of the
town of Lowestoft, thirteenpence every Sunday, after divine service; and
three shillings and fourpence to the churchwardens, yearly, for their
trouble. About the beginning of the last century, in consequence of the
great misapplication of the rents and profits arising from these lands,
and also those given to the church, the inhabitants applied to the Court
of Chancery, requesting that a commission might be appointed for making
enquiry into the abuses, and to redress the same. A commission was
accordingly granted, and an inquisition was held at Lowestoft, and in the
year 1616 a decree was issued from that court (which cost the town £114
10s.) wherein it was ordered.
I. That the town lands belonging to Lowestoft should be let by the year,
or by leases not exceeding seven years, by the feoffees (the
churchwardens for the time being, being two) and six other inhabitants.
II. No new leases to be made before the old ones are expired.
III. The Rents to be received by the Churchwardens, and to be disposed
of as follows:
1st. That twenty pounds be laid out annually in repairing and
ornamenting the church.
2nd. To thirteen poor people of the town of Lowestoft, thirteen pence
every Sunday, and three shillings and four pence, yearly, to the
churchwardens, for their trouble.
3rd. Twenty pounds a year to the poor, including the above.
4th. Ten pounds a year to put out poor children apprentice, and a stock,
to set poor people to work; and the remainder of the rents to be disposed
of as the churchwarden, and twelve other inhabitants shall think proper,
for the public good of the town.
5th. That in all the leases there shall be a reservation of the timber
and wood; and that no wood or timber growing upon the premises shall be
felled or taken, but for the reparations of the church and the houses
standing on the said premises. And all underwood, when felled, shall be
sold for the benefit of the poor and reparations of the church, by the
churchwardens.
The decree in Chancery declares that this is the true intent and meaning
of the donors, and therefore ordered that it should be fulfilled in the
most ample and liberal manner. The Churchwardens are required on every
Monday in Whitsun week to pass a true account to the new churchwardens,
feoffees, and townsmen under pain of five pounds.
In 1738 the town lands belonging to the parish were let for between £90
and £100 per annum.
In 1644 they were let for the term of seven years, at the rent of £64
only. The rents of lands about this time were much reduced in general,
probably from the violent commotions of that unhappy period.
In 1651 they were let for £71 1s. per annum.
In 1734 they were let for £90 per annum.
In 1756 they were let for £93 per annum.
In 1776 they were let for the annual rent of £163 4s. 6d., agriculture
being so much improved of late years as to render farming very
advantageous. The farming business was in such a flourishing state about
this time, that the vicar of Lowestoft, in the year 1776, compounded with
his parishioners, for his tithes at 3s. 6d in the pound, according to
what the farms were let for; but in 1777 the said composition was 4s. in
the pound.
In 1683 the lands realised £138 6s. 6d. per annum.
There is no Church rate in the parish of Lowestoft, the profits arising
from the lands belonging to the church being amply sufficient for keeping
it in repair. Whether the rents of these lands have always been applied
to the uses intended by the donors, is now uncertain, but thus far may
justly be observed, that through the great care and assiduity of the
vicar, the Rev. Arrow, in appropriating to the use of the Church such
part of the town lands as it is justly entitled to, and preventing their
being alienated to purposes for which they were never intended by their
generous benefactors, this stately edifice is not only kept in proper
repair, but rendered truly elegant; so as to become an honour to
religion, a credit to the parish, and the admiration of every stranger.
The town lands contain not only the sixty-seven acres given for the
repair and ornaments of the church, and the twenty-eight acres and a
half, called French’s, given for the use of the poor, in the whole
ninety-five acres and a half, which lands are particularly and separately
described in the decree of Chancery of the year 1616; {127} but also the
other smaller donations of lands in Lowestoft, making the whole amount
one hundred and four acres, exclusive of the estate at Worlingham, in
Suffolk, given by Mr. John Wilde, of Lowestoft for establishing an
English Grammar school in the parish, and the lands at Whitacre Burgh,
the donation of Mr. Thomas Annott, of Lowestoft, for a grammar school at
Lowestoft. The above one hundred and four acres of land are put up to
auction every seven years, in the presence of the minister and
churchwardens, to be let on leases for the said term of seven years. The
overplus of Mr. Wilde’s estate, at Worlingham, after founding and
supporting the school, and fulfilling other directions mentioned in the
will, he gave for such charitable purposes as the minister and
churchwardens should think proper. This is further explained by a decree
in Chancery in 1754, which says, “that the minister and churchwardens
shall have the liberty to apply the overplus in such manner as they
should think fit, for the relief of such persons as have large families,
and such aged, sick, lame and impotent persons that belong to the said
town, and who do not receive any relief from the parish; or to and
amongst the testator’s poor relations, at the discretion of the
trustees.” It is also further enjoined by the said decree, that as
Lowestoft is a fishing town, the preference shall be given to those
children whose fathers go fishing voyages, or any other employment about
the fishery belonging to that town, as an encouragement to the said
fishery. But if there be not forty boys so qualified, then any other
boys belonging to the town, so as to make up that number.
The tower belonging to this church is neither large nor lofty, its height
is only 120 feet, including a leaden spire of the height of 50 feet, and
it is obvious to the most common observer, that both its height and size
bear but little proportion to the building to which it is annexed;
neither is there much resemblance between them either with respect to
composition or workmanship, for in both these points the church is far
superior to the steeple. These circumstances plainly denote that the
tower belonged originally to the old church, and strongly indicate that
the latter was a building much inferior to the present structure. Some
remains of the old steeple are still visible, and are indubitable proofs
of its original meanness; and also prove that when the old church was
re-built by the priory of St. Bartholomew, the greater part of the tower
was suffered to remain, after being strengthened and enlarged by
buttresses, and ornamented with a spire, in order to give it a more
modern appearance, and bring it to a nearer resemblance with the external
appearance of the edifice. At this present time and for many years past,
the steeple contains only one bell; but it is evident, from the
appearances which still remain, that formerly it contained three. The
reason generally assigned why the number was reduced, is, that the
steeple was not strong enough to bear them. The weight of this bell is
17 cwt. 2 qr. 17 lbs., and has the following inscription thereon:
I tell all that do me see,
Newman, of Norwich, new cast me.
The expenses paid to Mr. Newman, for new casting this bell, including the
brasses, amounted to £19 12s. 7d.
The church is dedicated to St. Margaret. It may be here stated that St.
Margaret was born at Antioch, and was the daughter of a heathen priest.
Olybius, president of the East, under the Romans, intended to have
married her; but finding she was a christian, deferred it till he could
persuade her to renounce her religion: but not being able to accomplish
his designs, he first put her to cruel torments and then beheaded her.
She suffered in the year 278.
The patron is the Bishop of Norwich; it is valued in the King’s books at
£10 1s., and by Queen Anne at £43 16s. 6d., and is thereby discharged
from paying first-fruits and tenths. By the King’s books is meant the
valuation of all the livings in England, taken in the reign of Henry
VIII. In the beginning of the reign of Queen Elizabeth, all livings that
were under £10 in the King’s books were discharged from paying the first
fruits. And in Queen Anne’s reign, when a second valuation was made, all
livings under the value of £50 per annum were discharged from paying
first fruits and tenths, and were also entitled to Her Majesty’s bounty.
Before the dissolution of the monasteries the annual value of the
vicarage of Lowestoft appears to have been £44 4s. 5½d.
The principal entrance to the church is by a stately porch on the south
side. In a nich on the outside, was formerly placed, as usual, the image
of the saint to whom the church is dedicated. There is also a nich on
each side of the former one, wherein other saints were also placed. On
the ceiling of this porch is a representation of the Trinity, drawn in
the same usual, but profane manner as, Blomefield says, it was on the
rood-loft in Norwich Cathedral, namely, the Almighty Father represented
by a weak old man, the Redeemer on the cross between his knees, and the
Eternal Spirit by a dove on his breast. There are also Ancient shields,
representing the crucifixion. On one of them is the cross, with the reed
and spear saltyr wise; also the scourge, the nails, and on the top the
scroll for the superscription. On the other, only the cross. Over this
porch there is a chamber, called the Maids’ Chamber. There is a
tradition that it took its name from two maiden sisters, Elizabeth and
Katherine, who, before the reformation, resided in this chamber; and, by
withdrawing themselves from the world, retired to the more tranquil
pursuits of a recluse life. It is reported of these sisters, that they
caused two wells between the church and the town, called Basket Wells, to
be digged at their own expense for the benefit of the town.
The church is situated about half a mile to the west of High street; and
the reason of its being erected at so great a distance from the inhabited
part of the parish, is the danger it would be exposed to from the sea by
a nearer situation; it is probable, that at the time the church was
built, the sea approached much nearer to the bottom of the cliff than it
does at present. The church is about 43 feet in height, 57 feet in
breadth, and, including the chancel and steeple, 182 feet in length. It
consists of a nave and two side isles, which are separated from each
other by two rows of tall, handsome pillars. The building appears to be
a perfect model of the churches of the more early ages of Christianity,
which were divided into two principal parts, namely, the nave, or body of
the church, and the sacrarium, or according to the more modern
appellation, the chancel. The former part being common to the people, as
the latter was appropriated to the priests and other “sacred” persons.
This separation continued in the English churches till the reformation,
when Bucer, at the instigation of Calvin, objected to this division, as
making too great a difference between the clergy and the people in the
celebration of divine service. In consequence of this objection of
Bucer’s, reading desks were erected in the nave of the church, for the
people’s instruction. But though the whole of the service was originally
performed in the chancel, yet there were always pulpits in the nave of
the church, from whence, on Sundays and holidays, the ministers
instructed the people by a sermon; and at the bottom of the south-west
side of the middle pillar, on the north side of the nave of the church
was a stone pedestal, which, before the reformation, supported the bottom
part of one of those pulpits. As all the service was performed in the
chancel, so the people, during the celebration thereof, remained in the
nave, and were not admitted into the former place only at the
administration of the sacrament.
The side isles of those antient churches did not terminate where the
chancel began, neither did they extend to the end of it, but extended
only about halfway of the chancel; and that end of the north isle which
reached beyond the nave was named the prothesis, or side table. {129}
In all the particulars mentioned, the church at Lowestoft bears a perfect
resemblance to the antient churches; the side aisles extending exactly
half way of the chancel; the end of the north isle next the chancel is
made use of as a vestry; and there is the same space at the east end of
the south aisle, which was used formerly for the prothesis. Before the
Reformation the chancels were separated from the nave or body of the
churches by screens or partitions. These screens are still remaining in
some of our English churches; in Lowestoft church part of it was standing
about the year 1710. The doors belonging to these screens (or holy gates
as they were called in the primitive times) were always kept shut against
the laity, except at the celebration of the sacrament.
There was also a rood loft in this church in the times of Popery. A few
years since some bricks falling down from one of the buttresses on the
south side of the church, near the chancel, discovered the stairs by
which they ascended to the loft. The same has also been discovered on
the north side of the church. The rood was the representation of our
Saviour on the Cross, with the Virgin Mary on one side and St. John on
the other; and was placed on the top of the wooden screen which formerly
divided the church from the chancel. This screen, from the use above
mentioned, was often called the rood-loft, a small bell, which was rung,
probably, at some particular parts of divine service (as at the
consecration or elevation of the host, from whence it is called the
sacring, or consecrating bell), to rouse the attention of the
congregation, some of whom, who sat at the south-east and north-east
corners of the church, could not well see what was transacting at the
high altar. This bell is different from that called the Saints’ Bell,
which was hung on the outside of the church, and gave notice to those
abroad when the more solemn acts of religion were performing. A small
piece of stone work on the outside of the east end of the church, with a
small perforation or arch in the middle, for the bell to swing in, is
still standing on several of our churches.
The chancel belonging to this church is very neat and elegant. The Rev.
Tanner, while vicar of the parish, opened the subscription for purchasing
the impropriation, and declared that if he succeeded in his undertaking,
he would expend a considerable sum in repairing and beautifying the
chancel. Mr. Tanner was successful, and he strictly adhered to his
promise; for he thoroughly repaired the roof, raised five free-stone
steps the whole breadth of the building, leading to the communion table,
wainscotted the east end entirely, as well as part of the north and south
sides, and also erected the seats at the west end, and made such
alterations as rendered the chancel both commodious and handsome,
expending in the whole upwards of £300.
The succeeding vicar, Rev. Arrow, continued the plan of his worthy
predecessor in repairing and ornamenting the chancel. He erected a new
altarpiece, enclosed the communion table with handsome iron work, opened
the lower part of the east window (which before was filled up with brick
work), and glazed the same, which caused this window to produce a very
beautiful effect when viewed from the body of the church; and from these
and other alterations, he rendered the chancel truly elegant. The number
of communicants at Lowestoft church on Easter day, 1789, was 122.
There was a custom amongst the primitive Christians (during the violent
persecutions which raged in those early ages of Christianity) of having
churches underground, in order to avoid the dreadful cruelties which a
more open profession of their religion would have exposed them to. In
imitation of this antient practice the more modern Christians have also
had their subterranean places of worship, which were situated under the
choirs or chancels belonging to their respective churches, and where they
also deposited the bones of deceased persons, which places where called
the under-croft, and from the latter use of them charnel-chapels. There
seems to have been one of these charnel-chapels formerly under the
chancel belonging to this church. The design of them was for a priest to
officiate therein, and to pray for the souls of all those persons whose
bones were deposited in that place; but after the reformation they ceased
being used for any sacred purpose, and were made use of afterwards only
as repositories for the bones that were casually dug up in the church or
churchyard.
The font in the church is very antient. It is ascended by three stone
steps, and on the upper step is an old inscription, almost unintelligible
through corrosion. The font is surrounded by two rows of saints, each
row consisting of twelve figures; but they were so much injured by
Francis Jessope, when he visited the church in 1644, under a commission
from the earl of Manchester, as to be almost totally defaced.
On the 12th of June, 1644, Francis Jessope, of Beccles, under a
commission from the Earl of Manchester, visited this church, and took
away all the brass plates from the grave stones having the inscription
“Orate pro Anima, etc.” and others of the like nature, except the
following: “Pray for the soul of Lady Margaret Parker, who died the First
day of March, Ao. Dni. 1507. On whose soul may God be propitious.” He
also disrobed the stones of many brass effigies. All the brass was sold
to Mr. John Wilde, of Lowestoft for five shillings; although the quantity
was sufficient to be run into a bell, which was used for a chapel. On
the bell is the inscription “John Brand made me, 1644.” The stone work
of the font is covered with a handsome piece of carved work erected in
the year 1734 by John Postle and Edmund Gillingwater, churchwardens.
About the year 1740, the pews in the church being very old, irregular,
and much decayed, the Rev. Tanner, the vicar of the parish, in order to
recover it from this disgraceful state, and to ornament it with that
decent arrangement of seats, so becoming a place dedicated to public
worship, and so generally to be met with in other churches, first set the
example of new-pewing the church by erecting (in 1746) six neat wainscot
seats in the body of the church, in memory of his wife. On these seats
was the following inscription: “In memory of Mary, the wife of John
Tanner, and daughter of Robert and Mary Knight, 1746. Not unto us, O
Lord; not unto us, but unto thy name be the praise. John Tanner, vicar,
desires this to be considered as a monument and pledge of love.” In 1747
he added eight more, in grateful acknowledgment of some great mercy he
had received from the Almighty. On these seats the inscriptions are
“What shall I render unto the Lord for all his benefits towards me. J.
T., 1747”; the other is “In memory of Grace Symonds, sister of John
Tanner, vicar, 1759.” It is supposed he thus shewed his thankfulness,
for having been enabled to complete and publish the great work of
learning and antiquity the “Notitia Monastica,” which his brother, the
Bishop of St. Asaph, left unfinished. The town being stimulated by so
pious and useful an example, undertook within a few years after, to
complete what Mr. Tanner had so laudably began; for in the year 1770 the
whole design of new-pewing the church was completed; and by the addition
of a very elegant desk and pulpit, is become one of the neatest and best
pewed churches in the county.
In the year 1778 a resolution was formed by the minister and
churchwardens to erect an organ in the church, and in pursuance thereof,
a large gallery was built that year, at the west end of the middle isle,
for the purpose of an organ loft; and in 1780 a large chamber organ,
which formerly belonged to the late Dr. North, of Shanfield, near
Saxmundham, was purchased at the price of eighty pounds, and erected in
Lowestoft Church, and is the first instrument of the kind ever placed
there.
There was a large brass eagle in the church. It formerly stood at the
west end of the middle isle, but was removed into an obscure corner. The
original use of the eagle, so general, formerly, in most of the churches,
was for the purpose of being used as a litany desk; which part of the
Church service, after the Reformation, was read or sung, at a different
time of the day, from that where morning prayers were read. Also,
possibly, the great English Bible, which, in 1538, Thomas Cromwell, Lord
Privy Seal, ordered to be placed open in each parish church, for everyone
to have recourse to, was laid upon these eagles. The ardour with which
men flocked to read this bible is almost incredible. They who could,
purchased a Bible, and they who could not, crowded to read it, or to hear
it read, in churches; where it was common to see little assemblies of
mechanics meeting together for that purpose, after the labours of the
day. Many even learned to read in their old age, that they might have
the pleasure of instructing themselves from the Scriptures.
In many parts of the Church are stones with matrices, or moulds, wherein
plates of brass had formerly been laid; but all are now disrobed,
together with the inscriptions, during the ravages under the usurpation
of Oliver Cromwell.
The churchyard belonging to the parish, was nearly square, but not so
before the year 1769, for at the south-west corner there was a small
piece of glebe land, about a quarter of an acre, which projected into it.
The parish had formerly made application to the late Vicar, Mr. Tanner,
to exchange it for a piece of equal value; but the answer he always
returned was, that he had no right to make any alteration in the property
of the church. However, in the year 1769, the parish made an amicable
agreement for it with the Rev. Arrow, and it was enclosed with a wall and
laid into the churchyard, which made it of a regular form, but the piece
of ground was never consecrated. On the death of the Rev. Arrow, the
Vicar, in June, 1789, the dwelling-house, of which he was the proprietor,
was purchased of his executors, for £550, under the powers of an Act of
Parliament, passed some years since, for the better securing the
residence of the clergy. But as the Act did not authorise an incumbent
to raise more than two years value upon his benefice, and that sum
amounting only to £430, the deficiency was made up in the following
manner: Dr. Bagot, the Bishop of the Diocese, £20, and the parish of
Lowestoft £100; and accordingly the house is now settled upon the Vicars
of Lowestoft for ever.
In the churchyard formerly stood a cross, some remaining fragments of the
stone work which supported it were visible a few years since. On the
north side of the church is a tomb belonging to the family of the
Barkers; in which are interred the remains of John Barker, Esq., a native
and benefactor to the town; who died at his house in Mansel street,
London, the 1st November 1787, aged eighty years. He was one of the
elder brethren of the Trinity House, a govenor of the London Assurance,
vice-president of the Magdalen house, and one of the directors of
Greenwich Hospital. His body arrived at Lowestoft on the 8th of
November; and after laying in state at the Queen’s Head Inn till the next
day, it was conveyed with great funeral pomp to the burial place of the
family; where an elegant mausoleum has been erected, he having left by
will £500 for that purpose, and also charged £1000 Bank stock, with the
payment of £30 per annum for keeping the same in repair for ever; and
what was not wanted of the said £30 for that use, is to be given to the
poor of Lowestoft, in bread, at the church every Sunday after divine
service. He also gave £200 to the poor of Lowestoft, to be given in
coals, etc., immediately after his decease, which was done.
John Barker in his Will says:
I direct that my body be buried in the yard of the parish church of
Lowestoft, in the County of Suffolk, in the vault wherin my late wife
Elizabeth lies interred; and it is my desire that my executors
hereafter named do cause a handsome tomb and monument to be erected
over the said vault to our memory; but not to lay out a greater sum
than £500 in erecting the same. And it is my intent, that the said
vault, tomb, and monument be kept, in every respect, in perfect
repair, pursuant to the provision hereafter by me made for that
purpose.
I give and bequeath the sum of One thousand pounds, three per cent.
consolidated Bank annuities, unto the Accountant General, for the
time being, of the High Court of Chancery; but to, for, and upon the
uses, trusts, intents, and purposes following, that is to say, Upon
Trust to permit and suffer the minister and churchwardens of the
aforesaid parish of Lowestoft, for the time being for ever, (subject
to the control and direction of the said Court of Chancery, in case
if any misapplication of the said trusts, Bank annuities, contrary to
the true intent and meaning of this my will), to receive and take the
interests, dividends, and proceeds of the said one thousand pounds
Bank annuities, to and for the following uses (to wit): In the first
place thereout to keep, maintain, and support the said vault, tomb
and monument herein before by me directed to be erected in Lowestoft
churchyard, as aforesaid, not only neat, clean and decent, but in all
respects in perfect repair. And in the next place, as to what
overplus shall remain of such interest, dividends and proceeds, after
keeping the said vault, tomb, and monument in perfect repair, I do
empower the said minister and churchwardens, for the time being, to
lay out such overplus in the purchase of bread, and to distribute the
same, after divine service be finished on a Sunday, to and among such
persons in low and indigent-circumstances, of the said parish of
Lowestoft, as they shall think fit objects of this charity. But it
is my will and meaning, that my nephews, the aforesaid William Bell
Barker and Samuel Barker, and after the death of the survivor of
them, the persons for the time being for ever, who shall be heirs at
law to my said nephews, William Bell Barker and Samuel Barker, shall,
from time to time, have and enjoy the privilege of nominating to the
minister and churchwardens aforesaid, twelve of such poor persons to
receive the benefit of the said charity; and to which twelve poor
persons to be nominated as aforesaid, the preference shall be always
given, of having the said bread first delivered to them, anything
herein before contained to the contrary thereof, in any wise
notwithstanding. And it is my will, that all such expenses as at any
time may attend the execution of the said trust, shall be first
deducted out of the interest, dividends, and proceeds arising from
the said one thousand pounds trust Bank annuities. And it is my
further will, that if the aforesaid stock, commonly called three per
cent. consolidated Bank annuities, shall at any time be paid off;
then, and in such case, the produce of the said one thousand pounds
stock shall be re-invested in the name of the Accountant General for
the time being, on other Government security, to, for, and upon the
like uses, trusts, intents, and purposes hereintofore expressed of
and concerning the same.
Mr. John Wilde, of Lowestoft, having, by will, dated the 22nd of July,
1735, given several estates to this town, after the decease of Elizabeth
Smithson, for the purpose of a school for the education of children
belonging to this parish; and the said Elizabeth Smithson (afterwards
Perryson) having departed this life the 3rd of December, 1781, the
minister and churchwardens, in pursuance of the trust reposed in them by
the said will, on the 21st of March, 1788, began to erect a building, for
the purpose of a schoolroom, according to the directions of the said
will; which building is thirty-six feet in length and twenty-five feet in
breadth, and is situated at the bottom of the hill, on the east side of
the Stone House which he gave to the parish by the said will; which house
stands on the east side of High street, a little to the north of Rant’s
score. Under the first stone of this building are deposited several
silver and copper coins of his Majesty.
Subjoined is an extract of the Last Will and Testament of JOHN WILDE, of
Lowestoft, gentleman, (who died in April, 1738,) bearing date the 22nd of
July, 1735:
Also I give and devise unto the town of Lowestoft, for ever, all that
my dwelling-house, fish-houses, yards, gardens, and appurtenances
whatsoever to the same belonging, in the occupation of the Rev.
Shewell. Also I give and devise to the said town of Lowestoft, for
ever that all my meadow, in Lowestoft aforesaid, now in the
occupation of John Pope. Also I give and devise unto the said town
of Lowestoft, for ever, all that my house commonly called Rotterdam,
with the yards, gardens, and appurtenances whatever to the same
belonging, now in the occupation of James Pottle. Also I give unto
the said town of Lowestoft, for ever, all my dole-lands in Lowestoft,
together with all my lands, tenements, and hereditaments (if any
there be not before by me given and bequeathed in this my will)
whatsoever, which I have, at the time of my decease, in the town of
Lowestoft aforesaid. Also I give and devise unto the said town of
Lowestoft, for ever, the reversion (whenever it shall happen, after
the death of the said Elizabeth Smithson) of all my messuages, lands,
tenements, hereditaments, and premises, situate, lying, and being in
Worlingham aforesaid, now in the tenure or occupation of Nicholas
Matcheston, or his assigns, under-tenant, or under-tenants; all which
premises, before by me given to the said town of Lowestoft, I give to
the uses, intents, and purposes hereafter in this my last will more
particularly declared, limited, and appointed. And I do nominate the
minister and churchwardens, for the time being, for ever, hereafter
to be trustees of all these my bequests to the said town of
Lowestoft, strictly charging and commanding them religiously and
conscientiously to discharge their trust, hereby by me given to them
as they will answer it to Almighty God another day, in seeing the
same performed according to the true intent and meaning of this my
last will and testament, which now follows. And, first, my mind and
will is, that all the same estates before by me given and devised to
the said town of Lowestoft, together with the rents and profits
thereof, shall be applied for a virtuous and learned schoolmaster,
who shall teach forty boys to write and read, and cast accounts; and
also shall teach them the Latin tongue. And my mind and will is,
that the said schoolmaster shall be chosen by the said minister and
churchwardens for the time being, upon every vacancy that shall
happen by death, misdemeanour, or misbehaviour of the said
schoolmaster. All which I leave to the discretion and management of
the said Minister and Churchwardens for the time being, to place,
replace, or remove the said schoolmaster as they shall think proper;
desiring them they will act impartially in placing or removing the
said schoolmaster, and not choose by favour or affection, but having
virtue, religion, and merit chiefly in view. And my mind and will
further is, that when all the said bequests, before by me given and
bequeathed to the said town of Lowestoft, shall become due to the
said (then, and not before), the salary of the said schoolmaster
shall be forty pounds per annum; which I will be paid half-yearly to
the said schoolmaster, upon the feasts of St. Michael, the Archangel,
and the annunciation of the blessed Lady Mary the Virgin, by equal
portions in every year. And my mind and will is, that until the
death of the said Elizabeth Smithson, the profits of the other
bequests before by me given and devised to the said town of Lowestoft
shall be at their own discretion, so as the same be expended towards
the encouraging of learning; and therefore would have it employed, as
far as the rents will go, towards educating children in manner
aforesaid. And my mind and will further is, and I do hereby give and
devise unto the Minister of the said parish of Lowestoft for the time
being, for ever, the sum of one pound and one shilling; and unto the
clerk of the said parish, for ever, the sum of ten shillings; and
unto the sexton of the said parish, for ever, the sum of five
shillings. All which said sums of one pound and one shilling, ten
shillings, and five shillings, I will shall be paid out of the rents
and profits of all the messuages, lands, tenements, hereditaments,
and premises, before by me given and devised, in this my will, to the
said town of Lowestoft, for the purposes aforesaid. And I bind all
the same for the payment thereof. And my mind and will is, that the
said several sums shall be paid to the several persons always yearly
upon the twenty-third day of December, in every year; but upon this
condition, nevertheless, that the minister of the said parish of
Lowestoft for the time being, shall always yearly upon the
twenty-third day of December in every year, sometime in the forenoon,
preach a sermon (except the said day should fall on a Sunday, and
then my mind and will is, that the said sermon should be preached on
the Monday next following); and his text I desire should be these
express words—“Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he
is old he will not depart from it.” And my mind and will further is,
that the said sermon should chiefly tend upon the great necessity of
the good education of children, and the ill consequence that attends
the neglect of it. And in case any overplus should arise out of the
said several bequests before by me given and devised to the said town
of Lowestoft, after the said salary of forty pounds to be paid to the
said schoolmaster, in manner aforesaid; and the said several sums of
one pound one shilling, ten shillings, and five shillings, to be paid
to the several persons above mentioned, be fully paid and satisfied,
such overplus, if any should be, or whatever it be, I give and devise
the same, for such charitable purposes and uses as the Minister and
Churchwardens of Lowestoft aforesaid, for the time being, shall think
proper to distribute, so as such overplus, if any there be, or
whatever it be, shall be distributed every year.
Will of Mr. John Hayward, of Lowestoft, to whom some of the poor were
indebted for weekly donation of bread:
In the name of God, Amen. I, John Hayward, of Lowestoft, in the
county of Suffolk, mariner, being of sound and perfect mind and
memory, do make and ordain this my last will and testament in manner
and form following: First. I commit my soul into the hands of
Almighty God, etc., and for settling my goods and temporal estate, I
do give and dispose of the same as followeth: I give and bequeath all
my messuages or tenements unto Mary, my loving wife, during the time
of her natural life. I give and bequeath (after my said wife’s
decease) unto my son, Robert Hayward, all my houses, out-houses,
fish-houses, lands and appurtenances whatsoever, to hold to him for
and during the term of his natural life, and after his decease to the
heirs of his body lawfully to be begotten. And for want of such
heirs, give all the same lands and premises to and amongst all my
daughters that shall then be living. To hold them jointly, and to
their heirs for ever, so as, and upon condition, that my said son
Robert, or his heirs, or my daughters, or such person or persons as
shall enjoy my said messuages, lands, and tenements, shall pay or
cause to be paid unto my grandson, Samuel Mariner, the sum of fifty
pounds, of lawful money of Great Britain, at the age of one and
twenty years. And also shall pay yearly, and every year, into the
hands of the churchwardens of the parish of Lowestoft, and their
successors, for ever, the sum of two and fifty shillings. The first
payment within twelve months next after the decease of my said wife,
and so to be received yearly by the churchwardens, and employed and
laid out twelve pence weekly, and every week in the year, for
fourteen loaves of bread, to be by them given every Sunday, or Lord’s
day, throughout the year, for ever, after divine service in the
afternoon, at the parish church of Lowestoft aforesaid, to fourteen
such poor people as they shall think fit. Which said sums of fifty
pounds, payable to my grandson, Samuel Mariner, and two and fifty
shillings, given payable yearly for ever, for bread for the poor, my
will is, shall be paid out of the estate wherein I now dwell. And I
do make all the same estate liable and subject to the payment of the
same, as fully and amply as may or can be. And my will is, that the
same may so continue for ever. Except such persons as shall enjoy
the same, after the payment of the aforesaid fifty pounds to my
grandchild, shall give any other security to the churchwardens and
trustees of Lowestoft aforesaid, for the continuance of the payment
of two and fifty shillings yearly, for ever, as they, the said
churchwardens and trustees, shall think fit to accept. {134a}
This is a true copy of the clause of Mr. John Hayward’s will, which
was proved at the Bishop of Norwich’s principal office (19th of
August 1719), holden in the precinct of the cathedral church of
Norwich; where the original will may at any time be seen.
JOHN TANNER,
Vicar of Lowestoft, and one of the executors of the said John
Hayward.
* * * * *
A decree, judgment, and orders made sett down by Sir Arthur Heveningham,
Sir Miles Corbett, knts., Henry Gawdy, Esq., and Mr. Dr. Sucklinge,
doctor in divinity; by virtue of her Majesty’s commission to them and
others, out of her Majesty’s High Court of Chancery, under the great
seale of England, directed and hereunto annexed, upon a verdict by force
of the like commission, to them and others directed by them, the second
day of October, in the four and fortieth year of her Majesty’s most
gracious and happy reign, taken and returned unto the said Court of
Chancery upon the statute made in the High Court of Parliament holden the
seven and twentieth day of October, in the three and fortieth year of her
Majesty’s reign, intituled an Act to redresse the misemployments of
lands, goods, and stocks of money, before the making thereof, given to
charitable uses, as followeth:
IMPRIMIS. We do order, adjudge, and decree that the free grammar
schoole mentioned in the said verdict shall be and remain a free
grammar-schoole, and shall have continuance for ever within the said
town of Lowestoft; and the same schoole shall consist of a
schoolmaster learn’d in the art and knowledge of grammar, and able to
instruct and teach the rules and principles thereof and the Latin
tongue, and other things incident, necessary, and belonging to the
said art, to be master, tutor, and teacher of the schollars in the
said schoole, consisting of forty schollars, and not above, to be
taught and instructed within the said schoole.
ITEM. We do order, adjudge, and decree that the house within the
said town of Lowestoft, which is now used for the schoole-house for
the said master and scholars, {134b}, shall, for ever, hereafter,
continue and be the schoolehouse wherein the schoolemaster of the
said schoole shall teach and instruct the schollars thereof; and that
Stephen Phillips, now schoolemaster of the said schoole, shall
remaine schoolemaster thereof; and that he and his successors, and
all other schoolmasters of the said schoole, shall, for ever
hereafter be called and known by the name of “Mr. Annott, his
schoolemaster.” And whensoever, and as often as it shall happen,
that the place and roome of the schoolmaster hall become void, we do
order adjudge and decree, that the Chancellor for the time being, to
the Bishop, for the time being, of the see of Norwich, or sede
vacante the guardian of the spiritualities, shall have the nomination
and appointment of the schoolemaster of the said schoole within the
said town.
We do also order, adjudge, and decree, that the forty schollars of
the said schoole shall be of such children as are or shall be borne
within the said towne of Lowestoft, if there be or shall be
sufficient of such within the said town to supply and fill up the
said number of forty. And for want of a number sufficient of them to
supply or make up the said number of forty, then that the children of
the inhabitants within the said town, albeit the said children be or
shall not be born within the said town, to supply and make up the
said number of forty. And if these also neither are nor shall not be
sufficient to supply and make up the said number of forty, then that
the children of the inhabitants within the hundred of Lothingland and
Mutford shall be nominated, elected and appointed to supply and make
up the said number of forty; the choise and appointment of which
schollars shall be to the said Stephen Phillips, now schoolemaster,
so long as he shall be schoolemaster there, and to such as from time
to time shall supply the roome and place of the said schoolemaster
within the said town; so that he do nominate and appoint to the
number of forty scholars, and not above; and that he shall not take
for the nomination and appointment so by him to be made above the
sume of twenty pence for every schoolar within the said schoole.
(Examined by me,)
RICHARD MOSS, Dep. Reg.
Writings of great length concerning this school could at one time be seen
at the Episcopal Office at Norwich. Probably the original deed of Mr.
Annott, bearing date 10th of June, 1570, for founding the school, the
commission, inquisition and verdict, as well as the above decree, are
included amongst them. Mr. Annott dying without issue, his heirs at law
disputed the legality of the donation, and endeavoured to recover the
lands, for it is recorded that in 1591 it cost the town £120 to defend
its right to this school; and it was in consequence of this suit that the
heirs augmented the annual payment from twenty marks to sixteen pounds.
On the vacancy of a mastership of this school, a person of good
character, and a member of the Church of England, is presented to the
Chancellor of the Diocese by the Vicar and Churchwardens of Lowestoft for
the time being, who appoints and licenses the same.
About the year 1670 (when the old school-house belonging to Annott’s
foundation was decayed) a dispute seems to have arisen between this
parish and the Allens of Somerly, respecting a design formed by that
family of uniting Annott’s school with one founded by Sir Thomas Allen.
One Mr. Henry Britten formerly master of the school at Lowestoft, who had
been applied to by the town for information concerning this affair,
answered as follows:
TO THE TOWNSMEN OF LOWESTOFT,
Whereas I was desired to give an answer to divers things proposed
concerning the free grammar-school at Lowestoft, during the time I
had to do with it; to which I answer as follows: I was presented to
it by Mr. Thomas London, the then patron, in the year 1667, and
chosen by the general consent of the town, with the minister’s hand
and churchwardens, and generally the whole town; and had also a
license from the chancellor of Norwich, with his seal, to receive the
profits, and did receive, for divers years, the yearly salary of £16
per annum, paid me by the tenants of the school lands at Burrough.
But the tenant being a backward man, was always in arrears, and at
last died, and left at least £10 unpaid. Thomas Perry, steward for
Mr. Thomas Allen, seized what he had, and I was never paid it. But
after that they paid me, and I received it from Sir Thomas himself,
at the hall, but most what his steward paid me, but they also kept
behind in arrears, but told me I should be paid it, only desired me
to forbear awhile, because the tenant had not paid them.
Some while after, old Sir Thomas {136}, erected a school house. When
it had been some while built, and stood empty, Mr. Evans petitioned
that he might keep a writing school in it, which being granted soon
after, Sir Thomas would have me resign, that he might lay the
revenues given to the Latin to his school house, designed for
English. In refusing to sign, there being about two years in
arrears, he told me I should not have one farthing, if I did not
resign, and from that time the money was stopped. He desired also to
see writings belonging to the school, which he did obtain of some of
the townsmen, which he kept, and they could not be found until such
time as we came to agreement, which was many years after.
Thus it continued many years unpaid. Sometimes I had promise of
payment from Sir Thomas Allen, but he was set off again by some or
other. I have had many journeys to Norwich, and applied myself to
the Bishop and Chancellor, and had promise of them to do me right,
but something or other always happened that it was still unpaid. I
had counsel about it, and I was told that I might help myself by the
Court of Chancery, if the town would join with me, otherwise they
would not assist me. I propounded it and found the town cold, and
did not care for stirring in it; so that at last I was forced to
agree with them, there being £200 due. With much ado I agreed with
them to pay me £100, which I did not receive all, till a year or more
after I resigned (in 1696.) Mr. Echard, of Somerleyton, was he that
agreed it with me, as Sir Thomas Allen’s agent. They required me to
give them bond to quit all claim of the school, and also to give in
my license. And, thus, I suppose, I have answered what was desired.
HEN BRITTEN.
Needham Market, Dec. 26, 1701.
An extract of the last Will and Testament of JOHN WILDE, of Lowestoft,
bearing date the 3rd of April, 1699, respecting the donation of James
Wilde, his father, of twelve loaves of bread to the poor of this parish
to be given every Sunday, after divine service, in Lowestoft church.
Also his own donation.
ITEM. I give, devise, and bequeath unto my said son John and his
heirs, for ever, fifteen pounds, of lawful English money; the
interest of which said sum of fifteen pounds, with the rent of the
messuage, tenement, and pightle, in the occupation of John Middleton,
aforesaid, I will shall be for and towards the payment of twelve
loaves of bread, given by my father, Mr. James Wilde, deceased, every
Sunday, or Lord’s Day, in the year, for ever, to the poor of
Lowestoft aforesaid. And for and towards the payment of six penny
loaves more, as aforesaid, being my own bequest, to be distributed as
aforesaid, in Lowestoft Church, after divine service in the forenoon,
every Sunday for ever. But my mind and will is that it shall be in
my said son John’s power to choose whether he will give securities to
the feoffees of the town lands and churchwardens of the said tenement
and pightle, and the interest of the said fifteen pounds, or assign
and set over the said tenement and fifteen pounds unto the said
feoffees, to remain for ever to the use aforementioned, the one of
which, my mind and will is, shall be performed and done by my said
son John and his heirs, for ever.
ANN GIRLING, widow, by will, bearing date 8th of June, 1584, gave certain
premises therein mentioned to the poor of Lowestoft, to be given them in
firing.
LOWESTOFT.—At the General Court Baron, with the leet of Corton,
holden on Saturday, in Quinquagesima week, in the 27th year of Queen
Elizabeth, A.D. 1584–5.
To this Court came William Wilde and John Lawne, and brought into
Court the last will and testament of ANN GIRLING, of Lowestoft,
widow, in which is contained (amongst other things) as follows:
_Item_. My barn, house, with the tenement adjoining and their
appurtenances, being copyhold of this manor of Lowestoft, I give and
bequeath unto Thomas Ward, William Wilde, Nathaniel Arnold, John
Wilde, John Lawne, John Wells, and their heirs for ever. ONLY to the
use of the honest poor of Lowestoft, to be given by the hands of two
of them, in wood, so far as the farm of my said barn and tenement,
with the appurtenances, will reach yearly. So much yearly detained
only as shall keep the same in reparation sufficiently. And they the
said feoffees to see conveyance made from them, when there remaineth
but two of them, to others whom they shall think good to the use
aforesaid. Or as learned counsel shall best advise; and so from
feoffees to feoffees, to the use aforesaid, for ever, as by the said
will, bearing date the 8th day of June, A.D. 1584, it doth and may
more fully and at large appear. And thereupon the said William Wilde
and John Lawne, in their own proper persons, and the other feoffees,
namely, Nathaniel Arnold, John Wilde, and John Wells, by their
attorney, were admitted, etc.
The premises, named, have many years since fallen into decay; and the
ground was, in 1773, the garden of a house situated by the old market,
and was let for five shillings per annum.
The abuttalments are thus described in the last admission:—“One tenement
decayed, with a barn and garden thereunto belonging, in the west lane,
near the old market, between the king’s highway upon the south; and the
lands of Margaret Whitehead upon the north; and abutts upon the widow
Sterry, towards the west; and upon late Stingales, towards the east. In
whom it is now vested, is unknown; but the churchwardens dispose of the
rent.”
SECTION VI.
OF THE CHAPELS.
THE church belonging to this parish standing at too great a distance from
the general residence of the inhabitants to be frequented by the aged and
infirm, it became necessary to erect places for public worship in a near,
and consequently, more convenient situation. It is evident that there
have been two chapels in the town of Lowestoft, and both of them erected
before the Reformation. One of them was situated at the south end of the
town, and was called Good-Cross Chapel. This building was destroyed by
the sea, without leaving any traces remaining, whereby might be
determined either its dimensions or the exact place of its situation.
This chapel was not only situated at the south end of the town, but also
as far to the east, probably, as the sea would admit of; for it stood
between the ocean and the principal highway leading from Lowestoft to
Kirkley. The latest account that can be met with, respecting the time
when it was standing, is in the reign of Edward VI. These circumstances
appear from the following entry in the Court rolls of the manor of
Lowestoft:—“At a general Court Baron with the leet, held in the fourth
year of the reign of King Edward the Sixth, Laurance Robson was admitted
to parcel of land of the waste of the Lord with a house thereupon built,
called Good-Cross Chapel, containing in length sixty feet, in breadth
fifty feet, the west head whereof abutts upon the way leading from
Lowestoft to Kirkley, on the surrender of Richard —. At a Court held on
Wednesday next after the feast of the nativity of St. John, Thomas Welch
was admitted on the surrender of the said Laurance Robson.” The
offerings made to the holy cross in this chapel, before the dissolution
of the monasteries, amounted to about £9 annually for the benefit of the
Vicar of the parish.
The other chapel situated near the middle of the town, and after the
dissolution, appears not to have been used for many years as a place of
worship, but was suffered to fall much into decay. That part of the
building which was next the street was converted into a town-house, for
the residence of the poor. At the north-east corner was an entrance;
where, by ascending a gallery the chapel was entered behind the town
house; and also at this entrance was an isle, which led backwards to the
farther end of the chapel. The building seems to have been erected upon
arches, as there were cells underneath on each side of the isle; and
wherein, probably, in the times of Popery, some persons inhabited; for
afterwards, one of these cells was the residence of the sexton of the
parish. {138} This appears to have been the state of this antient chapel
from the time of the dissolution of the monasteries until the year 1570;
when the inhabitants, experiencing many inconveniences in not having a
place for public worship near the church, made application to Bishop
Parkhurst for a license, in order that divine service might be performed
in this chapel, which accordingly was granted; but upon this express
condition, that the chapel should be decently ornamented and fitted up
for that purpose; that no public prayers should be used there than those
prescribed in the Book of Common Prayer; and that neither the sacrament
of baptism nor Lord’s supper should ever be administered there on any
account whatsoever.
TO THE PARISHIONERS OR LOWESTOFT.
JOHN, by divine permission, Bishop of Norwich. To our beloved in
Christ, the parishioners of Lowestoft, in our diocese and
jurisdiction, health, grace, and blessing.
Know ye, that for the furtherance of devotion, and for the increase
of divine worship; and attentively considering and understanding from
certain good and weighty reasons to us explained, that the parish
church at Lowestoft aforesaid not being so conveniently situated for
hearing divine service as could be wished (especially in the winter
season,) you are not able to attend. And that you may be enabled to
cause public prayers to be celebrated in a proper chapel, in a fit
place, and decently ornamented, within the parish of Lowestoft
aforesaid, whenever the parishioners of Lowestoft, or the vicar
thereof, conceive that divine service may be less commodiously
performed in the said church than in the said chapel, we have granted
by these presents LICENSE for celebrating divine service therein; and
we have caused this our license to be irrevocable. But provided
nevertheless, That no vicar or curate baptize, or administer the
sacrament of the Lord’s supper, or cause it to be administered in the
place aforesaid, but in the church of your parish. Nor that they
cause, nor that you the parishioners presume, to assist therein, in
the celebration of either of the said sacraments, in any manner
whatsoever. Inhibiting, moreover That no other public prayers be
there used, or suffered to be thus used, than what are prescribed in
the Book of Common Prayer, set forth by royal authority, and by the
consent of the whole Parliament, approved and lawfully enjoined. But
if you or any one act contrary hereto, we will, that the authority
hereby given to you be void and of no effect. And moreover, you
offending in the premises, shall be liable to punishment, lawfully to
be inflicted, or imposed at our pleasure.
11th November, 1570.
After the granting of this license, divine service appears to have been
performed in this chapel until about the year 1674 or 1676; at which
time, probably, from its decayed state, it became wholly unfit for that
purpose; and the public weekly prayers, after that time, were read in the
town chamber, a room over the town house; and in this manner was divine
service performed until the year 1698, when the old chapel, from its very
ruinous state, was entirely taken down and rebuilt, in consequence of a
subscription opened for that purpose. The old chapel was a thatched
building.
The re-building of this chapel was undertaken under the care and
management of Captain Andrew Leake, {139} and Dr. Joseph Leake: and was
brought (together with corn-cross and town chamber) into nearly the same
state in which they appeared in 1698 at the expense of about £350.
The ADDRESS to the INHABITANTS of LOWESTOFT, Respecting the
RE-BUILDING of LOWESTOFT CHAPEL.
Forasmuch as I have observed the great danger which may ensue from
the weakness and decay of the chapel and town house at Lowestoft, in
the county of Suffolk, with many other inconveniences attending the
same. And considering the state of the inhabitants of the town at
this time to be a proper season for undertaking and re-building of
the said chapel. Being therefore devoted, not only to employ my time
in the management and carrying on so good a work, but also to solicit
a free and liberal contribution towards effecting the same, which I
doubt not but every honest gentleman will promote, by his generous
assistance therein; an account of which receipts shall always be
shewn to such as desire it, for their satisfaction, by reason of the
many complaints of the mismanagement of former collections. And if
any person do, or shall suspect my failure in my answering the sum
collected, and deposited in my hands, I do hereby promise to engage
to give treble security that the monies collected shall be laid out
to the use above mentioned.
As witness my hand, 7th of June, 1698.
ANDREW LEAKE.
The amount collected by Captain Andrew Leake was £152 0s. 6d.; by Dr.
Joseph Peake £193 14s. l¾d. The expenditure was £347 13s. 7d., being £1
18s. 11¼d. in excess of the receipts, and this sum was generously
discharged by Dr. Peake, in the presence of James Wilde, Henry Ward, John
Wilde, John Peake, John Barker, jun., John Jex, John Barker, Matthew
Arnold, Joseph Smithson. The chapel, although much superior to the
former building, was, nevertheless, but an indifferent structure. The
pews were of deal, the pulpit and desk stood on the south side; and a
gallery on the east, west and north sides. In the middle of the building
was hung a vast brass chandelier, the gift of Mr. Martin Brown, formerly
a merchant at Rotterdam, but was a native of Lowestoft.
The font belonging to this chapel stood originally on the north side of
it, opposite the desk and pulpit. In 1763 it was removed to the
south-east end of the chapel; and in 1773, when the north end of the corn
cross was inclosed for the purpose of a vestry, the font was again
removed to the north-east end of the building. Although baptism was not
permitted to be administered in the old chapel, yet it was always
performed in this chapel from the time it was erected. Elizabeth, the
daughter of Samuel Darkin, was baptised here on the 29th December, 1699,
and was the first baptised in the chapel. The font was the gift of Mr.
John Jex, merchant of this town. It is not clear from what place the
font was brought. The town book, belonging to this parish, says it came
from Easton Bavent; but the late John Jex of this town, used to declare
that it was brought from Gisleham, and was digged up by accident on the
lands in that parish, belonging to the above John Jex, merchant, his
father. Probably the latter is the fact, as Mr. Jex had lands at
Gisleham, but none at Easton Bavent. However, be that as it will, Mr.
Jex was undoubtedly the benefactor.
Prayers were read at this chapel every Wednesday, Friday, and holidays
throughout the year. On Sundays, divine service was always performed
here in the morning, except when the sacrament was administered, when it
was always at the church. Sometimes, in very bad weather, the service
was at the chapel on Sundays, both parts of the day.
It is not improbable, but that before the reformation there was another
chapel in the town besides those two already mentioned. This chapel (if
there ever really was such a place appropriated to sacred purposes) was
situated on the west side of High street, about thirty yards to the north
of Swan Lane. It was an old Gothic building, faced with black flint; was
about sixteen feet in height, and twelve in breadth; and had the
appearance of a very antient building. What tends to strengthen the
conjecture of its being a place originally designed for sacred uses is,
that the Rev. Tanner, who was vicar of the parish (and who published his
brother’s “Notitia Monastica,” and consequently was a competent judge of
those matters) used to say, that if ever there was a religious house in
this town, it was situated opposite to this building. If so, probably
this building was the chapel belonging to that religions society. The
buildings supposed to have been originally a religious foundation, carry
with them, some resemblance of an institution of that nature. They are
divided by a passage (which was entered by a large door-space, in the
Gothic style), having spacious rooms on each side, whose venerable
appearance demonstrates their having been formed neither after a modern
nor a mean original.
SECTION VII.
VICARS OF LOWESTOFT.
IN consequence of there not having been any regular registers of the
institutions to church benefices before the year 1299, it is impossible
to obtain any information respecting those appointments prior to that
period; but after the keeping of those registers, much light has been
thrown on the ecclesiastical history of this country: and it is from the
assistance derived from these registers that the regular succession of
vicars of this parish can be given from the year 1308.
Thomas Scrope, surnamed Bradley, from the town where he was born,
descended from a noble family, and very much adorned the honour of his
birth by his learning and virtues. He was first a monk of the order of
St. Benedict; after that, aspiring to a greater perfection of life, he
took upon him the profession and rule of a Dominican; and afterwards he
submitted himself to the discipline of the Carmelites. He became Bishop
of Dromore, in Ireland, but in the year of his age one hundred, he died
in this town of Lestoffe, the 15th January, 1491, the 7th of Henry VII,
and was buried in the chancel of Lowestoft Church. On the stone over his
burial place was a stone upon which was the effigy of a Bishop in his
episcopal habit: his crozier in one hand and his pastoral staff in the
other, with several escutcheons of the arms of his family etc., and
ornamented with a border, all in brass; but, scarce any remains of them
are now to be seen, and the matrices wherein they were placed are almost
empty.
In 1540 John Blomewyle, was on the presentation of Thomas Godsalve, Esq.,
instituted vicar. He resigned in 1555, in the beginning of the reign of
Queen Mary. Probably he could not conform to the alterations in
religious matters made by the Queen at that time; or possibly he might be
a married man, and therefore under the necessity of resigning, to prevent
being ejected, as was the misfortune of a great number of the clergy in
that unhappy reign.
The Rev. Jacob Rous appears to have been minister of this parish during
the whole usurpation of Oliver Cromwell. He was vicar, on June 12, 1644,
when Francis Jessope was sent with a commission from the Earl of
Manchester to disrobe the grave stones of the brasses that had the
inscription “Orate pro anima, etc.”
The Rev. Whiston, on the 19th August, 1702, resigned Lowestoft, to
succeed Sir Isaac Newton in the mathematical professorship, at Cambridge.
He was a divine of great abilities and uncommon learning. In 1694 he was
appointed chaplain to Dr. Moor, Bishop of Norwich, which he held till
1698, when the Bishop presented him with the living of Lowestoft with
Kessingland. A parish (Mr. Whiston said) of 2,000 souls, but not worth
more than £120 a year clear. The care of souls was rightly esteemed by
him as a concern of the highest importance; he, therefore, set himself
sincerely and in good earnest to that great work, discharging the several
duties of a parish priest with distinguished piety and unwearied
diligence. Notwithstanding that his income was so small, he kept a
curate, allowing him £30 a year, and the curate made £30 a year more by
teaching a small school. Mr. Whiston set up public prayers morning and
evening, everyday, at the chapel within the town. He constantly preached
twice on Sundays; and at the summer season, at least, had a catechetic
lecture at the chapel in the evening, designed more for the benefit of
the adult than for the children. To these lectures came many dissenters.
This may easily be accounted for when it is considered that the noted Mr.
Emlyn had officiated as minister to the Dissenters of the town eighteen
months, about ten years before. Mr. Emlyn had adopted the Arian
principles, and probably had introduced the same sentiments among many of
his hearers, who consequently, were pre-disposed to attend lectures that
were given by a minister of the establishment who entertained opinions
similar to those of Mr. Emlyn, as was the case with Mr. Whiston. There
appears to have been the most intimate friendship between these two
divines: for when Mr. Whiston, in 1715, held a weekly meeting for
promoting primitive Christianity, the third chairman of those meetings
was Mr. Emlyn. Mr. Whiston resigned the livings in 1702, and being, by
the interest of his friend, Sir Isaac Newton, appointed to succeed him in
the mathematical chair at Cambridge, he went and resided in that
university; but continuing to retain and propogate Arian principles, he
was for his heterodox opinions expelled the university on the 30th
October, 1710. In 1747 he left the communion of the Church of England,
and joined the Baptists. After engaging in various schemes, and
experiencing many vicissitudes of fortune, he died on the 22nd August,
1752, in London, after only a week’s illness. His body was interred at
Lyndon, near Stamford, Lincolnshire. The inscription placed over him
says he died in the 85th year of his age. Endued with an excellent
genius, and indefatigable in labour and study, he became learned in
divinity, antient history, chronology, philosophy and mathematics.
Jacob Smith, vicar in 1702, was a native of Scotland, and for
conscientiously refusing to take the oaths of King William, he was (with
a large family) reduced to all the hardships and miseries of an obscure
and necessitous life; but on the resignation of Mr. Whiston, Bishop Moor
presented him to Lowestoft. He was buried in the churchyard, close by
the north side of the chancel, where a tomb was erected to his memory.
And tradition reports that he was the first person ever buried on that
side of the church. There was formerly a great partiality respecting
burying on the south and east sides of the churchyard at Lowestoft. Many
years after the interment of Jacob Smith there was not more than two or
three graves on the north side of the church, though subsequently it
became as general to inter on one side as on the other. This partiality
may, perhaps, at first, have partly arisen from the antient custom of
praying for the dead; for as the usual approach to this and many other
churches is by the south, it was natural for burials to be on that side,
that those who were going to divine service, might, in their way, by the
sight of the graves of their friends, be put in mind to offer up a prayer
for the welfare of their souls; and even now, since the custom of praying
for the dead is abolished, the same obvious situation of graves may
excite some tender recollection in those who view them, and silently
implore the passing tribute of a sigh.
The Rev. John Tanner, who was Vicar of Lowestoft many years, died in
1759; he was precentor of the Cathedral of Asaph, Rector of Kessingland,
and also commissary and official to the arch-deaconry of Suffolk, (in
1725), which offices he resigned as soon as the infirmities of age
rendered him incapable of performing them with that care and exactness he
had always shewn in their discharge. Among his many antient acts of
charity may be mentioned (exclusive of the active part which he took in
the re-building of Kirkley church) his purchasing the impropriation of
Lowestoft, for the benefit of his successors; his expending a large sum
of money in repairing and beautifying the chancel; and also setting the
first example in new-pewing the church. He was the third son of the Rev.
Thomas Tanner, vicar of Market Leavington, Wiltshire; was educated at
Queen’s College, Oxford; and obtained his preferment through the interest
of his brother, Thomas Tanner, who was many years Chancellor of the
Diocese of Norwich.
Rev. J. Arrow who was instituted to the vicarage of Lowestoft in 1760,
was born in London in 1733; was educated at Westminister school, and
admitted of Trinity College, Cambridge; was formerly a chaplain to the
Royal Navy, which he exchanged for Lowestoft, with Dr. Greet, chaplain to
Dr. Hayter, Bishop of Norwich, who had presented him to the same, but was
not instituted. The Rev. Arrow died the 22nd of June 1789, aged 55
years, and was buried in the chancel of Lowestoft church. He was a
person of a very regular life and conversation; zealous in promoting the
interest and welfare of the church; and so very conscientious in
discharging the duties of his function, that although very ill, yet he
preached twice in the last twenty-four hours before he expired.
The Rev. Robert Potter, prebendary of Norwich, was well known in the
literary world as the learned and ingenious translator of the Aschylus,
Sophocles, and Euripides.
SECTION VIII.
OF RELIGIOUS SECTS.
THE town of Lowestoft has been much distinguished in religious concerns,
for its invoilable attachment to the establishment of the Church of
England, as in civil affairs, for its unshaken loyalty to its sovereign.
Nevertheless, it is not without its sectaries, which, at different times,
have arisen in the town; the principal of which sectaries is that society
denominated Independents or Congregational Dissenters. At what time it
was that this religious sect first began to make its appearance in
Lowestoft is uncertain. Previous to the year 1689, when the learned Mr.
Emlyn came to reside in the town, and commenced as minister to the
Congregational dissenters, it was but an inconsiderable body, destitute
of a regular pastor, and also of a decent structure for the purpose of
religious exercises. {143} The congregation of Protestant dissenters at
Lowestoft might be considered also, at that time, as a kind of dependent
assembly on the Dissenting congregation at Yarmouth; as it was customary
for the members belonging to the former congregation to repair to that at
Yarmouth at the usual seasons of receiving the holy communion, and was
much in the same state of dependence on that society as a chapel-of-ease
is on the mother church.
At this early period the Dissenters of Lowestoft had no other building
for the public exercise of religion than a barn situate in a lane called
Blue Anchor lane, opposite Rant’s score; and they continued in this
obscure situation till the year 1695, when a decent structure was erected
for religious uses. Probably the Society was much increased after the
year 1689, when so distinguished a character as Mr. Emlyn became their
minister, and in consequence thereof might be enabled to erect this
building. This meeting house was erected in 1695 upon a small piece of
ground given for that purpose by Mr. James Ward of this town. The
eminent Mr. Emlyn was born at Stamford, in Lincolnshire, May 22, 1663.
In August, 1674, he was put to a boarding school at Walcot, near
Folkingham, where he continued four years, and on Sundays was the
constant auditor of the noted Mr. Brocklesby, the then incumbent of that
parish. Mr. Emlyn’s parents were of the established church, and were
very intimate with the very learned and worthy Dr. Cumberland, then
minister at Stamford, and afterwards Bishop of Peterborough, but being
inclined to the Puritans, they choose to educate their son among that
sect; for this purpose he was sent, for academical education, in 1678, to
Sulby, near Welford, in Northamptonshire, where he continued four years.
In 1679 he went to Cambridge; and in 1682 was admitted of Emanuel
College, but, returned again to Sulby; and in the same year he removed to
Mr. Doolittle’s academy, first at Islington, then at Clapham, and
afterwards at Battersea. He made his first essay as a preacher December
19, 1682, at Mr. Doolittle’s meeting house, near Cripplegate. In 1683 he
was chaplain to the Countess of Donegal, a lady of great quality and
estate in the north of Ireland, but resided then in Lincoln’s Inn Fields,
London, and the year following accompanied the family to Belfast. While
in this station he made a journey to Dublin, and during his continuance
in that city, preached once before that congregation of which Mr. Daniel
Williams and Mr. Joseph Boyce were at that time pastors, in a manner so
acceptable to the audience, as gave occasion for that people afterwards
to invite him to be their minister. A favourable opportunity for this
purpose offered shortly after; for Mr. Williams having quitted the
congregation at Dublin, Mr. Boyce made some overtures to Mr. Emlyn
relative to his succeeding him, which he declined accepting. Mr. Emlyn
still continued his station as chaplain in this family; but in 1688, when
the disturbances in Ireland occasioned his patron’s family to leave that
Kingdom, he returned to London. On his arrival at that place, and being
out of employment, he was invited by Sir Robert Rich, one of the Lords of
the Admiralty, to his house at Rose Hall, near Beccles, and was by him
prevailed upon to officiate as Minister to the Dissenting congregation at
Lowestoft; which place he supplied about a year and a half, but refused
the invitation of being their pastor; for as he disapproved of Ministers
changing and shitting from one place to another, so he had determined not
to accept any pastoral care but where he thought he should settle, and
purposed to continue. It was during his residence at Lowestoft, that,
reading Dr. Sherlock’s piece on the Trinity, he first began to entertain
some scruples concerning the received doctrine in that point of faith.
Here also he contracted a close and intimate acquaintance with Mr.
William Manning, a Nonconformist Minister at Peasanhall, and corresponded
with him during Mr. Manning’s life. As both were of an inquisitive
temper, they frequently conferred together on the highest mysteries of
religion; and Dr. Sherlock’s book on the Trinity became a stumbling block
to both. Manning even became a Socinian, and strove hard to bring his
friend into those opinions, but Mr. Emlyn could never be made to doubt
either of the pre-existence of our Saviour, as the Logos, or that God
created the material world by him.
King James having fled into France, and Ireland being nearly reduced by
King William, the affairs of that Kingdom began to be in a more settled
state, and the dissenting congregations assembled in larger numbers.
This induced Mr. Boyce to renew his application to Mr. Emlyn, to accept,
jointly, with himself, the pastoral care of his congregation at Dublin;
and to effect his purpose, wrote him a very pressing letter, and sent it
to Mr. Nathaniel Taylor, minister at Salter’s Hall, London, who
transmitted it enclosed in one from himself, to Mr. Emlyn, at Lowestoft.
Mr. Emlyn being so strongly solicited to accept the office of assistant
pastor to the congregation at Dublin, complied with the invitation, and
accordingly arrived in Dublin in May, 1691, and continued there until
1702, when his troubles began; for Dr. Duncan Cummins, a physician in
that city, suspecting him of heterodox notions, about the Trinity, put
Mr. Boyce first upon the enquiry, and went afterwards with him to Mr.
Emlyn’s house, where the Unitarian freely confessed his belief “That God
the Father of Jesus Christ, is above the Supreme Being, and superior in
excellency and authority to his Son, who derives all from him.”
Protesting, however, that he had no design to cause strife among them, he
offered to leave the congregation peaceably. But, Mr. Boyce, not willing
to take such a weighty matter on himself, brought before the meeting of
the Dublin ministers; in consequence of which, Mr. Emlyn was immediately
prohibited from preaching, and in a few days obliged to withdraw into
England. But some zealous Dissenters, having resolved to prosecute him
with the utmost rigour, they obtained a special warrant from the Lord
Chief Justice to seize him and his books, and went with the keeper of
Newgate to execute it upon him. The Chief Justice refused at first to
take bail, but at length accepted of a recognizance, from two sufficient
persons, of £800 for his appearance. On his trial he was found guilty.
He was moved to retract, which he absolutely refused; and was therefore
sentenced to suffer a year’s imprisonment, to pay a fine of £1,000 to the
Queen, to live in prison till it was paid, and to find security for his
good behaviour during life; telling him that the pillory was the
punishment due, but because he was a man of letters it was not inflicted.
After this he was led round the four Courts to be exposed, with a paper
on his breast, signifying his crime. The fine was afterwards mitigated
to £70, and this, together with £20, claimed by the Primate, as the
Queen’s Almoner, was paid. Thus, after an imprisonment from the 14th of
June, 1703, to the 21st July, 1705, and on giving security for his good
behaviour, during life, he obtained his discharge. Soon after Mr. Emlyn
returned to London, where a few friends gathered a small congregation, to
whom he preached once every Sunday; this liberty gave great offence to
several clergymen of the Established Church, and complaint thereof was
made to Archbishop Jenison; but His Grace, being fully acquainted with
the proceedings against him in Dublin, and his accusers not alleging that
Mr. Emlyn made the controverted points the subject of his sermons, on the
account of his character, was not inclined to molest him. This
congregation was dissolved by the death of the principal persons who
supported it, and their preacher retired into silence and obscurity, and
died July 30th, 1741. Mr. Emlyn was a man of a lively and cheerful
temper, of strong parts, and clear way of thinking, of great learning,
and abounding in all religious graces; he was a popular and much admired
preacher, for he not only had a portly presence, a strong clear voice,
and a graceful delivery, but his discourses were, for the most part,
rational and persuasive, always concluding somewhat serious and
pathetical. He wrote several tracts, which, with his sermons on
practical subjects, were collected and printed, in 1754, in three
volumes, octavo, to which are prefixed Memoirs of his Life and Writings.
During Mr. Emlyn’s residence in Lowestoft, he cultivated the most
friendly intercourse with the Rev. Hudson, at that time vicar of the
parish; accompanying him in collecting public charities, and would
frequently himself with several of his society attend the service of the
church, by which means a perfect harmony subsisted between the members of
the Establishment and the Dissenters. Nevertheless, his conduct in this
respect was not approved altogether by those of his own community. Mr.
Emlyn was also intimately acquainted with the Rev. Whiston, vicar of
Lowestoft, and a successor of Mr. Hudson; and he was also particularly
intimate with Dr. Samuel Clarke, who entertained nearly the same
sentiments in religion as Mr. Emlyn and Mr. Whiston.
It is a little difficult to ascertain precisely who the ministers were
that officiated at Lowestoft from the departure of Mr. Emlyn to the year
1698. There is an account of one Mr. Manning, who was an occasional
preacher in the latter end of the reign of Charles II, or in the time of
his brother James; but who this person was, whether he was an ejected
minister (as there were several of that name in this country) or some
other minister of the name of Manning, does not appear. It is not
improbable that he was the Rev. Manning, of Peasanhall, previously
mentioned, who was the intimate friend of Mr. Emlyn. Be this as it may,
authentic accounts say that the Rev. Samuel Baxter, the eldest son of an
ejected minister of Lancashire, settled here as minister to the
Dissenters about the year 1698. He left the congregation about the year
1703, and removed to Ipswich. He was succeeded by the Rev. Henry Ward,
who left Lowestoft about midsummer, 1707, and settled at Woodbridge,
where he died at the close of the year 1734. Mr. Ward was succeeded at
Lowestoft by Mr. Samuel Say, in 1707 or 1708. Mr. Say was born in the
year 1675, and was the second son of Mr. Giles Say, minister of St.
Michael’s parish, in the town of Southampton, but rejected thence by the
Act of Uniformity in 1662. But after the grant of liberty of conscience,
in the reign of James II, he was chosen pastor of a Dissenting
congregation at Guestwick, in Norfolk, where he continued till his death,
April 7th, 1692. Mr. Samuel Say, the son, received his first education
at Southwark; and having discovered when he was but a young man, a strong
inclination to the ministry, his father accordingly took care to have him
educated in the best manner he could for that purpose, from his earliest
years; and about the year 1692 he entered as a pupil the Rev. Rowe’s
academy at London, where he had for his fellow students Mr. (afterwards
Dr.) Isaac Watts, Mr. John Hughes, and Mr. Josiah Hort, afterwards
Archbishop of Tuam. When he had finished his studies, he became chaplain
to Thomas Scott, Esq., of Liminge, in Kent, a gentleman eminent for piety
and goodness. Mr. Say continued in this family three years, and was well
esteemed by all for his Christian behaviour and exemplary conversation.
From thence he removed to Andover, in Hampshire; but in a short time came
to Yarmouth, in Norfolk, and soon after that became a constant preacher
at Lowestoft. Here he continued eighteen years, labouring in word and
doctrine; but not being able all the time to bring the people among whom
he ministered into a regular church order, he never settled with them as
their pastor. During the residence of Mr. Say, at Lowestoft, the
Dissenters had not the sacrament administered here; but after that Mr.
Say had preached at Lowestoft in the afternoon, on Sundays, he would ride
to Yarmouth, attended by such of the congregation as were so disposed,
and there he administered it. Mr. Say left Lowestoft in 1725, being
invited to a co-pastorship with the Rev. Samuel Baxter, of Ipswich, where
he remained nine years; and from thence was called to succeed Dr. Edmund
Calamy, then lately deceased, in the pastorship of the Church of
Protestant Dissenters in Westminister. He removed thither in 1734, and
continued in his pastoral relation till April 12th, 1743; where, after a
week’s illness of a mortification in his bowels he died at his house in
St. James’ street, in the sixty-eighth year of his age. He was a very
ingenious and sensible man; had great candour and good breeding, without
stiffness and formality; an open countenance, and a temper always
communicative; he was a tender husband, an indulgent father, and of a
most benevolent disposition, ever ready to do good, and relieve the wants
of the distressed to the utmost extent of his abilities. He was well
versed in astronomy and natural philosophy. This is evident from an
astronomical and meteorological journal kept by Mr. Say from the year
1713 to 1734; wherein, among the various occurrences related by him, as
an account of the great consternation excited among the inhabitants of
Lowestoft at what is called _the first_ appearance of the Aurora
Borealis. Mr. Say writes: “The market this day is full of discourse
concerning a great and unusual light, from seven to twelve last night,
seen in Lowestoft, Beccles, and at sea. Women rose out of their beds
through fear, others screamed, ships came to anchor fearing an unusual
tempest, so dreadfully the sky opened; the angry clouds also seemed, in
the imagination of the superstitious beholder, to flash one against
another. This curious phenomenon had never been seen either in England
or foreign countries from 1621 to 1707, and then only in a small degree;
therefore the splendour with which this appeared attracted universal
attention. The vulgar viewed it with consternation, and considered it as
marking the introduction of a foreign race of princes into this country;
so strangely do people perplex and bewilder themselves when they depart
from true philosophy, which never fails both to ennoble and enlighten the
human mind.” He had also a taste for music and poetry, and was a good
critic and master of the classics. Soon after his death a thin quarto
volume of his poems with two essays in prose “On the Harmony, Variety,
and Power of Numbers,” written at the request of Mr. Richardson, the
painter, were published for the benefit of his only daughter, who married
the Rev. Mr. Toms, a Dissenting Minister at Hadleigh, Suffolk. The poems
are not destitute of merit, but the two essays have been much admired by
persons of taste and judgment.
In the year 1725 Mr. Say was succeeded by the Rev. Whittick, who removed
to Kingston-on-Thames in 1733. It was during the ministry of Mr.
Whittick, that the dissenting congregation at Lowestoft became a
perfectly distinct body, and dissolved the connection which hitherto had
subsisted with Yarmouth, Mr. Whittick declaring that unless they became a
separate body, distinct from any other congregation, he would leave them.
In 1733 Mr. Whittick was succeeded by the ingenious Mr. Thomas Scott, son
of a Dissenting minister at Norwich. Mr. Scott, the grandfather of Mr.
Thomas Scott, was an eminent merchant in London. He had two wives. By
his first wife he had the above-mentioned Mr. Scott, Dissenting minister
at Norwich, who had (besides other children) two sons of considerable
note in the learned world, namely Mr. Thomas Scott, who was minister at
Lowestoft, and Dr. Joseph Nicoll Scott, who was first a Dissenting
minister, and published two volumes of sermons; but afterwards practised
physic in London, and was well-known by the hand he had in several
ingenious and useful publications. He was an assistant to his father in
the congregation at Norwich; but embracing the Arian principles,
(received there only by a few at that time) his father was under the
painful necessity of expelling him from that society. By his second wife
he had Dr. Daniel Scott, author of the Appendix to H. Stephens’s Greek
Lexicon, in two volumes, folio, dedicated to Archbishop Secker and Bishop
Butler—the New Version of St. Matthew’s Gospel, with critical notes,
etc., a learned and accurate performance—and an Essay towards a
Demonstration of the Scripture Trinity. The design of this last work is
to prove that the common notion of the doctrine of the Trinity (or the
Athanasian scheme) is erroneous. He had the highest esteem for Dr.
Doddridge, notwithstanding he differed so much from him respecting the
Trinity; and had such a particular regard for that author’s Treatise on
the Rise and Progress of Religion, that he made it a constant travelling
companion. And Dr. Doddridge seems to have held Dr. Scott with equal
estimation; for in his Family Expositor he called him the learned,
ingenious, candid, and accurate Dr. D. Scott. Mr. Thomas Scott, minister
at Lowestoft, in the early part of his life, kept a small boarding school
(for ten scholars only) at Wortwell, near Harleston, and used to preach
at the meeting house at Harleston once every month. From Wortwell Mr.
Scott removed to Lowestoft, where he continued five years; but the
keenness of the air being too severe for the tenderness of his
constitution, he was under the necessity of leaving Lowestoft about the
year 1738, and removed to Ipswich. {147}
After Mr. Scott’s removal to Ipswich, he became well known to the learned
world by several very ingenious publications, particularly by his poetic
translation of the book of Job, with critical notes, and some other
poetical pieces. But finding, during his residence at Ipswich, the
infirmities of age coming on him very hastily, and rendering him
incapable of discharging the duties of his function with that care and
exactness which he had always observed with the most scrupulous
attention, he quitted that town in 1774, and retired to a small
congregation at Hepton, in the neighbourhood of Norwich, where he died
about two years after. Mr. Scott was succeeded in the year 1738 by Mr.
Alderson, who continued pastor till his death, which happened in 1760.
Mr. Alderson having a large family, and the stipend at Lowestoft being
small, Mr. Elisha Barlow, a dissenter and eminent merchant of the town,
was so far influenced by the considerations as to bequeath by will to the
dissenting congregation at Lowestoft a considerable estate in the
adjoining parish of Mutford, as an augmentation of the salary of the
minister; but on this condition, nevertheless, that if Mr. Alderson was
not continued pastor, the said estate should devolve to him and to his
heirs for ever. In pursuance of this obligation, it was agreed on by the
whole body of Dissenters at Lowestoft (in consequence of their great
esteem for Mr. Alderson) to draw up an instrument, in which they formally
expelled him as pastor, in order to give him a legal claim to the estate
and afterwards re-chose him into his former pastoral office. But
notwithstanding all these endeavours on the part of the congregation to
render Mr. Alderson so essential a service, they were soon after entirely
frustrated by the heirs at law of Mr. Barlow, who disputed the legality
of the donation on the Mortmain Act, and commenced a suit in Chancery for
recovering the estate. The result of this suit was, that Mr. Alderson
was obliged to relinquish all future claims whatsoever to the same. This
misfortune was an irreparable loss to Mr. Alderson. The anxiety which he
suffered during the contest greatly impaired his health and shortened his
days; for soon after, as, on the Lord’s day, he was preaching to his
congregation, he was suddenly taken ill, was obliged to be led home, and
died in a short time. Mr. Alderson was a worthy, well-disposed man, of
an exceedingly affable and peaceable disposition, much esteemed by the
whole circle of his acquaintance; and as he lived much respected, so he
died universally lamented.
The Dissenting congregation at Lowestoft appears to have been but very
small before the year 1689, when Mr. Emlyn became their officiating
minister; after this period they became a more numerous body, and
continued increasing till the year 1735, when their number was become
very considerable; after that year they appear to have been in a
decreasing state, and declined very fast, especially since the death of
Mr. Alderson; for, according to an account taken in 1776, the number
amounted to only 35, that could be properly called Independents and
Congregational Dissenters. The number of Dissenting families in 1780 to
1790 (exclusive of the Methodists) was under twenty, but the congregation
usually consisted of 150 and 200 persons.
While the law suit was pending, and for a short time after the death of
Mr. Alderson, the congregation at Lowestoft was under the care of the
Rev. Nasmith. After Mr. Nasmith came Mr. Gardner. From 1760 to 1785
about fifteen ministers had charge of the Dissenting congregation.
A digression may be interesting respecting an extraordinary trial,
concerning two poor old widows belonging to Lowestoft who were tried,
condemned, and executed on a charge of witch-craft.
In the year 1663 Mr. Samuel Pacey, an eminent Dissenter at Lowestoft,
commenced a prosecution against two widows, on a suspicion of witchcraft.
Mr. Pacey had conceived an opinion that two of his daughters, Elizabeth
and Deborah, respectively eleven and nine years of age, were bewitched;
and that these two women, whose names were Rose Cullender and Amy Duny,
were the cause of the misfortune. In consequence of this suspicion, he
caused Amy Duny to be set in the stocks; but not thinking this a
sufficient punishment, he caused both women to be apprehended; and at the
ensuing Lent assizes, held at Bury, the 10th March, 1664, before Sir
Matthew Hale, Knt., Lord Chief Baron of his Majesty’s Court of Exchequer,
they were severally indicted for bewitching (amongst others) the said
Elizabeth and Deborah Pacey; and being arraigned on the said indictment,
pleaded not guilty; but being afterwards, after a long course of
evidence, found guilty, they were thereupon, on Thursday, March 13th,
sentenced to die for the same, and accordingly, on Monday, the 17th of
March following, they were executed.
Dr. Hutchinson, in his historical essay concerning witchcraft, has given
many pertinent observations respecting this very extraordinary trial;
intending thereby to expose its absurdity, and to detect and ridicule the
evidence on which the sentence was founded. To give a detail of every
ridiculous circumstance that was urged in the course of the evidence,
would be both irksome and disgusting; but two of the most material points
may be related, which were adjudged to have the most weight, and
principally to affect the cause then before the Court; adding thereto the
remarks made thereupon by Mr. Hutchinson.
In the course of the trial it was deposed by Samuel Pacey, that his
younger daughter Deborah, was suddenly taken ill with a lameness in her
legs, was seized with violent fits, and felt the most excruciating pains
in her stomach, like the pricking of pins, which caused her to shriek in
an alarming manner; and also, that his daughter Elizabeth was afflicted
in the same manner, and that they could not open their mouths wide enough
for respiration, sufficient to preserve life, without the help of a tap.
But Dr. Hutchinson says, there was no necessity for putting taps in the
children’s mouths when a sufficient quantity of air to preserve life
could have been drawn through their nostrils. John Soam, of Lowestoft,
deposed, that, in harvest time, as he was going into the field to load,
one of the carts wrenched the window off Rose Cullender’s house,
whereupon she came out in a great rage, and threatened him for having
done wrong. The consequence whereof was, that the cart was overturned
twice that day; and the last time of loading it, as they brought it
through the gate which led out of the field into the town, the cart stuck
so fast in the gate’s head that they could not possibly get it through,
but were obliged to cut down the post of the gate, to make the cart pass
through, although they did not perceive that the cart did of either side
touch the gate-posts. Dr. Hutchinson says, very true, Rose Cullender
might well be in a passion when they ran the cart against her house and
damaged it; and an unruly horse or a careless driver might easily
overturn a cart two or three times a day; and if the cart stuck so fast
in the gate’s head so as they could not get it through (though it did not
touch the gate-post as they could perceive), what made them cut the post
down? These depositions shew the kind of evidence it was on which these
poor unfortunate women were condemned and executed, the ludicrous manner
in which Dr. Hutchinson has treated it, as well as the contemptible light
in which it was regarded by all the wise and discerning part of mankind.
But exclusive of the evidence, they had also recourse, during the trial,
to art and stratagem; for they caused one of Mr. Pacey’s daughters to be
blindfolded and to be touched by one of the supposed witches, in order to
discover what effect it would produce; and on using this experiment, the
girl fell into a violent rage, and gave the Court what they deemed the
most evident demonstration of the criminality of the prisoners.
Nevertheless, Mr. Sergeant Keeling seemed so much dissatisfied with this
proof, that he thought it not sufficient to convict the prisoners; and
therefore Sir Matthew Hale privately desired the Lord Cornwallis, and Mr.
Sergeant Keeling to try the experiment in another place, and by a
different person; but notwithstanding they perceived the same effect, yet
these gentlemen, on their return into Court, declared, that from what
they had discovered, it was, in their opinion, that the whole of the
charge was groundless, and without any foundation. This was a favourable
circumstance in behalf of the prisoners, as it tended to acquit them, and
it actually stopped the proceedings of the Court a considerable time. At
last, however, it was resolved to take the opinion of Dr. Brown, a
physician from Norwich, and who was desired by the Court to give his
sentiments concerning the prisoners, whether he really thought they were
witches or not. The doctor’s evidence amounted to this: “That he was
clearly of opinion that the two girls were really bewitched; for that in
Denmark there had been lately a great discovery of witches, and from some
books that had been published in that kingdom, it appears that the
witches there had used the same methods of afflicting persons as had been
practised by the prisoners.” This evidence of Dr. Brown turned the scale
against these unfortunate women, and appears to have been decisive.
The eyes of all the sensible and inquisitive part of the nation were
fixed on this very extraordinary trial, and waited with impatience the
decision of the Court. They were full of expectations that the point
would be so fully discussed as finally to determine it, and leave no room
for posterity to engage in any farther controversy concerning these
notions. But this was reserved for a more enlightened age; for it
appears that nothing but perplexity and confusion ensued thereupon. The
judge himself was so far from being satisfied with the evidence, that, on
the contrary, he was extremely doubtful concerning it; and was under such
distressing fears and apprehensions during the trial, and proceeded with
such extreme caution therein, that he forebore summing up the evidence,
but left it to the jury, with prayers to God to direct their hearts in so
weighty a matter. Accordingly the jury, after withdrawing about
half-an-hour, returned with their verdict, which pronounced the prisoners
guilty. After this the judge gave the law its course, pronounced
sentence of death upon them, and they were executed very soon after.
Thus were these two unfortunate widows, whose only misfortune was either
the poverty of their circumstances, the deformity of their persons, or
the weakness of their understandings, sacrificed to the superstition of
the age, the insufficiency of the evidence, and the ignorance and
credulity of the jury.
Possibly it may be admitted, as some extenuation of the absurdity of this
prosecution, to remember that it was undertaken in an age in which the
notion of witchcraft was generally received; _that_ not only among the
illiterate and vulgar, but even amongst those who were in the highest
estimation for rank, piety, and learning.
It was in consequence of this ridiculous notion that one Matthew Hopkins,
of Manningtree, in Essex, together with some others, were commissioned by
Parliament in 1664, and the two following years, to perform a circuit, in
order to discover witches. By virtue of this commission they went from
town to town through many parts of Essex, Suffolk, Norfolk, and
Huntingdonshire, for the purpose of detecting them; and caused sixteen to
be hanged at Yarmouth, forty at Bury, and also as many more in different
parts of the country as amounted in the whole to nearly one hundred
persons. It is to this absurd commission that Butler alludes in
Hudebras, when he says:
Hath not this present Parliament
A ledger to the devil sent,
Fully empow’d to treat about,
Finding revolted witches out?
And has he not within a year
Hang’d three score of them in a shire?
This Hopkins used to call himself Witchfinder General, and had twenty
shillings allowed him for every town he visited. He used many arts to
extort confession from suspected persons, and when they failed he had
recourse to swimming them; which was done by tying their thumbs and toes
across one another, and then throwing them into the water. Thus he went
on searching and swimming the poor creatures, till some gentleman, out of
indignation at the barbarity of it, took him and tied his own thumbs and
toes as he used to tie others, and when he was put into the water he
himself swam as others had done before him. This method soon cleared the
country of him, and it was a great pity the experiment was not thought of
sooner.
Returning from the digression it may be noted that another religious sect
which appeared in Lowestoft is the Methodists. The society first made
its appearance here in the year 1761; and was introduced by that great
leader of the sect, the Rev. John Wesley, and has continued. In the year
1776 their number was increased to about fifty; they purchased a piece of
ground on the north side of Frary lane, and soon after erected a meeting
house there, which was opened on the 19th November, 1776, by Mr. John
Wesley, who came to Lowestoft for that purpose.
SECTION IX.
MILITARY AND NAVAL AFFAIRS.
LOWESTOFT being a maritime town, it is consequently more distinguished
for memorable transactions relative to naval affairs, than for those
respecting military.
The town having always depended upon the herring fishery for its chief
support, has rendered this fishery a constant nursery for seamen; and the
great advantages which maritime powers have always received from their
fisheries, are too many to be enumerated, as well as too evident to
require a demonstration; for the constant protection and encouragement
which those powers have always found it their interest to afford them,
are indubitable proofs both of their usefulness and importance. But
exclusive of the valuable benefits which the nation has derived from the
herring fishery, in common with other fisheries, in supplying his
majesty’s service with a considerable number of useful seamen, it has
also received many other advantages in consequence of the several very
able and gallant sea commanders with which the town has furnished the
royal Navy; and who, by the wisdom of their Councils, and gallantry of
their actions, have rendered very essential services to their country,
and received the most distinguished honours to themselves.
In the memorable sea-fights between England and Holland during the first
Dutch war, in the reign of Charles II, among commanders who remarkably
distinguished themselves in those important struggles were Admiral Allen,
Admiral Utber, and his son, Captain Utber, all of whom belonged to this
town.
It was that gallant sea-officer, Admiral Sir Thomas Allen, who first
commenced hostilities against the Dutch, in 1665, by attacking their
Smyrna fleet, consisting of forty merchant ships, of which some were very
large, were well provided with ordnance and had four third-rate men of
war for their convoy. Sir Thomas had only eight ships with him; but what
he wanted in force, he supplied by his eminent courage and conduct; for
he immediately attacked them, killed Commodore Bracknell, their
commander, took four of their merchant ships, richly laden, and drove the
remainder into Cadiz. {151}
In the great sea fight off Lowestoft, June 3, 1665, all the three
abovementioned commanders had a respective share in that memorable
engagement.
The English fleet consisted of 114 sail of men of war and frigates, 28
fire ships, and several bomb ketches, and had on board about 22,000
seamen and soldiers; and the whole was commanded by the Duke of York.
Admiral Opdam commanded the Dutch fleet. The fight began about three in
the morning, and for some time victory was doubtful; but about noon, the
Earl of Sandwich, with the blue squadron, forced himself into the centre
of the Dutch fleet, divided it into two parts, and began that confusion
which ended in a total defeat. The Duke of York, in the Royal Charles of
eighty guns, and Admiral Opdam, in the Eendracht of eighty-four guns,
were closely engaged, and continued the fight with great obstinacy for
several hours, wherein his highness was in the utmost danger. Several
persons of distinction were killed on board his ship, particularly the
Earl of Falmouth, the King’s favourite; Lord Muskerry, and Mr. Boyle, son
of the Earl of Cork, who were killed with one ball, and so near the Duke,
that he was covered with their blood and brains, and a splinter from the
last named gentleman’s skull, grazed his hand. About one o’clock the
Dutch Admiral blew up, with a prodigious explosion; by which accident the
Admiral and 500 of his men perished. Vice-Admiral Stillingwert was shot
through the middle by a cannon ball; and Vice-Admiral Cortenaar received
a shot in his thigh, of which he instantly died. These ships bearing out
of the line on the death of their commanders, without striking their
flags, drew many after them; so that by eight at night Van Tromp, who
fought to the last, and kept fighting as he retreated, had not above
thirty ships left with him. This was the most signal victory the English
ever gained, and the severest blow at sea that the Dutch ever felt. In
this action the Dutch had eighteen ships taken and fourteen sank,
exclusive of those which were either burnt or blown up; and lost 6000
men, including 2300 taken prisoners. The English lost only the Charity
of forty-six guns, had 250 men killed, and 340 wounded; among whom were
(besides those already mentioned) the Earls of Portland and Marlborough,
Vice-Admiral Sampson, and Sir John Lawson, who died of a wound in his
knee, though he survived the battle. Among the wounded was Mr. Howard,
youngest son of the Earl of Berkshire; he was landed at Lowestoft, where
he died of his wounds on the 6th of June following, and was interred in
the chancel of Lowestoft church.
As soon as the battle was over the English retired to Southwold Bay to
rest; where they received fresh orders to sail again as soon as possible
in search of the Dutch fleet. Accordingly on the 5th July, the fleet
steered from the bay to the coast of Holland. The standard was borne by
the Earl of Sandwich, and the Blue flag by Sir Thomas Allen, having for
his Vice and Rear-Admirals Sir Christopher Minnes and Sir John Haringn.
{152a} The design of the expedition was to intercept de Ruyter on his
return with the Turkey and East India fleets, or at least to take or burn
the merchant ships, of which they had certain intelligence. But they
succeeded in neither of these attempts. De Ruyter returned unexpectedly
by the north of Scotland, and arrived safely in Holland. The fleets,
consisting of twenty sail, took the same northern route, in hopes of
avoiding the English, but receiving intelligence at sea that this would
prove very difficult, if not impossible, they took shelter in the port of
Berghen, in Norway. This port was easy of access, and covered only by an
old castle; the Danish governor, indeed, promised to protect the Dutch as
much as possible, and the Dutch, to facilitate their intention, landed
forty-one pieces of cannon, which were disposed on a line before the
fort; after they had taken this precaution, the Dutch formed another line
across the bay, consisting of their largest ships, and in this defensive
posture they waited the arrival of the English. It was not long before
the English appeared; for the Earl of Sandwich having received advice of
the Dutch fleet having put into Berghen for protection, detached Sir
Thomas Tyddiman with fourteen sail of men of war, (one of them was the
Guernsey, commanded by Captain Utber), and three fireships to attack and
destroy them. Sir Thomas appeared at Berghen on the 1st of August, 1665,
and though he executed this expedition with great courage, yet, having
the wind against him, and the enemy making a prodigious fire from the
castle, the line, and the ships, he was forced to bear out of the bay,
which he performed without the loss of a ship, though he had five or six
ill treated; one of which was the Guernsey, Captain Utber, who was
unfortunately slain in the engagement. {152b}
In the great sea fight in 1666, which lasted four days, it is probable
that both the Admirals Allen and Utber had their shares in that
remarkable engagement, thought, they are not particularly mentioned. For
when the fight was over, and both fleets had retired to their respective
coasts to refit and prepare for a fresh engagement, on their proceeding
to sea again, the English fleet consisting of eighty men of war, great
and small, and nineteen fireships, were divided into three squadrons,
under the command of Prince Rupert and Duke of Albermarle; and the second
squadron of this fleet was commanded by Sir Thomas Allen, who had under
him Sir Thomas Tyddiman and Rear Admiral Utber.
The Dutch fleet consisted of eighty-eight men of war and twenty
fireships, and was divided into three squadrons, under de Ruyter, Evertz,
and Van Tromp. On the 25th July, about noon, the English fleet came up
with the enemy off the North Foreland. Sir Thomas Allen, with the white
squadron, began the battle by attacking Evertz. About one o’clock Prince
Rupert and the Duke of Albemarle made a desperate attack upon de Ruyter,
and after fighting about three hours were obliged to go on board another
ship. During this interval, the Admirals Allen, Tyddiman, and Utber, in
the white squadron, had utterly defeated Evertz: his Vice-Admiral de
Vries, and Rear-Admiral Keenders, being both killed. The Vice-Admiral of
Zealand was taken, and another ship of fifty guns burnt. The Prince and
the Duke, who were both in the same ship, fought de Ruyter, ship to ship;
disabled the Guelderland of sixty-six guns, one of his seconds; killed
the Captain of another, and mortally wounded two more, after which the
Dutch squadron began to fly. De Ruyter’s ship was so miserably torn, and
his crew so dispirited and fatigued, that he could make but little
resistance, and nothing but the want of wind could have hindered the
English from boarding him. De Ruyter continued his retreat all that
night, and the next day Prince Rupert and the Duke of Albemarle pursued
him as fast as the wind would permit. A fireship was then dispatched to
bear down on the Dutch Admiral, and missed very little of setting him on
fire. At last they approached so near to each other as to cannonade a
second time, when De Ruyter finding himself so extremely oppressed, and
his fleet in the most imminent danger, that in a fit of despair he cried:
“My God, what a wretch am I among so many thousand bullets! is there not
one to put me out of my pain?” By degrees, however, the Dutch drew near
their own shallow coast, where the English could not follow them. On
this occasion Prince Rupert ungenerously insulted him, by sending a
little shallop, called Fanfan, with only two guns on board, which, being
rowed near to De Ruyter’s ship, fired upon him for two hours; at last a
ball from the Dutch Admiral so damaged his contemptible enemy, that the
crew were forced to sheer off very briskly, to save their lives.
This was one of the greatest victories obtained at this war. In this
battle the Dutch lost twenty ships, had four Admirals and a great many
captains killed; as to common seamen, the number slain was computed to be
4,000, and 3,000 wounded. The English had only the Resolution burnt,
three captains and about 300 seamen killed.
In the same year, when the Dutch and French fleets were endeavouring to
form a junction, Sir Thomas Allen, with his squadron, attacked the French
fleet, and having boarded the Ruby, a fine ship of 1000 tons and
fifty-four guns, he carried her in a short time. This bold attempt so
intimidated the French ministry, that they scarce ventured their fleet
out of sight of its own shore afterwards.
The first Dutch war being ended, Sir Thomas was sent, in 1669, with a
stout squadron, into the Mediterranean, to suppress the insults of the
Algerines, where he did his country very eminent services, and was the
last employment he ever engaged in. {153}
After Sir Thomas had honorably finished the Algerine war, and in
pursuance of his instructions, appointed Sir Edward Spragge to command in
his place in the Mediterranean, he returned to England, where, for the
many services he had rendered his country, he was created a baronet, 14th
December, 1669. But having been constantly engaged in the most active,
as well as dangerous scenes of action, and being worn down with fatigue,
and crowned with success, he was under the necessity of withdrawing
himself from the service of the public; and having acquired a handsome
fortune, he purchased the estate of Somerley Hall, and removing thither
from Lowestoft, it became afterwards the place of his future residence,
thereby exchanging the dangerous and tumultuous scenes of war for the
calm and undisturbed repose of rural retirement. During the residence of
Sir Thomas at Lowestoft, he lived in a black flint-stone house on the
east side of High street; where, on that side next the sea, he caused a
small round tower to be erected, that he might be enabled to command an
extensive prospect of the German Ocean, an object of great consequence
during the Dutch wars. He buried a daughter in the north-east corner of
the north isle of Lowestoft church, where a handsome monument is erected
to her memory.
Another valiant and experienced Admiral belonging to Lowestoft, and who
remarkably distinguished himself by his gallantry in the service of his
country, was Sir John Ashby.
King William had no sooner ascended the throne of this kingdom than he
found himself obliged to engage in war with France, who had sent James II
over into Ireland with a considerable force, escorted by a fleet of
twenty-two sail of men-of-war.
His Majesty’s affairs in England were at this time in so critical a
state, that it was some time before he could provide a force sufficient
to cruise on the coast of Ireland. At last Admiral Herbert, who
commanded the English fleet, in the begining of April, 1689, sailed for
Cork, with a squadron which consisted of no more than twelve ships of war
(one of which was the Defiance, Captain Ashby) one fireship, two yachts,
and two smacks. On the 29th of that month he discovered a fleet of
forty-four sail, a convoy that followed King James; on the 30th, he saw
them standing into Bantree bay; he lay off that place till morning, and
about break of day resolved to attack the enemy. The French detached
their merchant ships to land the supply at a place down the bay while
they engaged the enemy. The English fleet was reinforced to nineteen
ships. The French fleet consisted in the whole of twenty-eight ships.
As the English had the wind, they could have avoided fighting if they
pleased; but the Admiral exerted his utmost efforts to get into the bay,
and come to a close engagement. About ten in the morning, on the 1st of
May, the French bore down upon the English, when the battle began. The
fight was pretty warm for two hours, but then slackened, because a great
part of the English fleet could not come up, but they continued firing on
both sides till about five in the afternoon. Admiral Herbert had no
opportunity of bringing his whole fleet to engage, as the wind would not
suffer him to enter the bay, and consequently was under the necessity of
keeping out at sea all the time of the engagement, therefore the dispute
was very unequal; but about the hour before-mentioned, the French fleet
stood in the bay, which put an end to the fight.
This is the battle of Bantree bay, which, though inconsiderable of
itself, {155} is yet magnified by some writers as a very important
stroke. The French had one ship, called the Diamond, set on fire, and
two others so much damaged as to withdraw from the line. The affair,
however, was certainly of no very great consequence; and the small
advantage that was claimed by the French was more to be ascribed to a
favourable wind and superior force, than either a want of courage or
conduct on the part of the English. After the action Admiral Herbert
bore away for the Scilly Islands, and having cruized there for some time
returned to Spithead; on which occasion the King himself went down to
Portsmouth, where, to shew his determination to distinguish and reward
merit, though not pointed out to him by success, he declared Admiral
Herbert Earl of Torrington, and knighted Captain John Ashby and Captain
Cloudesley Shovel; giving, at the same time, a bounty of ten shillings to
each seaman, and making a provision for the widows of such as had been
killed in the action. Sir John Ashby was also presented with a gold
watch, set with diamonds.
The French were so elated with the small advantage gained in Bantree bay,
as to boast, that the next summer they would insult the joint fleets of
England and Holland; therefore, both the honour and safety of the kingdom
depended upon taking such measures as might disconcert their designs. In
consequence of this necessity, a resolution was formed of assembling
early in the Spring a large fleet in the Channel; especially as that part
of the nation in the interest of King James where almost everywhere in
motion, and waiting, in all appearance, for nothing but the sight of a
French fleet, on the coast, to take up arms and declare against
Government; but it was so late before the Dutch sent their fleet to sea,
and the English fleet was desirous of forming a junction with the Dutch
before they put themselves in a condition of sailing that it considerably
retarded the operations. But the conduct of the French was very
different; for on the 12th of June they put to sea with their grand
fleet, consisting of seventy-eight men of war, and twenty-two fire ships,
the whole fleet carrying upwards of 4,700 pieces of canon. On the 13th
of June they steered for the English coast, and on the 20th appeared off
the Lizard.
Our Admiral, Lord Torrington, who was then at St. Helen’s received this
intelligence with the utmost surprise; and he was so far from expecting
the arrival of the French fleet on the English coast that he had not sent
out any scouts to the westward for information. However, he put to sea
with such ships as he had on the 24th of June, and gave orders that all
the English and Dutch ships which could have notice should follow him.
The next morning he found himself within sight of the enemy, and the
fleets continued looking on each other for several days. It is certain
that the Earl of Torrington did not think himself strong enough to
venture an engagement, and in all probability the rest of the Admirals
were of the same opinion. In this fleet Sir John Ashby was Vice-Admiral
of the Blue.
The whole strength of the English and Dutch fleets together, consisted
only of fifty-six ships; his Lordship therefore, seeing that he was
outnumbered by above twenty sail, was not willing to risk his own honour
and the safety of the nation upon such unequal terms, but the Queen, who
was then Regent, sent him orders to fight at all events, in order to
oblige the French to withdraw from the English coast. In obedience to
this order, his Lordship, on the 20th of June, as soon as it was
daylight, gave the signal for drawing into a line of battle, and bore
down upon the enemy. The signal for battle was thrown out at about eight
o’clock, and the engagement began about nine. The Dutch squadron, which
formed the van of the united fleets, fell in with the van of the French,
and threw them into disorder. About half-an-hour after Admiral Russell,
and Admiral Ashby with the Blue squadron, engaged the rear of the French
very warmly; but the Red Squadron, which formed the centre of the fleet,
and was commanded by the Earl of Torrington, did not come up till about
ten; and this occasioned a great opening between the Blue squadron in the
rear and the Dutch in the van, which the French taking an advantage of,
caused the Dutch to suffer very much.
In the night the Earl retired to the eastward, with the French pursuing
him as far as Rye; from thence he retreated towards the river Thames,
where, on going ashore, he left the command of the fleet to Sir John
Ashby. The French were as much censured for not taking every advantage
which this victory afforded them, as the Earl was blamed for the defeat;
for the French retired to their own coasts, and after the beginning of
August were no more seen in the English Channel.
The Earl of Torrington, as soon as he came to London, was examined before
the Council, before whom he vindicated his conduct with great presence of
mind. He assigned two reasons for his behaviour in this important
transaction: the first was, the ill-grounded contempt the English and
Dutch officers had of the abilities of the French fleet at sea; the
second was, that he had acted to the best of his knowledge in saving the
fleet, and that he had much rather his reputation should suffer for a
time, than his country should sustain a loss which it might never be able
to recover; but the Council were so far dissatisfied with these reasons,
and they committed his Lordship to the Tower; and that they might appease
the clamours of the populace, and make some satisfaction to the Dutch,
they appointed a committee to repair to Sheerness, in order to make a
thorough enquiry into the real causes of this disaster.
The fleet, after this misfortune, was put under the command of Sir
Richard Haddock, Vice-Admiral Killegrew, and Sir John Ashby; who had
orders to put the fleet into the best condition possible, which being
executed with the utmost diligence, they had, by the end of August, a
fleet of forty-one ships of the line under their command, exclusive of
the Dutch. Yet, notwithstanding all their activity, it was very late in
the year before they were in a capacity fit to undertake any essential
service, and by that time it became necessary to lay up the larger ships.
The assiduity and administration to rectify all the errors and
miscarriages which had lately happened, and, to retrieve the honour of
the nation, was very visible in 1691, when the utmost efforts were
exerted to send a large fleet to sea early in the spring. In order to
effect this purpose, the week after that the Earl of Torrington was
dismissed from his command, Edward Russell, Esq., was appointed Admiral
and Commander-in-Chief; and in the fleet which was got ready for service
in the spring, Admiral Russell, in the Britannia, commanded the Red
squadron, having for his Vice and Rear-Admirals Sir John Ashby and George
Rooke, Esq. But the French having orders to avoid fighting, nothing
material was done this year.
The last employment Sir John Ashby engaged in was the great sea-fight off
Cape La Hogue. Lewis XIV finding it impossible to prosecute the war in
Ireland any longer with success, came to a resolution of employing the
forces in that country, consisting of 20,000 men, some other way; with
this view, he concerted with malcontents in England an invasion on the
coast of Sussex.
On the 16th of May, Admiral Russell sailed from Spithead in order to meet
the French fleet. The English fleet consisted of ninety-nine ships. The
Blue squadron was commanded by Sir John Ashby, who had for Vice and
Rear-Admirals George Rooke, Esq., and Richard Carter, Esq. The French
had only sixty-three ships, having under their protection a fleet of
three hundred sail of transports, well provided with every necessary
requisite for the invasion.
On the 17th, the scouts to the westward of the fleet made signals for
discovering the enemy; in consequence thereof, orders were immediately
issued for forming a line of battle.
On the 19th, the fleet was in proper order for battle about eight in the
morning; having the Dutch in the van, the red in the centre, and the blue
in the rear. About ten o’clock the French fleet bore down upon them with
great resolution, and about half after eleven, the Royal Sun, the finest
ship in France carrying 100 guns, began the fight with Admiral Russell,
within three-quarters musket shot. The French exercised their guns very
briskly till about one o’clock, when they began to tow her off in great
disorder. The fight continued till four in the afternoon, when the
French taking advantage of a fog began to retreat. About eight in the
evening it grew foggy again, and part of the blue squadron having fallen
in with the enemy, engaged about half an hour, till the French, having
lost four ships, bore away for Conquest road. In this short action Sir
John Ashby’s Rear-Admiral Carter was killed: who when found himself
mortally wounded, recommended to Captain Wright, who commanded his ship,
to fight her as long as she could swim.
The English continued the chase till the 22nd, when, about eleven in the
forenoon, the French Admiral, in the Royal Sun, ran ashore and cut away
her mast. He was followed by some others of his fleet, and were all
afterwards destroyed. In the evening a great number of the enemy’s ships
were seen going to La Hogue. On the 23rd the Admiral sent Sir George
Rooke, with several men of war, fireships and all the boats in the fleet,
to destroy these ships, consisting of thirteen sail of men of war,
besides a great number of transports, etc. Sir George having manned his
boats, went in person, to encourage the attempt; when he burnt six of
them that night, and the other seven, with the transports the next
morning.
Sir John Ashby, with the blue squadron and some Dutch ships, pursued the
rest of the French fleet till they ran through the race of Alderney,
among such rocks and shoals where the English pilots refused to follow
them. Sir John has been much censured for his conduct in this part of
the transaction, though probably without any reason, since some of the
ablest seamen in England were of opinion, that nothing could be more
desperate than the flight of the French through that dangerous passage.
And though despair might justify them in attempting it, yet the bare
possibility of success in following them might be equivalent to the
danger of the undertaking.
Besides the Royal Sun of 106 guns, the French lost another ship of 104
guns, one of ninety, two of eighty, four of seventy-six, four of sixty
and two of fifty-six guns. If Sir John Ashby had been so fortunate as to
have come within the reach of those who took shelter in St. Maloe’s, the
English would almost have annihilated the power of the French by the sea;
as it was undoubtedly a most glorious victory, and too much praise cannot
be given by the British nation to those gallant commanders who achieved
it. Queen Mary was no sooner informed of this victory than she sent
£30,000 to be divided among the seamen and soldiers.
After the battle, Sir John Ashby was left with twelve ships and three
fireships, in conjunction with a Dutch squadron of the same force, with
orders to proceed to Havre de Grace, and to endeavour the destruction of
such part of the French fleet as had taken shelter there; which service
they were unable to perform; the situation of the enemy and the violence
of the weather rendering it impracticable.
Admiral Russell, with the remainder of the fleet, returned as soon as
possible to Spithead, in order to carry into execution a design which had
been meditated, of making a descent on the French coast. But the
ministry and the sea and land officers not concurring in what manner the
descent was to be made, it came to nothing. However, the Admiral sent
Sir John Ashby, with a stout squadron, to endeavour, if possible, to
intercept the French Fleet which was every day expected to sail from St.
Maloe’s to Brest; but in his passage he received orders from the Queen to
return, and, therefore, in obedience thereof, was obliged to come back in
a few days to St. Helen’s.
On the 4th of November the King opened the sessions of Parliament: on
which occasion he took notice of their great success, and also of their
great disappointments at sea. On the 11th, the House of Commons thanked
Admiral Russell, in the strongest terms, for his courage and conduct in
the battle of La Hogue; but, nevertheless it did not prevent a warm
representation of the opportunities that were said to be lost, after that
signal advantage. The Admiral entered into a circumstantial relation of
the whole of that transaction, and furnished the House with all letters,
papers, and instructions that were necessary for their information.
After Admiral Russell, Sir John Ashby was examined concerning his not
executing the orders that were given him to destroy the French ships that
had sheltered in St. Maloe’s. But Sir John acquitted himself so
handsomely, and set the whole affair in so clear a light, that he was
informed by the Speaker, by order of the House, “that having observed his
ingenious behaviour in his detail of his conduct in that engagement, and
received the amplest satisfaction, he was dismissed from any further
attendance on that House.”
Bishop Burnet speaking of this battle, says, that if Sir John Ashby had
pursued the six-and-twenty French ships, which afterwards got into St.
Maloe’s, by all appearance he might have destroyed every one of them.
This very illiberal reflection on the conduct of Sir John is an evident
proof of the malevolence which too often actuates the spirit of party;
and shews that the most brilliant actions, when executed by commanders
whose political principles happen not to coincide with certain writers,
are too often tarnished through the malignity of the historian. The
conduct of Sir John Ashby in this memorable transaction is so far from
being liable to the censure of Bishop Burnet, that it is capable of being
vindicated and applauded for its wisdom and prudence. For a naval writer
speaking of the battle of La Hogue, says, “that to attempt to destroy the
French ships that had sheltered in St. Maloe’s, would not only have been
extremely dangerous, but wholly impracticable. For soon after this
action, when we meditated a descent upon the French Coast, and had
received advice that twenty-five sail of French ships were in the port of
St. Maloe, Sir George Rooke was dispatched to make soundings on that
coast, in order to our attacking them; accordingly he gave a particular
account of several surroundings near St. Maloe’s, and reported, ‘that not
one of the pilots would undertake to carry in any ship of war, or
fireship, at St. Maloe’s, though he offered a hundred pounds
encouragement to each man.’”
Sir John Ashby died at Portsmouth, and was there interred; but his body
was afterwards taken up and buried in Lowestoft church, where a handsome
monument is erected to his memory.
The next eminent sea officer belonging to Lowestoft, who demands notice
for distinguished bravery, is Sir Andrew Leake.
On the 4th of May, 1702, her Majesty Queen Anne, soon after her accession
to the throne, declared war against France and Spain. In consequence
whereof, the grand fleet was immediately got ready for sailing, in order
to carry into execution a plan, originally concerted by King William, for
an attack upon Cadiz.
On the 19th of June following, the fleet, commanded by Sir George Rooke,
having Vice-Admiral Hopson, in the Prince George, carrying a red flag at
the fore top-mast head; Rear-Admiral Fairbourne, carrying the white flag
at the mizen top-mast head of the St. George; and Rear-Admiral Graydon,
carrying the blue flag in the same manner in the Triumph; who were also
accompanied by five Dutch Admirals, sailed from St. Helen’s. The
strength of this fleet consisted of thirty English and twenty Dutch ships
of the line, exclusive of small vessels and tenders, making in the whole
about 160 sail. The land forces embarked in this expedition consisted of
9,663 English, and 4,138 Dutch, amounting in all to 13,801 men.
As the expectations which the public had conceived from this prodigious
armament were very great, so, consequently, they were exceedingly
disappointed at being informed that the attempt upon Cadiz had proved
unsuccessful.
However, Providence afterwards put it in the power of Sir George Rooke,
before he returned to England, to render his country a more signal and
important service than it could possibly have received from a successful
attack upon Cadiz. Captain Hardy, of the Pembroke, being sent to water
in Lagos Bay, before he returned received intelligence there that the
Spanish galleons, under the convoy of a French squadron, had put into
Vigo on the 16th of September. Captain Hardy hastened with the utmost
expedition in his power to convey the news to the fleet, which he did not
meet with until the 3rd of October, and even then the wind blew so hard
that he found it impossible to speak with the Admiral until the 6th, when
he informed him of the intelligence he had received. On this information
Sir George called a council of war immediately, in which it was resolved
to sail as expeditiously as possible to the port of Vigo, to attack the
enemy. In order to effect this purpose, some small vessels were
dispatched to reconnoitre them and discover their force, which was
effectually performed by a boat belonging to the Kent man-of-war; and
from this intelligence the Captain understood that Monsieur Chasteau
Renault’s squadron of French men-of-war and the Spanish galleons were all
in that harbour. Sir George was unable to arrive off Vigo before the
11th of October. The passage into the harbour was not more than
three-quarters of a mile over, and was defended by a battery of eight
brass and twelve iron guns on the north side and on the south side was a
platform of twenty brass guns, and twenty of iron; and also a stone fort,
with a breast work, and French ships before it mounting ten guns, and
containing in it 500 men. There was also extended from one side of the
harbour to the other, a strong boom, formed of ships’ yards and
top-masts, fastened together with three-inch rope, very thick, and
underneath were hawsers and cables. The top chain at each end was moored
to a seventy-gun ship. Within the boom were moored five ships of between
sixty and seventy guns each, with their broad sides fronting the entrance
of the passage, so as to fire with the greatest execution upon any ships
that should attempt to come near either the boom, forts, or platform.
The Admirals removed their flags from the great ships into third rates,
the first and second rates drawing too much water to enter the harbour.
Sir George Rooke went from the Royal Sovereign into the Somerset; Admiral
Hopson out of the Prince George into the Torbay; Admiral Fairbourne out
of the St. George into the Essex; and Admiral Graydon out of the Triumph
into the Northumberland. A detachment of fifteen English, and ten Dutch
men-of-war, with all the fire ships, frigates, and bomb vessels, were
ordered to go upon this service. The Duke of Ormond, to facilitate the
attack, landed 2,500 men on the south side of the river, about six miles
from Vigo. Then Lord Shannon, at the head of 500 men, attacked the stone
fort at the entrance of the harbour; and having made himself master of
the platform, mounting forty pieces of cannon, the French governor, Mons.
Sozel, ordered the gates of the place to be thrown open, with a
resolution to have forced his way through the English troops: but though
there was great bravery in this order, yet there was but little judgment;
for immediately upon its being obeyed, the grenadiers entered the place
sword in hand, and forced the garrison, consisting of French and
Spaniards, in number about 350, to surrender prisoners of war. These
attacks were of the utmost consequence to the fleet, as our ships, in
attempting to enter the harbour must have been excessively galled by the
fire from the platform and fort.
As soon as the British flag was seen flying from these places, the ships
advanced; and Vice-Admiral Hopson, in the Torbay, crowding all the sail
he could, sailed directly against the boom and broke it, and the Kent,
with the rest of the squadron, English and Dutch, entered the harbour.
The Torbay, who first struck the boom and broke it, was so entangled
therein that it was impossible to extricate her from it. The enemy,
perceiving her situation, were determined to exert their utmost efforts
to destroy her; and in order to execute their design the more
effectually, dispatched a fireship, which immediately laid the Torbay on
board. In this dreadful situation, having a fireship grappled to her
side, the enemy playing upon her with cannon, and at the same time so
entangled with the boom that it was impossible to disengage themselves
and escape, all subordination was disregarded, and every man was
permitted to provide for his own safety in the best manner he was able.
Nevertheless, in this very alarming situation, Providence interposed in
their behalf, and rescued them from the impending destruction which
threatened them; for when the fireship blew up, a large quantity of snuff
which she had on board extinguished the flames, and soon after they were
able to disengage her from the boom, and repair, as well as circumstances
would admit, the damages she had received. It may, possibly, appear a
little extraordinary that the fireships should have so large a quantity
of snuff on board as to extinguish the flames, but it is to be
remembered, that she was originally a merchant ship laden with that
commodity, and on this pressing emergency, converted into a fireship.
The Torbay, though not absolutely destroyed in this action, yet was so
extremely damaged as to be reduced almost to a wreck; her fore top-mast
was shot by the board, most of her sails burnt or scorched, the foreyard
burnt to a coal, the larboard shrouds, fore and aft, burnt at the dead
eyes, several ports blown off the hinges, her larboard side entirely
scorched, one hundred and fifteen men killed and drowned, out of which
were sixty who jumped overboard as soon as they were grappled by the
fireship. Admiral Hopson, when he found his ship in this disabled
condition, left her, and hoisted his flag on board the Monmouth. The
loss in this action (exclusive of the Torbay) was very inconsiderable
considering the resistance of the enemy, and the great advantages which
we obtained. In this attack upon Vigo we burnt five French men of war
from seventy-six to forty-six guns, one of twenty-two guns, and another
of eight guns. We also took and brought home four ships from seventy-six
to sixty-six guns, and there were also taken by the Dutch six ships from
sixty-eight to forty-two guns. There were likewise taken and destroyed
seventeen galleons. The French and Spanish ships had been twenty-five
days in Vigo harbour before our fleet arrived there; during this interval
they unladed the best part of the plate and rich goods, and sent them up
the country. The galleons had on board twenty-eight millions of pieces
of eight, besides merchandise, which was thought of equal value. Of the
silver, fourteen millions were saved; and of the goods, about five
millions. Four millions of plate were destroyed with ten millions of
merchandise. The fourteen millions of silver and five millions of goods
were brought away by the English and Dutch fleets.
Her Majesty gave a signal testimony of the high sense she entertained of
the merit of Admiral Hopson, for his gallant behaviour in breaking the
boom at Vigo; for she not only conferred upon him the honour of
Knighthood, but settled upon him a pension of £500 a year for life, with
the reversion of £300 a year to his lady, in case she survived him. The
Queen conferred on Captain Leake also the honour of Knighthood.
On the 4th of May, 1703, the grand fleet consisting of thirty-five ships
of the line, was sent into the Mediterranean, under the command of Sir
Cloudesley Shovel. The Grafton, of seventy guns, one of the ships of
this fleet was commanded by Sir Andrew Leake. On the 30th of September,
Sir Cloudsley sent five ships, namely, two thirds, a fourth and fifth
rate, with a fireship, under the command of Sir Andrew, to Lisbon, and
from thence to Oporto, etc., to take under his convoy such merchant ships
as were bound for England; and having a fair wind and good weather, he
arrived safe in the Downs on the 17th of November, and there happily
escaped the great November storm that happened a few days after.
In the year 1705, a large fleet of men of war, under the command of Sir
George Rooke, was sent into the Mediterranean for the assistance of
Charles III, King of Spain. In this fleet the Grafton, of seventy guns,
was commanded by Sir Andrew Leake; and the Monk, of sixty guns, by
Captain Mighells, both of Lowestoft. From a variety of unforseen
accidents and disappointments, Sir George was unable to perform any
essential service to his country in the former part of this expedition;
and being apprised of the reflections he would be exposed to from his
enemies, upon his return to England, for having spent the summer with so
formidable a fleet without performing any important action, he called a
council of war, on the 17th of July, in the road to Tetuan; where, having
delivered his opinion that it was highly requisite they should resolve on
some important action that would be of signal service to their country
they accordingly, after a long debate, came to a resolution of making a
sudden and vigorous attack upon Gibraltar.
The fleet got into the Bay of Gibraltar on the 21st of July; and the
marines, English and Dutch to the number of 1800, were landed, under the
command of the Prince of Hesse, on the isthmus, to cut off all
communication between the town and the continent. His Highness having
taken post there, summoned the governor, who answered, that he would
defend the place to the last extremity. On the 22nd, the Admiral, at
break of day, gave the signal for cannonading the town. The Grafton,
commanded by Sir Andrew Leake, was one of the ships sent on this service.
The Monk, Captain Mighells, was in the fleet, but not engaged in the
attack. The cannonading was carried on with such vigour, that 15,000
shots were expended in five hours, when the Admiral perceiving that the
enemy were driven from their batteries at the South Mole Head, and that
if we were once possessed of them, the town must be taken, he ordered
Captain Whitaker to arm all the boats, and to attempt making himself
master of them. This order was no sooner issued, than Captain Hicks and
Captain Jumper, who where nearest the Mole, pushed on shore with their
pinnaces, and actually seized the batteries before the others could come
up. The Spaniards, perceiving this advantage, immediately sprung a mine,
whereby two lieutenants and forty men were killed, and about sixty
wounded. However, the English kept possession of the great platform till
they were supported by Captain Whitaker and the seamen under his command,
who very soon made himself master of a redoubt between the Mole and the
town; on which the Admiral sent a letter to the governor to surrender,
who on the 24th capitulated, and the Prince of Hesse took possession of
the place. This attack upon Gibraltar was planned by the Admiral, and it
was executed wholly by the sailors; consequently, all the success and
honour of the undertaking must be attributed to the valour and conduct of
the British seamen. In the execution of this design, nothing contributed
more to its success than the furious cannonade previous to the attack,
which obliged the Spaniards to abandon their posts; for the general
officers, who inspected the works after they were in possession of the
English, declared that they might have been defended by fifty men against
as many thousands.
After the taking of Gibraltar the fleet sailed to Tetuan, in order to
take in wood and water. On the 9th of August the fleet sailed again for
Gibraltar, and had sight of the French fleet, which they resolved to
engage; but the latter declined an action, and endeavoured to avoid the
English. But Sir George pursued them with all the sail he could make,
and on Sunday, being within three leagues of them, the French brought to,
and forming a line of battle, lay in a position to receive him. The
French fleet consisted of fifty-two ships and twenty-four galleys,
commanded by the Count of Toulouse, High-Admiral of France. The English
fleet consisted of fifty-three ships. A little after ten in the morning,
Sir George bore down in order of battle, and throwing out the signal for
engaging, began the fight. The fire of the enemy fell very heavy on the
Royal Katherine, the St. George, and the Shrewsbury. About two in the
afternoon the van of the French gave way to the English, and the battle
ended with the day; the enemy retreating to leeward, and towing off their
ships by the assistance of their galleys. Our fleet employed every
manœuvre for two days, to renew the fight, but to no purpose, for the
French assiduously avoided it, and at last bore quite away, which is an
evident proof that the victory was the indisputable claim of the English.
In this great battle, called the Malaga fight (from its being fought off
that port) that brave and valiant officer, Sir Andrew Leake, was
unfortunately slain. After Sir Andrew had received his fatal wound, and
was carried down to the surgeons to be dressed, his heroic soul fired
with the love of his country, and burning with an insatiable thirst for
glory, would not suffer him to remain inactive; but despising death,
though surrounded will all its terrors, he wrapped a table cloth around
his wounded body, and though possessing only the small remains of life,
he placed himself in his elbow chair, and gave orders to be carried again
upon the quarter-deck, where he bravely sat and partook of the glories of
the day, until he nobly breathed his last. Sir Andrew commanded the
Grafton, of seventy guns and 440 men. In this fight he had thirty-one
men slain and sixty-six wounded.
Another British sea-commander belonging to Lowestoft, who by his conduct
and gallantry in the service of his country, acquired the distinguished
honour of Vice-Admiral of the Navy, was James Mighells, Esq.
In the year 1697, the sieur Pointis, the French Admiral, in his return
from his successful expedition against the Spaniards in the West Indies,
in which he had acquired as much plate and other effects as were computed
to be worth £1,200,000 sterling, thought himself safe when he arrived off
Newfoundland, as he had not received the least intimation of our having a
stout squadron in those seas, under the command of captain Norris, and
which would have been able to have given a very good account of Pointis
and his Spanish plunder, had they been so fortunate as to have met with
him and engaged him.
Captain Norris, from the first advices that he received of the arrival of
a French squadron in those parts, conjectured that it was the squadron
sent out after him from France, with a view of intercepting him in his
passage, or attacking him at Newfoundland; however, shortly after he
received the most authentic information what squadron it was, also an
account of its strength, and that it was conveying to France the rich
plunder of Carthagena, in the West Indies. Captain Norris was
transported with this advice; and immediately calling a Council of war,
shewed the great uncertainty of meeting with the enemy if any delay was
permitted, and urged with vehemency the necessity of immediately sailing
in pursuit of them. Other commanders, however, did not appear in such
haste. Many difficulties were apprehended, and many objections started;
and therefore the determination of the council was, to continue in their
present situation, and expect the French in close quarters. But fresh
advices successively arriving, confirming the truth of his former
intelligence, it occasioned the summoning of repeated councils of war;
but in all these deliberations, Captain Norris, who was eager for
fighting the enemy, experienced the mortifying misfortune of being still
over ruled; so that by these repeated delays, arising from the irresolute
decisions of the councils, the sieur Pointis with his rich booty, was
suffered to escape, and arrive safe in France.
The several councils of war which were held on this occasion consisted of
eleven land officers, and thirteen sea officers; the former were all
unanimous against fighting; of the latter, eight were for it, and five
against it. It is necessary to be observed, concerning this transaction
that Captain Mighells, who commanded one of the ships belonging to this
squadron, was among those who voted for fighting.
The whole business was in the ensuing session of Parliament, examined in
the House of Lords; when, on a full view of the evidence, their Lordships
came to the following resolutions:
DIE Lunæ, 17th April, 1699.
1st.—It is resolved, by the Lord’s spiritual and temporal in
Parliament assembled, That the squadron commanded by Captain Norris,
at St. John’s, in Newfoundland, not going out to fight Pointis, on
the several intelligences given, was a very high miscarriage, to the
great disservice of the king and kingdom.
2nd. It is resolved that the joining the land officers in the
council of war on the 24th July, 1697, was one occasion of the
miscarriage in not fighting Pointis.
The first action wherein Captain Mighells had an opportunity of
signalising his bravery, is represented as follows: Real-Admiral Dilkes
having received orders to look for a grand partee, said to lay in
Cancalle Bay, on the cost of Normandy, sailed from Spithead on the 24th
July, 1703, in pursuit of them. Having dispatched the Fly, Captain
Chamberlain, for intelligence, he was informed, that a fleet of about
forty sail were plying towards Granville. The Admiral resolved to sail
immediately after them; and having discovered them, determined to attack
them at break of day the next morning. He followed them as far as the
pilots would venture, and found them to consist of forty-three sail of
merchant ships and three men-of-war. On the approach of the English
fleet, the French stood in for the shore; and the Admiral being come
within four feet of the water which the ships drew, thought it too
dangerous to pursue them any farther with the larger men-of-war; and,
therefore, having manned all the boats of the fleet, they attacked the
French, and so far succeeded, that by noon they had taken fifteen sail,
and burnt six; the remainder stood so far into the Bay, that, according
to the judgment of the pilots, even the smaller ships could not attack
them. Hereupon, the 27th, in the morning it was resolved, in a Council
of War, that, under cover of the Hector, Mermaid fireship, the Spy
brigantine, a ship of six guns, taken the day before from the enemy, and
a ketch fitted as a fireship, all the boats in the squadron should enter
the harbour and renew the attack. This service was performed between ten
and eleven in the morning, the Admiral being present, accompanied by
Captain Fairfax, Captain Legg, and Captain Mighells, as also by Captains
Lampries and Pipon. Out of the three men-of-war which the enemy had, one
of the eighteen guns they burnt themselves; one of the fourteen guns was
set on fire by Mr. Paul, first Lieutenant of the Kent, who, in this
service, was shot through the lower jaw, and had four men killed; and the
third of eight guns, was brought off. Seventeen merchant ships more were
burnt and destroyed; so that of the whole fleet only four escaped by
getting under the command of Granville fort. The Queen, to testify her
gracious acceptance of so cheerful and effectual a service; and to
perpetuate the memory thereof, as well as recompense the gallantry of
those who rendered it, ordered gold medals to be struck on this occasion,
and to be delivered to the Admiral and all his officers.
The next remarkable action wherein Captain Mighells was eminently
distinguished for his conduct and bravery, was the great Malaga fight on
the 13th of August, 1704. In this battle he commanded the Monk of sixty
guns, 365 men. In this memorable action Captain Mighells gave a most
signal instance of true magnanimity and British valour; for the French
Admiral having ordered the Serieux of seventy guns, commanded by M.
Champmelin, to board the Monk, which he attempted three times, yet he was
as often beaten off again by Captain Mighells, with the firmest
resolution and courage; and notwithstanding the French, after every
repulse, had their wounded men taken off, and their complement restored
by their galleys, yet this gallant Captain as constantly cleared the
decks of the enemy, and at last forced them to bear away. In these
several attacks the Monk had thirty-six men killed and fifty-two wounded,
among the latter was Captain Mighells.
The Monk was probably lost near Lowestoft a few years after. In 1719 the
Monk, man-of-war, sixty guns, Captain Clinton, coming out of the sea, ran
upon Corton sands. The Captain and men left her (except the master and
twelve men) and came ashore at Lowestoft. In the night the ship went off
the sands, and the master and men brought her up in Corton roads; but
afterwards she went ashore at a place called “Old Almonds” (between
Corton and Gorleston) where she was totally lost.
In the year 1711, Captain Mighells was again in the Mediterranean, in the
Hampton-Court, man-of-war, under Sir John Jennings. The Admiral, after
he had appeared off Barcelona, and had taken on board the King of Spain,
whom he had landed at Genoa; and had also proceeded to Leghorn, to
procure such a supply of stores as that place would afford, sailed for
Port Mahon. On his arrival there, he was informed by the Captains of two
ships, that they had heard a great firing all the night before. On this
intelligence he sent the Chatham and Winchelsea the next morning to try
what they could discover; who soon brought him intelligence that the
Dutch Vice-Admiral, with his squadron, was in the offing, together with
five ships of ours. The ships belonging to the English were the Hampton
Court, Captain Mighells; the Nottingham, the Sterling Castle, the Charles
galley, and the Lynn; which came from the coast of Catalonia, and in
their passage had fallen in with two French men-of-war; the Toulouse and
the Trident, each of fifty guns, and four hundred men. The Hampton Court
came up with the first of them and engaged her two hours; and to whose
commander she struck, at the time when the Sterling Castle came within
musket-shot, which was about ten o’clock at night. But the Trident, by
the advantage of light winds and the assistance of her oars made her
escape. The masts of the Hampton Court being much injured in the fight,
they, by the violence of the weather, came next day all by the board, so
that she was towed into port by the Sterling Castle.
Captain Mighells, for the many eminent services rendered by him to his
country, being made a Rear-Admiral, was appointed a Rear-Admiral of the
White, 1718, in a strong squadron sent to the Baltic, under the command
of Sir John Norris; this squadron, consisting of ten ships of the line,
left Southwold bay on the 1st May, having eighteen sail of merchant ships
under convoy. On the second, at three in the morning, they took their
departure Lowestoft light-house distant six leagues, and on the 14th May
arrived safe at Copenhagen; where, the same day, Sir John Norris had an
audience of his Danish Majesty, by whom he was received very graciously;
and soon after he sailed, in conjunction with the Danish fleet, and
blocked up the Swedes in their harbours, and returned to England again
about the latter end of October.
On the 17th December, 1718, war was declared against Spain; and in the
beginning of the following year, the nation was under the greatest
apprehension of an invasion; and on repeated advices being received of
the great preparations made in Spain for that purpose, every necessary
precaution was taken to defeat their designs. Sir John Norris set out on
the 5th of March, 1719, for Chatham and the Nore; and Rear-Admiral
Mighells, for Portsmouth, to forward the sitting out such ships as were
in those stations, and to take them under their command. On the 8th of
March the Earl of Berkeley kissed his Majesty’s hand on his being
appointed commander of the fleet, which was then fitting out with all
expedition. The Earl sailed from St. Helen’s to the westward, and after
joining Sir John Norris, sailed to the coast of Ireland; from thence he
returned on the 4th of April, having dispatched Vice-Admiral Mighells
with the Windsor, Monmouth, and Antelope, to the coast of Galicia for
intelligence, and then left the command of the fleet to Sir John Norris.
Soon after, advice was received that the fleet of Spanish men-of-war and
transports, crowded with men, but wanting all necessaries, had sailed
from Cadiz for the Groyne, where they were to be joined by other ships
and transports, but had been dispersed in a storm, and driven into
different ports, terribly shattered and disabled; some without masts, and
others were reduced to the necessity of throwing their horses, stores,
and guns overboard, which totally frustrated the designs of the Spaniards
to invade England.
The English, being determined to retaliate the insults threatened by the
Spaniards in the preceding year, against the British coasts, formed a
resolution of sending a fleet and army to the coast of Spain; the former
under the command of Vice-Admiral Mighells; the latter under Lord
Viscount Cobham. On the 21st of September, 1719, the ships of war and
transports, having on board the forces consisting of about six thousand
men, sailed from St. Helen’s.
The Admiral arrived upon the coast of Galicia in the month of September,
and continued cruising three days in the station appointed for Captain
Johnson to join him; but receiving no intelligence of him, and the danger
of lying on that coast at that season of the year, with transports,
rendering it necessary to take some measures of acting without him, and
the wind being fair for Vigo, he came to a resolution of sailing to that
port.
On the 29th of September, they entered the harbour of Vigo and the
grenadiers being immediately landed, about three miles from the town,
drew up upon the beach. Lord Cobham went on shore with the grenadiers,
and the regiments followed as fast as the boats could carry them. On the
1st of October his Lordship moved with the forces nearer the town; this
motion of the army, together with the motion of some parties that were
ordered to reconnoitre the town and citadel, gave the enemy some
apprehensions that preparations were being made to attack them, whereupon
they abandoned the town and retired to the citadel.
On the 3rd a bomb-vessel began to bombard the citadel, but with little
success, by reason of its great distance; but in the evening the large
mortars and the cohorn mortars between forty and fifty of them, great and
small, being landed at the town, and placed on a battery, under cover of
fort St. Sebastian (which had been taken from the Spaniards) began in the
night to play upon the citadel, and continued it four days with great
success. On the fourth day his Lordship ordered the battering cannon to
be landed, and, at the same time his Lordship sent to the governor a
summons to surrender, signifying, that if he staid till our battery of
cannon was ready, he should have no quarter. Colonel Ligonier was sent
with this message; but found that the Governor had the day before been
carried out of the castle wounded. The Lieutenant-Colonel, who commanded
in his absence, desired leave to send for directions, but being answered
that hostilities should be continued if they did not send their articles
of capitulation without any delay, they soon complied.
On the 25th and 26th of October the forces were all embarked again; on
the 27th the fleet put to sea; and on the 11th of November Admiral
Mighells, with the men of war and most of the transports arrived at
Falmouth, with the loss of only two officers and three or four men killed
in the fleet, and about three hundred men killed, died, or deserted in
the army. The enemy had above three hundred killed or wounded by our
bombs. There were found in the town and citadel a great number of fine
brass cannon and mortars, several thousand cannon shot, muskets, barrels
of gunpowder, and an immense quantity of other stores and ammunition,
which were shipped on board the fleet; besides destroying 153 pieces of
iron cannon, sixteen brass cannon and mortars, and a large quantity of
other stores; and the treasure brought into the Tower of London was
computed to be worth £80,000 sterling. It is remarkable, that the arms
and the stores thus taken and destroyed were originally designed for the
intended invasion of England the preceding year; but from this successful
expedition every design of that nature was rendered totally abortive.
This was a very humiliating blow to Spain, and convinced them and the
rest of the world, that the English spirit was so far from being
depressed by the threatening insults of its enemies, that it was not only
capable of planning, but of really executing that invasion which our
enemies only meditated.
This expedition to the coast of Spain appears to have been the last
service that this great officer was engaged in; for being now arrived at
his full meridian glory, and worn out with fatigue in the service of his
country, he exchanged the tumultuous scenes of war for the more calm and
undisturbed enjoyments of a retired situation. He died on the 21st of
March, 1733, and was buried in Lowestoft church, where a handsome
monument is erected to his memory. The following is a copy of the
inscription: “To the memory of James Mighells, Esq., late Vice-Admiral
and Comptroller of the Royal Navy, whose publick and private character
justly deserves remembrance, if courage and conduct in a commander,
fidelity and diligence in a commissioner, sincerity in a friend,
usefulness in a relation, love and affection in a husband, care and
indulgence in a parent, and the strictest justice and honesty to all men,
deserved to be remembered. He died March 21st, 1733, aged 69 years.”
The last naval officer belonging to Lowestoft at the same period, who
remains to be mentioned, and whose conduct and bravery, as a commander,
is justly entitled to notice and esteem is Captain Thomas Arnold.
The Arnolds have been a flourishing family in this town from the reign of
Queen Elizabeth. In 1584 Nathaniel Arnold was one of the feoffees for
Ann Girling’s donation. Thomas, his eldest son lost £375 13s. by the
great fire in 1644.
The most memorable action in Captain Thomas Arnold’s life, wherein he
displayed the greatest valour and magnanimity, was in the great seafight
in the Mediterranean, in the year 1718.
About the middle of March, 1718, Sir George Byng was appointed Admiral
and Commander-in-Chief of His Majesty’s fleet, and to command the
squadron designed for the Mediterranean, to act against Spain, in order
to protect the neutrality of Italy. On the 3rd of June, the fleet,
consisting of twenty-two ships of the line, etc., sailed from St.
Helen’s; about the latter end of the month it arrived in the
Mediterranean, and in the beginning of July was in sight of the Spanish
fleet consisting of twenty-seven sail of men-of-war, great and small with
fireships, bomb-vessels, etc. On the approach of the English, they went
from them a long way, but in their order of battle. Early in the morning
of the 11th, the English got pretty near up to them. The Marquis de
Mari, Rear-Admiral, with six Spanish men-of-war, and all the galleys,
fireships, bomb-vessels, and store ships, separated from their main
fleet, and stood in for the Sicilian shore; upon which the Admiral
detached Captain Walton, of the Canterbury, with five more ships after
them. In this engagement Captain Walton took four Spanish men-of-war, a
bomb-vessel, and a ship laden with arms, and burnt four men-of-war, being
all the Spanish ships that were on the coast. In the meanwhile Admiral
Sir George Byng pursued the main body of the Spanish fleet.
The Kent and Superbe (the latter being commanded by Captain Streynsham
Master, whose first lieutenant was Mr. Arnold), together with the Grafton
and Orford, being the fastest sailing ships, having orders to make what
sail they could, and to place themselves near the four head-most ships of
the enemy, were the first that came up with them. The Spaniards began
the action by firing their stern chasers at them; but the English ships
having orders not to fire unless the Spaniards repeated their firing,
made no return at first; but the Spaniards firing again, the Orford
attacked the Santa Rosa, which some time after she took. The St. Charles
struck next, without much opposition, and the Kent took possession of
her. The Grafton attacked the Prince of Austrias (formerly called the
Cumberland), in which was Rear-Admiral Chacon; but the Breda and Captain
coming up, she left that ship for them to take, which they soon
accomplished, and stretched ahead after another sixty gun ship, which was
on her starboard while she was engaging the Prince of Austrias, and kept
firing her stern chase into the Grafton.
About one o’clock the Kent and Superbe engaged the Royal St. Philip the
Spanish Admiral; which, though supported by two other ships, and all of
them kept a continual fire, yet made a running fight of it till about
three in the afternoon, when the Kent bearing down upon her and passing
under her stern, gave her a broadside and fell to leeward of her. After
that the Superbe bore up to the Royal Philip; but Captain Master (who
commanded the Superbe) being diffident concerning the most successful
method of attacking her, consulted his first lieutenant, Mr. Arnold, who
told him, “That as the eyes of the whole fleet were upon them, expecting
the most vigorous efforts in the discharge of his duty in that critical
moment; he therefore advised him to board the Royal Philip immediately
sword in hand.” The council of Mr. Arnold was immediately put in
execution; and as his office of first-lieutenant obliged him, he boarded
the Royal Philip, sword in hand, and shortly after carried her. Mr.
Arnold received such a dangerous wound in this service, in one of his
hands and arms, as rendered him almost useless afterwards. At the same
time the Barfleur being within shot of the Royal Philip, and astern of
her, and also inclining on her weather quarter, one of the Spanish
rear-Admirals and another ship of sixty guns, which were to the windward
of the Barfleur, bore down upon her and gave her their broadsides, and
then clapped upon a wind and stood in for the land. Admiral Byng, in the
Barfleur, stood after them till it was almost night; but it being little
wind, and they galeing from him out of reach of his cannon, he left
pursuing them, and stood away again to the fleet, which he joined in the
night. In this action the Essex took the Juno, of thirty-six guns, the
Montague and Rupert took the Velante, of forty-four guns. Vice-Admiral
Cornwall followed the Grafton, to support her, but it being very little
wind, and night coming on, the Spaniard galed away from the Grafton.
Rear-Admiral Delaval took the Isabella of sixty guns. The English
received but little damage in this battle; the ship that suffered most
was the Grafton, Captain Haddock, and being a good sailor, her Captain
engaged several ships of the enemy, always pursuing the headmost, and
leaving those ships he had disabled or damaged to be taken by those that
followed him. Several other men-of-war, fire ships, bomb vessels, etc.,
were taken and destroyed in this action. As for the prizes that had been
taken, they were sent to Port Mahon; where, by an unlucky accident the
Royal Philip took fire and blew up with most of the crew on board; but
the Spanish Admiral had been before set ashore in Sicily, with some other
prisoners of distinction, where he soon afterwards died of his wounds.
As soon as Admiral Byng had obtained a full account of the whole
transaction, he dispatched his eldest son to England with the
intelligence; who, arriving at Hampton Court in fifteen days from Naples,
brought thither the agreeable confirmation of what public fame had before
reported, and on which the King had already written a letter to the
Admiral as under:
Sir George Byng—Although I have received no news from you directly, I
am informed of the victory obtained by the fleet under your command
and would not, therefore, defer giving that satisfaction which must
result from my approbation of your conduct. I give you my thanks,
and desire you will testify the same to all the brave men who have
distinguished themselves on this occasion. Mr. Secretary Crags has
orders to inform you more fully my intentions, but I was willing to
assure you that I am your good friend.
GEORGE R.
Hampton Court, August 23, 1718.
Mr. Byng met with a most gracious reception from his Majesty; who made
him a handsome present, and sent him back with plenipotentionary powers
to his father to negociate with the several Princes and states of Italy,
as there should be occasion; and with his royal grant to the officers and
seamen, of all prizes taken by them from the Spaniards.
The Spanish Court was extremely chagrined at this unexpected blow, which
had almost totally destroyed the naval force which they had been at so
much pains in equipping, and therefore were not slow in expressing their
resentments; for they immediately made themselves masters of all the
English ships that were in the port of Cadiz, and seized all the effects
of the English merchants that were at Malaga. These hostilities
occasioned a declaration of war against Spain, in form, on the 17th of
December, 1718.
Soon after this battle Mr. Arnold was appointed Captain of the Spy sloop
of war, and sent express to the West Indies; but his ship was so very
unfit for the voyage that it was expected he would never return.
However, he was so fortunate as to arrive safe again in England, and was
afterwards appointed to the command of the Fox man-of-war, and ordered
upon the Carolina station; but on coming home again, finding his friend
Lord Torrington dead; {167} and all his hopes of promotion entirely
frustrated, he resigned his command in the navy, and retired to Great
Yarmouth, where he ended his days, August 31, 1737, aged 58 years, and
was interred in Lowestoft church, where a monument containing a just
representation of a brave and gallant officer is erected to his memory.
These are the accounts of the many valiant sea commanders who formerly
belonged to the town of Lowestoft, and who by their wisdom, conduct, and
gallantry, have not only adorned the annals of their country, but have
cast a lustre upon the place of their nativity, and obtained the most
distinguished honour to themselves and their posterity.
Lowestoft being a maritime town, it is more distinguished by important
events relative to naval affairs, than those respecting military
transactions having occurred, which were of considerable importance, such
as have given evident demonstrations of the loyalty of its inhabitants,
and of their invoilable attachment to the Government.
In the year 1715, a block-house was standing at Lowestoft, well furnished
with ordnance, for the defence of such ships as anchored before the town
for the purpose of merchandising, which block-house was destroyed by the
sea.
In 1549, as soon as the report of Kett having formed a camp upon
Mousehold Heath, Norwich, was received in Suffolk, the common people
assembled together in great multitudes, made themselves masters of
Lothingland, seized six pieces of cannon at Lowestoft, and brought them
to an enclosure at the north end of Gorleston, intending to batter from
thence the town of Yarmouth. These designs being perceived by the
inhabitants, a party of them were dispatched to set fire to a large stack
of hay, on the west side of the haven; which being executed, it
occasioned a prodigious smoke, and falling upon the face of the rebels,
prevented their seeing the Yarmouth men, who, consequently, fell upon the
enemy, whereby many of them were slain, thirty were taken prisoners,
together with six pieces of cannon. The prisoners, with the cannon, were
immediately carried to Yarmouth, where the rebels were committed to
prison, and the remainder of the party being disappointed in their design
of seizing the town, immediately withdrew themselves, and taking another
rout, joined their leader Kett on Mousehold Heath. Afterwards, Queen
Elizabeth gave the town of Lowestoft four pieces of cannon and two
slings, in the room of those taken away by the Suffolk rabble, when they
went to join Kett at Mousehold.
In 1588, when the nation was alarmed with the apprehension of a Spanish
invasion it cost the inhabitants of Lowestoft upwards of £200 towards
defending the coast against the enemy, which was applied in the following
manner: in fitting out a pinnace, £100; in erecting bulwarks, £80; in
mounting the cannon £16; and in purchasing gunpowder £16. Also, in the
following year, a warrant was issued by the Privy Council to the men of
Ipswich, commanding the inhabitants of this town to concur with them in
fitting out two ships of war; the charges attending this undertaking
amounted to £2,800, and the share allotted to Lowestoft was £23. The
town received also a warrant from the Lieutenant of the county, directing
that another bulwark should be erected for its defence. In consequence
of this order, it was found necessary to apply the money which had been
collected in Ipswich, in erecting this bulwark. But about two or three
years after, the Ipswich men made a demand of this money; and for
non-payment thereof procured an order of Council, whereby several of the
principal inhabitants of Lowestoft were arrested, in order to appear
before the Council, and answer the charge of disobedience, which cost the
town £60.
During the great revolt from loyalty, the usurpation of Oliver Cromwell,
the town of Lowestoft exerted its utmost efforts in support of the Royal
cause, and consequently was thereby exposed to the greatest dangers and
inconveniences; particularly in opposing and counteracting the violent
proceedings of Cromwell and the Parliament, respecting the association of
the Eastern Counties. Among the many misfortunes and inconveniences
which the town was subject to in consequence of this rebellion, may be
reckoned, its being obliged, in 1642, to join with Ipswich, Orford,
Dunwich, Aldborough, Southwold, Colchester, Maldon, Harwich, Woodbridge,
Walberswick, Gorleston, Manningtree, and Barnham, in furnishing a ship of
800 tons burthen, and 260 men, with double tackle, ammunition, wages and
stores.
In 1642, when Cromwell was advanced to the rank of Colonel, and also
appointed a Commissioner in the order for settling the militia, the
eastern counties entered into an association, and agreed to support the
Parliament against all its opposers.
The king, in order to defeat the designs of this association, which the
Parliament had confirmed, issued out his commission of array.
Cromwell having by his great skill and management, raised a regiment of a
thousand horse, obstructed, with the most indefatigable industry, the
levies that were raising for the service of the King in Cambridgeshire,
Essex, Suffolk and Norfolk, and hearing that several gentlemen of eminent
rank were assembled at Lowestoft, among whom were Sir John Pettus, Sir
Edward Barker, etc., with a design of forming a counter association in
this county, and also in Norfolk, for the service of his Majesty, he
marched with the utmost expedition to Lowestoft, and surprised them the
day before that many others were to have met and joined them; and had not
their designs been frustrated by this unexpected surprise, probably all
the eastern counties would have been rescued out of the hands of Oliver
Cromwell and his adherents.
The inhabitants of Lowestoft, as soon as they were informed of Oliver’s
approach were exceedingly alarmed, and exerted their utmost efforts to
put the town in a state of defence, and to dispute his entrance; and in
order to this purpose, two pieces of cannon were placed at the south end
of the town, and two at the head of Rant’s score, but one of the
principal inhabitants (Thomas Mighells, merchant, who died in 1695)
foreseeing the improbability of a design of this nature being attended
with success, and also representing the extreme rashness of attempting it
with so inferior a force, as well as the great damage which the town
would probably sustain from an unsuccessful opposition, so far prevailed
with the inhabitants and members of the association that they declined
the resolution of opposing Oliver’s entrance into the town. The sum of
twenty pounds was paid by the City of Norwich to Sergeant-Major
Sherwood’s volunteers for their service at Lowestoft, where a design was
discovered of a counter-association on the King’s behalf, made by Sir
John Pettus, Sir Edward Barker, and other loyal gentlemen; and was
carried so far, that Colonel Cromwell was in danger of his person, and
was very near being taken, had not these volunteers rescued him, by
sending for one hundred soldiers from Norwich and also one hundred more
afterwards.
In consequence of pacific measures being adopted, Cromwell entered the
town without any opposition, and fixed his head quarters at the Swan Inn.
While he was here he sent for Sir John Pettus, who accordingly waited on
him. After that Oliver had interrogated him very closely respecting the
designs of the counter-association, requested that he would inform him to
which party it was that he intended to engage himself during these
disputes, Sir John, without any duplicity or reservation, declared that
he should act for the King. Oliver, so far from shewing the least
resentment against Sir John for his ingenuous declaration, highly
applauded his frankness and sincerity, and dismissed him with assuring
him, that he sincerely wished every man in the kingdom would be as open
and sincere in declaring his real sentiments and intentions.
Cromwell by the surrender of the town became possessed of a considerable
quantity of ammunition, saddles, pistols, and several pieces of cannon;
as many as were sufficient for arming and supplying with necessaries a
considerable body of forces.
This unfortunate event exceedingly discouraged the King’s friends of
Norfolk and Suffolk; and it appeared afterwards, that, however artfully
Cromwell might conceal his resentment on this occasion, yet, he was far
from being sincere, or that those resentments were wholly suppressed by
the surrender of the town. For he not only declared that had the
inhabitants and those concerned in the counter association attempted to
fire upon him when he entered the town, he would have put them all to the
sword, but also suffered his soldiers, in a great measure, to plunder the
town and live at free quarters. The tradesmen in Lowestoft suffered the
greatest injuries by Oliver’s soldiers plundering them of their
stocks-in-trade, as far as they were useful to the army, without making
them any recompense. This misfortune, which happened in the year 1643,
together with the terrible fire in 1644, which consumed £10,000 worth of
property; the Dutch wars, which followed soon after, and the tedious and
expensive law-suit with Yarmouth concerning the herring fishery, almost
ruined the town.
In the year 1663 a petition was presented by the town of Lowestoft to the
Duke of Albemarle, requesting that the four pieces of cannon then in the
town might remain there, in order to guard the coast against any attacks
of the enemy.
In consequence of this petition, the four pieces of cannon were permitted
by Government to remain at Lowestoft, for the defence of the town;
accordingly the inhabitants at their own expense, mounted the same on a
platform, and also purchased ammunition necessary for their own security.
But this platform being afterwards destroyed by the sea, the town was
obliged to present a petition to the Earl of Suffolk, Lord Lieutenant of
the County, requesting assistance, in order to enable them to erect
another platform which petition was granted.
In 1744 a battery of six pieces of cannon, eighteen pounders, was erected
at the south end of the town, for protecting ships in the south roads,
and guarding the passage of the Stanford. The cannon were given by
Government, but the ammunition was furnished by the town.
On the 14th October, 1745, in consequence of the rebellion in Scotland, a
subscription was opened in Lowestoft for the defence of his Majesty’s
person, the support of the Government and the peace and security of the
county; when the sum of £200 was subscribed, advice was received of the
victory obtained over the rebels, 16th April, 1746, by his Royal Highness
the Duke of Cumberland, only £20 of the subscription was paid.
In 1756 a battery of two pieces of canon, eighteen pounders, was erected
upon the beach at the north end of the town, near the ness. These pieces
were taken from the battery at the south end of the town. They were
never of any great service to the town, for vessels belonging to the
enemy seldom approach so near to the coast as to come within reach of the
guns. On the 7th of April, 1778, Lord Amherst, accompanied by his
brother, came to Lowestoft and examined the forts in consequence of the
survey they were making by order of the Government, of the state of all
the fortifications on the coast.
In 1782, when England was involved in a war with France, Spain, Holland,
and America at the same time, was under apprehension that the British
Navy was unable to maintain its superiority as mistress of the sea, when
threatened by such numerous and powerful enemies, the county of Suffolk
held a general meeting at Stowmarket, where it was agreed to open a
subscription throughout the county, in order to raise a sum sufficient
for building a man-of-war of the line, of seventy-four guns, to be
presented to the Government. The town of Lowestoft subscribed £38 6s.
6d. The sum proposed to be raised was £30,000. The utmost efforts were
exerted to obtain the money, and weekly accounts were published in the
papers of the success that attended it in the several parts of the
county; but it appearing, at the close of the year, that the whole
subscription amounted to only about £20,000, it was apprehended that the
zeal of the county was nearly exhausted, and that the subscription had
arrived at almost its utmost limits. In the beginning of the year 1783,
the war being terminated in a general peace, a further subscription
became unnecessary, and consequently the subscribers were not called on
for their subscriptions.
In the beginning of the year 1781, when the war broke out between England
and Holland, there were quartered at Lowestoft two companies of the East
Suffolk Militia commanded by Col. Goat, which in the May following were
succeeded by a party of the 19th Regiment of light horse. Government
seemed to have been apprehensive of this war, and also sensible of the
necessity of having recourse to such methods as were proper for securing
the eastern part of the kingdom against any attacks of the enemy.
On the 31st of July Lord Amherst, Commander-in-chief of his Majesty’s
forces in the Kingdom, in his survey of the fortifications on this coast,
after being met at Kessingland by a party of light dragoons from
Lowestoft, was escorted to Lowestoft, where he surveyed the forts, which
were found to be in a very ruinous condition. On the 13th of August the
town was alarmed with the appearance of a fleet of large men of war in
the offing, steering a direct course for Lowestoft, supposing them to be
Dutch ships, but on a nearer approach they were found to be Admiral
Parker’s fleet returning from a sharp engagement with a Dutch squadron,
commanded by Admiral Zoutman on the Dogger Bank, the 5th August. On the
4th September there arrived in Lowestoft a waggon loaded with powder,
shot, &c., guarded by a party of the Huntingdonshire and East Essex
Militia, from the camp at Hopton, in order to prove, before General
Tryon, four pieces of cannon then lying at the old fort, at the south end
of the town, in order to discover whether they were serviceable or not;
when, after charging each of them with 16lbs of powder and an 18lb shot,
one of them burst, and flying in various directions, part of it struck a
boy on the arm, who happily received no material injury. One part of the
cannon, weighing between two and three hundred weight, was thrown into a
field at a distance of 175 yards. On the 11th October following, Colonel
Deibeig proved also the guns lying at the old fort, near the ness, which
had laid there since the reign of Queen Anne, when three of them burst.
This month the party of the 19th regiment of light horse quartered at
this place, left the town, and were succeeded by two companies of the
East Suffolk Militia, commanded by Captain Delane, who continued here
till the May following.
Government being acquainted with the ruinous condition of the forts at
Lowestoft, and the defenceless state of this part of the coast,
immediately formed a resolution to erect several new fortifications at
this town, and the principal one to be situated at the north end of the
town, on the same spot whereon the old fort formerly stood; and also to
have it much larger. But the premises on which the fort was designed to
be erected being town land, Government was under the necessity of hiring
it by a lease for a term of years, and also to purchase of different
proprietors about three-quarters of an acre of land to add to it, the
former spot not being large enough. Half an acre of this land was
purchased of Mr. Robert Reeve, and the other quarter of an acre of Mr.
Henry Lucas.
On January 7, 1782, the new fort, at the south end of the town was begun
under the direction of Captain Fisher, one of His Majesty’s engineers.
About 300 men (including fifty of the East Suffolk militia), were
employed in this work. This fort consisted of a ditch about eighteen
feet deep, fifteen feet wide, mounted with chevaux de frize. Over this
ditch was a drawbridge between four and five feet wide. The inside of
the south-west angle measured seventy feet; the width of the other angles
were 95, 140, 100, and 249 feet. The terrace before the embrazures was
four feet wide. The embrazures were eighteen feet wide and eight high.
Next the sea was the glacis, extending about sixty-five yards. There was
also a breastwork to defend the bridge, about eighteen feet thick and
eight feet high. At the north-west angle of the fort was the magazine,
it was thirty feet long and twelve broad; it was sunk beneath the surface
of the earth, and was bomb proof, and contained 300 barrels of powder.
In the centre of the fort stood the guard house; this was a handsome
sashed building, about seventy feet long and twenty-six wide, having a
spacious parade in front. At the south-west angle stood the flag staff,
fifty-five feet high on which was hoisted an English jack. The battery
mounted thirteen pieces of cannon, ten thirty-pounders, and three
eighteen-pounders. The whole battery was finished on the 21st December,
1782. The south battery was distant from the north, three quarters of a
mile, and from the east battery upon the beach, seven furlongs; and the
distance of the north battery, near the distance of the north battery, on
the beach three furlongs.
On the 4th April in the same year (1782) the erection of the fort at the
north end of the town was commenced about one hundred yards to the north
of the light-house. This battery consisted of a breast-work, having four
angles, each of them about thirty feet wide. There was a guard house
adjoining, about twenty feet long, and sixteen feet broad. Also a
magazine, about six feet-square, which was paled round. This battery
mounted four eighteen-pounders, and was intended to act with another
battery, purposed shortly to be erected upon the Beach near the Ness.
A descent on this coast was so much apprehended about this time that a
party of soldiers patrolled through Lowestoft every four hours during the
night, in order, if necessary, to give an alarm.
And on the 23rd April following they began to erect the eastern battery
upon the hill. It was surrounded by a ditch about fifteen feet wide and
twelve deep, over which was a draw-bridge about four feet wide. The
south-west angle measured eighty-three feet; the other angles ninety-six,
eighty-three, fifty-eight, and twenty-nine feet. There was also a
block-house erected, about fifteen feet square, the upper part of which
was a guard house. The terrace round the inside of the ditch was four
feet broad. The embrazures were eighteen feet wide and four feet high.
The magazine was six feet square, and the glacis (which was next the sea)
was fifty-three feet broad. This battery mounted six pieces of cannon,
four thirty-two pounders, and two nine pounders; and was finished, as was
also the north battery, on the 21st December, 1782, just time enough to
fire (as it happened) for the general peace concluded the 20th January,
1783. On the 12th August, 1782, in honour of the Prince of Wales’s
birthday, nine guns were fired from the south battery, four from the
north, and four from the east battery; which was the first time of the
cannon being exercised. The camp on East Heath also fired three volleys
on the occasion.
The real cause, most probably, that hastened the finishing of these
forts, was the information which Government had received of a descent
intended to have been made on this coast.
In consequence of this intelligence, on the 23rd March, 1782, Captain
Fisher, of the engineers, came to Lowestoft, and afterwards went to East
Heath, near Mutford Bridge, and marked out the ground for an encampment.
On the 27th following, the Captain requested a meeting of the inhabitants
of the town to know whether a sufficient number of men could be raised in
order to work the guns at the batteries, provided that a party of the
Royal Regiment of Artillery, then quartered in the town, should undertake
to teach them their exercise. On the Captain offering this proposal, a
subscription of upwards of £100 was immediately entered into by the
principal inhabitants, with a design of carrying the proposal into
execution, but not being sufficiently encouraged it came to nothing.
On the 29th March, Colonel Deibieg arrived at Lowestoft, and informed the
inhabitants that Government had received undoubted information of an
intended invasion shortly to be made at three different parts of the
kingdom at the same time, namely at Torbay, Newcastle, and on the coast
near Yarmouth; and therefore requested to be informed whether the town
was able to furnish two hundred men to work the guns at the batteries.
On this application a meeting was called of the inhabitants to take the
same into consideration, when the answer was, that by reason of the great
number of sailors belonging to the town being at that time employed in
the navy, it was impossible to obtain the number of men required.
On June 23rd, Lord Townshend, Commander-in-chief of the camp at Warley
common, and the coasts of Essex, Norfolk and Suffolk, came to Lowestoft,
and surveyed the works carrying on there, and also the ground intended
for the encampment on East Heath. On the 24th his Lordship, accompanied
by his aide-de-camps, went to Oulton, and surveyed the dyke there, in
order to discover whether that part of the river was fordable by the
enemy in case of descent.
July 22nd, the 20 regiment of Light Dragoons, commanded by General
Philipson, encamped on East Heath, at the bottom of Fidlers’ hill, near
Kirkley bridge. And on September 10th, they were reviewed on the Heath
by Lord Townshend, the Earl of Orford, General Tryon, and General
Philipson.
September 11, eight pieces of cannon passed through Lowestoft for
Benacre, to be placed there, along the coast to Harwich as signal guns.
September 25, General Conway, Commander-in-chief of his Majesty’s forces,
arrived at Lowestoft; and being attended by Lord Townshend, General
Tryon, General Morrison, and their Aide-de-Camps, surveyed the batteries
in Lowestoft, and afterwards reviewed the regiment of Dragoons from East
Heath; the regiment of foot and Cambridgeshire militia from Hopton; and
the West Norfork militia from Castor, on Fritton Heath.
On the 28th September Captain Heigington’s company of the 10th Regiment
of Foot came from Hopton Common, and encamped near the Battery at the
north end of the town, to be in readiness, in case of necessity, to
assist the artillery at the fort, commanded by Captain Marlow.
On the 14th October his Grace the Duke of Richmond, master of the
ordnance, arrived at Lowestoft, accompanied by his son Lord George Lenox
and surveyed the works.
In February, 1782, Lord North, Prime Minister, and all the other officers
of State belonging to his administration, were under the necessity of
resigning their respective employments on account of the American war.
The many miseries which the nation was involved in, in consequence of
this unhappy war, and the opposition which ministers met with in the
House of Commons, as being the authors of these calamities, occasioned an
entire new ministry to be formed. The Marquis of Rockingham was made
Prime Minister; who, dying soon after was succeeded by the Earl of
Shelburne; Admiral Kepple was appointed First Lord of the Admiralty, in
the room of Earl of Sandwich; General Conway was made Commander-in-chief
of His Majesty’s forces in the room of Lord Amherst; and the Duke of
Richmond master of the Ordnance in the room of Lord Townsend. These
circumstances are necessary to be remembered, as they account for the
different noblemen and officers visiting the town in so short a space of
time, in order to survey the works and review the troops.
Among the various methods made use of in order to alarm the coast on the
approach of an enemy were the following: July 18, 1782, about ten at
night General Tryon caused skyrockets to be let off at the several places
of Caister, Gorleston Heights, Lowestoft East Battery, Pakefield, and
Covehithe, intending thereby to communicate an alarm from Caister and
Covehithe, the two most distant places, in the same manner as was
practised by lighting up beacons. This method was found to answer
exceedingly well, as intelligence could by these means be communicated
from Caister to Covehithe in two minutes. September 5, another
experiment was made use of by the General to convey an alarm in case the
enemy should approach in the night near Lowestoft; which was to set fire
to a stack of about fifty faggots of furze, upon a hill, in the bounds of
Gunton, and to let off four large skyrockets, so as to be seen at
Caister, Hopton camp, Somerly Hall, (the head quarters) and East Ness.
September 16, another experiment made, was by firing a signal gun from
the East Battery at Lowestoft; to set fire to a stack of furze in the
Church lane, and let off some skyrockets. The same methods were made use
of at Bawdsey Cliff, and at the several different stations between here
and Caister (one of which was the foregoing at Lowestoft) when it was
found that an alarm was conveyed in this manner from Bawdsey to Caister,
fifty miles, in eleven minutes. September 17, an experiment by daylight
was made in making a great smoke. This signal was answered from the camp
at Hopton. Another signal was given from the East battery to East Ness,
by flash of gun, September 25, an experiment was made to convey an alarm
to Norwich from the coast, the camp on East Heath, and from the camp at
Herringfleet, by firing skyrockets and cannon, which were answered by
other rockets, and platoons of musketry upon Mousehold Heath, Norwich.
After which, beacons of piles of wood, were set fire to on Herringfleet
and Mousehold Heath. October 9th a similar experiment was made at seven
o’clock in the evening. A chain of signals, by skyrockets and fire
beacons, were displayed successively from Coxford lodge, near Houghton,
Swanton Novers, near Melton Constable; the heights above Attlebridge; and
Mousehold Heath, Norwich; to Herringfleet (near the head-quarters at
Somerly). These several modes of conveying alarms, in case of an actual
invasion, were the most practicable and speedy that could then be made
use of in this part of the country.
November 11th, 1784, the camp upon Hopton common broke up, and the
Cambridgeshire militia having joined the Light Infantry that had been
encamped upon the common at Southwold, went into the winter quarters in
Cambridgeshire. At the same time the camp also at Caister broke up, and
went into winter quarters at Lynn. And on the 12th the camp upon East
Heath broke up, when the troops, together with the 10th Regiment of Foot
from Hopton, went into winter quarters at Yarmouth, Gorleston, and
Lowestoft. The enemy had not once attempted to carry their intended
descent into execution. As the war was terminated on the 20th January
following, by a general peace, the fortifications which had been so
lately erected in Lowestoft, at a great expense, were allowed to fall
into decay.
On the 23rd July, 1785, at four o’clock in the afternoon, Major Money, of
Crown Point, near Norwich, ascended from the public gardens in that city,
in a car suspended from an air balloon. When arrived at a considerable
height, he was not only carried above the clouds, but by a change in the
current of air, was driven over Lowestoft, and forced many miles over the
sea. About six o’clock, the Major with the balloon fell upon the water,
where, after experiencing the most astonishing dangers with the greatest
fortitude and presence of mind, he was taken up by a cutter between
eleven and twelve o’clock that night, about eighteen miles to the east of
Southwold; and the next morning landed safe at Lowestoft, to the great
surprise and joy of his friends and the country in general.
SECTION X.
THE rise and progress of the herring fishery have been previously
mentioned and further discussion would be superfluous, were it not to
represent more clearly the attempts that were made by some new
adventurers, who resided at Dunbar, Caithness, and other places in
Scotland; at Liverpool, in the western part of England; and at the Isle
of Man, in the Irish Channel; in order to deprive the town of the
benefits arising from this antient fishery, and to monopolise them wholly
to themselves.
The declining state of the herring fishery at Lowestoft was apparent
about the year 1776, that the inhabitants began to entertain alarming
apprehensions concerning it. This decline may be attributed to the new
adventurers and the war with France and Spain.
The merchants at Lowestoft, in the year 1776, had formed a scheme for
sending boats to the coast of Scotland, to fish for the large fat
herrings which frequent those seas in great quantities, with the design
of bringing them to Lowestoft, to be dried and cured, in the manner
practised with herrings caught on the Lowestoft coast. By this means an
intercourse was opened between the Lowestoft and Scotch people. In
consequence whereof, inquiries were made respecting our mode of curing
herrings, and the advantages which we received from the fishery; premiums
were offered to our fishermen to entice them to repair to Scotland,
during the herring season, to instruct those people in the methods of
catching and drying the herrings; and persons were also sent from
Scotland to Lowestoft to take dimensions of our fish-houses, their manner
of construction, etc., and as they had obtained every information
necessary for their purpose, fish-houses were immediately erected in
Scotland, the fishery was established there and prosecuted with vigour,
and Lowestoft was threatened with the annihilation of its antient branch
of commerce, which had been its support for many centuries. The
adventurers at Liverpool and the Isle of Man having at the same time
formed a design of introducing the art of drying and curing herrings at
those places, the same as in Scotland, the like methods were practised by
them as were made use of by the Scotch. But all these designs of the
Scotch, however alarming they might appear at first, were of short
duration; for the heat of the weather during the fishing season, and the
fat and oily quality of their herrings, rendered the fish difficult to
cure, and unpleasant to the taste; and consequently their schemes were
frustrated. But at Liverpool, and particularly at the Isle of Man, the
case was very different. In these places the fishery continues a
considerable part of the year, the herrings are taken in prodigious
quantities at a small expense, and are not of that oily quality as those
are which frequent the coast of Dunbar and Caithness, and consequently
are capable of being better cured than those which are caught on the
eastern coast of Scotland.
Nevertheless it was generally allowed that the western herrings, though
preferable to those caught on the coast of Scotland, in that they were
more capable of being properly cured, were yet greatly inferior in
quality to those either of Lowestoft or Yarmouth. But notwithstanding
the superior quality of the Lowestoft herrings, considerable orders were
given for the western fish; and in consequence of the low price they
could be afforded at, found a more speedy sale than those from Lowestoft,
not only at all the markets in England, but at those also of the
different Italian ports in the Levant. The diminution of the price of
herrings, especially when accompanied with an increase of their size,
were recommendations which had so great an influence with the generality
of purchasers of that commodity, that they more than balanced the far
superior qualities of richness of colour and excellency of flavour, which
have always so remarkably distinguished the Lowestoft herrings above
those from any other place.
This success of the western adventurers greatly alarmed the merchants at
Lowestoft. The great quantity of fish which they caught, the proficiency
they discovered in curing them, together with the greatest success they
had met withal at market, exhibited but a melancholy prospect to the
inhabitants of Lowestoft.
It was computed that in the year 1776, six thousand barrels of herrings
were cured only at the Isle of Man; and in 1777 there were sent from the
same place four thousand barrels to the London market only, exclusive of
those that were sent to the other places. There were also sent to market
that year twenty thousand barrels from Liverpool, and a considerable
quantity from Scotland. These prodigious quantities of fish, offered
also to the public at the reduced price which those merchants could
afford them at (namely, Lowestoft herrings at £15 10s. per last, and
herrings from Liverpool at £11 per last) so extremely distressed the
Lowestoft merchants, that they were obliged to export the greater part of
their herrings at Leghorn, and other ports in the Mediterranean on a
venture. But even here also they found that ships from Liverpool, with
herrings, had arrived there before them; and in consequence thereof were
obliged to deposit their herrings in warehouses till the following year,
when they were sold at a great loss. The Lowestoft merchants were also
in the same predicament respecting the herrings that remained unsold at
the London market; and therefore a meeting of merchants was held at
Lowestoft, in order to consult about the most eligible methods of
disposing of those herrings, and it was agreed to lodge them also in
warehouses there till the succeeding year, which resolution was attended
with the same misfortune as that respecting the herrings at the Italian
ports to the great injury of the Lowestoft merchants.
Notwithstanding the great success which had hitherto attended these
competitors with Lowestoft for the herring fishery, yet it was but of
short continuance; for the large size of their herrings, and the fat and
oily quality they possessed, though perhaps in a lesser degree than those
caught on the coast of Scotland, were such great obstacles to their being
properly cured, as could not be surmounted, and evidently proved that
they were wholly unfit for exportation, and could only be sent to our
English markets, and were not saleable even there, unless they were
brought for immediate consumption; and consequently the herring fishery
established at Liverpool and the Isle of Man experienced the same ill
success as attended that at Dunbar and Caithness, that of being totally
abolished, at least so far as respected the curing or making red
herrings.
The attempts of these new adventurers have evidently demonstrated that
the herrings caught on the eastern coast are the only ones that are
capable of being properly cured for red herrings; the colour and flavour
of these herrings are superior to those from any other place, and they
retain their excellent qualities to a longer period and are preferable to
any others either for a foreign or home consumption.
The second cause, which, about the year 1777, greatly retarded the
success of the herring fishery at Lowestoft, as well as embarrassed the
merchants was the war with France and Spain. By this event the
intercourse which the English merchants had formerly maintained with the
different ports in the Mediterranean was greatly interrupted, and
particularly at the time when the siege of Gibraltar by the Spaniards was
turned into a blockade. The usual methods formerly made use of by the
merchants at Lowestoft in exporting herrings to the Italian and other
ports in the Mediterranean, when we were engaged in a war with France or
Spain, was, to convey them to those ports in foreign bottoms;
particularly in ships from Holland; but the Dutch, at this time being
suspected of carrying English property, were more narrowly watched than
formerly as they passed the Straights of Gibraltar and consequently were
in the most imminent danger of being captured. But in the year 1780 this
difficulty was in a great measure, removed by the treaty of “The Armed
Neutrality.” This treaty was entered into by most of the commercial
powers on the Continent, in order to protect any ships belonging to those
powers from the interruptions and depredations they had lately been
exposed to, under the pretence of carrying warlike stores, etc. By this
treaty foreign vessels were permitted to pass the Straights of Gibraltar
without being searched, or suffering any other interruption, but
unhappily for the Lowestoft merchants, they not being apprized of the
treaty being ratified before the usual time of selling their herrings,
and consequently were apprehensive of being liable to the same dangers
and inconveniences they had before been exposed to, they at the beginning
of the season, sold the greater part of the fish which they should catch
this year to the fishmongers in London, whereby they sustained a very
considerable loss.
The herring fishery at Lowestoft appears at this time to be established
on the most lasting and permanent foundation; such as promises not only
to be advantageous to the inhabitants, and beneficial to the public, but
also, as a nursery for seamen, very useful to Government. In fact it is
a wise policy of all great maritime powers to establish and encourage, as
much as possible, fisheries of every denomination; they being not only of
the greatest benefit to individuals, but of the utmost utility to every
naval power; for not only the English, but also the Dutch, French, and
other foreign nations, from the encouragement of their fisheries, have
given evident demonstrations of the truth of this assertion. For this
reason the British Legislature has always encouraged and protected its
fisheries as much as possible; and the herring fishery has been
particularly favoured, but in former reigns as well as the present, with
signal instances of its indulgence and protection; as is manifest, not
only from the many wise laws, interpositions and regulations of preceding
kings, but also from the Act passed in the 26th year of his Majesty King
George III., for granting a bounty on herrings, under certain
restrictions therein mentioned.
SECTION XI.
THE Rev. Alfred Suckling, L.L.B., in his “History and Antiquities of the
Hundreds of Blyth and part of Lothingland,” writes:—“There being no
parsonage-house at Lowestoft, in consequence of the fire in 1606, the
Rev. John Tanner, who died in 1759, left by his will £100 towards
purchasing a residence for that at purpose: on condition, however, that
his successors advanced another £100, and the purchase was made within a
limited time. But Mr. Arrow, who succeeded Mr. Tanner, not complying
with the terms of the will, the legacy became void; and Mr. Arrow, in
1762, purchased a very handsome and commodious house on his own account,
towards the north end of the town, on the east side, in which he resided
during the residue of his life. Mr. Arrow died in 1789, and was
succeeded by the Rev. Robert Potter, upon whose institution, Dr. Bagot,
the then Bishop of Norwich, and patron of this vicarage, revived the idea
of purchasing a parsonage-house; and Mr. Potter and the inhabitants
approving the measure, and Mr. Arrow’s house, then on sale, being thought
a proper residence for the vicar, it was accordingly purchased for the
purpose, in 1789, for the sum of £550. To accomplish the purchase, the
trustees of certain charity lands in Lowestoft, the rents whereof are
applicable for matters appertaining to the church, advanced £100; Dr.
Bagot was pleased to give £20; and £430, the residue, was borrowed by the
vicar, under the authority of the Act of Parliament to enable rectors and
vicars to build or purchase parsonage-houses in those parishes where
there are none. It was also thought desirable, that a garden, the
property of the late Mr. Arrow, and not far distant from the house,
should be purchased; the purchase-money for which was £120, but included
in the £550 given. The deeds of conveyance executed on this occasion are
in the possession of the vicar.”
In 1831, the Rev. F. Cunningham purchased part of a garden and right of
way, which cost £77 7s. 3d., which he presented to the vicarage, and
likewise put the vicarage-house into a thorough state of repair.
The river Waveney in ancient days sought its junction with the Ocean
through Lake Lothing, between Lowestoft and Kirkley. Its channel, which
is proved to have been shallow, by the discovery of fossil elephants’
teeth, as already related, was open in Camden’s time, who calls Kirkley a
haven town. Reyce, who wrote his account of Suffolk a few years after,
describes it as still navigable, for he says, “and then Leystoffe, until
you come to that part of Yarmouth which is on the south side of the river
Hiere, do finish the number of our havens.” The sea, however, aided by
the fury of the eastern gales, gradually raised a barrier of sand and
shingle about a quarter-of-a-mile wide, by which all navigation was
finally interrupted. Still, whenever a violent storm arose from the
north-west in conjunction with a spring tide, the sea would flow into
Lake Lothing with great rapidity, and threaten the adjacent low grounds
with inundation. To guard against these irruptions, and prevent the
consequent damages, a break-water was formed on the sandy isthmus,
between Lowestoft and Kirkley, as a security for the marshes which lay
contiguous to the river. It is not, however, apparent when this
embankment was first complete; for, in a Commission of Sewers, held in
February, 1652, a levy was made to repair the breaches effected by the
ocean in this bank or walls. These operations must have been imperfectly
conducted, for even so late as 1712, a shallow channel was still
maintained between the sea and Lake Lothing; for it was then customary
for a man to stand there with boots on, to carry children through the
water, who went from Lowestoft to Pakefield fair. Subsequently, the
barrier was so greatly strengthened, that all apprehension of damage from
the ocean had vanished, when, on the 14th of December, 1717; the sea
forced its way over the beach with such irresistible violence, as to
carry away Mutford Bridge at the distance of two miles from the shore.
The writer has been led to assert, in his introduction to the Hundred of
Lothingland, from false information, that this was the last attempt of
the ocean to regain its ancient passage to the lake. Such, however, is
not the fact, for on the 2nd of February, 1791, a remarkable high tide
once more burst over the isthmus of sand, and again carried away the
bridge at Mutford, built in 1760. On this occasion the salt water flowed
over every surrounding barrier, and forced the fishes into the adjoining
fields, where they were found, weeks afterwards, sticking in the hedges.
In 1814, Mr. Cubitt, a county engineer, was employed to make a survey,
“with a view of ascertaining whether or not it was practicable to open a
communication with the sea at Lowestoft,” so as to enable vessels,
drawing eight feet of water, to pass into the lake, and thence by a
navigable canal, to Norwich. In 1821, he published his report, strongly
recommending the plan, but estimating the cost at £87,000. After much
opposition from the inhabitants of Yarmouth, and the gentlemen whose
property lay adjacent to the line of the proposed navigation, a Bill was
carried through both Houses of Parliament for making Lake Lothing
navigable for sea-borne vessels by a new cut, connecting that lake with
the ocean, from Lowestoft to Norwich. The Bill received the Royal
Assent, May the 28th, 1827, and the works were commenced in the same
year. Though not finally completed to Norwich till September 30th, 1833,
they were sufficiently advanced for the admission of the sea, and the
reception of shipping, in 1831. On Friday, the 3rd of June, in that year
the engineer having made the necessary arrangements for the purpose of
bringing vessels into the harbour, the _Ruby_, a beautiful yacht of
fifty-one tons burden, and drawing nine feet water, belonging to the
writer, entered the lake from the sea under full sail, with her colours
flying; and having on board the Chairman, Colonel Harvey, and other
Directors. She was followed by the _Georgiana_ yacht, of forty-eight
tons, belonging to John Fowler, Esq., of Gunton Hall, and by several
pleasure-boats and vessels of a smaller class. Some of the circumstances
attending the junction of the salt and fresh waters, in the first
instance, were remarkable. The salt water entered the lake with a strong
under-current, the fresh water running out at the same time to the sea
upon the surface. The fresh water of the lake was raised to the top by
the irruption of the salt water beneath, and an immense quantity of
yeast-like scum rose to the surface. The entire body of the water in the
lake was elevated above its former level; and on putting a pole down, a
strong under-current could be felt, bearing it from the sea, and at a
short distance from the lock next the lake there was a perceptible and
clearly defined line where the salt water and the fresh met; the former
rushing under the latter; and upon this line salt water might have been
taken up in one hand, and fresh water in the other. Lake Lothing was
thickly studded with the bodies of pike, carp, perch, bream, roach, and
dace; multitudes of which were carried into the ocean, and thrown
afterwards upon the beach; most of them having been bitten in two by the
dog-fish, which abound in the bay. It is a singular fact, that a pike of
about twenty pounds weight was taken up dead near the Mutford end of the
lake, and on opening the stomach, a herring was found in it entire. The
waters of the lake exhibited the phosphorescent light peculiar to sea
water, on the second or third night after the opening. This harbour and
navigation afterwards fell into the hands of Government, and were
purchased of the Exchequer Loan Commissioners in 1842, by Messrs.
Cleveland, Everitt, Lincoln, Hickling, and Roe, of Lowestoft; who
expended considerable sums in repairs. They continued in their
possession until October, 1844, when they were sold to S. M. Peto, Esq.
The present Act, entitled “An Act for making a Railway from Lowestoft to
Reedham, and for improving the Harbour of Lowestoft,” was obtained in
1845; and the works commenced in the spring of 1846. The plan is to form
a basin outside, or seaward, of the old lock, and entrance, by means of
piers, consisting of a frame-work of timber piling—the timber being
creosoted by Bethel’s patent process to keep out the worm. The
frame-work will be filled in with large blocks of stone, varying in
weight from one to six tons each block, brought from Kent and Yorkshire.
The piers will be about 1,300 feet in length, 800 feet apart, and the
entrance 160 feet wide. The basin, so formed, will enclose twenty acres,
and the depth of water will average at the top of the tides twenty-four
feet. The piers will be finished, and the harbour available for every
description of vessel navigating the coast, at all times of tide, in June
next. In addition to the formation of the outer basin or refuge harbour,
the inner harbour has been dredged; and wharfs, three quarters of a mile
in length, are in the course of construction: eight coke-ovens have been
erected, and upwards of thirty acres of land levelled for the erection of
storehouses, &c. Parallel with the wharfing, a sea-wall, upwards of a
quarter of a mile in length, is being built on the south side of the
harbour, as a protection to the works; and an esplanade, a large hotel,
and lodging-houses, will be erected as soon as the season permits. An
Act to enable trustees of certain charity and trust estates at and near
Lowestoft, to carry into effect a contract for a sale of parts thereof to
the Lowestoft Railway and Harbour Company, and to grant leases for long
terms of years, for building purpose, received the Royal Assent on the
13th of August, 1846.
SECTION XII.
ST. PETER’S CHAPEL.
ON the 8th of January, 1832, a public notice was given at church of a
town meeting to consider the propriety of building a new and more
convenient chapel for the use of the inhabitants; to appropriate for its
site a portion of the town land, and to provide the necessary funds. In
pursuance of which notice the inhabitants of Lowestoft met on Thursday,
the 12th of January following, when it was resolved, that the present
chapel having been found unsuitable in size and situation for the
accommodation of the inhabitants, it was expedient that a new chapel be
erected. That in the impossibility of enlarging the present site, if one
more suitable cannot be found, application be made to the Church Building
Commissioners to purchase a portion of the town land, opposite Back
Street, and abutting on the Beccles road. That the new chapel should
contain not less than 1,209 sittings, and that in order to provide a fund
for the erection and fitting such chapel, subscriptions be collected; in
respect of which, pews and sittings be allotted to the subscribers upon
the terms after mentioned; that application be made to the Society for
Building and Enlarging Churches, for aid; and lastly, voluntary
contributions be collected from the public. That 300 sittings be
disposed of under a faculty to be obtained from the Ordinary. That
subscribers of £25 each be entitled to one sitting for every £5
subscribed. The pews and sittings to be allotted to each subscriber by
ballot, &c. That no expense be incurred relative to providing such a
site for building new chapel, until the necessary funds, which were
estimated at £2500, be subscribed and raised; and that a committee of
inhabitants be formed to carry these resolutions into effect.
Subscriptions for pews were immediately entered into, which amounted to
£790, besides donations of £130; of which the Rev. F. Cunningham, the
Vicar, gave £100. On the 13th of January, at a meeting held in the town
chamber, it was further resolved, that personal application should be
made throughout the town for subscriptions and donations, and that
applications should be made to different architects for plans and
estimates. On the 16th of February, the site of the proposed building
was determined on, and the draft of an application to the Incorporated
Society for promoting the enlargement, building, and repairing of
Churches and Chapels, was prepared; which Society shortly after announced
a grant of £600 towards the purposes required.
On the 17th of May, an application was made to Mr. Kitson, the Bishop’s
Secretary and Registrar, inquiring whether the Marriage Act would allow
of the publication of banns and celebration of marriages in the new
chapel intended to be erected at Lowestoft, and if so, whether the Bishop
would be willing to grant a license for the above purposes. Mr. Kitson’s
reply stated, that the intended new chapel not being one “having a
chapelry thereto annexed,” nor, “one situated in an extra-parochial
place,” did not come within the provisions of the Marriage Act of the
fourth of Geo. IV, cap. 76; and therefore that publication of banns and
solemnization of marriage cannot be authorised to be performed therein.
On the 24th of May, in consequence of the exertions of the Vicar and the
principal inhabitants of the town, a sum of very nearly £2,500 had been
raised, including the grant from the Incorporated Society; and four days
after, Mr. Brown, the architect selected by the committee, attended at
Lowestoft with his plans, which were examined and approved, with a
trifling exception. After divers tenders and propositions, that of Mr.
John Bunn, of Norwich, to build the chapel with white brick, including
the palisades, fencing, and boundry wall, for £2,626, was agreed on, and
signed on the 30th of July; at which time the sum of £75 was ordered to
be paid to Messrs. Reeve, Elph, and Cleveland, the trustees appointed by
the feoffees of the town land, as the piece of the site for the chapel;
and the further sum of £10, being the charge of the Solicitor of the
Treasury, relative to the conveyance.
On Monday, August the 6th, 1832, the first stone of the new chapel was
laid in the presence of a vast concourse of the inhabitants and visitors.
The committee, the contractor, and architect, met at the vicarage-house,
whence they proceeded to the ground. Two hundred and forty children—the
Sunday and endowed schools belonging to the established church—had also
been brought together. After an explanation of the object of the
meeting, the Vicar laid the first stone, in which was deposited a piece
of money, of the coinage of William IV., and a plate engraven as follows:
LOWESTOFT.
THE FIRST STONE OF THIS
CHAPEL,
TO BE CALLED BY THE NAME OF
SAINT PETER,
AND ERECTED
BY SUBSCRIPTIONS AND VOLUNTARY
CONTRIBUTIONS, WITH THE AID OF THE
INCORPORATED SOCIETY FOR
BUILDING AND ENLARGING CHURCHES,
WAS LAID ON THE 6TH DAY OF AUGUST,
IN THE 3RD YEAR OF THE REIGN OF HIS
MOST GRACIOUS MAJESTY,
WILLIAM THE FOURTH;
1832;
BY THE
REV. FRANCIS CUNNINGHAM, M.A., VICAR.
* * * * *
JOHN BROWN, ARCHITECT.
* * * * *
After this the Vicar offered up a prayer composed for the occasion, and
the whole assembly sang the 100th Psalm. On the 15th of August, 1833,
Dr. Charles Sumner, Lord Bishop of Winchester, under a commission given
to him by the Bishop of this diocese, proceeded to the act of
consecration. Prayers were read by the Vicar, and the sermon preached by
the Bishop; the text being taken from the 122nd Psalm, and 7th verse.
The subject of the Prelate’s sermon was the _Peace_ attendant upon a
knowledge of the truths of the Gospel:—that Peace beautifully promoted by
the various services of our church, and an application as to the
possession of this Peace on the part of those present. A collection was
made after the sermon of £56 13s. 6d. On Sunday August the 25th, the
Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper was administered for the first time at the
communion table to 140 persons.
On the 15th of October following, a certificate was forwarded to the
Secretary of the Incorporated Society, informing him, that the chapel had
been completed in the substantial and workmanlike manner, and was capable
of accommodating 1215 persons, including 900 free sittings. In
consequence of subsequent arrangements, these sitting have been increased
to 1263; of which 939 are free.
It appears that upon the completion of the work, and the putting up of a
bell, weighing about 6 cwt., a sum of £196 6s. 5d. was required for the
payment of all the bills and expenses, which the vicar generously
consented to advance by way of loan. Of this debt £140 18s. 9d. were
repaid; so that the final deficit paid by Mr. Cunningham was £55 7s. 8d.
It should be recorded, that an offer was made by Mr. Robert Allen, an
inhabitant of Lowestoft, to present to the chapel, glass for the east
window, painted by himself at the advanced age of eighty-seven,
representing the king’s arms, &c. But on consulting the architect, it
was judged that this glass was not in character with the design of the
building, and that, therefore, plain glass would be adopted to prevent
the glare to which, otherwise, the congregation would be exposed. A copy
of the original faculty for erecting this edifice is deposited in the
chest of Lowestoft, and the opinion of Dr. Lushington and Mr. Kitson,
respecting the faculty pews are in the hands of the Vicar; from whose
careful and well-arranged minutes of the proceedings adopted throughout
the whole business, the preceding remarks have been extracted.
Among the notes attached to these records, it stated that “the
proposition is to build a chapel in a parish, where there is a parish
church, but so distantly situated from the town, as, under any
circumstances, to be of no use, and occasionally insufficient.” The
particulars are as follows:
The parish church of Lowestoft was placed upwards of 500 years since
in its present situation, under the impression as it is supposed,
that if nearer to the sea, it might, at no great length of time, be
destroyed by its encroachments. But the sea, instead of advancing,
has continued to recede, and now a new town has sprung up on the
beach, and the church is left, even in fine weather, out of the reach
of a considerable part of the population. In the inclement weather
to which so frequently the easternmost point of England is exposed,
the church is not opened, and it would be highly inexpedient to hold
an evening service in it, at any time. In order to meet the actual
necessities of the place, part of a town house has been used by a
license of Bishop Parkhurst, as a chapel, since the year 1572, on
occasions, ‘hiberno præsertim tempore,’ according to the original
document—when the people cannot without great inconvenience get to
church. But this expedient is found insufficient. The chapel will
hold between three and four hundred persons, but it is usually so
filled, that when it is used, numbers do not attempt to go at all;
and many who at all events, will attend a public service, are driven
to the Dissenting Meeting Houses. Some peculiar circumstances,
connected with the town, make a new provision for public worship
absolutely necessary. In the bathing season the church is not
sufficiently large for the congregation, and then it would be
expedient, if circumstances permitted, to open a second place of
worship. Moreover, a harbour, for which the Government is about to
grant a loan of £50,000, will, at no distant period, be opened; and
Lowestoft, in the course of a short time, will become a commencing
point to a navigation, which is likely to extend through a large part
of Suffolk and Norfolk. For the persons attendant upon this harbour
the church is most inconveniently situated.
In a notice of the new chapel, printed in the provincial journals at the
time of its foundation, its architecture was said to be in the style of
the Temple Church at London. Wherein the similitude consists, the writer
is unable to determine; unless, indeed, the presence of long narrow
windows, unaccompanied by the charming proportions and graceful
decorations of the proud Crusaders’ church, be alone able to constitute
its resemblance.
SECTION XIII.
IN a Hand-book to Lowestoft, published by Mr. Thos. Crowe, in 1853, is
the following:
Lowestoft is, happily for the peace and cordiality of its people,
neither a parliamentary Borough nor a corporate town: so that
political and party feuds in no degree embitter the charities of
private life. These are advantages of which its inhabitants are
fully sensible; and if they are disposed to forget them, they are
abundantly admonished by the example of a town nine miles to their
north, which is a prey to the dissensions Lowestoft is so luckily a
stranger to. Another reason for the complete absence of those
quarrels and bickerings which are usually found in country towns, is
the fact, that the inhabitants of this parish are not called upon to
pay church-rates, the lands belonging to the church being amply
sufficient to keep it in repair. Many of these unseemly
disagreements common in other and less fortunate localities are thus
avoided. The Vicar, however, makes a claim for a tithe of fish—about
half a guinea on the return of each boat; but with his well-known
good nature he has only taken this step _pro formâ_, his unbounded
charity and benevolence being one of the “great facts” of the
locality. Amongst the other immunities and privileges enjoyed by the
inhabitants may be mentioned exemption from payment of toll, service
upon juries, &c., granted them by charter of Henry VI., in 1442, and
confirmed by Elizabeth and Charles I.
Adjoining the pier is the Royal Hotel, forming the commencement of
one of the finest of terraces, which strikes the attention of the
traveller from its elegance and architectural beauty, as the reader
will have no great difficulty in discerning through the aid of the
artist.
This superb establishment, the Royal, having been recently erected,
with an entire disregard to expense, and under the ablest supervision
in every department, comprises all the latest improvements in the
cellerage, _batterie de cuisine_, and dormitories; while the coffee
and dining rooms and suites of private apartments are most admirably
adapted for their respective uses, combining in singular perfection
all the desirable characteristics of a first-class hotel and family
mansion, without the least encroachment of the one upon the province
of the other. The house comprises within itself almost every comfort
that can be needed by the valetudinarian, or desired by the luxurious
pleasure-seeker. Situate on the very edge of the sea, and the tide
receding but very few feet during the day, out of door bathing is
nearly at all times practicable at will, the neighbourhood being in
every way favourable for it; while salt water baths, at every
temperature, are within doors, as well as all the ablutionary
appliances available under Mahmoud at Brighton, or the most eminent
professors of human detergency at Scarborough or elsewhere. A
billiard room of noble dimensions, a large conservatory, partly
filled with exotics, and partly with native plants, chiefly
indigenous to the horticulture of East Anglia (a district peculiarly
rich in this respect), and a well supplied news room, offer potent
antidotes to _ennui_. If with these accessories, added to the
auxiliaries of a most _recerché_ refectory, the attendance being at
once unobtrusive and assiduous, and everything which the experience
of a long skilled and discerning _maitre de hotel_ can suggest for
the regalement of his guests, a sojourner at the Royal Hotel,
Lowestoft, do not discover a true specific against the blue devils,
he must belong to the category of Sir Charles Coldstream’s
hypochondriacs in _Used Up_, who could find neither tranquillity in a
domestic Elyseum, nor excitement in the crater of Vesuvius. Perhaps
it may be supposed that the _agremens_ we speak of are materially
qualified by the undue “inflammation of one’s weekly bills.” But not
so. The pecuniary administration at the Royal is conducted as nearly
as possible on the model of the most approved Metropolitan Clubs,
combining the maximum of service with the minimum of charge
compatible with the high character of the house and the completeness
of its appointments. The present proprietor, Mr Samuel Howett,
possesses peculiar facilities for conducting it with advantages on
this score denied to any other person. As owner for several years of
the Royal at Norwich—one of the finest establishments of the kind in
England, as the Festival visitors can testify, and as is demonstrated
by the constant patronage of the officers of the troops stationed in
that city—he has had large local experience of the district, enjoying
the respect of many of the resident families, and well known for his
business habits, urbanity of manner, and liberal-handed management of
all public banquets or private entertainments committed to his
supervision. With such a commissariat for head-quarters, as the
Royal at Norwich, the Royal at Lowestoft becomes, in his hands,
adequate to almost any exigency that can arise, especially as, since
last Autumn, its former great capacity for accommodation has been
very considerably extended. The view in our illustration is on too
small a scale, and is taken from too remote a point to give an
adequate idea of the extent or peculiarly commanding position of the
Royal; but still it will serve to show that it is a sumptuous-looking
pile externally, and we can assure the reader that its interior is of
fully corresponding excellence in every possible respect. Another
story has recently been added to the original building, and an
entirely new wing erected, affording a large number of additional
bed-rooms, sitting-rooms, and other appliances of comfort and luxury,
all of which are furnished and adorned with unusual taste and
elegance. The pictorial establishments will especially attract the
attention of the artistical. The accommodation for guests now so
ample, however large their number, and the servants’ department so
well ordered and efficient, that there is no over-crowding,
confusion, or inattention. In securing order, regularity, quietness,
and promptitude on the part of his domestics, Mr. Howett has proved
himself an admirable tactician, and has made his hotel a model of
comfort in these important respects. When full of guests it has more
the air of a private mansion than an hotel. All conveniences for
visitors of rank, such as carriages and horses, &c., are provided in
great variety and abundance, the extensive and handsome mews being a
very noticeable feature of the Royal. Amongst the recent
improvements we may add, that the restaurant has been enlarged and
redecorated. Public banquets, or private dinner parties, must be
large indeed, if stinted for space in this noble apartment.
Connoisseurs assure that for extent, variety, excellent taste in
selection, and samples of the choicest vintage, Mr. Howett’s wine
cellars are unequalled in this part of the kingdom.
The establishment is conducted on the convenient principal of
furnishing the guests with the ordinary scale of charges, which Mr.
H. forwards on application to any gentlemen wishing to visit his
hotel. The applicant must be fastidious in the extreme if he finds
any items in this scale to complain of. As evidence at once of the
salubrity of the climate, and of the suitability of the Royal Hotel
for the utmost requirements of its various frequenters, it may be
mentioned, that Earl Cardigan makes it his occasional head-quarters,
(bringing his beautiful Yacht, the famous “Enchantress,”) and
assembling around him a large circle of his military and fashionable
friends; and, on the other hand, the Royal is often occupied by
several eminent members of the Society of Friends, to whom its
quietude and methodical system of management, no less than the
seclusion and healthiness of the locale, recommend it in preference
to watering-places of more eminent repute among the faculty. The
increasing eclât of the Annual Regatta, the number and value of the
prizes, and the celebrity of the Yachts that have assembled and
competed on occasion of the last Regatta or two, give promise that
henceforth the most “crack” Yachts and most prominent members of the
Royal Yacht Club will make an annual visit to Lowestoft, and greatly
enliven the season. From its proximity to the harbour and sea, and
other attractions, the “Royal” is the favourite rendezvous of the
Yacht owners and Regatta patrons, and the most eminent sons of
Neptune on their visit to Lowestoft; and frequently, on other
occasions, contains a large and distinguished assemblage of rank and
fashion.
We are thus particular in dwelling upon the Royal Hotel, not only
because it is one of the principal features in the beautiful new town
of Lowestoft, but because its character must necessarily have a
considerable influence upon those who may contemplate visiting the
place. Under the same admirable management of Mr. Howett is the
excellent secondary hotel at a short distance, called the Harbour
Inn, which is inferior to the Royal only in the splendour of its
fittings up; but in all its substantials of comfort and convenience
it is wholly impossible it could be surpassed; and it may be
recommended unhesitatingly to those of less aristocratic pretensions
than the usual inmates of the Royal. In the Old Town, also, there
are several inns of great respectability and merit, extremely
moderate in their charges, and distinguished by a _naìveté_ and
heartiness of manner in their proprietors and assistants that will
astonish a philosopher as being found at the terminus of a
railway—belonging, as those attributes do, rather to the primitive
hostelries of Addison and Goldsmith, than to the days of electric
telegraphs and _Bradshaw’s Time Tables_. In concluding this portion
of our subject, we may add, and in no town within our experience are
the lodgings, speaking generally, so good, so economic, so
unexceptionally conducted, as in Lowestoft—the cost of all household
necessaries and rural luxuries being fabulously trifling compared
with the tariff in other latitudes, whether on the south-west, the
north-west, or even on the Welch coast.
The sanitary condition of Lowestoft is most satisfactory. Unlike
some neighbouring towns, there has been no occasion here for the
compulsory clauses of the “Health of Towns Bill.” A few years ago,
an admirable plan of systematic and thorough drainage was adopted and
carried out under the superintendence of Messrs. Lucas, at a large
expense,—the situation and physical characteristics of the town
affording peculiar facilities for an effective scheme of sewerage.
In addition to this, a plan has been resolved on for thoroughly
draining the North Beach, and thereby preventing the possibility of
effluvium arising from “pulk holes” in the vicinity of the fish
houses.
Waterworks and Gasworks (at Kirtley), for supplying the south end of
the town, have been completed and in operation some time; and, in the
course of last year, a private bill received the Royal assent,
incorporating a company for supplying and erecting, at the north part
of Lowestoft, Waterworks, enlarged Gasworks, new Market Place,
Abattoirs, and other appropriate adjuncts, at an expense of £20,000,
to be raised by two thousand £10 shares. These shares were
immediately taken, chiefly by the inhabitants and promoters of the
undertaking, which promises to be a very successful one, pecuniarily,
and a signal advantage to the town.
The new Waterworks are now in progress near the “Church Lane” where
the element, according to repute and chemical analysis, is of
excellent quality and unusual purity; and the Market House, &c., is
speedily to be erected near the present Market square, and upon the
new site now occupied by the excellent Queen’s Head Hotel, and
adjacent buildings.
To the new Waterworks Mr. Clemence’s recently-erected _Soap_ Factory,
pretty near thereto, would seem an appropriate appendage. If
abundance and cheapness of soap and water will secure cleanliness,
the inhabitants of Lowestoft must not be classed amongst the “great
unwashed.”
The various comprehensive reports of the Directors of the Harbour of
the Shareholders show at a glance the progressively improving nature
of this locality, and the extent of the trade carried on. They are
all drawn up by the energetic and accomplished Captain W. S. Andrews,
for several years known as the Captain of the _Medway_ West India
Mail Steamer, and whose appointment here first as Harbour-master, and
more especially as Managing-director of the North of Europe Steam
Packet Company, has been a most important auxiliary in the
advancement of everything connected with Lowestoft, especially all
matters pertaining to the docks and shipping.
SECTION XIV.
RECEPTION OF THE CHARTER OF INCORPORATION.
TUESDAY Afternoon, 22nd September, 1885, was the time appointed for the
official reception of the Charter of Incorporation. The Town Hall was
not sufficiently capacious to accommodate the large number of townsmen
who sought admission.
Chairs were ticketed for the following gentlemen, namely, to the right of
Major Seppings, the Mayor—Rev. T. A. Nash, James Peto, Esq., Rev. J. F.
Reeve, T. Lucas, Esq., E. K. Harvey, Esq., W. F. Larkins, Esq., H. G.
Woods, Esq. To the left of the Mayor—The Town Clerk, Geo. Bush, Esq.,
Sims Reeve, Esq., G. Keen, Esq., W. Chater, Esq., T. S. Allerton, Esq.
Amongst the Ladies were Mrs. Larkins, Mrs. Clubbe, Mrs. F. Worthington,
Mrs. J. Worthington, Mrs. F. Seago, Mrs. Warman, etc. Amongst the
gentlemen were Rev. Dr. English, Rev. J. Wright, Rev. H. I. Wonfer, Col.
H. Leathes, Messrs. T. R. Woods, W. R. Seago, W. Youngman, B. M.
Bradbeer, R. B. Nicholson, A. Lawrence, W. T. Balls, B. Preston, F.
Seago, F. Peskett, J. Hobson, W. Warman, J. L. Clemence, A. Adams, H.
Jefferies, R. B. Capps, S. Howett, R. W. Saul, T. Hobson, T. W.
Etheridge, T. H. Leggett, A. Stebbings, W. W. Garnham, J. Swatman, W.
Farrett.
The Mayor said: Ladies and Gentlemen, I regret that the capacity of our
Town Hall, is not sufficient for the number of townsmen who seek
admission. If we were to adjourn to the Market Place that would be only
sufficiently large. However, our proceedings will not be very long. I
will at once enter on the business before us. My duty to-day is to
receive the Charter of Incorporation, which our Most Gracious Queen in
Council Assembled has been pleased to grant us. (Applause.)
Mr. Keen, (of the firm of Messrs. Keen, Rogers, & Co.,) then rose, and
was received with applause. He said: I have been honoured by Her
Majesty’s Privy Council, who have entrusted me with the duty of conveying
to its destination the Charter of Incorporation of the Borough of
Lowestoft. In parting with it I may be allowed to hope as our native
country has prospered and thriven under our Great Charter, and as the
various towns and boroughs have prospered under their respective
charters, so may the good town of Lowestoft go on to more and more
prosperity under this its own charter. (Applause.) Ladies and
Gentlemen, I am sure I am speaking the sentiments of the whole Borough
when I say I could not place the charter in more worthy hands. (Renewed
applause.)
The Mayor then received the black tin box containing the important
document. Having taken the Charter out of the box he handed it, amid
applause, to
The Town Clerk (Mr. J. E. Cook), who read the lengthy document.
BOROUGH OF LOWESTOFT.
* * * * *
CHARTER OF INCORPORATION.
* * * * *
_VICTORIA_, _by the Grace of God_, _of the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Ireland_, _Queen_, _Defender of the faith_, _to all to whom
these presents shall come_, _greeting_.
WHEREAS by the Municipal Corporations Act, 1882, it was enacted that if
on the Petition to Us of the Inhabitant Householders of any Town or Towns
or District in England, or of any of those Inhabitants, praying for the
grant of a Charter of Corporation, we, by advice of our Privy Council,
should think fit by charter to create such Town, Towns, or District, or
any part thereof specified in the charter with or without any adjoining
place a Municipal Borough, and to incorporate the inhabitants thereof, it
should be lawful for us, by the charter to extend to that Municipal
Borough and the Inhabitants thereof so incorporated the provisions of the
Municipal Corporations Acts.
And it was further enacted that every Petition for a Charter under the
said Acts should be referred to a Committee of the Lords of our Privy
Council (in the said Act called the Committee of Council) and that one
month at least before the Petition should be taken into consideration by
the Committee of Council, notice thereof, and of the time when it should
be so taken into consideration, should be published in the _London
Gazette_, and otherwise in such manner as the committee should direct for
the purpose of making it known to all persons interested.
And it was further enacted that where We by Charter should extend the
Municipal Corporations Acts to a Municipal Borough, it should be lawful
for us by the Charter to do all or any of the following things:—
(_a_) To fix the number of Councillors and to fix the number and
boundaries of the Wards (if any), and to assign the number of Councillors
to each Ward; and
(_b_) To fix the years, days, and times, for the retirement of the first
Aldermen and Councillors; and
(_c_) To fix such days, times, and places, and nominate such persons to
perform such duties and make such temporary modifications of the
Municipal Corporations Acts, as might appear to Us to be necessary or
proper for making those Acts applicable in the case of the first
constitution of a Municipal Borough.
And that the years, times and places fixed by the Charter, and the
persons nominated therein to perform any duties, should as regarded the
Borough named in the Charter be respectively substituted in the Municipal
Corporations Acts for the years, days, times, places, officers, and
persons therein mentioned and the persons so nominated should have the
like powers and be subject to the like obligations and penalties as the
officers and persons mentioned in those Acts for whom they would be
respectively substituted:
And that subject to the provisions of the Charter authorised thereby the
Municipal Corporations Acts should on the Charter coming into effect
apply to the Municipal Borough to which they should be extended by the
Charter: and where the first Mayor, Aldermen, and Councillors, or any of
them should be named in the Charter should apply as if they were elected
under the Municipal Corporations Acts, and where they should not be so
named should apply to their first election:
And whereas certain inhabitant householders of the District of the
Lowestoft Improvement Commissioners did in the month of January, 1885,
petition Us for the grant of a Charter of Incorporation:
And whereas such petition was referred to a Committee of our Privy
Council, and one month at least before the same was taken into
consideration by the said committee, notice thereof and of the time when
the same was so to be taken into consideration was duly published in the
London Gazette and otherwise as directed by the Committee:
And whereas our Privy Council have recommended Us to grant this Charter
of Incorporation:
We, therefore, as well by virtue of Our Royal Prerogative as in pursuance
of and in accordance with the Municipal Incorporations Act, 1882, or any
other Act or Acts and of all other powers and authorities enabling Us in
this behalf, by and with the advice of our Privy Council, do hereby grant
order and declare as follows:
(1.) The District of the Lowestoft Improvement Commissioners as defined
in the First Schedule to these presents is hereby created a Municipal
Borough by the name of the “Borough of Lowestoft.”
(2.) The inhabitants of the said District, and their successors, shall
be, and are hereby declared to be one body politic and corporate, by the
name of the Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses of the Borough of Lowestoft,
with perpetual succession and a Common Seal, and may assume armorial
bearings (which shall be duly enrolled in the Herald’s College), and may
take and hold such lands and hereditaments as well without as within the
Borough as may be necessary for the site of the buildings and premises
required for the official purposes of the Corporation and other purposes
of the Municipal Corporations Acts, not exceeding in value the amount of
£2500 by the year.
(3.) The Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses of the said Borough shall have
the powers, authorities, immunities, and privileges usually vested by
law, in the Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses of a Municipal Borough, and
the provisions of the Municipal Corporations Acts shall extend to the
said Borough, and the inhabitants thereof incorporated by this charter:
(4.) The number of the Councillors of the Borough shall be 24:
(5.) The Borough shall be divided into four Wards, with the names and
bounds specified in the First Schedule to these presents:
(6.) Each of the Wards shall elect six Councillors:
(7.) For the purpose of making the Municipal Corporations Act, 1882,
applicable in the case of the first constitution of the Borough, we do
hereby, so far only as regards the first Burgess List, first Burgess
Roll, and first Election of Councillors, Mayor, Aldermen, Town Clerk, and
Treasurer for the Borough, fix and order as follows:
(_a_) The Town Hall in the Town of Lowestoft shall be the place at which
any list, notice, or document required to be affixed, on or near the
outer door of the Town Hall is to be affixed; and
(_b_) Both in relation to the matters aforesaid, and also in relation to
any such election as aforesaid, which it may be necessary to hold before
a valid election can be held under the Municipal Corporations Election
Act, 1882, JOSEPH EDWARD COOK, of Lowestoft; or in case of his death,
inability, refusal, or default, THOMAS SIMPSON ALLERTON, of Lowestoft,
shall perform the duties of Town Clerk; and SIMMS REEVE, of Norwich; or
in case of his death, inability, refusal or default, WILLIAM CHATER, of
Lowestoft, shall perform the duties of the Mayor and the assessors for
revising the Burgess List, and the separate list of persons qualified to
be Councillors; and HENRY SEPPINGS, of Lowestoft, or in case of his
death, inability, refusal or default, GEORGE BUSH, of Lowestoft, shall
perform the duties of the Mayor and Aldermen respectively, as returning
officer, and of the Mayor as summoner of the first meeting of the
Council, and of the Mayor or Chairman of the Meeting for the election of
the Mayor, Aldermen, Town Clerk and Treasurer.
And the said persons shall be substituted in the Municipal Corporations
Act, 1882, for the said Town Clerk, Mayor, Assessors, Aldermen, and
Chairman, respectively, so far as relates to the matters aforesaid: and
(_c_) The first meeting of the Council of the Borough shall be held on
the ninth day of November, 1885:
(_d_) The first Councillors shall be elected on the first day of
November, 1885, and the first Mayor and Aldermen on the ninth day of
November, 1885.
(8.) The years and days specified in the Second Schedule to these
presents shall be the years and days for the retirement of the first
Aldermen, and Councillors, who shall retire in the manner and at the
times therein designated.
(9.) Subject to these presents and the second schedule thereto the
provisions of the Municipal Corporations Act, 1882, shall apply to the
determination of the qualifications of the Burgesses, the making out,
signing, delivering, inspection, completion, publication, commencement,
and continuance of the first Burgess Lists and Burgess Rolls, the claims,
objections, and determinations with regard to the first Burgess Lists or
Rolls the holding adjournments and decisions of the first Revision
Courts, the nominations, elections and continuance in office of the first
Mayor, Aldermen, Councillors, Auditors, and Assessors, the appointment
and continuance in office of the first Town Clerk and Treasurer, the
first Meeting, and Quarterly Meeting of the Town Council, and all matters
and things touching and concerning the above, and the dates and times in
the said act mentioned shall be the dates and times on, at, during within
or for which the matters aforesaid, and the various acts and things in
relation thereto shall take place, be done, be estimated or be
calculated.
* * * * *
FIRST SCHEDULE.
METES AND BOUNDS OF BOROUGH.
The Boundaries of the Borough are identical with those of the District of
the Lowestoft Improvement Commissioners, and comprise the whole of the
Parishes of Lowestoft with Kirkley, otherwise Kirtley, in the County of
Suffolk.
* * * * *
NAMES AND METES AND BOUNDS OF EACH WARD.
EAST WARD.
The East Ward comprises so much of the Borough as is bounded on the North
by the Borough Boundary, on the East by the German Ocean, on the South by
the Outer Harbour, and on the West by a line commencing at a point in the
Borough Boundary in the centre of the Yarmouth Road, and proceeding
thence in a South-Easterly direction along the centre of the Yarmouth
Road to the junction of the same with Park Road, and thence in a
Southerly direction along the centre of Park Road and Albert Street to
the junction of the last-named street with Mariners’ Street, and thence
in an Easterly direction along the centre of Mariners’ Street to its
junction with High Street, and thence in a Southerly direction along the
centre of High Street and the London Road to the junction of the London
Road with Mills Road, and thence in a Westerly direction along the centre
of Mills Road to the junction of the same with Clapham Road, and thence
in a generally Southerly direction along the centre of Clapham Road to
its junction with Bevan street, and thence in a South-Easterly direction
along the centre of Bevan Street to its junction with the London Road
near the Suffolk Hotel, thence in a Southerly direction along the London
Road to the Harbour.
NORTH WARD.
The North Ward comprises so much of the Borough as is included within a
line commencing at a point in the Borough Boundary in the centre of the
Yarmouth Road, and proceeding thence in a South-Easterly direction along
the centre of the Yarmouth Road, to the junction of the same with Park
Road, and thence in a Southerly direction along the centre of Park Road
and Albert Street to the junction of the last-named street with Mariners’
Street, and thence in an Easterly direction along the centre of Mariners’
Street to its junction with High Street, and thence in a Southerly
direction along the centre of High Street, and the London Road, to the
junction of the London Road with Mills Road, and thence in a Westerly
direction along the centre of Mills Road, Love Road, and Love Lane, to
the junction of Love Lane with Rotterdam Road, and thence in a Northerly
direction along the centre of Rotterdam Road, to its junction with
Beccles Road, and thence for a few feet along the centre of the Beccles
Road in a Westerly direction to a point exactly opposite the footpath
which leads in a Northerly direction towards St. Margaret’s Church, and
thence to and along the said footpath and along the road or lane which
forms a continuation of the said footpath, and runs by and to the East of
certain pits to the junction of the said road or lane with the Oulton
Road, just South of St. Margaret’s Church, and thence in a Westerly
direction along the centre of the Oulton Road to the Borough Boundary,
and thence, first in a North-Westerly and Northerly direction and then in
a generally Easterly direction along the Borough Boundary to the point of
commencement before described.
WEST WARD.
The West Ward comprises so much of the Borough as is included within a
line commencing at a point in the Harbour under the bridge over the same
and proceeding thence in a Northerly direction to and along the centre of
the London Road to the junction of the same with Bevan Street, and thence
in a North-Westerly direction along the centre of Bevan Street to its
junction with Clapham Road, and thence in a generally Northerly direction
along the centre of Clapham Road to the junction of the same with Mills
Road, and thence in a Westerly direction along the centre of Mills Road,
Love Road, and Love Lane, to the junction of Love Lane with Rotterdam
Road, and thence in a Northerly direction along the centre of Rotterdam
Road to its junction with the Beccles Road, and thence for a few feet
along the centre of Beccles Road, in a Westerly direction to a point
exactly opposite the footpath which leads in a Northerly direction
towards St. Margaret’s Church, and thence to and along the said footpath
and along the road or lane which forms a continuation of the said
footpath and runs by and to the East of certain pits to the junction of
the said road or lane with the Oulton Road, just south of St. Margaret’s
Church, and thence in a Westerly direction along the centre of Oulton
Road to the Borough Boundary, and thence, first in a South-Westerly and
Southerly direction and then in an Easterly direction along the Borough
Boundary to the point where the boundaries of the three parishes of
Lowestoft, Kirkley, and Carlton Colville meet in Lake Lothing or the
Inner Harbour, and thence in an Easterly direction along the Inner
Harbour to the point of commencement before described.
SOUTH WARD.
The South Ward comprises so much of the Borough as is bounded on the
North by the Inner and Outer Harbour, on the East by the German Ocean,
and otherwise by the Borough Boundary.
SECOND SCHEDULE.
Persons to Retire. Date of Retirement.
The one-third of the Councillors in each 1st. November, 1886.
ward who are elected by the smallest number
of votes shall go out of office on
The one-third of the Councillors in each 1st. November, 1887.
ward who are elected by the next smallest
number of votes shall go out of office on
The remaining one-third of the Councillors 1st. November, 1888.
in each ward shall go out of office on
The one-half of the Aldermen who first go 9th. November, 1888.
out of office shall be those who are
elected by the smallest number of votes,
and shall go out of office on
The remaining one-half of the Aldermen 9th. November, 1891.
shall go out of office on
If any Councillors in any ward or any Aldermen have obtained an equal
number of votes, or have been elected without a poll, so that it cannot
be determined which of them has the smallest number of votes, the Council
of the Borough shall, at the first or second quarterly meeting, and not
later, by a majority of votes, or in case of an equality of votes, by the
Casting vote of the Chairman, determine who are to go out of office at
the times above specified respectively.
In return whereof we have caused these Our letters to be made Patent.
Witness Ourself at Westminister, the 29th day of August, in the 49th year
of Our Reign. By Warrant under the Queen’s Sign Manual,
MUIR MACKENZIE.
Here follows the
Queen’s Sign Manual.
The Mayor said he had only one resolution to bring before the meeting,
and he would ask Mr. Thos. Lucas, a gentleman well-known to all in former
years, and one who was allied with the great promoter of the prosperity
of Lowestoft—Sir Morton Peto—to propose it. The town owed very much to
Sir Morton Peto and the eminent firm of Messrs Lucas Bros., for its
prosperity.
Mr. Thos. Lucas on rising was received with prolonged applause. He said
he had been requested by the Mayor to propose “That the inhabitants of
the Borough of Lowestoft in public meeting assembled hereby desire to
express their great gratification at the grant by Her Most Gracious
Majesty the Queen by and with the advice of her Privy Council, of a
Charter of Incorporation of Lowestoft with Kirkley; and also their
earnest hope that the Charter may tend to the advancement, extension, and
prosperity of the town.” This was, Mr. Lucas said, a peculiarly
interesting ceremony to him. In September, thirty-one years ago, he
entered Lowestoft with his friend Sir Morton Peto, and, he ought to be
able to say, “Sir” James Peto. (Hear, hear.) The names of the gentlemen
who were prominent in the town then were Edwd. Leathes, F. Morse, H. G.
Woods, Youngman (father and son), the Gowings, Seago, Balls, Barnard,
Howett, and several others. This year happened to be the anniversary of
the introduction of the Improvement Act of 1854, and of the formation of
the Improvement Commissioners. On looking over the list who formed that
body in 1854–5, he noticed that eighteen of them were no more, and not a
single one of them was a member of that Commission at the present time.
There might be some persons who knew Lowestoft thirty-one years ago, and
if so, it was only those who could properly appreciate the stride it had
made. He knew Lowestoft years before that date, when the inner harbour
was first formed, and there were very few houses on the south side. The
progress, north, south, east and west of the town was remarkable.
Instead of the very small harbour which was made thirty years ago,
Lowestoft now possessed one of the finest harbours in the kingdom.
Lowestoft had a magnificent fleet of fishing vessels, worth any person
coming from London to look at. The Railway Company had done great things
for Lowestoft. It used to be considered a great feat to get from London
to Lowestoft in 5½ hours, now the journey was accomplished in three
hours. An important interest connected with the town was that of the
visitors. He was sanguine that following the inauguration of the Charter
of Incorporation more accommodation and conveniences would be provided
for visitors. Some of the requirements, though considered as luxuries in
former times, were now regarded as necessities. He would, if he might,
ask the gentlemen who would form the governing body of the town to turn
their attention to the drainage. It was quite true he was interested as
an owner of land on the south side, but that was a mere bagatelle and did
not weigh one iota with him, because he could dispose of it in
twenty-four hours if he wished. But he never lost the touch of interest
he felt in Lowestoft. He would compare the growth of Lowestoft with the
growth of another place. Just before Sir Morton Peto (one of those
far-seeing men) bought the harbour at Lowestoft, he did a similar thing
at Folkestone. That place was very much like Lowestoft, with a few
houses and few people. They did not receive Sir Morton Peto nor himself
with open arms; in fact they were christened “foreigners.” The people
there could not see that it would be an advantage to make any effort to
improve the place, nor to encourage those who were willing to help them.
After a time the people saw the advantages the place possessed, and they
struck out boldly, houses sprung up in all directions, and mansions were
there which had recently been occupied by Princes. There were baths,
assembly rooms, club rooms and tramways up the cliffs. It was proposed
to have a National Art Gallery there in 1886, and for that purpose a
guarantee fund of £50,000 was required. £38,000 of the amount was
guaranteed within two months, and he believed the whole amount would be
guaranteed very shortly. His object in mentioning Folkestone was because
he believed Lowestoft was capable of doing a great deal more than it had
done. He did not mean by that that Lowestoft could raise a guarantee
fund of £50,000 in a short time, but he would say there ought to be pluck
enough in Lowestoft after receiving the Charter, to do certain things
which very much required to be done. The drainage question he would
leave in the hands of the Corporation. (Laughter, and hear, hear.) A
great want in Lowestoft was Assembly Rooms, where high-class
entertainments could be given. Something was wanted for the amusement of
young people, and for that purpose Assembly Rooms were required. He was
prepared to say that if good club rooms were near the harbour, Lowestoft
would be favoured with visits by the largest yacht clubs. He had seen as
many as thirty yachts, between sixty or seventy tons each in the harbour
at one time, and he would ask what reason was there that such a sight
should not be seen in the harbour again. (Hear, hear.) Medicated and
other baths were wanted, and they should be near the reading rooms.
Within the last week he had been in the company of the Chairman of the
Great Eastern Railway Company. He discussed with that gentleman his
opinion as to what ought to be done in Lowestoft. He felt bound to say
that no gentleman could possibly offer to meet the town with more
liberality and kindness than Mr. Parkes. (Loud applause.) Of course,
Mr. Parkes could not commit the railway company, nor would he commit
himself. Mr. Parkes however expressed his desire to co-operate for the
benefit of Lowestoft on the condition that the townspeople did their
part. If the people intended Lowestoft to be what it ought to
become—namely, a first-class watering-place, the inhabitants must drop
their little differences and co-operate together. The prosperity of the
town was far too important a matter to be impeded by personal
differences. He had a temper, and he knew it, but he schooled it, and
during his thirty-six years connection with Lowestoft he had had
transactions with all classes of men—Tory, Radical, Nonconformist, and
Churchman, and he hoped he had never offended one of them nor had one of
them offended him. (Hear, hear.) If he did not agree with a man, that
man had just as much right to an opinion as he (Mr. Lucas) had. He
always respected the opinions of his opponents. (Applause.) He urged
that in electing the corporation they should not care to what party a man
belonged, but that they should put aside all personal feeling, and elect
the very best men they could find. They had no right to think of
anything, or of anybody but the prosperity of the town. If that line was
followed out, the Charter would be, in his opinion, a great blessing to
the town. If at the beginning they took an opposite direction they would
make a mistake. When the list of candidates for the first Board of
Commissioners appeared it represented every class. He advised a similar
course with regard to the New Town Council. Let every class be
represented by the very best men. Then they would give tone, dignity and
go, to the whole thing. In the Mayor they required a gentleman of long
experience, energy, high character, integrity, and means. (Laughter.)
The last-mentioned qualification was an important one. If Lowestoft
started well under the Charter, it would go on well, but if it started
badly, it would take a long time to get right again. He had this week
paid a visit to the Lord Lieutenant of the County (Lord Stradbroke), at
Henham, and although his Lordship was very old, he enjoyed good health.
(Hear, hear.) His Lordship desired him to convey to the town (through
the Mayor), his warmest congratulations on it becoming a Borough, and he
wished Lowestoft continued prosperity. Viscount Dunwich would have
attended the reception of the Charter, but he was away from home. In
conclusion Mr. Lucas said—I should like to couple the name of my brother
(Mr. C. Lucas), with what I am about to say. If you will help us we will
go out of our way to help you. If the new Corporation should not think
it worth to go on making improvements I shall make my bow and say
farewell. We are quite prepared to assist in promoting the North end as
well as the South. If you go round the district, as I have been doing,
there is not a single building put up for a first-class residence. What
we have done for Kirkley is for the good of the town, and I would beg of
you to remember these things. After a passing reference to the Railway
Company, and Sir Morton Peto, and prophesying a great future for
Lowestoft, Mr. Lucas (who became Sir Thomas Lucas) resumed his seat amid
loud cheers.
The Rev. J. F. Reeve seconded the resolution, which was supported by the
then Rector, Rev. T. A. Nash, and, on being put to the meeting, was
carried with enthusiasm.
Colonel Leathes proposed thanks to the chairman, Mr. E. K. Harvey
seconded, and the vote was accorded with acclamation. The Mayor replied,
and Mr. Lucas then eulogised Mr. W. Youngman for the very great interest
he took in the Borough, and the exertions he had made to promote its
prosperity.
Mr. B. M. Bradbeer called for three cheers for the Queen, and these
having been given, the proceedings closed with cheers for the Mayor.
SECTION XV.
LATER PROGRESS.
BY A. E. MURTON.
IN compiling a history of any place, a stop must be made somewhere, owing
to the exigencies of publication. The details of Lowestoft’s past have
been recorded, and brought up to, perhaps, the most important point in
her career, viz., the granting of the Charter of Incorporation in 1885;
and it only now remains to show how it has fared with the Borough since.
It may at once be said that its record has been one of steady progress.
It has continuously grown in favour as a health resort, and in the year
1897, when this book was published, it had attained a high position among
seaside watering places—a position that must be more than maintained if
the powers that be will only work well together with a single eye for the
benefit of the town. Since the granting of the Charter the population
has considerably increased. In 1881 the census showed 19,696
inhabitants; in 1891 this had increased to 23,347, and in 1897 it was
put, for the purposes of compiling the health report, at 25,590. So it
may be safely said that since the date of the Charter, the Borough has
received an accretion of fully 5,000 persons. The growth of houses has
been in a corresponding ratio. In 1891 there were 4,242 houses in the
parish of Lowestoft, 998 in Kirkley, and one in Gunton, making 5,241 for
the Borough. At the end of 1896, this number had risen to 6,430 in round
figures—an addition of nearly 1200, which must be considered very
satisfactory.
The complaint made by Sir Thomas Lucas, as set forth on the preceding
page, namely, that there is not a single building put up for a
first-class residence, has to a great extent been remedied, for during
the last four years some very fine houses have been built, especially in
South Lowestoft. These have immensely raised the rateable value of the
Borough, and given it greater prestige in the eyes of wealthier seaside
sojourners. This activity in providing large, commodious, and
well-arranged residences does not promise to abate for awhile, for the
builder is busy on Kirkley Cliff, where splendid houses are already
accomplished facts. The Grand Hotel, built by Mr. John Whaley, stands
boldly on the brow of the Cliff. It is a palatial place, splendidly
furnished and decorated, and well patronised. In other parts the Borough
has extended—notably in the West, where hundreds of houses suitable for
the working classes, have been erected. In the North there is also
progress in this particular, and with the advent of the Great Eastern and
Midland & Northern Joint Line Station, this beautiful portion of lazy,
lovely Lowestoft, will rapidly go ahead. Indeed, at the present rate of
progression, it is not difficult to forsee the day when Lowestoft shall
extend to Corton on the North, Oulton and Carlton Colville on the West,
and Kessingland on the South.
There have not been any very great upheavals to disturb the even tenour
of Lowestoft life—the record is that of a peaceful, but none the less
powerful, forward movement. As a fishing port it has greatly advanced,
and in this connection mention must be made of the splendid accommodation
afforded by the Great Eastern Railway, in the shape of the Spacious
Herring and Mackerel Market and Trawl Market, and Waveney Dock, which
were opened on the 1st October, 1883, by Lord Waveney. Even the
capacious trawl dock proved inadequate, and in 1892 it became necessary
to provide additional berthage and quays for the trawlers, the new dock
facing the London Road being constructed. The number of fishing boats
and smacks sailing out of the port are constantly receiving additions,
and it is the proud boast of Lowestoft that she possesses the finest
fishing fleet in the world, manned by crews of brave, hardy seamen, who
are ever ready to render assistance in saving life. A notable instance
of this grand trait of the “toilers of the deep” was the rescue of the 20
survivors of the North German Lloyd Liner _Elbe_, bound from Bremen to
New York viâ Southampton, which sunk about 40 miles off Lowestoft, after
collision with the SS _Crathie_ in the early morning of the 29th January,
1895. By this awful catastrophe 360 lives were lost. The 20 survivors
escaped in an open boat, were sighted and taken aboard the Lowestoft
smack _Wildflower_, and landed at Lowestoft in the afternoon of the same
day.
The old order is ever changing, giving place to new, and so it came about
that the swing bridge which was placed over the harbour waterway in 1830,
was found to be inadequate for the vastly increased traffic. This has
now given place to the present fine and commodious structure and
approaches, which have been provided by the Great Eastern Railway at
great expense.
Improvements have been carried out on all hands. The sewerage of the
town has been brought up to date, and a new outfall has been
necessitated. It has been considered necessary to groyne the North Beach
to prevent the incursions of the sea on the Denes, which are prized by
the inhabitants and visitors in general as a public walk and recreation
ground, and by the fishermen in particular as a place whereon they can
dry their nets. The incandescent light has been adopted in the main
streets of the Borough, and a fine theatre, provided by public-spirited
townsmen, was opened on April 26th, 1897.
Belle Vue Park possesses the Jubilee Memorial. When, in 1887, the
question of providing a lasting record of the Queen’s Jubilee was talked
over, a proposal emanated from Mr. Arthur Stebbings, a member of the Town
Council, that a bridge should be built across the ravine which separated
the Park from the North Parade. Assisted by several other gentlemen, he
raised a goodly sum. But Mr. William Youngman, J.P., an Alderman of the
Borough, who was its first elected Mayor, and who has benefited his
native town to a great extent, came forward and gave the bridge, which
stands as a substantial and useful reminder of the Queen’s Jubilee, and
of Mr. Youngman’s munificence. This gentleman also placed the splendid
East Window in St. Margaret’s Church, and has offered to build a
Children’s Wing to the Hospital as a Diamond Jubilee Offering.
Educationally, Lowestoft has progressed. A School Board was formed in
1893, and since that year handsome new schools have been built, where a
sound education is given. The need for higher instruction was felt, and
to meet it the Corporation are about to provide a fine Technical School
on Clapham Road.
Movements having for their object the moral and physical well-being of
the community have not been neglected. The commodious rooms of the Young
Men’s Christian Association on London Road have been erected, containing
a comprehensive gymnasium, given by Sir Thomas Lucas, and a Home for the
Young Women’s Christian Association is being built. A fine residence
facing the Park is utilized as a Convalescent Home, and Connaught House
in High Street has become a Church of England Home for Waifs and Strays.
An incident worthy of note is the visit which Mr. W. E. Gladstone paid to
the locality on May 19th, 1890, when he was the guest of Mr. J. J. Colman
at “The Clyffe,” Corton. He addressed an audience of 7000 people at
Norwich on the previous evening, and received an address on Lowestoft
Station, to which he replied in a speech of half an hour’s duration.
From that time till the following Tuesday, Mr. and Mrs. Gladstone
remained at “The Clyffe,” and on leaving by special train for Hawarden
Castle, the Right Honourable gentleman, who was then in his 81st year,
was presented with an album containing 50 photographs of the principal
views in the neighbourhood. During his stay he expressed himself as
“delighted with the place and the people,” to which Mrs. Gladstone added
that she agreed with all her husband had said.
The late Duke of Clarence (Prince Albert Victor) was a visitor to
Lowestoft in 1885, when he stayed with Lord Claud Hamilton, the present
Chairman of the Great Eastern Railway Company.
The narrow part of High Street, which has for long proved a great
inconvenience, owing to the obstruction to traffic, thereby stopping the
growth of this part of Lowestoft, has been widened, and smart places will
undoubtedly take the place of the somewhat tumble down houses and shops,
relics of “ye olden time,” which formerly existed. While the work of
demolition was in progress, an ancient crypt was found to extend some
distance beneath one of the buildings. The roof is groyned and arched,
and rumour has it that the crypt is a portion of a subterranean way
leading from the Cliff to the Church. Be this as it may, the discovery
is an interesting one for the antiquarian to ponder over, and it should
be carefully preserved.
The fine old Parish Church of St. Margaret’s was completely restored in
and about 1870, when the Rev. W. Hay Chapman was Rector, at a cost of
over £5,000. Thanks to the energy of the present Rector, Hon. Canon
Charles D’Aquilar Lawrence, the sacred edifice has been entirely
re-roofed at great cost. St. Peter’s Church at Kirkley has also been
restored, beautified, and added to, mainly through the munificence of Mr.
E. K. Harvey, J.P. A fine new Seamen’s Church and Institute has been
erected in Suffolk Road under the auspices of the Missions to Seamen
Society. This building is the gift of the Misses Hume, in memory of
their late brother, the Rev. H. S. Hume, M.A., a beloved Vicar of St.
John’s, who died on November 9th, 1895, after an energetic and useful
ministry in Lowestoft, of not quite three years.
In the early part of 1897 a Bill was promoted in Parliament by the
Midland and Great Northern Joint Lines for the purpose of making a
railway from Yarmouth to Lowestoft, entering the town across the Denes.
The scheme also provided for a Dock at Gorleston. It was felt that this
would attract a good deal of fishing trade from Lowestoft, besides which,
it would ruin the Denes, and destroy the future prospects of North
Lowestoft. The Council, by a majority of three, were in favour of the
Bill, but a large public meeting protested against it. A petition was
got up and largely signed, with the result that the Midland & Great
Northern dropped their Bill, and made a compromise with the Great Eastern
Railway, to have joint running powers over a new line, which they, too,
proposed making from Yarmouth to Lowestoft, by a route which will go to
the West of the town and join the present main line near the Coke Ovens
Signal Box. There will be a Station on the Yarmouth Road, which will
also be used jointly. Thus Lowestoft will he in direct communication
with the Midlands.
Lately, Lowestoft Harbour was a source of trouble owing to the periodical
accumulation of sand at its entrance. To obviate this the Great Eastern
Railway Company will carry out extensive works, by which the North and
South Piers will be considerably lengthened, and the Harbour space
greatly added to. The necessary Bill for the purpose has passed through
Parliament.
Another event of the last few years is the building of the splendid
Reading Booms and Concert Hall on the South Pier, this handsome and well
appointed building taking the place of an older structure which was
destroyed by fire on the night of June 29th, 1885.
It will be seen that Lowestoft has not stood still. There is no reason
why she should not go on in her onward march; and there can be no
question but that the chronicler of the future will have plenty of
material at his command wherewith to continue the History of Lowestoft.
[Picture: Decorative graphic]
* * * * *
PUBLISHED BY ARTHUR STEBBINGS, 56, HIGH STREET, LOWESTOFT.
FOOTNOTES
[Note: In the 1897 edition of the book all footnotes were printed as part
of the narrative text, often in parenthesis. This made it almost
impossible to follow the narrative, where a sentence would have a
multiple sentence footnote inserted in the middle of it. In this Project
Gutenberg transcription, the most obvious footnote cases have been
converted back into proper footnotes. Gillingwater’s original edition
had footnotes in this manner.—DP.]
* * * * *
{1} 15 Henry VI. Anno 1535, when the clergy granted a tenth to the king,
the deanery of Lothingland paid as fellows:—
£ s. d.
Vicarage of Lowestoft 0 8 8
Rectory of Blundeston 1 6 8
Rectory of Somerliton 1 4 0
Rectory of Lound 0 16 0
Rectory of Belton 1 14 8
Rectory of Burgh 0 13 4
Rectory of Bradwell 2 16 0
Vicarage of Gorleston 0 13 4
Vicarage of Yarmouth Parva 0 8 8
Rectory of Oldton 1 9 4
Rectory of Gunton 0 8 8
£11 19 4
Benefices of 12 merks or under, which did not pay this tenth, and on
which the Rectors or Vicars kept personal residence, were Flixton,
Fritton, and Ashby.
Why Herringfleet, Corton, and Hopton came to be omitted, does not appear.
This, though apparently a small sum, was in fact, a very considerable
one, for thirty pounds now is scarcely an equivalent in value to five
pounds at the time of Henry VI.
{3} In a field near Barnby, called Bloodmere-field, have been found many
ancient beads, spears, etc.
{4a} Sixth son of Earl Goodwin, brother of Queen Edith, wife of Edward
the Confessor. This earl, with Harold his brother, who disputed the
crown with William the Conqueror, was slain at the decisive battle of
Hastings.
{4b} Fee farm is a perpetual fixt rent, in ancient times, both in
England and France. A ferm signified rent, and land put to farm, was
said to be affirmed or arrented.
{4c} At this period the only distinction of property was the king’s
demesne, and the baronies of the nobility, and the rest of the people
were vassals either to one or the other, small private estates were
entirely unknown, and the yeomen of England did not exist of a century
after.
{4d} The principal branch of the family of the Fitz-Osberts, resided at
Somerley Hall in this island.
{6} The strength of the contest during the whole of this dispute may be
summed up in these words: “By this controversy between the burgh of Great
Yarmouth and the men of Little Yarmouth and Gorleston, in Lothingland it
appears that prescription, seeing they were no burghs, prevailed not to
assert and make good a liberty of unlading goods and exposing them to
sale in the towns.” By the same it is also evident that liberties
belonging to free burghs are only to be had and obtained by the king’s
charter; and that where they were used without it, they were esteemed and
judged usurpations, especially if practised and continued to the
prejudice and damage of a free burgh. It was observed before, that the
fee of this hundred was originally in the crown, and it appears to have
continued so, without any interruption, till the time of king Henry 3rd,
who, in the twenty-second year of his reign, anno 1238, granted it to
John de Baliol and Devergill, his wife, one of the sisters (Ives says
nieces) and heiress of John Scot, Earl of Chester and Huntingdon, in
exchange for their part of the county of Chester. The reasons which
induced king Henry to make this exchange were strictly political: the
ancient Earls of Chester being Earls Palatine, bore great sway in any
combination of the barons, and this the king, as well as his father, had
often experienced. Randulf, the sixth Earl of Chester, uncle and
immediate predecessor of John, was not only a man of great power, but of
considerable abilities and much integrity; he warmly espoused the cause
of king John against the barons, and proved himself a faithful champion
to his son, even to the preservation of his person, and the raising him
to his father’s throne; his attachment to loyalty seemed to proceed from
conviction; and, notwithstanding his being so great an advocate for John
and Henry, yet, with all the dignity and hardiness of one of the iron
barons of that period, he openly rebuked the former in parliament for his
criminality respecting the wives and daughters of the nobility, and
joined with the Earl of Cornwall to force the latter to seal the new
charter of the forest liberties instead of that which he had cancelled at
Oxford. Earl John, the last of this family, his successor, adopted his
uncle’s system, and took part with king Henry upon the great difference
between him and Richard, Earl Marshall, in 1233, and, upon the solemity
of Henry’s marriage with Eleanor, daughter of Raymund, Earl of Provence,
we find him bearing the sword, called Curtana before the king, in token,
says Matthew Paris, that, being an Earl Palatine, he had power to
restrain the king, if he should be exorbitant. It is no wonder,
therefore, that, upon his death, Henry should be desirous of annexing the
county of Chester to his crown, especially as he left no issue, and only
female relations; and as this earldom was, in some respects, entitled to
royal privileges, and a local monarchy, he assumed it into his own hands,
“lest so fair a dominion should be divided among women;” and in the 31st
year of his reign this Earldom annexed to the crown for ever, and
remained so till the 21st of Richard 2nd, when by Act of Parliament, it
was united to the principality of Wales.
{7a} Beatrice, the second daughter of king Henry and his Queen Eleanor,
married John, the first Duke of Britainy, son of John, the late Earl of
the same family, by whom he had issue, Arthur, duke of Britainy, and John
Earl of Richmond, the said nephew. This great and accomplished nobleman
was no less famous for his conduct and courage, than for his illustrious
descent from one of the ancient Norman families, strengthened in its
interests and possessions by several very near alliances to the crown; he
also united to those qualifications, great generosity and real goodness.
{7b} It is evident from Swinden, that the affair was agitated in the 8th
and 9th of Edward 2nd, although Ives asserts, that the Earl of Richmond
took no notice of it till the 2nd of Edward 3rd. Possibly the earl, from
residing at so great a distance, might not personally appear in the
prosecution till the time of Edward 3rd; when the suit grew more serious
and importunate.
{8} The Commissioners appointed by the king to meet at Great Yarmouth,
in order to make enquiry concerning this dispute, and to terminate the
differences, were the Bishop of Winchester, Lord Chancellor of England,
Lord John Stoneherd, and John de Cambridge, his justices; Robert de
Ufford, Oliver de Ingham, and Ralph Nevel, steward of the king’s
household. In the roll of this year is the following entry:—Paid to the
lord chancellor and others, the king’s justices, the time they were at
Great Yarmouth, by order of John Pere Brown, £1 2s. 6d., and at the same
time paid for bread sent to them 13s. 4d.
{9a} In August 1578, the Queen was expected at Yarmouth, by way of
Suffolk, and great preparations were made for her reception and
entertainment; particularly, a silver cup of £16 value, made in the form
of a ship, was intended as a present to Her Majesty; but she proceeded no
further than Norwich, and from thence the Lords of her retinue came to
Yarmouth. In the same year, an annuity of 20s. a year, was granted, by
the city of Norwich, to John Benne, of Lowestoft, who was lamed with
firing off the cannon at Norwich, when the Queen visited that city.
{9b} Leuks, leuga, or luca. There are various conjectures concerning
the meaning of this word; some making it three, others two, and many only
one mile; but with respect to the liberties belonging to the herring
fair, the leuk was determined as only one mile; as may be seen in section
4th., when an actual admeasurement of the said distance was ordered to be
made,
{10} It appears indisputably evident, from divers charters granted to
the town of Great Yarmouth, that the rights and privileges belonging to
their herring fair extended to the distance of seven leuks or miles. The
principal point in dispute between that town and the town of Lowestoft,
was, from what place the said distance was to be measured, whether the
quay or the mouth of the haven: when it was proved, and legally
determined, about the year 1664, that the said admeasurement should
commence at the former place. And, therefore, the town of Lowestoft, and
the other towns, pretending to have a right to buy and sell herrings,
etc., within the limits of the said seven miles from Great Yarmouth was
illegal, and a manifest infringement on the liberties of the town.
{11} A beam to weigh with.
{12a} About this time a Warren, earl of Surrey, was warden or bailiff of
Lothingland, who, it is conjectured, was William de Warren, the second
earl of Surrey.
{12b} It also appears that Lowestoft, and also the island, in the reign
of King Henry IV. and Henry V. was part of the estate of Michael de la
Pole, earl of Suffolk, and passed to his successors.
{12c} Of Somerly town, in this island, and in whom the family became
extinct. Isabel, the sister of Sir Roger Fitz-Osbert, of Somerley, was
wife of Sir Walter Jernegan, of Horham, by virtue of which marriage [her
brother, Sir Roger, dying without issue] he became possessor of the
Somerley estate. This family, in the reign of King John, was settled
first at Horham, in Suffolk, afterwards another branch was settled at
Stonham Jerningham, in the same county, about the year 1234. The Horham
branch, by marriage with the Fitz-Osberts, removed to Somerly which then
became the principal seat of the family.
{13a} The Yarmouth men were opposed by the adjoining towns six years
before they obtained this charter.
{13b} The granting of this charter, for uniting Kirkley road with
Yarmouth haven, was one of the principal sources of the great contention
which arose between Yarmouth and Lowestoft, about the year 1660,
respecting the herring fishery; and gave rise to a law-suit which
subsisted several years: the Yarmouth men insisting, that the place
called Kirkley Road was not contiguous to the haven, but a part of the
main sea, opposite to the town of Kirkley; which town lies to the south
of Lowestoft, thereby including the Roads of Lowestoft within the
boundary of their liberties. Whereas, it is very evident, from the
charter itself, that Kirkley Road was an adjoining place to the haven,
and that the mouth of the haven, at that time, discharged itself into the
sea, opposite the town of Corton; and, therefore, must be situated a
little to the south of that town. This assertion receives still further
confirmation from an ancient view of the town of Lowestoft, late in the
possession of Thomas Martin, F.S.A., and an old map of this part of the
coast, inserted in Ives’s Garianonum, where Kirkley Road is placed
between Lowestoft and Corton.
It is probable that the passage cut through the cliffs at Lowestoft, a
little to the north of the town, called the Cart’s Score, and also the
foot-path between that Score and the northern light-house, were designed,
originally, for the convenience of a communication between Lowestoft and
the adjacent country, and the haven’s mouth when situated near Corton:
and there are several other passages, similar to the above, between
Lowestoft and Yarmouth, which were also formed for preserving a
communication between the country and the haven’s mouth, according to the
several situations which the haven afterwards had.
{14a} The old map from whence this was taken, remained in a chest called
the Hutch, belonging to the Corporation of Yarmouth; and was copied from
one still more ancient, which appeared to be in a perishing condition
about the time of Elizabeth.
{14b} Camden speaks of Kirkley as a haven town, and in his time very
likely it was so; for the Waveney had then not only a communication with
the sea near Lowestoft, but had also such a depth of water at its
entrance as was sufficient to admit vessels of a small draught into it.
At a little distance from the mouth of this river, on the south side, is
a small inlet running towards Kirkley, and now called Kirkley Ham, and
probably is the place which in those days was called Kirkley Haven.
{14c} Blomfield in his history of Norfolk, says it was navigable as far
as Brockdish, and its opposite village Syleham. That the former place,
from the great breadth and depth of the river there, was originally
called Broad-ditch; and the latter now called Syleham, is derived from
Sail-home, intimating probably that there the navigation terminated.
[Swinden says, that in the time of Kett’s Rebellion in 1549, a small
pinnace was to go up to Weybread with twenty-four men] and, as a
corroborating circumstance, anchors have been found, in turning up the
ground in the last-mentioned village, which is generally acknowledged as
sufficient evidence that some centuries ago large boats and barges had a
free and easy access to those places. But when the Yare was reduced to a
stream, and all communications between the Waveney and the sea was cut
off at Lowestoft, the rivers decreased, and the navigation consequently
was more contracted.
{14d} From hence it appears that the defence or fortification, ordered
to be erected at the sea-breach near Lowestoft, was, in reality, only the
reparation of a former one. When it was first erected is now unknown.
In a violent storm and high tide in 1786, the sea was very near breaking
into the river, and so much soil was washed away that the old foundations
of the above defence were discovered.
{16} The first levy, at two shillings, and sixteen pence in the pound
was made under the former commission in 1652.
{17a} Possibly Mutford Bridge before this event was only a dam of earth,
formed across the river. The bridge that was built afterwards consisted
chiefly of earth, arranged in the same manner, with a small passage
through it for the current of water to pass through, consisting of
planks, about three feet wide and two in height, and called the sluice.
In the year 1760 a new bridge was built of brick materials consisting of
one spacious arch, large enough to admit small craft through the same;
and thereby rendered the river navigable to its utmost eastern limits.
{17b} It was customary about this time, on Pakefield fair day, for a man
to stand near this channel, with boots on, to carry children through the
water who went from Lowestoft to the fair.
{17c} This work, intitled Notitia Imperii, is supposed to have been
written in the reign of Valentinian III, and Theodosius II, but by some,
in the very beginning, by others at the latter end of the reign of
Theodosius. It contains a succinct account of the state of the Roman
empire in those times; to wit, of the provinces, and their governors; of
the other magistrates, both civil and military, their titles and
officers; of their land and sea forces; of their foot and horse; of their
troops, both Roman and foreign; and the places where they were quartered,
etc. It was published by Guidus Pancirollus, 1593, under the title of
“Notitia Utraque,” etc., that is a General Survey of the Dignities, both
of the East and West, since the times of Arcadius and Honorius. Ives.
{17d} Designed as a watch for this part of the coast, and under the
command of the honorable the count of the Saxon Shore, so called from its
situation being near, or rather opposite to the country of the Saxons, a
warlike people in Germany. The count guarded this shore against the
attacks of the Saxons.
{18} This is confirmed by an inscription in the Barberini Palace at
Rome.
{19} Ives, whom I have chiefly followed in this account of Garianonum,
is somewhat mistaken here; for I have seen a coin, found in this place,
of Romulus and Remus sucking the wolf.
{20a} In the year 1781, as some labourers were digging in the fields at
Eye, in Suffolk, they discovered a leaden box, which contained several
hundred Roman coins and medals; they were all of the purest gold,
extremely well executed, and in the highest preservation; they were
chiefly of the Emperors Arcadius and Honorius, the last who governed
Britain; they were of about 11s. in value each, and near them were found
some human bones. Whether they were buried with some eminent Roman, to
defray his charges over Styx, or to inform posterity that the Romans once
possessed this island, I leave the ingenious to determine. And in 1786
as the workmen were making a new turnpike road at Benacre, in this
county, one of them struck his pick-axe against a stone bottle, which
contained about 920 pieces of silver coin of Julius Cæsar, supposed by
the date to have been hid there 1500 years. The coins were in general in
good preservation, and included a large series, some few before Domitian;
they were all about the size of sixpence, nine of them weighing an ounce.
Sir Thomas Gooch purchased near 700, some were bought by different
persons, and the remainder sold to a Jew, who retailed them at a low
price in the neighbourhood. Some impressions of Aurelian, Germanicus,
and Nerva Trajanus, were amongst them.
{20b} Son of John Jex, Esq.; late eminent merchant at Lowestoft, and one
of his majesty’s justices of the peace for the county of Suffolk: to
whose kindness the author of this work is much indebted for many papers
relative to the herring fishery at Lowestoft.
{20c} Probably Flixton; a small village near Lowestoft, derived its name
from this Felix, the first bishop of the East Angles. This parish is now
consolidated with Blundeston, and valued, in Queen Anne’s time at £14.
There was formerly a small chapel in this parish, which is now in ruins,
and appears to have been so ever since the year 1704; for in that year
George Burrows, chapelwarden, delivered to his successor Henry Green the
following things belonging to this chapel, viz. two books, a surplice, a
cup, a cloth, a cushion, and an anchor and two pieces of iron belonging
to the chancel window: therefore we may conclude from this, that after
this time the chapel was become unfit for religious uses. Possibly so
small a parish might be unable to keep it in repair, or possibly it might
have received very great damage from the great November storm in the
preceding year. This chapel is dedicated to St. Andrew, and is now made
use of for the vile purpose of a farmer’s out-house; the walls are
demolished for the reparation of stables, and the font is split asunder
to support the two ends of a hog’s trough, to the great offence of common
decency. Thomas Skeete was rector of this parish in 1704, and was the
last rector; and William Fiske, in the year 1717, was the last
chapelwarden. James Smith was rector in 1684 and 1685; John Burrell in
1697, and continued till 1701; and Robert Barrow was curate in 1703.
Richard Newman was buried here January 14th, 1682; Elizabeth Bugg was
buried May 23rd, 1683; William, son of William Fiske, husbandman, and
Mary, his wife, was baptised, November 12th, 1702; John Wallis, of Great
Yarmouth, single man, and Mary Hollis, of Gorleston, single woman, were
married December 21st, 1697; John Davey, of Raydon, single man, and
Elizabeth Shinglers, of South town, single woman, were married July 4th,
1699; William Dawson, of Cromer, in the county of Norfolk, single man,
and Ann Richardson, single woman, were married February 4th, 1695.
{21a} Cnobersburgh, that is Cunoberi-Urbs, from a Saxon Chief who had
formerly resided here.
{21b} St. Olaves, in Herringfleet, was a priory of black Canons, founded
by Roger Fitz-Osbert, of Somerley the last of that family, to the honour
of the St. Mary and St. Olave, the King and martyr, in the beginning of
the reign of Henry III. Herein were, about the time of the dissolution,
five or six religious, who were endowed with £49 11s. 7d. per annum. The
site of this house, with great part of the lands, were granted to Henry
Jerningham, Esq., patron, 26th January, 38 Henry VIII. The site of this
house, together with a considerable estate, comprehending almost the
whole of the parish of Herringfleet, about half a century ago, passed
from the Bacon family to Hill Mussendon, Esq., who bequeathed it to his
elder brother Carteret, who had taken the name of Leathes; from him it
descended to John Leathes, Esq., his son, a very worthy gentlemen, and
much respected, and is now in the possession of his widow, Mrs. Elizabeth
Leathes. Camden says that Sir James Hobart, attorney general and privy
councellor to Henry VII., built Loddon Church from the ground, St. Olaves
Bridge, and the causeway thereby; but it appears from an inscription in
Loddon church, that Sir James built only the former; and that the bridge
and causeway were built by dame Hobart, his wife. In the reign of Edward
I. there was a ferry near the priory of St. Olave, to carry passengers
across the river in a boat. This ferry was then, and for several years
before, kept by one Sireck, a fisherman, who received for his trouble,
bread, herrings, and such like things, to the value of 20s. a year.
After his decease, William, his son, did the like, and made it worth 30s.
per year; Ralph, his son, also did the same, and had of his neighbours
bread and corn, and of strangers money. And because the prior of Toft
hindered passengers from going through his marsh, the said Ralph
purchased a passage through the prior’s marsh, paying 12d. a year; and of
the commoners of Herringfleet, he purchased a way through their common,
and was to carry the mover at all times free for it, and then it became
worth £10 per year; after Ralph’s decease, John, his brother, had it, and
it was valued at £12 per year; John sold it to Robert de Ludham, who made
it, worth £15 per year; and he gave it to Roger de Ludham, who held it
till the 25th of Edward I. 1296, the time when that king sent out a writ
to William de Kerdeston, sheriff of Norfolk and Suffolk, to enquire, to
what detriment it would be to any person, for him to grant leave to
Jeffery Pollerin, of Yarmouth, to build a bridge over the river at St.
Olave’s priory; and a jury being empanelled, etc., returned, that the
building of a bridge there would be to the detriment of Roger de Ludham
and the prior of Toft; but it would be to the great benefit of the
country. Whereupon leave was given, and a bridge began, at least, as it
is supposed, but perhaps, not finished in a durable manner; for amongst
the patents of the 9th of Henry V. anno domino, 1420, one is for building
a bridge over the water between Norfolk and Suffolk, at Seint Tholowe’s
ferry. What was then done doth not appear, but probably not much; for it
was not till the reign of Henry VII.—it is generally believed—that the
late bridge was built by dame Hobart. This bridge was found to be so
much in decay about 1770 that a new one was forced to be built in its
place. The remains of the priory at Herringfleet were chiefly taken down
in 1784, but some parts of it are still left. John Jernegan, of
Somerley, Esq., and Agnes, his wife, were buried in St. Mary’s chapel, in
the priory of St. Olave, at Herringfleet, about the year 1470. He left
Somerley on his son’s marriage, and went and resided at Cove, near
Beccles. The Jernegans became owners of St. Olave’s, also Herringfleet
and the Somerley estates, by marriage with the Fitz-Osberts: for Sir
Walter Jernegan marrying Isabel, daughter, and at length heir of Sir
Peter Fitz-Osbert, of Somerley, and her brother, Roger Fitz-Osbert,
leaving no issue, Somerley came to the Jernegans about 1230, and became
the capital seat of that family. The Jernegans came from Horham. The
Jernegans of Cossey are a younger branch of the family late of Somerley.
{23} Wista was a measure of land in use among the ancient Saxons, and
was equivalent to half a hide, or sixty acres.
{24} A sand, similar to that whereon Yarmouth was founded, appears at
this time to be forming a little to the north of the point bearing east
from Lowestoft, It begins to be dry even at high water, and at low water
is of considerable length and firmness; so that, probably, in another
century, it may become [as Yarmouth was originally] a convenient
situation for fishermen to dry their nets, etc.; and who may be induced
afterwards to erect the necessary buildings for the purposes of a
sea-fearing life; and from thence may give birth to the origin of a new
town, which may, with propriety, be called New Lowestoft; as should that
ever be the case, it must prove extremely prejudicial to the old town.
{26} Bathing in salt water is much in use at this time in many parts of
the kingdom, particularly at Southampton, Brighthelmston, Margate,
Scarborough, Yarmouth, Lowestoft, and at other places. It was
recommended originally for medicinal purposes only, it being pronounced
by the faculty to be useful in the cure of many diseases; and, probably,
in many cases it has been productive of very happy effects. The first
bathing machine in Lowestoft was erected in Lowestoft in 1768, by Mr.
Scrivener, from a model procured from Margate, in Kent. It met with that
success, that a second machine was soon after set up, and afterwards a
third. The bathing season commences about the month of August, and
continues about six weeks. During this part of the summer season, the
resort of genteel and fashionable company to the town is very
considerable, and is of great utility to many of the inhabitants,
respecting lodgings and other accommodations. Among many other
improvements which the town has lately received, may be included a fine
new turnpike road which runs through Lowestoft to Yarmouth; a mail cart
under the direction of the general post-office, passes through the town
twice a day, with letters to and from London; and the London stage coach
once every day.
{27a} It is probable that the town consists of much the same number of
houses now, as it did many years ago; there being very few houses erected
upon new foundations, but only re-built upon the old ones. The town is
much admired for its fine air, and its remarkably pleasant and healthy
situation which much contributes to the longevity of its inhabitants. In
1755, died here, Thomas Cockrum, aged 103 years; in 1784, Silvester
Manclarke, aged 107; and in 1788, John Wilkerson aged 96.
{27b} When you pass out of the present Market Place into the lane called
Fair Lane—so called from its leading to the place where the fairs were
formerly held—and pass directly westward, till you have passed the four
cross-ways, you then enter the place where the said fairs were kept some
years ago; but upon an application of the town to the Rev. Sir Ashurst
Allen, Bart., Lord of the Manor of Lowestoft, in the year 1768, the fairs
were removed from thence, and were afterwards held in the market place,
and have been kept there ever since.
{28} The clock was made by Mr. Isaac Blowers, of Beccles, and cost £20;
the expense of the frame, and other necessary work in fixing it, £2 13s.
6d.—total, £22 13s. 6d. In defraying these charges was collected a
subscription of £15 16s. 6d.; the remaining money was advanced by the
Rev. Mr. Tanner, vicar, who was repaid again in three years by the
churchwardens.
{29} A court-leet has been held by the lord of the manor of Lowestoft
from time immemorial. A jury used to be empanelled at Lowestoft, which
was obliged to attend at the adjoining parish of Corton, the Thursday
after Ash-Wednesday, to be sworn. On the Friday they took a survey of
the town of Lowestoft, in order to present such nuisances as came under
their jurisdiction; and on the Saturday they dined at an inn in the town,
where they appointed constables, ale-founders, etc., for the said town,
for the year ensuing. After the decade of Sir Thomas Allen, in 1765,
this custom was discontinued.
{31} In consequence of this misfortune, the following petition, signed
by five of his Majesty’s justices of the peace, the ministers of
Lowestoft, and the most respectable parishioners there, was addressed to
the principal inhabitants of the adjoining towns soliciting their
assistance for the relief of the sufferers by the said fire.
{34} Mr. Aldous Arnold, an eminent merchant in this town, very humanely
offered ten pounds to any person who would take this man off the wreck.
{35a} The most probable method of rescuing seamen from those unfortunate
situations, that I can think of, is that of a kite. When the storm is so
far abated that a boat is able to approach pretty near the wreck let a
line—which may soon after easily convey a strong rope—be carried by the
kite over the vessel, and then let it fall. Thus a communication may be
obtained between the wreck and the boat, and by that means the seamen, by
fastening themselves to a float, may be drawn through the water from the
ship to the boat. Or a rope may be conveyed from the boat to the wreck
by means of a small cask, sent from the former in the direction of the
tide, or waves of the sea; and when a communication is obtained a float
may be applied as abovementioned. And, again, if ships which frequent
this coast were to furnish themselves with a floating machine it might be
the means of saving the lives of many passengers and seamen, when they
happened to be in those distressing situations, by sending them off to
the boats which usually attend the wreck. Many lives and much valuable
property might thus be saved. Should every one of the above methods be
deemed impracticable, yet I should think myself extremely happy, was I
only to suggest a hint to some ingenious artist, for the invention of a
more successful scheme that might afford relief in such inconceiveable
distress.—When the author received the honour of being elected a member
of that very respectable body at Norwich, “The Society for the
Participation of Useful Knowledge,” he communicated to them a proposal of
this nature, to be submitted to their consideration.
{35b} It was from this hill that the royal yacht was first discovered,
which brought to England her serene highness, the princess Charlotte, of
Mecklenburgh Strelitz, the intended queen of his present majesty, King
George III. Lord Anson, vice-admiral of Great Britain, was appointed to
convey her highness, with a squadron of men-of-war to the British shore.
After a voyage of ten days, occasioned by boisterous and contrary winds,
Lord Anson, with his squadron—which was damaged—and the royal yacht,
appeared off this place, on Saturday, the 5th September, 1761, about two
o’clock in the afternoon, and anchored in Harwich road about three in the
afternoon the day following. Her highness landed at Harwich on the 7th.,
in the afternoon, and from thence was escorted to London. Had not the
wind suddenly changed, her highness would have landed at Lowestoft, as
was the case of his majesty, King George II. who landed at this town on
his return from Hanover, January 14th, 1736–7. His majesty had been a
considerable time on his voyage from Helvoetfluys to England, occasioned
by stormy and contrary winds, and had been also exposed to the most
imminent danger. When the royal barge, with his majesty, the countess of
Yarmouth, and his lords, approached the shore, a body of sailors
belonging to Lowestoft, uniformly dressed in seamen’s jackets, waded into
the sea, and meeting the barge took it on their shoulders, with the king
and all the nobility, and carried it to the beach, without suffering it
to strike the ground. His majesty was met at the sea-shore by John Jex,
Esq., of this town, with his carriage, who conducted his majesty to his
house; himself having the honour of being coachman. His Majesty landed
about twelve at noon, and about two hours after set off for London. His
majesty died in 1760, and his present majesty, George III. was proclaimed
at Lowestoft by Mr. Robert Reeve to whom the author acknowledges himself
much indebted for many favours, and particularly for his great assiduity
in promoting the publishing of this work. John Adams, Esq., the first
ambassador from America to England, landed at Lowestoft, the 6th August,
1784.
{36a} This light-house is composed of timber, and hangings in a frame of
the same materials; the upper part of it next the sea is sashed, and the
light is produced from three lamps placed inside. In the year 1779, the
timber was found to be in so decayed a state, that the building was
obliged to be wholly taken down, and replaced by another, made of the
same materials, and upon the same construction.
{36b} In the year 1778, the Stanford channel bore S.S.E. from the upper
light-house. The depth of water in the middle of the roads opposite to
the Ness, was between seven and eight fathoms at low water. In the
middle of the roads opposite to the south part of the town, and about 120
fathoms from the shore, is a shoal, where there is not above nine feet of
water at ebb tide; and another shoal lies about three quarters of a mile
from the shore, on which is about sixteen feet at low water. In 1788 the
roads appeared to grow narrower, from the sea losing against the town,
especially at the ness, where the distance from the Holm sand was not
more than a mile and a quarter from the shore; this sand still continues
to increase, which with the sea receding from the shore, accounts for the
roads growing narrower.
Trinity House, London, January 19th, 1782. This corporation having
lately caused a survey to be taken of the Stanford, in which was
found only three fathoms, in the best of the channel, at high water;
it is recommended to all masters and pilots to be very cautious in
navigating ships of a great draught through that channel.
To give one instance of the fluctuating nature of the sands off
Lowestoft; it is observed, that that part of the sands where the church
and chapel bore on each other the fishing boats, a few years ago, used to
sail over, at their going out to sea and returning again into the roads:
this part of the sand is now become perfectly dry; and at low water, when
the weather is fine, extends to a considerable distance; and may,
possibly, afterwards become the foundation of a new town.
{39} In the reign of James I. the Dutch paid an acknowledgement for
leave of fishing on our coasts, which being withdrawn, his son, Charles
I. in the year 1636, issued a proclamation, declaring that he should
maintain such a fleet at sea as would protect his coasts from the insults
of the Dutch. And soon after sent a fleet, under the command of the Earl
of Northumberland, to disperse them, and obliged them to pay 30,000
florins for leave to continue their fishing that season. And thus it has
frequently happened since; the Dutch, by infringing on our liberties, and
having had complaints alledged against them, have paid considerable sums
to appease our resentment; and sometimes, when they have proved
unsuccessful in these methods, have been severely chastised: but all to
no purpose; for to this day they continue practising the same
depredations on our coasts and we every year experience the usual
inconveniences which attend them. About the year 1636 great progress was
made in this fishery by the Dutch; and the wealth procured it to the
republic, caused, as I have just observed, much jealousy in the English
nation. In 1601, eighty thousand tons of herrings were caught, which
being worth eight hundred gilders per ton, brought to the republic
sixty-four millions of gilders. It increased so much from that time that
Sir Walter Raleigh assures us, that in 1610 the inhabitants of the united
provinces employed in this fishery, upon the coasts of England, three
thousand busses, manned with fifty thousand hands. Such a prodigious
gain occasioned the English that year to renew their ancient pretensions
to the property of the seas which surround their island, and to exact of
the Dutch fishermen the tenth herring as a sort of duty. About the year
1600 the Dutch, the French, the citizens of Embden, Hamburgh, and Bremen,
got out of our seas, upon a medium, to the value of between six and seven
millions sterling annually. Another inconvenience which the British
nation experienced from foreigners being permitted to usurp so large a
share of the herring fishery, was the great increase of their seamen.
This was very evident from the wars with the Dutch which happened in the
reign of Charles II., when they were able to supply with able seamen a
fleet of upwards of one hundred sail of line of battle ships. It may be
worth observing, that the ground work of the regulations pursued by the
Dutch in their herring fishery, is taken from the sagacious institutions
laid down by Edward III., in the famous statute of herrings passed in
that reign.
{40a} It is probable, that Lowestoft, as a fishing town, was in a
flourishing state some ages before this period: for though the herring is
a northern fish, and but few of them are seen in the Mediterranean; yet
it is a fish that was known to the Romans, who, probably, acquired the
knowledge of it from their having a station in the vicinity of Lowestoft,
viz., Burgh Castle.
{40b} “Prescription is a title acquired by use and time, and allowed by
law: as when a man claims anything because he, his ancestors, or they
whose estate he hath, have had or used it all the time whereof no memory
is to the contrary.”
{41a} But, notwithstanding, the bailiffs of the cinque ports, in
consequence of the composition not being paid by the burgesses of
Yarmouth, discontinued to frequent, as usual, the Yarmouth herring fair.
Yet those fishermen called the west countrymen still continued coming to
these parts till the year 1756, but after that time they declined coming
any longer. These vessels from the western part of England, as it was
called, _i.e._ from the coast of Kent, etc., used to frequent these
coasts during the herring season, and sell the fish which they caught to
the merchants of Lowestoft and Yarmouth. Also vessels called north
country cobles used to attend and dispose of their fish in the same
manner. These vessels used to engage themselves to some owner here for
the fishing season, which was called being bosted: but this mode of
practice is also now almost wholly discontinued. It was not the custom
formerly for the merchants of Lowestoft to catch all the fish they wanted
with their own boats, but were supplied with a considerable part of it
from the vessels above mentioned: but now the merchants from increasing
the number of their own boats, are able to furnish themselves with a
sufficient quantity of herrings without the assistance of either of the
west country boats, or those from the north. This new mode will appear
very evident, if we compare the number of boats employed by Lowestoft in
the year 1670, with the number employed in the year 1775; in the former
they were only twenty-five, in the latter they amounted to forty-eight.
{41b} This abbey was of the Premonstratensian order. It was founded by
Randulph de Glanvill, A.D. 1182. At the dissolution, the annual revenues
were estimated at the sum of £180 17s. 1d., and the site, with the
greatest part of the manors, rectories, and lands, were granted 28 Henry
VIII. to the above Duke of Suffolk; afterwards it became the property of
Daniel Hervey; next it was vested in the honourable Elizabeth, relict of
Killand Courtney, Esq., daughter of the Viscountess Hinchinbroke, and
grand-daughter of the right-honourable lady, Ann Harvey; afterwards it
belonged to Sir Joshua Van Neck, of Putney, in Surrey, Bart.; and now to
Sir Gerrard Van Neck, of Hevingham, in this county.
{45} Probably one mediety of the church was dedicated to All Saints; the
other to St. Margaret.
{48} During the civil war in the reign of Charles I, Lowestoft took an
active part against the Parliament.
{51} In the year 1737, one boat only, belonging to Joshua Marshall,
caught 72 lasts of herrings. A last is 10,000.
{55a} On the 29th May, 1731, fifteen boats, belonging to Lowestoft,
caught 24,600¼ of mackarels, being the greatest number ever remembered to
have been taken in one day. The sale of these fish amounted to £295 7s.
9d., and were sold by the late Mr. John Spicer, {55b} who usually sold
the mackarels.
{55b} Mr. Spicer was clerk of this parish about fifty years; he died
about the year 1776, and was succeeded by Mr. Bolchin.
{60} The disputes arising from the privileges granted to the burgesses
of Yarmouth and the barons of the cinque ports clashing with each other,
gave birth to the most violent outrages and domestic wars that were ever
known before between any two places in this kingdom; they even proceeded
to such lengths as to alarm the whole kingdom with their mutual
depredations.
By a special pardon granted to the men of Yarmouth, 10 Edward I. it
appears, that they were fined £1000 for damages which they had done upon
the western coast as far as Shoreham and Portsmouth. And in the 31st of
that king it appears, that Yarmouth had sustained damages by the portsmen
to the amount of £20,138, an enormous sum at that time. This, probably,
is what Hollingshed alludes to in his Chronicle, where it is recorded,
that in the 25th of Edward I, “That king passing into Flanders, to the
assistance of the earl thereof, being no sooner on land, but the men of
the ports and Yarmouth, through an old grudge long depending between
them, fell together and fought on the sea with such fury, that,
notwithstanding the king’s commandment to the contrary, twenty-five ships
of Yarmouth and their partakers were burnt, etc.” But Manship observes,
“That in the town’s Record of that year he did not find that so many were
burnt; but by a complaint and presentment made to his majesty it appears,
that thirty-seven ships were greatly damaged by the portsmen, 171 men
killed, and goods to the value of £15,356 were spoiled and taken from
them;” of which (says he) a grievous requital was not long after made by
the men of Yarmouth against portsmen. The late disputes seem to have
originated from the mistaken idea which each of the parties had conceived
of their own importance from their newly-acquired grants, and for want of
having their respective privileges more clearly ascertained.
{61a} In the reign of Edward III. Yarmouth had more ships than any city
or town in England.
{61b} Upon uniting Kirkley road to Yarmouth haven by letters patent, 46
Edward III. the fee-farm rent of £55 per annum was augmented to £60.
{63} Exclusive of the above mentioned rent of £55, which made the whole
fee-farm £60 annually.
{67} At this time there was no bridge over the Yarmouth haven.
{69a} The charter for uniting Kirkley road to Yarmouth haven repealed
the second time, the 5th of Richard II.
{69b} Sir Robert Trisilian was chief justice of England in the time of
Richard II. He was adviser of many illegal acts in that reign, for which
he was impeached, with several other judges and some noblemen in
Parliament. Being convicted of the offences he was charged with, he was
executed, February 19, 1388.
{74} Sir Francis Gawdie, of Wallington Norfolk, was son of Thomas Gawdie
Esq., of Harleston. In 1582, he was appointed sergeant-at-law and
queen’s sergeant; in 1589, a judge; and in 1605, lord chief justice of
the common pleas, being then a knight. He died after a fit of apoplexy
at Sergeant’s Inn, London, before he had sat a year in that station,
leaving no male issue.
{78} Henry Gawdy, of Claxton, Norfolk, Esq., afterwards Sir Henry Gawdy,
Knight, who was a judge of the Common Pleas; he died in 1588 and was
buried in the chancel of the church at Redenhall. The above Sir Henry
Gawdy was created Knight of the Bath at the coronation of James I. and
served the office of sheriff, for the counties of Norfolk and Suffolk
about the sixth of that King’s reign. Another branch of the Gawdy’s
flourished for many years at West Herling, near Thetford. Sir Thomas
Gawdy, Knight, of Gawdy Hall, in Redenhall, a judge in the reign of
Charles II. was employed in all the public business transacted in this
neighbourhood about that time. He was one of the commissioners
respecting the sea-breach at Lowestoft in 1661.
{79} _I.e._, southerly.
{81} Whoever impartially considers the tendency of the second
commission, and the manner of introducing it, will perceive but too much
reason to suspect its being obtained by some improper means.
{82} That a post was erected is evident, from the order in 1662, for a
_new_ post to be set up.
{90} The persons who had the principal management of this suit, which
was conducted with the most indefatigable industry and scrupulous
integrity, as appears from the account of their expenses, which is
preserved and will be given further on.
{97} Probably Sir John Holland, Bart; who died in 1700, aged 98; who was
the son of Sir Thomas Holland, of Quidenham and Wortwell, in Norfolk,
Knt. The Hollands were a very ancient family, and flourished before the
conquest. They came out of Lancashire, and a branch of the family
settled at Wortwell Hall, near Harleston, about the year 1500; and from
thence they removed to Quidenham about the year 1600. The estate at
Wortwell then belonged to Mr. Aldous Arnold, of Lowestoft.
{110} Sir George Reeve was judge, and lived at Oulton High House; but
was buried at Long Stratton.
{119} St. Roche lived in the 14th century, and was lord of Montpelier;
but abandoned his fortunes to turn pilgrim. After curing many persons of
the plague, he was himself attacked, but cured by a dog licking him. For
this reason he is, in France, invoked, in order to avert that calamity,
and is always represented with a sore thigh and a dog. _Gent. Mag._,
March, 1785.
{120a} The brother of Admiral Mighells, and father of Thomas Mighells,
of Lowestoft surgeon, who died in 1763.
{120b} Mary, the wife of the Rev. John Tanner, was a daughter of Mary
Mighells, by Robert, son of Mr. Nicohlas Knight, gent., which Mary
Mighells was sister to Captain Josiah Mighells, who married the above
Dorothy whose maiden name was Coates, of Burlinton, in Yorkshire. This
excellent woman, Mrs. Dorothy Mighells, was a person of the most
exemplary piety and charity. Among her many other pious acts she gave
two silver flagons, weighing upwards of 146 ounces, for the use of the
communion table at Lowestoft.
{127} As may be seen at large in the folio town-book, in the feoffment
before that decree, and in the feoffment of 14th October, 1768.
{129} A repository for the plate, ornaments, etc., belonging to the
altar, and called the prothesis.
{134a} The dwelling-houses charged with the payment of this donation are
situated near the north end of the town, on the east-side, now belonging
to the Arnold family.
{134b} Formerly there was a school-house for Annott’s foundation in the
Town Close adjoining to the east wall of the Churchyard, which being in a
ruinous state, an allowance was made the master until such time as the
Town Chamber was fitted up and made a convenient schoolroom in 1674.
{136} Admiral Sir Allen, formerly of Lowestoft.
{138} After the re-building of the chapel in 1698, the sexton had a
certain sum allowed him annually by the parish for the house rent, until
the year 1720, when a house was purchased for him to reside in.
{139} Afterwards SIR Andrew Leake; eminently distinguished as a gallant
sea commander in the reign of Queen Anne.
{143} When Mr. Emlyn first came to Lowestoft he had not adopted those
religious principles which afterwards proved to him a source of the
heaviest afflictions.
{147} The fine air at Lowestoft was at this time, 1730, strongly
recommended by the London physicians, as extremely beneficial in many
disorders, particularly nervous complaints.
{151} In 1661, Sir Thomas Allen was member for Dunwich. In 1668, Sir
Thomas was a candidate for the same place, but lost the election. In
1710, Sir Richard Allen was member for Dunwich.
{152a} On the fourth day’s fight in the first battle in the following
year, Sir Christopher Minnes having received a shot in the neck, remained
upon deck and gave orders, keeping the blood from flowing with his
fingers an hour, till another shot came and put an end to his existence.
{152b} Against the south wall of the south isle of St. Margaret’s church
is a small monument with the inscription: “Neere unto this place lyeth ye
body of captaine John Utber, commander of His maiesties fregat the
Guernsey. In which, valiantly Fighting in the defence of his King and
countrey, against the Dutch and Dane at Berghen, he was unfortunately
slayne, ye 2nd Augusti, 1665. Ætatis suæ 22.”
{153} The Algerines had been committing depredations for many years on
the English merchants, so that it now became absolutely necessary to
check and chastise them. Among the unhappy captives that were enslaved
by falling into the hands of these Infidels, was one William Wilde of
Lowestoft, who whilst he was in slavery, wrote a letter to Mr. John
Wilde, his father, of which the following is an extract:—
From the prison at Constantinople, 22nd November, 1663. Dear Father,
In all duty I do send you salutations, with my loving mother; having
yet place left me to mourn for your sorrow for me in your old age and
grey hairs, when usual comfort is expected from children; but it is
the Lord’s hand, let him do with me what pleaseth him. For six
months past I have had but little rest. I was chained in the galleys
by the leg, and also both hands together, besides a chain to my back,
as the other slaves; with all which I was forced to row. My
allowance is bread and water; and I am exposed, naked, to the
extremity of both heat and cold. I write you the truth, but not all;
it would wear out a pen of brass to do it. Now that you may know the
occasion of our falling into this calamity, I shall observe to you,
that upon Whitsunday last, in the morning, we saw thirty sail of
galleys coming into the bay towards us; we weighed and towed about
two miles, it being calm where we lay. The galleys coming within us,
cast themselves in a half moon, and began with us. I was laid on
board by the Bassa himself; the remainder of his squadron, with his
nephew, forming the body of his strength, laid round me. Five laid
me on board, and three of them thrust their prows [a kind of
boltsprit at the head of a row galley, on which is fixed a large gun]
into our ports. The general or bassa, once; the admiral another; and
one more. The others laid upon their oars, discharging their prows,
and boarding us with great clamour. Our ship was on fire all over
our heads, which happened on his boarding us, from a wad out of his
cursed piece, which shot a bullet of thirty-two pounds. We cleared
ourselves of the galleys, supposing to have overcome the fire,
otherwise they should have perished with us. At last I caused a
barrel of powder to be brought and placed abaft the mast, on the
gun-deck; then drawing all my men to the fore part of the ship, I
caused it to be fired, and so blew up all, that the enemy might enjoy
nothing. The fight continued from eight or nine in the morning till
twelve or one in the afternoon, the half of which time they were on
board us. Amongst the greatest of my afflictions, this stands first
before me:—my care at home. My two boys are forced to turn Turks, to
my infinite grief. I do beseech you, show love to my wife and
children, by which (if I do live to see) your great love will be
shown to me. Committing you to the protection of the Almighty, I
rest, your dutiful son and poor captive, WILLIAM WILDE.
{155} Since the English, who had certainly the worst of it, lost only
one Captain, one Lieutenant, and ninety-four men, and had about three
hundred wounded.
{167} Sir George Byng was created Lord Torrington.
*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Gillingwater's History of Lowestoft - a reprint: with a chapter of more recent events" ***
Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.